Vangaurds are a little OP



  • I’ve seen this happen with WAY too many games in the past. The majority of the community will make balancing complaints and all of the “veteran” players will shrug it off as incompetence even though it’s clearly broken.

    I will parry a vanguard with a short sword, attack, and because he’s mashing lmb his swing will be too far in to be stopped by my slash. They have so much reach I can’t sidestep them or anything, so I need to duel them up front, and this happens every single time. Look at ALL of the servers, VGs are top scoring in 80% of games. You’re saying that isn’t a balancing problem? I decided to try it myself and ended up topscoring as VG and Knight by spamming lmb over and over again. Only archers killed me, this is ridiculous.

    Sorry, but this community majority/minority bullshit has ruined too many games for me in the past, and I’m not letting Chivalry get the same shoddy treatment. (Biggest example of this happening before is APB “vets” telling me, who played since the first f***ing beta (The RTW beta, before it failed and got started up again!), that I was wrong in saying that many of the weapons have no good counter and that guns are too expensive to be able to counter most in the first place. It really does ruin games, people.)



  • You know this is a team game and some classes are better suited for some jobs? Vanguards and knights are supposed to get kills, specially vanguards. That’s what they do, they get kills.

    There is something called support role in every life aspect. Archers and MAA are support classes. They help vanguards and knights get kills and protect them. MAA is better suited for objectives, MAA could also be duelling class thanks to dodge, but getting kills in quick succession is what knights and vanguards do.

    Before screaming imbalance, understand what classes are supposed to do.



  • Boxohope: balancing for the top does not ruin games. The refusal of new players to get better and having things nerfed until competitive play boils down to a handful of weapons ruins games. The only good vanguard players I know use the claymore or spear/brandistock - the weapons with the least wide sweeping attack power and the most thrust power, because thrusts are dominant in the hands of a good player.

    Easy != best. “E-sports” would never have emerged if Blizzard nerfed rushing every time new players complained, and other developers of early titles that started the competitive scene caved in on similar l2p issues. Imagine 2D fighters with no combos or directional blocks. FPS with no headshots. Maybe you find it easiest to top scoreboards by slashspamming with a greatsword, but I find it easier by far to top the scoreboard stab spamming with a norse sword or sword of war. Same # of hits to kill any melee class, far far far faster, and on the most mobile class in the game.

    Furthermore, I’d go so far as to say the game is balanced pretty well even in random pubs right now, considering in the main balance thread there are plentiful claims that Man-at-Arms is the most powerful class, and a similar number of complaints about Knights. So what are we supposed to do, in that case, nerf every class the same amount so nothing changes? I guess then archers will be the new strongest as they’d just go around 2 hitting everyone with the cudgel.



  • I apologize for how I had written my post, it was too blunt and aggressive. I understand that there is a metagame in manipulating controls and such, but an average player will still topscore by using a lazy tactic and it will still anger new players, and it has. It’ll always be up to the devs, but me and many others believe that many 2h weapons are too fast for their damage and reach.



  • The very reason a two-hander weapon tends to top the highscores for each game, is because those who fight with smaller weapon thinks that they can just go aggresive. Today I fought as Man-at Arms and I managed to get twice more kills than the knight on second place. IF there was a group of decent Man-At Arms, then you shall easily see them placed on the top list because they got rather swift and deadly attacks.

    Also, IF you find it hard to fight off vanguards, then you all you need is to practice your timing, find the gap between when he has launched the attack and recovers, and you shall see how easy it is to break down the average vanguards defence.

    And to say that we veterans tend to push the “balance” away cause we have no problem, is just not right to say. I don’t think classes should be changed in my opinion, just because someone whom recently started on the game finding problems with their techniques and thus they complain about the balance !

    Nah, Vanguards are not overpowered. Practice hard, and you’ll see ;)



  • @wildwulfy:

    Also, IF you find it hard to fight off vanguards, then you all you need is to practice your timing, find the gap between when he has launched the attack and recovers, and you shall see how easy it is to break down the average vanguards defence.

    ^^Sage words here. Timing is everything in this game.



  • @wildwulfy:

    The very reason a two-hander weapon tends to top the highscores for each game, is because those who fight with smaller weapon thinks that they can just go aggresive. Today I fought as Man-at Arms and I managed to get twice more kills than the knight on second place. IF there was a group of decent Man-At Arms, then you shall easily see them placed on the top list because they got rather swift and deadly attacks.

    Today I played as Man-at-Arms and managed to top the scoreboard every round, going 4:1 in 3 maps with hatchet, mace and norse sword respectively. Most of the server was in awe because they’d never seen a Man-at-Arms do well before. Next round I randomed vanguard, used my best weapon - the claymore - and only managed 2:1. Same when I was a knight with the impossibly fun to use maul.

    I don’t think VG or Knight can compete with MaA for topping scoreboards when used correctly. MaAs kill people so fast and move on to the next kill fast as well, you can get scores that are just impossible with other classes.

    As a side note, I’m using the maul a lot more recently and realizing how damn enjoyable it is now that I’m better at manipulating swing timings. I hated the hammer/axe in AoC, so I assumed the same would be true in Chiv, but it’s a really fun experience going all in on one attack (or two for knights - but they never see the stab followup coming).



  • I topped the scoreboard yesterday as vanguard with a K:D of like 32 to 8. I had near 500 points and completely dominated the game. It was on Battlegrounds and I was playing mason so it was unfair for the other team. But anyhow, when it comes to laying waste to the masses Vanguard owns. But 1 on 1 vs a skilled MAA I lose almost every single time.



  • @SlyGoat:

    As a side note, I’m using the maul a lot more recently and realizing how damn enjoyable it is now that I’m better at manipulating swing timings. I hated the hammer/axe in AoC, so I assumed the same would be true in Chiv, but it’s a really fun experience going all in on one attack (or two for knights - but they never see the stab followup coming).

    Only way to play man. ;) This is definitely my best setup for sure. Currently, I’m trying to get the hang of the Archers bow, but getting nowhere fast. Hit detection seems a bit off for projectile weaponry, but I love the shank fest you can have with that little dagger.



  • Actually when I duel a MAA as Vanguard I usually switch to my 1H.

    Even when using the Claymore (Fastest 2H sword) my attacks are so slow that he can simply shield block and then dodge in to hit me with very fast strikes. If he’s not using a shield I have some success with feinting/delaying attacks (Especially with the slow Zweihander) but generally when a MAA comes around I switch to my 1h axe so I can be of equal speed.

    Also, when fighting Vanguards with polearms I usually switch to my 1h too. If you manage to close the distance using a variation of parrying and kicking, you can usually overwhelm them. It’s certainly easier than using my slow 2H which has a shorter reach.

    TL;DR I think that currently the long reach weapons are just pubstomping because people don’t know how to exploit their slowness and how to close the gap.



  • @dragonfury:

    Actually when I duel a MAA as Vanguard I usually switch to my 1H.

    Even when using the Claymore (Fastest 2H sword) my attacks are so slow that he can simply shield block and then dodge in to hit me with very fast strikes. If he’s not using a shield I have some success with feinting/delaying attacks (Especially with the slow Zweihander) but generally when a MAA comes around I switch to my 1h axe so I can be of equal speed.

    Also, when fighting Vanguards with polearms I usually switch to my 1h too. If you manage to close the distance using a variation of parrying and kicking, you can usually overwhelm them. It’s certainly easier than using my slow 2H which has a shorter reach.

    TL;DR I think that currently the long reach weapons are just pubstomping because people don’t know how to exploit their slowness and how to close the gap.

    You are correct. I do switch if I have time… But on so many occasions I turn to my side and a MAA is right in my grill. I have no choice but to fight with my polearm. A good MAA is just too much to handle even with every feint, perry, and block trick in the book when using a 2 hander.



  • @dragonfury:

    Even when using the Claymore (Fastest 2H sword) my attacks are so slow that he can simply shield block

    Now this - this is an issue. I truly detest how shields are only able to be bypassed when up close, and completely nullify the use of feinting. Actually many things about shields are in need of changes IMO.



  • @SlyGoat:

    Now this - this is an issue. I truly detest how shields are only able to be bypassed when up close, and completely nullify the use of feinting. Actually many things about shields are in need of changes IMO.

    I find shields hard to use. I prefer MAA with just just an axe and fire pit. I try to do the knight with shield, but can’t seem to do well with it.



  • We are getting a little bit off-topic, but I felt like saying this anyways.

    I think that shields should be nerfed in somewhat way, cause they serve their purpose well. I love the way that they infact cover your screen, which they didn’t do so well in AoC. IF you hold-block with the towershield for too long, you’ll most likely get an sneaky attack from the sides, so tap-blocking would be best to do, and remember that the shield doesn’t change the way you parry. They are also quite decent to counter feints, due to hold-block option, and they of course block enemy projectiles when equipped or on back. That’s the true purpose of the shield, and I think IF any changes should be made, then the shield should be nerfed :)



  • It’s still a bit on topic, because shields take away the vanguard’s biggest strength by forcing him to fight you up close as he has no hope of getting around your shield otherwise.



  • @reapy:

    Hard countered by range. Try to approach an archer on ruins who can aim as a VG. Not an easy thing.

    I think they are balanced nicely, adding in the thrust/overhead from sprint and having smoke actually cloud up an area makes them a pretty well rounded class imho.

    I don’t think they offer anything up that would make you want to 100% take them over a knight or MAA.

    i personally fully agree with this. VG is definately my favorite class, but i can easily get killed by a knight or maa that knows how to play his guy and get in close. Plus, this isnt a 1v1 game, its a team based game. use ur teamates to help if need be. I avoid maa’s on my vg cuz i know what they can do to me.



  • I agree with OP all the way i play MAA all the time.
    i dont know about the nerf tho but i agree with Op.

    Vangaurds have More health, more Reach, fast attacks, run fast perrying/whatever its called does crap…
    and are overall good.

    MAA uhhhh …Dodges? and yea thats about it.



  • My problem with the vanguard is not his reach…but that he can still hit you when you are really close.

    The polearms should have a “window” SO you cant get stabbed in the face when you are 2 inches away from him. For example. Really all them honestly. The swords are too powerful in my opinion. Swing too fast. But the polearms, well, if you swing an axe on a long pole at someone who is 2 inches in front of you, you will miss. Same with the spear. It should be ineffective inside a certain range.

    EDIT: Here is another grip. The vanguard special attack needs a small nerf. All the vangaurds needs to do is run away, then he can instantly turn 180 degrees and do his special attack. Perhaps slow his turning when he is “charging”.



  • If any class needs a nerf its the MAA.

    Maybe allow for them to take 1 more hit before dying, but the MAA swing way too fast to the point where they just block you one time, run into point blank, and stab you 4 times before you can even kick them backwards. If you parry their attack, their weapon speed is so fast that they can setup another parry or swing at you before you get a chance to land an attack.

    The only way I beat an MAA is to kill him before he reaches point blank.

    But seriously, I won’t even play this damn class for any game type. It’s too OP that despite being the most fast paced class, it’s just not fun for me. Maybe on LAN, but not with 100 ping… blocking those attacks is very difficult to the point where I would say it is definitely not balanced.

    What you could do for the MAA is increase health by 20% but also increase parry delay by 20%, and decrease attack speed by 20% (or 10% or whatever seems balanced).

    Other than that, the game is pretty flawless. No game has ever been released without its balance issues, I’m confident they will make improvements on the balance in the coming month or two.



  • What you will see for scores depends on the game mode.

    In TO you always have many vs many set ups, there are usually 3 ‘backstabs’ available to you at any given moment, doing the most damage and having the most reach will allow you the most kill potential.

    In FFA, it honestly just comes down to backstab timing and having ~50 damage you can put out. If you are 1 on 1ing a person and take longer than 15 seconds, pretty much 100% of the time a 3rd party will come in and kill someone.

    The balance thing ultimately comes down to the weapons. VG isn’t as crippled with the jump attack anymore, and I think that really helped them imho, but I always find the VG’s as nice softies that can’t take too much punishment.

    I think that 1h weapons have more control overall in this game. It is a game about getting around blocks, and a 1h weapon just has more options. Getting close is still pretty easy, just block on your way in. Then you an rock left and overhand, or stab/slash around the right, both of which are pretty good at going round a person you are face hugging. I just find it way easier to overwhelm people with 1h vs the 2h weapons with good maneuvering, esp shields.

    But 1h still takes a bit more work, and you have to sick your neck out a touch more to get in that close, but overall, I think that mastering 1h’s will be more important than 2h for racking up kills. As blocking improves I just don’t think 2h’s will be able to keep up.


Log in to reply