Open Plains

[Overdriven]

There is no current plains maps rotation though Kato...we get one very very rarely. I'm only arguing for a few more.

[RamsesXXIIX]

Ofc it isn't like the infantry you see in cRPG, but thats not the point. The point is, this video shows massive cavalry is very strong, since they can beat a force of 50 pikemen without problems. And i did bring other arguments to show why massive numbers of cavalry is overpowered.

1.Stop saying infantry Ramses. They aren't infantry. They are pikemen in that video. Put a mixed group of shielders, archers, 2h and pike men and do the same and then you have an argument.

2. The problem is the proper material can't be gained because there aren't any maps. I have the proper material from the one map we played. And there's a thread with other witnesses to attest to it. The only way to 'test' it is to put more maps in rotation in the first place. Thus nullifying your argument.

3. 100 people saying something is more relevant than posting a native video with pikemen and not infantry.

4. Edit: Also your 50vs50 point is just plain irrelevant because never in public would you get a battle that is pure 50vs50 infantry to cav. So your point makes little sense in the context of adding more open plains maps. The argument is irrelevant and so should be stopped here. It's taking away from the purpose of the thread.

1. I disagree, but i don't think we'll agree on that. Just leave it.

2. Maybe you should have collected some material and showed us to back up what you're saying, instead of just talking. And, maybe i'm just slow, but what thread are you talking about that nullified my argument? Please quote the important points here. Finally, i would love to see your material

3. Where are these 100 people? And again, i disagree.

4. Let me cut it out for you: I raised the situation to show that massive numbers of cavalry beat massive numbers of infantry, with little matter to skill and organization.

Imagine this situation if you need something that's more realistic in cRPG: 2 teams, both of 50 players. One team has 40 cavalry, the other one has 10. I still believe the team with 40 cavalry will win alot easier than the team with 10, no matter how much the infantry organizes.

[Lorenzo_of_Iberia]

I think Ramses what I'd like to see is not a dated native example with just one class, where there are many changed factors (because yes having more heavy horses does make a difference, many heavy horses can survive several pike hits). One of the differences between native and crpg is crpg has had some huge alterations for example the great lance is only couchable in crpg. In native it was amazingly powerful because of the thrust length.

And if we go by the assumption that clan fights have limitations only because of the control of the op, we should say that archers are too strong in large numbers, but we constantly play archer biased maps such as village and other city maps.  Yet these seem to take up every other map... You could claim that current rotation is archer biased which might explain the reason we have so many archers in crpg.

I propose someone test this out and have an open fields map with 20 selected footmen vs 20 selected cav and see what the outcome is then, we will have some relevant evidence that is representative of the current state.

Finally ramses you are probably right by saying that 40 cav vs 30inf/10 cav would be victory for 40 cav, as its difficult to protect those 10 cav unless they too themselves hide or just plain avoid the 40. Leaves 30 inf vs 40 cav and a significant number advantage but its not down to op cav class.

[Overdriven]

Ofc it isn't like the infantry you see in cRPG, but thats not the point. The point is, this video shows massive cavalry is very strong, since they can beat a force of 50 pikemen without problems. And i did bring other arguments to show why massive numbers of cavalry is overpowered.

1. I disagree, but i don't think we'll agree on that. Just leave it.

2. Maybe you should have collected some material and showed us to back up what you're saying, instead of just talking. And, maybe i'm just slow, but what thread are you talking about that nullified my argument? Please quote the important points here. Finally, i would love to see your material

3. Where are these 100 people? And again, i disagree.

4. Let me cut it out for you: I raised the situation to show that massive numbers of cavalry beat massive numbers of infantry, with little matter to skill and organization.

Imagine this situation if you need something that's more realistic in cRPG: 2 teams, both of 50 players. One team has 40 cavalry, the other one has 10. I still believe the team with 40 cavalry will win alot easier than the team with 10, no matter how much the infantry organizes.

Ramses...take this argument to the nerf cav thread. I'm asking for map variation...which we don't have. This is not the ground to argue cavalry vs infantry because there it is far more likely that the majority of players that end up on a open plains map will be infantry.  The majority of builds in cRPG are infantry based. Most maps only see a fraction of the team as cavalry (hence why you get the cav is op argument in the first place, because there are only a few of them to be ninja cav taking advantage of the hack and slash maps).

I'll refute your arguments in the endless nerf cav threads, but this isn't the place to do it.

Map variation is not a bad thing. If you want to argue against having open plains, then argue from that basis. Not a cav is OP basis. Which has little context in the entire picture of open plains and cRPG.

2. Maybe you should have collected some material and showed us to back up what you're saying, instead of just talking. And, maybe i'm just slow, but what thread are you talking about that nullified my argument? Please quote the important points here. Finally, i would love to see your material

O and...go check the general discussion forum, also earlier in this thread. There are plenty of witness statements. And in the real world witness statements count as real evidence.

[RamsesXXIIX]

I'm not arguing to nerf cavalry, my point remains the same: Too many random plains results in cavalry being overpowered, which results in an increasing number of cavalry.

Which is why we should watch out with having too many random plains, since then everyone but the most dedicated infantrymen will be riding around.

Here's the point i'm slowly trying to get to: I'm afraid that having too many plain maps will make infantry obsolete, and cavalry OP. Every class should be equally able to perform successfully. If there's too many plain maps, people will find out cavalry is the easiest and the more cavalry your team has, the better.

There is a (another) difference between us Overdriven:
 

The majority of builds in cRPG are infantry based.

You state this as if they won't ever change. I'm pretty sure if we had 24/7 random plains you would see the majority of players turning into cavalry, given enough time. Players adapt, as far as i can see.

And one of the funniest things you don't seem to see:

Don't take too many random plains. 1 of 3 seems quite good though.

I've been agreeing with you almost from the beginning. I want map variation as well, i'm just advising against too many random plains maps, since they are unbalanced towards cavalry.

[Overdriven]

I'm not arguing to nerf cavalry, my point remains the same: Too many random plains results in cavalry being overpowered, which results in an increasing number of cavalry.

There is a (another) difference between us Overdriven:
 
You state this as if they won't ever change. I'm pretty sure if we had 24/7 random plains you would see the majority of players turning into cavalry, given enough time. Players adapt, as far as i can see.

And one of the funniest things you don't seem to see:

I've been agreeing with you almost from the beginning. I want map variation as well, i'm just advising against too many random plains maps, since they are unbalanced towards cavalry.

But all your examples are stating stuff which I'm not suggesting. I'm not suggesting 24/7 random plains. I'm suggesting the occasional open plains map. Which isn't really a problem. If it were constant open plains, then I doubt you'd ever see infantry again. But I'm suggesting anything between 1 in 6 maps to 1 in 4 being open plains maps. Just so that occasionally something comes up that provides a good set piece battle. Rather than the street brawling individual camps we get now.

[Lorenzo_of_Iberia]

So thats a positive that we are all in agreement that slightly more regular open plain maps would be nice I don't think anyone wants purely open plains, that is boring

[RamsesXXIIX]

What i'm stating is that massive amounts of cavalry is overpowered on random plains. Thats what all my examples, the video and the arguments have been about. BUT i'm up for having the occasional random plains, more than what we have now. I like the OP suggestion of 1 out of 4 maps. Its a nice challenge and usually cavalry will be balanced anyway.

Its a statement like this that can't stop me:

Furthermore, an organised foot team with archers, shields and pikes will rape any cav on that map.

Sorry if i took things a bit too far.

[Overdriven]

What i'm stating is that massive amounts of cavalry is overpowered on random plains. Thats what all my examples, the video and the arguments have been about. BUT i'm up for having the occasional random plains, more than what we have now. I like the OP suggestion of 1 out of 4 maps. Its a nice challenge and usually cavalry will be balanced anyway.

Its a statement like this that can't stop me:

Sorry if i took things a bit too far.

Glad we reached an agreement. Rape was probably not the best word from Kafein. I would say they can certainly hold their own and do have the potential to beat them. But not rape   

[Lorenzo_of_Iberia]

Hugs all round! tbh I thought it was a good debate

[Casimir]

The efficiency of cavalry on an open plains map varies from  each one as they are randomly generated, some will be virtually flat allowing for cav to easily surround and dominate the infantry, some will be far more hilly allowing the infantry to defend themselves easily.

Random plains is random, that's all their is too it. i'm a fan of it, keep it in.

[Jarlek]

Actually "Random" plains aren't random. They are just maps that were made by the procedural method and then remembered for the server. They are just the same no matter how many times we play them (altough there are a lot of them). What would be fun was if we could have ACTUALLY random maps where the server makes new ones at a regular basis or something. To do that now we would have to change the serverlist manually.

[Overdriven]

Would steppe plains provide flatter maps? Random plains always has too many big hills. Steppe plains should do the job.

[Jarlek]

They are all the same actually. Start up warband and before you select a module (native, crpg etc.) press configure and enable edit mode. Then start/continue a single player game. To the far left bottom (just left of the "camp" button) you will see a new button called "Terrain". Here you can make a random map. See how it varies when you change the different valuables.
    What I would like was for the servers to make some maps like this, maybe two or three once a week, and add them to the maplist. When so the week is over they are deleted and replaced by the new ones. If by luck a really fun and balanced one is made then we can also save it and make it a normal map or if a weird/unbalanced one is made then it can be removed.
   If we also could make it add a building here and there (like a single hut/house/roadside inn/farm) and maybe a couple of roads (it can already do rivers) then it would be awesome.

[Lichen]

I'm not arguing for 1 in 2 maps being open plains I said maybe 1-4 as a basic suggestion. But that could vary and honestly I don't see that as unreasonable. Certainly with 4 maps in rotation, you are likely to get an infantry map in there, so why shouldn't there be an open plains map?

Infantry rampages on those maps, so why shouldn't there be a map that swings in cavalry's favour?

Because we all know this game is about manly heroic sword duels in congested maps done over and over to the point of nausea (nord town makes me throw up...many of those other overplayed maps make me sick too (don't know the names)). I quit another game I used to play because every time I went to play (really not exaggerating) they were playing THE SAME overplayed mind numbing repetitive congested urban map.  One way to ruin a game is play the same maps OVER AND OVER. But you can't argue with some people. Some don't want diversity.