Battle vs Siege

[Tomas_Miles_again]

I play battle mostly, especially when I have work to do that can run at the same time as Warband. But nowadays I have less time so when I do play I like to get more playtime, and with my build that kind of works out better on siege. Unless I stand around and hide.

[San]

I like to tease siege and siege players, but I honestly like them both. NA siege just doesn't have enough players I want to fight a lot of the time (mostly wait until HG or KUTT or clan members are on) and I get a lot of playtime on battle since I survive pretty decently. I would still say I like battle more, it never gets dull for more than a day for me.

[Joker86]

Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.

[Kafein]

-- Cav is by nature OP compared to Inf, and is only fully utilized by a very minority of players. They could be safely nerfed, leaving only people with brains to do well with them. 1 grain of teamwork makes them vastly more powerful i.ex. (Like, I saw Tommy and 1 more do a nice sandwich against 5 enemies yesterday.. Bumped half of them, killed 2 outright and survived.)

About a specific cav nerf, I think adjusting the maneuverability of horses would do a lot. This would make sure they travel in more predictable paths, can't turn on a dime, and will generally force them to teamwork more, aka bump trains, sandwiching, timing their charge etc.

Always the same bullshit, Thomek. I've counted how many cavs there are around primetime on EU_1 when I was there. And it seems you think 2 cav players per team is too much. They haven't been nerfed to oblivion enough with all the horse nerfs apparently. Decrease maneuver even one point and horses will simply stop turning, I guess that'll make them unable to do anything but sneak attacks. Who I am kidding, cav players dumb enough not to respec stopped doing any kind of open attack long ago anyway.

[Erasmas]

Siege.

Cave trolls love siege.

[Molly]

Always the same bullshit, Thomek. I've counted how many cavs there are around primetime on EU_1 when I was there. And it seems you think 2 cav players per team is too much. They haven't been nerfed to oblivion enough with all the horse nerfs apparently. Decrease maneuver even one point and horses will simply stop turning, I guess that'll make them unable to do anything but sneak attacks. Who I am kidding, cav players dumb enough not to respec stopped doing any kind of open attack long ago anyway.

2 cav per team? How long is it ago that you visited EU1?

Try 5-8 per team in the evening...

[Leshma]

Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive. Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.

Fixed.

[Thomek]

Neither game mode is really good, but I voted for battle since it is closer to a round based conquest mode, which is what the game would have needed while it was alive.

Joker, the game is alive. Wake up.

Always the same bullshit, Thomek.

(click to show/hide)

I've counted how many cavs there are around primetime on EU_1 when I was there. And it seems you think 2 cav players per team is too much. They haven't been nerfed to oblivion enough with all the horse nerfs apparently. Decrease maneuver even one point and horses will simply stop turning, I guess that'll make them unable to do anything but sneak attacks. Who I am kidding, cav players dumb enough not to respec stopped doing any kind of open attack long ago anyway.

Who can afford an open attack nowadays anyway? You want to charge head on to a prepared player? That would be really good for gameplay you know. Would very quickly clean out all targets until there were only cav and xbowers left in this mod.

Kafein, in a cav charging a melee player, who takes the biggest risk?
Can the cav player not just block if the melee player surprises him?
Who decides when to attack?
Who can run away?
Who can just wait around or ride to the next target?
Who has a 120+ armored animal that needs to be slaughtered before he can touch the rider?
Who can bumpslash, bumpcouch, bumplance the melee player?
Who can rapetrain the melee?
Who can just bump him and wait for the xbower in the bushes 100m away to snipe him while the inf is down?
Who doesn't have to worry about equipment weight?
etc etc..

Give me a break, you are the one full of BS about cav. You have so many tools and options, and if its hard to play cav, it's because you are not using them, or because the infantry player is more than 1 step better than you.

With all these advantages, cav is a class that can EASILY survive a nerf, and making them less like go-carts would not be the least unnatural.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

Joker, the game is alive. Wake up.

Who can afford an open attack nowadays anyway? You want to charge head on to a prepared player? That would be really good for gameplay you know. Would very quickly clean out all targets until there were only cav and xbowers left in this mod.

Kafein, in a cav charging a melee player, who takes the biggest risk?
Can the cav player not just block if the melee player surprises him?
Who decides when to attack?
Who can run away?
Who can just wait around or ride to the next target?
Who has a 120+ armored animal that needs to be slaughtered before he can touch the rider?
Who can bumpslash, bumpcouch, bumplance the melee player?
Who can rapetrain the melee?
Who can just bump him and wait for the xbower in the bushes 100m away to snipe him while the inf is down?
Who doesn't have to worry about equipment weight?
etc etc..

Give me a break, you are the one full of BS about cav. You have so many tools and options, and if its hard to play cav, it's because you are not using them, or because the infantry player is more than 1 step better than you.

With all these advantages, cav is a class that can EASILY survive a nerf, and making them less like go-carts would not be the least unnatural.

Thomek thanks for proving you don't understand shit about how cavalry works.

Not saying Kafein ain't sliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiightly over the top, but still.

[Teeth]

Kafein, in a cav charging a melee player, who takes the biggest risk?

Charging any infantry head on is very dangerous business as lancer cavalry and you really gotta be sure of yourself that you can pull it off. The speedbonus with which you plan to drive your lance through someones skull is the same speed bonus that is going to be applied to your or your horse if you fail. The difference is that your base damage is a 31p MW lance which gets a 27.25% damage penalty from being used on horseback. Which means you have a 22.5p attack, whereas the guy you are stabbing could have a 28p Great Sword, a 36p Awlpike or a number of weapons that will significantly outdamage you.

Also, if I block when charging a melee player my horse is gonna bite the dust, whereas if he simply downblocks he will get bumped, worst case scenario. As far as lancer cavalry goes, I use a level 32 build and usually around 70-80k gear and I fall slightly short of both my pole, 2h and swashbuckler infantry performance at least K/D wise. I do find that 1h cav has too high damage potential with low powerstrike builds, but I can't say lancer cav is OP. Especially now that every class has a very high reach stab and hoplites and 2D polearms are very popular.

[HUtH]

Generally what's wrong with cav is the terrible horse animations, that the horse can't kick and bite, that the decision when too jump belongs only too player(so unrealistic), that nothing happens when cav hits a wall, etc., that some not warbred horses can just charge at infantry blob though it'd be possible a horse would just stop, etc.
Cavalry should be powerful, because it's a freakin' medieval blitzkrieg machine, but also in many situations it should be hard for a horseman to ride as he wants, just be harder to control and less like go-karts.

[San]

Siding with Thomek there. If you get beat that badly as cav, the infantry was just that much better than you or you were just riding carelessly.

[Gravoth_iii]

Only 1h cav should be nerfed though. Lance cav are fine as they are now, no need for buffs or nerfs.

[wanteds]

sieg cuz i liek spawn wen i ded.

[Gurnisson]

Lancer is stronger than 1h cavalry.