So was talking with some old AoC friends..



  • Been a few years, but surprised to see them still playing AoC, but not excited about Chivalry. They say Chivalry looks to be noob mode and made for casual gamers and requires less skill than Chivalry.

    They say the skill gap is really small in Chivalry, while it is wide in AoC. Having not played Chivalry yet, I can’t fully know, but based on videos, battle looks like it requires more skill and less glitching, but that’s just me. Some glitches are around so long that people see them as gameplay intentional, so when they are removed / fix, they think it’s been made noob.

    Was just shocked to find the only AoC server with anyone in it, and they were all “meh” when talking about Chivalry.

    Hope it ends up proving them wrong. They said alot of stuff that didn’t make sense like “You can’t start a swing then run towards the enemy and hit them” in Chivalry, which from videos, seems you can? He says you can in AoC, but I never managed to, though I tried every fight.

    Was just odd to see; I jumped in to play an old favorite and generally get excited with some fans of AoC about Chivalry, surprised me how much they didn’t want it.

    But it reminds me of another game, which name escapes memory, that when it went retail, a bunch of friends of mine said they wouldn’t play it because it made it to easy / noob mode. It’s on the tip of my tongue, but I can’t remember what game it was. But I’ve seen this before, tis terrible.

    They’re so absorbed in the nostalgia of AoC, that they can’t see Chivalry. Got beer goggles on. AoC is alot of fun, but it was far from perfect, Chivalry seems to be an evolution of the formula, not a new one.



  • Yes, you can start an attack and then run.



  • Can’t really say AoC was any good nor skill-based. To me it felt like spamming attacks is the way to go… but I can’t say for sure as I could never stand to play it for more than a few rounds.



  • AoC had a great learning curve actually, glitchy games usually do that, they have the biggest learning curves.

    Well Chivalry is definitely a lot more improved, smoother, more realistic, not glitchy.
    I don’t know about the skill aspect of it yet.

    But some things really look like they catter for the noobs, I will agree there, like crosshairs, zooming.

    In AoC you had to aim with the tip of your bow, and crossbows had something like an iron sight that you’d aim with, it was great, also when you maned a balista you’d have to judge yourself where the bolt will go, right now from what I’ve seen ballistas are very easy to use.

    And generally it was a way more unforgiving game, one mistake and you were gone.



  • Chivalry has the same feel as AoC. But it is a different game. Personally, I don’t know how you could love aoc and not love chivalry. That doesn’t make sense to me. Unless your computer sucks. Then you would def love aoc more the chiv. Chiv requires a ton more performance then aoc did. I upgraded my computer this year and I’m really glad I did. Chiv runs perfect.

    As far as the combat goes, Chiv is MUCH more dynamic then aoc. When you get past the noob level of combat and start fighting experienced fighters, one mistake and you’re dead. The combat is much better than aoc. The epicness of aoc on it’s best day isn’t half the epicness of Chivalry on a daily basis.



  • @-Slash-:

    AoC had a great learning curve actually, glitchy games usually do that, they have the biggest learning curves.

    Why would glitchy games have the highest learning curves, that makes no sense at all. You sure you know what a glitch is?
    Glitches get patched, usually, so does that mean the learning curves get removed?



  • Yea, kinda, not removed, but very much shortened.



  • I’m with gB here. I don’t know how anyone could prefer AoC to Chivalry. I guarantee you anyone who’s actually played both wouldn’t even consider the comparison. AoC’s skill ceiling was actually very low, so much so that the majority of the ‘skill’ in combat came from knowing quirks and abuses within the engine. It was the skill floor which was higher in AoC than in Chivalry, because Chivalry has much more intuitive and user friendly controls/mechanics and much more reliable hit detection, while AoC felt like a fight against Source and its unfriendliness towards melee from the first minute.



  • @SlyGoat:

    I’m with gB here. I don’t know how anyone could prefer AoC to Chivalry. I guarantee you anyone who’s actually played both wouldn’t even consider the comparison. AoC’s skill ceiling was actually very low, so much so that the majority of the ‘skill’ in combat came from knowing quirks and abuses within the engine. It was the skill floor which was higher in AoC than in Chivalry, because Chivalry has much more intuitive and user friendly controls/mechanics and much more reliable hit detection, while AoC felt like a fight against Source and its unfriendliness towards melee from the first minute.

    You are saying that the Xbow people that did well, like Russian, me and Fergus etc all used very little skill / abused how they worked?

    Imo, I’d still much rather prefer Age of Chivalry’s Ranged combat, it took a lot more skill to aim and I hope that the devs see that the arching of it made archery fun :(

    Melee is faster in Chivalry, and until you start getting penalized for spamming repeatedly and Stamina is actually Introduced (fully), then it’s not going to require as much skill either, Age of Chivalry might of been a Block then hit, whereas at the moment this is a 1 guy spams at you while you repeatedly block his attacks and hope for the best you can out run him or find a team mate, but it still required more skill so far…

    As said once stamina, more weapon balance and blocking become more of a reality, it will probably make it better than AoC… but until Ranged is changed from M & B to between AoC and Chiv or more towards Aoc, its not as much fun / skill requiring.

    while AoC felt like a fight against Source and its unfriendliness towards ranged from the first minute.

    Fixed, as we all know people hate ranged, its all you heard from ragers :p



  • Maybe I should’ve clarified I was talking about melee. Ranged in Chivalry does seem very shallow.



  • i find it just the opposite really, chivalry is far from easy where is i found AOC to be just that. I think the reason more than anything else that “some” AOC players are trying to knock Chivalry is either 1: they have not played the beta yet or more probabal 2: they lack funds, seems to me that when you have a free mod you get a lot of kiddies that dont have jobs.

    Chivalry is 5 times the game AOC was and quite frankly blows it out of the water, ive payed more for games i have deleted and havent enjoyed a game like I do this in Years.

    Hats off to the Developers for making a game you dont just play… But you actually Feel.



  • obviously your friends don’t know what they’re talking about. i played AoC for 4-5 years and once i start alpha testing Chiv i LOVED it, even in early alpha. yes, there is certain things that are “noob”, but they’re just the things that define lower skilled combat, just like slash spammers in AoC. Chiv takes AoC and adds 5 layers of game onto it, it adds armor and attack types, which honestly i don’t think AoC had and if it did i didn’t notice it at all, it adds feinting, dynamic hitting and parrying, even ranged has improved in ways since shield no longer form an invisible wall in front of someone, i OFTEN shoot someones feet and have them go “WTF”. i think the only gripe i have about chiv currently is some of the pushing objectives, since it’s just an area of effect around the back of a cart or bomb wagon it takes out the “pusher” aspect of it and takes out some tact, but everything else that’s been added easily makes up for it. all in all if you form an opinion on chiv without even playing it first then you’re talking out your ass, you need to put in atleast 8 hours to start to fully understand the game.



  • I’m hearing a lot of this from former AoC players myself. I think the problem lies with the restriction placed on movement and attacks. To the free wheeling AoC veterans it’s extremely jarring at first, especially since the rest of the game is so reminiscent of the mod, the players expect those aspects to remain the same. The new mechanics seem limiting “noob-friendly” to them at first, when in reality they provide a slew of new combat options that dwarf AoC’s offering and reward intuitive skill as much as they do intimate knowledge of the game.

    If the game was to grow into something more it needed to be stripped to its core to strengthen its foundation. The heart of the game has been retained while the unintuitive design has been left in the rubble, which is the only way things could and should have happened at a studio that promises innovation.



  • @dirtyjob:

    i find it just the opposite really, chivalry is far from easy where is i found AOC to be just that. I think the reason more than anything else that “some” AOC players are trying to knock Chivalry is either 1: they have not played the beta yet or more probabal 2: they lack funds, seems to me that when you have a free mod you get a lot of kiddies that dont have jobs.

    Chivalry is 5 times the game AOC was and quite frankly blows it out of the water, ive payed more for games i have deleted and havent enjoyed a game like I do this in Years.

    Hats off to the Developers for making a game you dont just play… But you actually Feel.

    I actually work night shifts and earn 2x more than a 37-40 hour day job for 2 days, I don’t lack funds, I have plenty of time to test solo and with friends and I’ve played AoC since September 2008 when it was released on Steam, to which the devs know full well of me (most of the time bad way of coming across) :P

    A lot of the reviews are coming from those who play the game, the Devs have an initial feedback thread to which it’s been used well, same with the bug thread, people are contributing and things are being changed…

    Simply saying that Age of Chivalry’s ranged mechanics involved you to aim high for long range with an Xbow, which made good xbow players stand out, for being able to compete with a longbowman in range, the difference being higher damage for learning something that was difficult to master, compared to Chivalry in which 99% of the time its straight forward / little drop.

    Age of Chivalry had a lot of different age groups, Heard / seen 10 year old to 50 year old people, all have their unique play style.

    P.S,

    We’re not trying to knock Chivalry, Age of Chivalry was a stepping stone compared to this, and I never thought the devs would of been capable of producing something this amazing in such a short period of time really, compared to Age of Chivalry in design wise its on par with companies that have 50+ workers and those of us who have been playing since early days (i know it was earlier than 2008) want to see what else they can bring and how they will mould Chivalry :)

    Not trying to sound like a jackass or anything, or trying to mean it as offensive lol, just my take on your comment :P



  • @Saraski:

    @dirtyjob:

    i find it just the opposite really, chivalry is far from easy where is i found AOC to be just that. I think the reason more than anything else that “some” AOC players are trying to knock Chivalry is either 1: they have not played the beta yet or more probabal 2: they lack funds, seems to me that when you have a free mod you get a lot of kiddies that dont have jobs.

    Chivalry is 5 times the game AOC was and quite frankly blows it out of the water, ive payed more for games i have deleted and havent enjoyed a game like I do this in Years.

    Hats off to the Developers for making a game you dont just play… But you actually Feel.

    Simply saying that Age of Chivalry’s ranged mechanics involved you to aim high for long range with an Xbow, which made good xbow players stand out, for being able to compete with a longbowman in range, the difference being higher damage for learning something that was difficult to master, compared to Chivalry in which 99% of the time its straight forward / little drop.

    Not trying to sound like a jackass or anything, or trying to mean it as offensive lol, just my take on your comment :P

    let me address your response, and i take no offense :)

    if you read what you have quoted me on, i said “some” NOT all.

    continuing on,
    since your kind enough to inform me of your work and financial life, thats good, in this economy , I too am blessed, we are not 10 year old kids.

    on to the xbow point… I would say, judging by playing xbow on both AOC and Chivalry, depending on the map in chiv, yes there may be a lot of straight on shots if your close “as the xbow was designed for realistically”, like in aoc but at a distance you still have to aim high, so i am either missing your point or i have to disagree with you on how the xbow works for distant shots in chiv, keeping in mind there are 3 xbows in chiv. I will also like to say i do not think xhairs belong in chiv and prefer the aoc way of sighting the bow and xbow better, however it is my understanding a hardcore mode under server settings will take care of the xhairs “Hopefully”.

    p.s. I dont miss that source engine one bit :)



  • i hear a lot of complain bow the crossheirs and if you think about it AoC had them to, just in a different way. the way chivalry does it is that they put it on your HuD and not on the model itself, i think they did this because having to model and animate things like that for 9+ ranged weapons just takes too long when they’re trying to develop a game with a budget and time constraint.



  • Yea you’re right about having to model an ironsight for each and every one of these 9 weapons being some work to do, which tbh isn’t an excuse but ok.

    But please now, don’t say that an artificial crosshair(Lines on your screen) is the same with an actual ironsight on your weapon, or aiming with the tip of your arrow, you don’t believe that either.



  • i do, i play games with and without cross heirs, it doesn’t change how i play only how i learn how the weapon aims, in the end i either learn where it goes if it has no indication, or like AoC, the weapon model itself shows me where it goes.



  • Yea you can get used to either with or without it, it’s only that it’s more immersive without it, and it might need a bit more while to get used to it.



  • @-Slash-:

    Yea you can get used to either with or without it, it’s only that it’s more immersive without it, and it might need a bit more while to get used to it.

    yup, i agree, it would be nice to have a model, but with everything they’re trying to accomplish i can understand why they added a cross heir, once i heard they were adding one i was really disappointed myself but i got used to it.


Log in to reply