Author Topic: Cav stacking  (Read 6982 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kafein

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 2203
  • Infamy: 808
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #60 on: September 11, 2012, 05:06:32 am »
0
Anyway, what can cav players do when they are downed is of little relevance. It only very rarely does not lead to an immediate death.



As with kiting archers, what people are complaining about is not the strength of the class, it's the behavior. Nerfing backstabbing cav and buffing organised charges at groups of enemies would be a step in the right direction.


Cav relies on backstabbing because they are forced to. It's something they do quite well, but the real reason is that cav is terrible at doing anything else. Create a STF horseman, go on a duel server and try for yourself. Everyone but the slowest turtles will be a serious challenge, and you will never win against half of the players, simply because of weapon length differences.


The human body as a weight, even though this isn't true in warband. On the other hand, horses are not all crippled and obese. Balancing the agility of horses and humans would go a long way into making cav a class worth something in a straight fight. Of course this should go with nerfs, especially to backstabbing. I can't think of many possibilities right now but I'm sure it's not that hard to find. At the very least, collisions with the environment and other horses should have serious consequences. A dead stop is quite dangerous and usually a death sentence when in enemy areas, but it's really not punishing enough.

Offline Adamar

  • He who doesn't want to be labelled
  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 422
  • Infamy: 319
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #61 on: September 11, 2012, 05:12:11 am »
0
I know, ridding damages one's testicles, so each new retirement should bear some wpf and skill penalties to the new generation. Alternatively, horsemen could choose to play female characters or not at all.

Offline Son Of Odin

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1856
  • Infamy: 338
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Sky belongs to Asagods as long as the raven flies.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Son_Of_Odin
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #62 on: September 11, 2012, 05:32:04 am »
+2
I predict your global moderator status won't last very long Odin.
No one predicted your admin status last this long, Thomek :wink:
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

There is no sight in my third eye

Offline Ptolemy

  • Weeaboo
  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 257
  • Infamy: 182
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Ninja
  • Game nicks: Nomin
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #63 on: September 11, 2012, 09:46:10 am »
0
Anyway, what can cav players do when they are downed is of little relevance. It only very rarely does not lead to an immediate death.

This is just not true. Previously, yes, you could easily kill a fallen rider before they got up and started fighting back, but since the horse's corpse has started taking damage while it's dead the rider often has that crucial couple of seconds they need to get on their feet and start attacking/blocking.

Another way to stop this would be to not allow fallen cavalry to instant-switch from their lance to a secondary weapon, like for example (sorry Wolf), the poleaxe. This would mean that the downed player would have to stand up before they can switch their weapon, putting them at a greater disadvantage after being de-horsed. I don't believe this idea has been discussed yet?

Offline Tovi

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 387
  • Infamy: 251
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: OdE
  • Game nicks: KrisTovi
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #64 on: September 11, 2012, 10:45:44 am »
+1
I'm not a 2h spammer hero, so as a thrower/hoplite my role is to protect my team from cav.
I never, never rush into melee as long as I can see enemy cav running around. This would be a team suicide.
If I can, I stand close a lone archer to protect him against cav while he's shooting on them.
I can kill an average 2 or 3 horses in a round.
My problem is the dehorsed cav-man who can kill me 50% of time. At this moment I need 2h support. But where are they ??? Fighting somewhere in the middle of the map...

My advice :
- don't rush, kill cav first or...
- join GK and have fun :)
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Joker86

  • Mad & Bad
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1226
  • Infamy: 324
  • cRPG Player
  • Why so serious?
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Companions
  • Game nicks: Joker86_TP
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #65 on: September 11, 2012, 01:46:04 pm »
0
And what if the GKs use tactics themselves, wait, until your infantry cluster meets their infantry cluster, and then start picking people who are engaged in fights? How much can tactics, sticking together and awareness help them?

All classes have strengths and weaknesses. So in theory a team with high concentration of one class should be easier to counter than an evenly mixed one.

I wouldn't sign that. Often you need a certain class to counter another class. But if the team has stacked a lot of one class, there won't be enough counters, and thus the stacked class will easily hunt down their "prey class" first and there will be an imbalance between the teams which will almost always lead to the victory of one team.

And the problem cRPG has is, that of the three "meta classes" it has, ranged, cav and infantry, cav and ranged represent the counter to each other, while infantry doesn't really counter anything. Shields stop arrows, but they don't kill archers. Pikes fend off horsemen, but they don't kill them. Cavalry kills archers who are standing in tunnel vision and shooting, and archers shoot horses and their riders.
Joker makes a very good point.
î saved for eternety (without context  :mrgreen:)

Offline matt2507

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1013
  • Infamy: 168
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • It is when making anything that we become anyone.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Mercenaries
  • Game nicks: Merc_Raylin The_Village_Idiot Mohamed_Ali
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #66 on: September 11, 2012, 02:39:45 pm »
0
This is just not true. Previously, yes, you could easily kill a fallen rider before they got up and started fighting back, but since the horse's corpse has started taking damage while it's dead the rider often has that crucial couple of seconds they need to get on their feet and start attacking/blocking.

Another way to stop this would be to not allow fallen cavalry to instant-switch from their lance to a secondary weapon, like for example (sorry Wolf), the poleaxe. This would mean that the downed player would have to stand up before they can switch their weapon, putting them at a greater disadvantage after being de-horsed. I don't believe this idea has been discussed yet?

euh, have you noticed the time was that we put up from a fall ?

I guess as infantry you find it fast, but I can assure you that when it is you who fall, you find that suddenly becomes very long time, especially when you see a hating cavs gang jump on you in taking their time to prepare their shots and you can do absolutely nothing except watching  :lol:

if you can not change weapons, it means that death is the moment when the horse dies, which is already the case most of the time.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2012, 02:45:59 pm by matt2507 »
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


No donkeys were harmed in the making of this gif.

Offline CrazyCracka420

  • Minute Valuable Contributor
  • Strategus Councillor
  • **
  • Renown: 1950
  • Infamy: 794
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Welp
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Vaegirs
  • Game nicks: Huseby
  • IRC nick: Steam name: crazycracka420
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #67 on: September 11, 2012, 04:03:42 pm »
+1
And what if the GKs use tactics themselves, wait, until your infantry cluster meets their infantry cluster, and then start picking people who are engaged in fights? How much can tactics, sticking together and awareness help them?

I wouldn't sign that. Often you need a certain class to counter another class. But if the team has stacked a lot of one class, there won't be enough counters, and thus the stacked class will easily hunt down their "prey class" first and there will be an imbalance between the teams which will almost always lead to the victory of one team.

And the problem cRPG has is, that of the three "meta classes" it has, ranged, cav and infantry, cav and ranged represent the counter to each other, while infantry doesn't really counter anything. Shields stop arrows, but they don't kill archers. Pikes fend off horsemen, but they don't kill them. Cavalry kills archers who are standing in tunnel vision and shooting, and archers shoot horses and their riders.

So infantry (non shield/pikemen/throwers) should be protecting the archers and pikemen.  And the pikemen and archers will be protecting the infantry...but instead most of the time you have a zerg rush to the enemy.

This discussion SHOULD BE about a better team balance system, but since people want to discuss class balance let's go there.

I still believe that infantry actually protecting their ranged, and fighting with their shielders and pikemen will instantly counter all the archer/cavalry whine, but people can't be arsed to actually fight as a team instead of zerg rushing at the enemy.  I don't see how that makes cavalry or archers overpowered.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
 - Stolen from Macropussy

Offline Fartface

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 476
  • Infamy: 288
  • cRPG Player
  • Centurii
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Deathcore,Djentcore,Deathmetal,Brutal,Slam
  • Game nicks: Growling,Grunting,Screaming,Squeeling
  • IRC nick: Fuck I love it.
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #68 on: September 11, 2012, 06:41:24 pm »
+1
I use the view outfit button to check around me all the time!
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline PhigNewtenz

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 74
  • Infamy: 2
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Literally A Clan
  • Game nicks: Literally_PhigNewtenz, Literally_Not_PhigNewtenz
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #69 on: September 11, 2012, 07:07:21 pm »
0
This is just not true. Previously, yes, you could easily kill a fallen rider before they got up and started fighting back, but since the horse's corpse has started taking damage while it's dead the rider often has that crucial couple of seconds they need to get on their feet and start attacking/blocking.

I have to disagree with this. Very rarely does a fallen rider end up completely obscured by their dead horse. That usually happens if the horse and rider slide into a wall or something. Most of the time, the rider is in the open and defenseless but also very near the dead horse. The problem is that both ranged and melee people are accustomed to ignoring the horses body, so they shoot and/or swing through the horses hit box. Players are already getting used to this (dare I say realistic?) difference and ground killing is becoming routine again. Remember: think, then swing.

This discussion SHOULD BE about a better team balance system, but since people want to discuss class balance let's go there.

I agree! In regards to team balance (though perhaps not the team balance system) Has anyone ever looked into the logistics of allowing players to switch between their main and alts without leaving the server and without losing their multiplier? Many players have alts of different classes (I for one currently have a lancer main with thrower and melee alts) and this would allow them to switch to counter the other teams make up. For instance (and going back to the topic at hand) if the other team had a large amount of cavalry I would probably switch off my main (going 1 lancer vs. 10 isn't fun) and onto a thrower or a melee with a spear.

Would this royally bork the auto-balance? Yes, it probably would. Could that be addressed? Possibly:
  • You would probably have to restrict the switching to alts that are close to the same level.
  • To prevent teams from constantly jockeying back and forth to intentionally stack against each other, you could restrict switching to the losing team, and only after the second and later rounds on each map.
This is just a crazy idea the popped into my head, but it seems like it would reduce the misery of facing a stacked team and could add additional strategy and variety to the game.

Thoughts?

Offline Joker86

  • Mad & Bad
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1226
  • Infamy: 324
  • cRPG Player
  • Why so serious?
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Companions
  • Game nicks: Joker86_TP
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #70 on: September 11, 2012, 08:55:58 pm »
+1
I think such a thing would not help much. In fact it can even increase the problems on maps which favour a certain class, which will be either archers or cavalry.

And the restriction to changing to an alt which is of the same level is no way near precise enough. Generation, equipment, your K/D and W/L and a lot of other things would need to be calculated, and I don't think it would help the already complicated issue of establishing a working autobalancer.

The idea is tempting, don't get me wrong, and it would be nice to switch from one character to another without logging off, but it would bring a lot of problems. That's my opinion, at least.  :?
Joker makes a very good point.
î saved for eternety (without context  :mrgreen:)

Offline Sandersson Jankins

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1450
  • Infamy: 223
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop
    • View Profile
  • Faction: CSA Apologists
  • Game nicks: fnord
  • IRC nick: "There's always a bigger nerd"- Qui-Gong Jim, Star Trek IV: Electric Boogalo
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #71 on: September 11, 2012, 09:24:59 pm »
+3
Click me gently, I'm a link

Wouldn't that work? No need to prevent people of playing with their clanmates.  :wink:

This fucking guy right here. Dis nigga right hurr. He just laid out EXACTLY what needs to fucking happen. Like, there wasn't a SINGLE flaw in what he said. Joker for crpg president 2012.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

the administrator of this forum is the Internet Keyboard man? Can only play "authority" in the virtual world?Can you tell me why?

Offline Thomek

  • El Director
  • OKAM Developer
  • ***
  • Renown: 1372
  • Infamy: 481
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • Ninja Guide Wiki
  • Faction: Ninja_
  • Game nicks: Ninja_Thomek
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #72 on: September 11, 2012, 09:33:57 pm »
+5
I think such a thing would not help much. In fact it can even increase the problems on maps which favour a certain class, which will be either archers or cavalry.

And the restriction to changing to an alt which is of the same level is no way near precise enough. Generation, equipment, your K/D and W/L and a lot of other things would need to be calculated, and I don't think it would help the already complicated issue of establishing a working autobalancer.

The idea is tempting, don't get me wrong, and it would be nice to switch from one character to another without logging off, but it would bring a lot of problems. That's my opinion, at least.  :?

I have to commend joker on generally writing shorter and better! :)
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


That Thomeck-delay-kicking bussiness is like that asshole-retard dude that fucks your sister sometimes.

Offline Joker86

  • Mad & Bad
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1226
  • Infamy: 324
  • cRPG Player
  • Why so serious?
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Companions
  • Game nicks: Joker86_TP
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #73 on: September 11, 2012, 09:38:34 pm »
0
Thanks a lot!  :D
Joker makes a very good point.
î saved for eternety (without context  :mrgreen:)

Offline PhigNewtenz

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 74
  • Infamy: 2
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Literally A Clan
  • Game nicks: Literally_PhigNewtenz, Literally_Not_PhigNewtenz
Re: Cav stacking
« Reply #74 on: September 11, 2012, 11:02:51 pm »
+2
And the restriction to changing to an alt which is of the same level is no way near precise enough. Generation, equipment, your K/D and W/L and a lot of other things would need to be calculated, and I don't think it would help the already complicated issue of establishing a working autobalancer.

Great critiques, or they would be if I was proposing a new auto-balance system:
  • Level: You're right. Restricting switching to the same level wouldn't work. I think I said 'close', and more importantly I never suggested that that was a sufficient criteria for balance.
  • Generation: Generation of alts? Nope. That's not a reflection of player skill or experience, unless (maybe) you're counting the total gens of all a player's alts. If you are counting them all, then that figure doesn't change if a person chooses to switch.
  • Equipment: Depends on what you mean. Equipment value wouldn't be a good metric, as a dirt-cheap Bamboo Spear can be invaluable against stacked cavalry. Equipment type is tricky, because people own many things. More on this in a bit.
  • K/D: Maybe. Probably not. You'll often be switching to a lower K/D, support class to defend your teammates, which actually helps your team. I doubt there's a high correlation between K/D and usefulness when considering hard counters.
  • W/L: This one wouldn't work well either. For one, if you prefer to play your main, and you're only switching to these alts when you're team is getting rolled, you'll probably continue to get rolled when on them. Will you help your team get less rolled and win slightly more often? Yes, so switching to a lower W/L alt might not be bad either.

Experience, generation, equipment, K/D, W/L and many other stats we talk about are relatively poor measures of what a main/alt can contribute on a specific map and in a specific fight. Why do we use them? They are the best that we have. Fortunately this is a topic about 'stacking', which ties in to one stat that I feel is a reasonably good measure: class (which I think is what you may have been referring to when you said 'equipment').

I followed the link you posted and read your 8 step plan for fixing auto-balance (great post by the way). I think you mostly hit the nail on the head. Balancing classes between teams can lead to fair and interesting combat. Is implementing your fourth step (the hidden classes) and balancing by the results possible? Certainly. It would be imperfect and subject to manipulation (like all systems) but would do the job, and likely do it far better than the current system.

Allowing people to switch between alts would accomplish the same thing, but in a different way. It would put the burden of proper team composition on the players and add another level of planning and strategy to the game. I for one would prefer choosing how I can best help my team, to having an algorithm take the best shot it can and sticking me with the result for four to seven rounds.

Teams don't need to be symmetrical to be fair. Does each team having exactly X infantry, Y cavalry, Z archers (and of course equal numbers of all the sub-classes you defined within) have a pleasing symmetry to it? I can see the appeal, but it seems boringly predictable.

Let people figure it out for themselves and you can have tactics that are always different, and teams that adapt to interesting maps which are fair without being

Clean out all maps that are not perfectly even.

Check out if there are "natural fortifications" (turning battles into "soft" sieges), if the distances to choke points are equal (the team spawning closer to the central bridge will lose in the majority of all cases), and if both teams spawn on the same height level (so one team doesn't need to fight uphill).

depressingly symmetrical.

Anyway, it was just an idea. Too many ideas are shot down when people only see challenges. Thanks for your response; these are good debates to have.