Official Survey about item power

[ManOfWar]

After reading some posts from other people, I demand a "buff xp" poll option!

hhelll yesssss

[cilerc]

The polearms are getting a litttle too good.

[Rangerbob]

They do more damage at the same speed as 2 handers and good lord the polearm stun is nasty in the middle of a fight.  Not to mention everyone with polearms now carries a pike and a bec which is more annoying than you can imagine.

[John]

LOL, I do, all the time, but thats like saying if a 2hander is swinging at you, hold up a shield, doesn't make a class somehow not OP just by blocking them

Oh my comment didn't warrant such a response. I was just imagining you standing in the middle of a field somewhere, watching a horse charging at you, then trying to jump out of the way without holding a block and it made me laugh.

[Blackstone]

Overall well balanced.

Once stunned it is extremely difficult to counter the next consecutive blows, but overall the fights seem more balanced now.

[Uhtred_III_of_Bebbanburg]

May I say that it is likely the average player will vote to buff their most used playstyle and nerf their natural counter.

Ya gotta do, what ya gotta do!

[SHinOCk]

i wish the exp would be as it was before those last couple patches... I think it was a big blow for a portion of the community that was actually playing like crazy to stack those gens and be able to slack a little bit afterward but still be able to change spec more than once every 3 weeks(random numbers, takes me like 2 weeks, maybe a bit more), anyway that's how i see it. I don't care as much about the heirlooms, but i do care about the fact that i put around 600hrs in that mod over an unhealthy amount of time (lol) to be able to have some diversity hopefully be able to swap builds every 3-5 days before i get bored with the spec I'm currently using.

Keep in mind that this is not a rant but just an opinion/suggestion. I can say for sure that it did not drive me away from the game cause i really love the combat  but the deception was and is such that i am not willing to put so much time/interest into the game

[Gamerofthegame]

I voted, but also here is something else; Buff AGI builds.

Right now it would appear that high STR builds actually swing and attack faster then their AGI counterparts, all the while wearing their heavy stuff. Which is down right weird, especially when I, personally, am pushing 180 WPF with a katana while wearing about 10 weight in equipment, total.

Additionally, I recommend buffing Athletics, or at least the acceleration. Mount and blade has a strange physics engine, so if you even glance at something that isn't flat you lose a lot of speed, everyone functionally running at the same speed over such terrain as a result. It's silly.

Additionally, having AGI be the ones who swing fast would be nice; Consider STR to be ye olde damage dealers and tanks while AGI the speedy rogues. AGI builds are largely confined to light armor to keep their bonuses going and, additionally, have shit health. (STR and IF give you health, which... AGI builds do not have.) Throwing them a slashyslashy bone would be nice.

[Rangerbob]

I voted, but also here is something else; Buff AGI builds.

Right now it would appear that high STR builds actually swing and attack faster then their AGI counterparts, all the while wearing their heavy stuff. Which is down right weird, especially when I, personally, am pushing 180 WPF with a katana while wearing about 10 weight in equipment, total.

Additionally, I recommend buffing Athletics, or at least the acceleration. Mount and blade has a strange physics engine, so if you even glance at something that isn't flat you lose a lot of speed, everyone functionally running at the same speed over such terrain as a result. It's silly.

Additionally, having AGI be the ones who swing fast would be nice; Consider STR to be ye olde damage dealers and tanks while AGI the speedy rogues. AGI builds are largely confined to light armor to keep their bonuses going and, additionally, have shit health. (STR and IF give you health, which... AGI builds do not have.) Throwing them a slashyslashy bone would be nice.

Strength users don't really swing faster. Its just mechanics.  The reason to go agi is not for swing speed its for athletics.  The top end players that go agi are good because of their footwork and not their ability to spam.  Its a game basic game mechanic that if both players are standing still and you block a swing you can always counterattack.  Thats why if you're blocked by a long maul even using a side sword he can counterattack you with an overhand.  The reason people are able to get 2 swings in on you is footwork.  He's moving closer to you away from the side you're swinging at him from therefore he can hit you before your swing hits.  The way to counter this proper footwork keeping him in front of you and learning how to block.

[MountedRhader]

I have no complaints. I love cRPG no matter what freakish zombie baby it may turn out to be.

[Lech]

LOL, I do, all the time, but thats like saying if a 2hander is swinging at you, hold up a shield, doesn't make a class somehow not OP just by blocking them (and by the way other than crushthrough weapons, lancers have the only UNBLOCKABLE attack - couched lance).  In actual combat, just go watch NA 100 server with 30-40% of the server going cavalry.  You can downblock the first cav, he tramples you, seccond cav following easily lances you.  Or the more common scenario, you downblock or use a pike all the way to an actual melee fight and as soon as you engage anyone they can turn their horse on a dime (arabian) or charge halfwaya cross the field in a few seconds (courser) and either couch you or lollance you while you are meleeing.

Most cavalry kills are not people being unaware but cavalry having much higher speed and maneuverability and a much longer weapon than most allowing them to take advantage and easily kill anyone engaged in melee.  When you are on a horse just skirt the edges of the fight see someone actually try to melee anyone and you can get there within 2 seconds and lance them in the back, its incredibly easy way to rack up 20, sometimes 30 kills on a map with minimal risk.  The supposed counter of get a pike also doesn't work in that scenario as you cant melee very well if you are using a pike or if you are meleeing  or trying to attack a different cavalry person, the same thing happens to you.

The main reason this is possible is because of the huge bonus the riding skill gives to speed and maneuverability, which wasn't horirble as long as there were few cav on the battlefield (just like when there were few throwers on field before january), but as people have acquired more gold, upkeep is more manageable for many using a horse and the imbalance becomes readily noticeable as they proliferate.  It was actually much easier to dodge a lance before January even though horses lost 2 speed because the riding skill requirement of 6 agility kept riding skill lower, but now with the average riding skill being half again as high as it used to be it actually made horses faster and more maneuverable with 2 less speed stats.  Most lances outrange all but the longest polearms (think pikeman but with much greater mobility and a much larger speed bonus), so unless they are really average or bad they will hit you before you strike their horse and downblocking doesn't make them go away they just spin a 180 and hit you when you are meleeing or facing a different horseman.

The best evidence is just watch most fights nowadays and the practical reality of any map with even remotely flat terrain, inevitably cav completely dominate the battlefield every round.  Don't look at your own self as a horseman but how it actually plays out ina  balancing or unbalancing role in large group fights with multiple cavalry.  Inevitably, individual cav don't think speed/maneuvarbility need to be reduced, but thats never the whole picture from agame balancing perspective.

Well said!

[Yachdiel]

I feel like more polearms should have a unbalanced attribute. And some swingy spears should have cut damage, or do more damage when thrusted. One handers should get some love aswell as bows, besides the Long Bow of course.

Oh and 2H is outrageous

[PhantomZero]

Well said!

Well said for someone who wants to lay waste to all before him. Why must you think of not the single cavalryman, but the cavalry as a whole?

Why do you think of yourself as the lone warrior? If infantry were in a group, they would be much safer from cavalry.

If a two-hander is swinging at you, hold up your shield, and let your teammate bash in his skull! It does not matter if you get the kill, only that you win, for the multiplier.

If an archer is shooting at you, and you have no shield, hide behind someone who does! Or ask a horseman to assist you while you distract the archer.

Cavalry can only bump into one or two people before being stopped, even without a pike.

When 10 archers get together, and focus their fire, Cavalry gets decimated. 10 two handers will tear through almost any defense. 10 crossbowmen will reduce armored men to scrap. 10 spearmen will keep anyone at bay, 10 1h swordsmen will swarm any foe.

Why must you think of only cavalry when they act as a group? Cavalry act together because you learn very early on, that a lone cav at the start of the battle is mincemeat. It is time for everyone else to learn this lesson, and act together if they want to win a battle.

You talk about cav ignoring the full picture, but it is Kesh who ignores it, and would be happy to see cavalry gone from the game, or limited to only 3 per team.

Cavalry is heavily dependent upon the map terrain and composition of the enemy force. In addition, a cavalryman is also heavily dependent upon his horse, a great expense. Cav is forced to spend less on armor and secondary weapons as he must spend all of it on his horse, maybe a shield, and lance, if he equips himself fully, he will quickly run out of money. If the horseman loses his horse he is usually swarmed and beaten to death, and if not, he may find himself inadequately equipped to fight on foot for someone at his level.

As cavalry becomes more popular, both teams will have similar numbers of cavalry, thus balancing it out. Having many of one type working together on a team will always defeat an opposing team without the correct counter or teamwork. This is also why many people are upset with the "banner balance" mechanic.

You might say "You can't balance this game depending upon people to work together!" but that is stupid, what about Strategus? Are there going to be two sets of rules for balance?

[DrKronic]

cool man, I actually think melee is basically balanced better than its been, anytime I see someone good now it doesn't matter what they use 1h/2h/pole I've even seen archers rape(this guy called nicotine lol) anyhow powwa to the people@@!

[polkafranzi]

Well said for someone who wants to lay waste to all before him. Why must you think of not the single cavalryman, but the cavalry as a whole?

Why do you think of yourself as the lone warrior? If infantry were in a group, they would be much safer from cavalry.

If a two-hander is swinging at you, hold up your shield, and let your teammate bash in his skull! It does not matter if you get the kill, only that you win, for the multiplier.

If an archer is shooting at you, and you have no shield, hide behind someone who does! Or ask a horseman to assist you while you distract the archer.

Cavalry can only bump into one or two people before being stopped, even without a pike.

When 10 archers get together, and focus their fire, Cavalry gets decimated. 10 two handers will tear through almost any defense. 10 crossbowmen will reduce armored men to scrap. 10 spearmen will keep anyone at bay, 10 1h swordsmen will swarm any foe.

Why must you think of only cavalry when they act as a group? Cavalry act together because you learn very early on, that a lone cav at the start of the battle is mincemeat. It is time for everyone else to learn this lesson, and act together if they want to win a battle.

You talk about cav ignoring the full picture, but it is Kesh who ignores it, and would be happy to see cavalry gone from the game, or limited to only 3 per team.

Cavalry is heavily dependent upon the map terrain and composition of the enemy force. In addition, a cavalryman is also heavily dependent upon his horse, a great expense. Cav is forced to spend less on armor and secondary weapons as he must spend all of it on his horse, maybe a shield, and lance, if he equips himself fully, he will quickly run out of money. If the horseman loses his horse he is usually swarmed and beaten to death, and if not, he may find himself inadequately equipped to fight on foot for someone at his level.

As cavalry becomes more popular, both teams will have similar numbers of cavalry, thus balancing it out. Having many of one type working together on a team will always defeat an opposing team without the correct counter or teamwork. This is also why many people are upset with the "banner balance" mechanic.

You might say "You can't balance this game depending upon people to work together!" but that is stupid, what about Strategus? Are there going to be two sets of rules for balance?

Well said!