Remove turnrate nerf

[Rebelyell]

Well sure, but its more about reverting back to an older state that is working fine in native, rather than breaching new grounds of difficulty that have not been tested. And while true that bad decision making such as 1vs many is punished hard now as many think it should be, isnt it more fun to see the spectacle of really good players overcome those situations consistently? So that those arent bad decisions, but calculated gambles. You can often notice a bad bunch and select to fight them for easy pickings, but current mechanics will punish such decisions by limiting the ability to deal with it.

There will always be split opinions on these balances, but its like i mentioned, should it be balanced to even out skill or to allow for high skill ceilings to that people can really push performance into new areas. As one who strives to become better, i feel like i have been locked into very simple mechanics that work but arent very advanced and dont feel very rewarding.

Man I soooo disagree with anything you say about game balance in crpg that sometimes I think I hate you for only that reason.

I am sure that in your eyes everything you say makes sense but some player rather just leave that game for good that see that cancer back.

[Grumbs]

I don't really have much of an opinion on turn speed, but I would like to have a longer effective reach on the stabs. Awlpike shouldn't glance just because you're more than a foot away from someone. All the polearms have terrible glance rates atm tbh

[Gravoth_iii]

Man I soooo disagree with anything you say about game balance in crpg that sometimes I think I hate you for only that reason.

I am sure that in your eyes everything you say makes sense but some player rather just leave that game for good that see that cancer back.

And some left simply due to it being implemented. Do you even play the game anymore? I guess youre probably playing under an alt if so, otherwise it seems like youre not playing now eitherway. And i cant hate you babby, youre too cute for that.

[Leshma]

I'm ready to accept some changes and adjustments as should any player, but if they're taking control from the player then it's gonna turn out bad. Pretty sure it'd get shunned by the Warband competitive community as well.

That's very touchy topic, because even tho everyone is sane enough to recognize that "feinting" in Warband is actually abuse of broken animation system, if they leave it out by fixing that shit in Bannerlord certain percentage of Warband players will be very unhappy. Should they make the game better so it actually make sense or should they keep numerous tricks enabled by leaving broken systems in place or emulating those broken systems?

I'm fairly sure they never intented for things like two-ha duelist feinting to be a thing, it's just they couldn't test for it or maybe they've noticed it but left it in game for the lulz. But they certainly aren't wicked enough to build their game around broken system, or maybe they are. We're talking about metal loving, long haired Turks who lack mustaches and bears and can be considered as liberal (anti Erdogan). You can expect anything from such weirdos.

What you call control might be another players bug or exploit. Ultimate control in video games is god mode in games where you glide in all directions at gradually rising velocity and go through walls and stuff. You know like when you start a game in editor.

[Vibe]

I'm not sure how involved taleworlds is with the competitive scene, but bannerlord could very well go the same route as sfv, and well, look at that competitive scene vs sf4's.

Fair point but not everybody is Crapcom I think TW wants the competitive scene to grow, as we've seen by them doing Battle of Bucharest for Warband a while ago.

[Butan]

If players overcome those situations consistently, then it's not sufficiently difficult. I already see good players win in those situations, and it's more impressive because you don't see it all the time.

You are closing in on the actual problem: people can still overcome difficult situations (ganks, dealing with backstabs and general awereness challenges) but they are rarer artificially because the game has a hard cap (turn rate) on how much people can exploit their actual attention span / reflex time / overall motor/eye coordination. The skill oriented part of the game is what drives me, and if lots of people think the same maybe it can show a dissonance between the playerbase and the game, and justify modifications.

So yeah people still manage to overcome tough situations, but way less and players dies that wouldnt before, why? To avoid some netlag/animation spazzing up and to make combat a bit more realistic looking (people instantly 180° stabbing an opponent lol): the first is avoidable if coding permits, and the second is (for me) less important than gameplay (to a limit of course) and can still be limited.


Now I agree that we must temper our passion, thats why I'm a proponent of increasing the maximum turn rate, but not to the point we had 5 years ago. A compromise between realism/gameplay/animation.

[Jona]

Fair point but not everybody is Crapcom I think TW wants the competitive scene to grow, as we've seen by them doing Battle of Bucharest for Warband a while ago.

Cool, would be interesting to see if Bannerlord can become a decent competitive experience for both players and spectators.

[Gravoth_iii]

If players overcome those situations consistently, then it's not sufficiently difficult. I already see good players win in those situations, and it's more impressive because you don't see it all the time.

I too want to get better at the game, but surely wanting to move the goal-posts is the opposite? That's less about wanting to be the best you can be at the game, but wanting to make the game more convenient for you. As long as you aren't the best player in the entire game right now, there's room to grow within the current mechanics. You're far far from reaching the physical cap of how well you can play with these mechanics.

I think its more impressive to see someone be able to deal with such situations often and consistently, rather than it being a big rarity even amongst the best because it makes it a much bigger threat defensively.

I wouldnt say its moving the goal-posts, more like reverting the ball into the previously standard lighter weight since its been increased. I cant do the same curve balls with this high weight ball, and its far easier for anyone to block it because the variety of shots has been limited quite a bit. It has also crippled passing, because they will be far slower and reach shorter. I am forced into a much more solo oriented game because passes have to be so certain otherwise they'll just be interrupted. People will still try the passes and get intercepted constantly, but can you blame them? it doesnt feel natural anymore.

[Butan]

If the game was changed to make these situations less rare, then the number would be artificially higher. It's artificial in either case, because you're changing a factor independent of player skill to allow a certain outcome to occur more or less easily.

In this case, increasing turn speed would be making certain behaviour easier. Should Prof sit with a cRPG leaderboard and decide that certain players that can't rambo successfully now "are good enough already, they should be allowed to rambo more easily" and change the game accordingly?

I don't hate the idea of an increase as long as it doesn't have an adverse effect on population, game performance, or the quality of animations. I still strongly suspect that the impact on 1v1 has been greatly exaggerated in this thread and that people will simply find the average skill level is just higher but I can't substantiate that.

What I do disagree with is any attempt to claim the moral high-ground by making the argument "I want the game to be harder by making it easier for me to play the way I like" or "the game took a bad turn cos devs listened to lobbying. Now do what I say!". See it for what it is, players who think their playstyle will be improved are lobbying for a change, there's no shame in that since it's what players have been doing since the mod came out.

No need to pick on a couple words and play dictionnary 


The amount of exaggeration isnt crucial either, as long as you understand the reality behind the exaggerations = combat is of course longer if the game is slower or less responsive, in general.
I dont think there is a matter of high-ground as its just a debate between two ideas and where the dev stands.

[Larvae]

i wonder what would happen to the playerbase that we have now,if devs turn all changes back to the model we had 2012 ( but keep ofc new weapons gear etc )

guess it would be funny.

i have no problem with increasing turnrate,never had a problem with it,not on my shielder or my 2h,u can easy adapt to some changes,thats what makes the game for me so addictive.

[Leesin]

I would accept the cancer of turn rate nerf removal if there is a HA buff 

[Gravoth_iii]

I would accept the cancer of turn rate nerf removal if there is a HA buff 

I have no issues with HA buffs  But we are in the minority.

[Tindel]

Name a single good player who lobbied to have turnrate nerfed.

You cant,  it was crying from scrubs that caused it. People who could not block down.

[Leshma]

Name a single good player who lobbied to have turnrate nerfed.

You cant,  it was crying from scrubs that caused it. People who could not block down.

Actually it was decision made by devs, doubt scrubs knew it was possible to nerf turnrate.

[Gravoth_iii]

Name a good player who's lobbying to have it reverted.

I'll wait

Just look in the thread and there are multiple. I know a chunk of byzantium want it. Phyrex wants it, and at the time he was one of the best duelists. Varadin wants it.

Actually it was decision made by devs, doubt scrubs knew it was possible to nerf turnrate.

And we all know how good the devs were. But scrubs did cry that roflcopter stabs are somehow bullshit because they cant learn to block down.