Feedback and General Thoughts

  • I know I didn’t provide a thread last patch, but it’s ok, I’m BACK with all new walls of text!

    Firstly I want to talk about map diversity as it’s fresh on my mind.

    Right now all the maps in the game feel like “capture the points then push a cart”. I know it’s very early in development and more exciting maps will come, but I just want to go over some of the really cool things from C:MW and the great maps in that game. I also want to talk about the possibility of siege weaponry in this game, I’m sure you guys have something planned but I’m not sure how you would implement it.

    I feel like Stoneshill is probably one of the maps designed in that game, no doubt. Whether it be the layout of important environmental features such as the hills, or the very unique objectives like the 3rd one, Stoneshill has always been, in my mind, the best designed map in that game. It was never my favorite, but when I take a moment to really conceptualize it, it really amazes me.

    I thing the amazing thing about Stoneshill is the uniqueness of it. One thing that is common is cart pushes. Cart pushes are good, they’re sort of like a basic building block that you want to have, but don’t want to use too much of… The killing/defending peasants on the first objective is so cool, especially with the ability to burn down houses. I also think the map layout is one of the best of any game I’ve ever played. Really, go back to Stoneshill and just look at how the map is layed out. It makes it feel really unique and adds a level of competitiveness. The middle hill, for example, allows teams to stack up there and then make a push to river or to middle. It is also a great place for archers, but you are also prone to their archers to some degree. The way the hill kind of curves up makes it hard for the defenders to see them at times, which is good. You also have a risky route of dropping in between mid and river, but faster access to the village. All these options add a layer of competitive depth. That’s only one part of the map too… just one hill, and look how much it is responsible for. The second hill, although not as great, adds great flank potential if you send the rest of the team towards the river. It’s also a great archer spot. The thing about these two hills though, is they are easily accessible by both defenders and attackers. It’s a little bit more risky for the defenders to push up, especially on the mid hill, but it’s not like defenders have to sit there and just watch. The fact that the first objective, and mostly the entire map is very open, makes the 1st objective incredibly hard to defend, but it is possible. This is really nice, because good teams will be rewarded for having proper rotations, communication, and knowing when to push up. I feel like the first objective really rewards teams that function properly in conjunction with each other.

    The second objective is your standard cart push, but even here you guys managed to add a layer of uniqueness by adding the whole ram in the gate part and the map layout itself. This is sort of where I want to get into siege weaponry and how implementing small amounts of it really changes things up.

    I really really REALLY like the way the map is layed out for the second objective, especially the castle wall. Especially in a game like Mirage, where you can actually parry projectiles, the castle wall in Stoneshill would be even better! The addition of the balista and oil to the castle wall really makes it interesting, particularly the oil. The archer, outside of having his own arrows, has this siege weaponry to work with. It can have a high impact or no impact at all. I think a lot of people may not like the idea that you are basically reliant on a counter-archer to deal with the one of the wall, but I think it’s ok. This is mostly because by having someone on the wall, suddenly the melee fight becomes a 5v6. The archer on the attacking side has an easier time landing shots probably and also can choose to go melee if he so chooses. The attackers can also utilize the ram itself to avoid fire from the person on the wall. The layout, again, is really incredible. I like the placement of the river, the ammo boxes are incredibly smart and also the fact that you can hug the castle wall if you’re attacking to avoid fire. So if you already have the cart close enough, just hug the wall. Oil is a great defending tool as well, if used properly it can buy you a lot of time, if not, you may lose the objective.

    Onto the third objective. I would say arguably this the most lackluster objective overall. The biggest thing it has going for it is uniqueness. I really really like this objective. Although it was never really balanced in Vanilla or Mercs, it was a very interesting objective nonetheless. The idea of defending an actual player, not just some random dumb AI, is really cool. The player is basically a knight on massive steroids. I remember back when I was a noob I would try soooooo hard to top frag defending so I could be king.

    I know I’m ranty :( But, the biggest thing to take away from this is uniqueness. Even if it’s just one objective, I think giving every map a distinguishing objective makes it so much more enjoyable. Dark Forest, for example, has two cart push objectives, but it really mixes it up with sluice and the fourth objective. These two objectives really define the map, other than the trees of course. Even battlegrounds, one of the maps with the longest cart pushes in the game, has an incredibly interesting first objective.

    I know you guys have more maps coming and are always working to improve, so keep it up! I can’t wait to see what you have to offer moving forward.

    Ok, so now I’m gonna talk about weapon diversity and roles

    Right now there is very minimal weapon diversity, and it’s not because of the lack of weapons or anything, it’s just that the two choices we have so far barely differ. I think 3 weapons would be a good number to have for this game, any more and it would become incredibly difficult to balance. However, I think 2 would also be a perfect number when considering roles. I’ll get to that in a bit. First I just want to highlight some of the weapon choices and how they don’t differ at all. I think the Taurant is the most obvious case. The Taurant’s second weapon, the tabar or something, completely outclasses the first weapon in every regard. I’m pretty sure the 1st one is just suppose to be faster, yes? The problem is, it’s not. They also don’t play any differently whatsoever. They have the same feel, same animations, same everything. The second one has more reach, speed and damage. It’s like I’m level 100 or something and I have this level 90 mace, or I could just use this level 100 axe I just got which completely outclasses the mace and also plays the exact same way. The only weapon that really differs I feel from the default, is the Vypress. Her pickax weapon gives me the dane axe sort of feel, which is cool. It definitely plays differently from the first one.

    So now let’s talk about roles and how weapons influence them. I’d like to take one example from Chiv to show why 2 weapon choices can be perfect. Let’s take either the Grand Mace or the Maul, and compare it with any of the swords. Swords are the primary weapon choice for a knight, but many choose a heavy as well. Swords often play the engaging role and parry a lot of the incoming front line attacks. Heavy knights often play a supportive role where they look for opportunities to get a free hit in because of how hard those weapons hit, especially with the potential one shot if you’re using maul. Heavy weapons are always more difficult, especially where there is first-hit-flinch. A lot of people prefer swords because of the versatility of them. However, there are some very good heavy players such as Spook or Beast who have spent a lot of time on those weapons. Those weapons play very differently from swords. It’s almost as if you’re playing a flanker role, where you constantly try to hit people in the back with massive damage. Vanguards also had some roles, although less defined I would say. If you went Halberd or Spear you often were just sitting behind your sword knights being a flinch-machine or trying to pick off the enemy vanguards. If you went Polehammer or Zwei, you would often try mini flanks and use the terrain to get behind people and cause a ton of damage.

    I believe that roles like these can be very healthy for a game and especially for a competitive scene. This was more of an idea to outline what I think should be weapon choices in this game. Weapon choices, along with your ability choices, should define how you play. You should be able to make these selections with certain ideas in mind. I would like to point out though, enforcing roles is probably not a good idea. That would cause the game to be boring, I think it’s better to just allow roles to form themselves.

    Ok let’s move on to this build and maybe some more specific things.

    I really like that I can actually parry things now, it feels so much better. I’m still having to get use to actually looking at my enemy’s weapon in order to parry, but it is very rewarding.

    I don’t like that you can feint while out of stamina, really questionable if it is an intentional change.

    I like that the feint lockout is removed, I like the increasing stamina alternative better.

    I like the slow, but steady UI improvements.

    I don’t like rat class, I’m not gonna write a whole post outlining why as you guys already know why.

    I like Taurant, just wish his melee weapon wasn’t so overpowered.

    I like the change you guys did to that one map, forgot what it’s called. The one where you capture the thingies. It seems to cap slower, but you only need 3 now. I really like that change.

    Speaking only for this patch, I don’t like the objective diversity for the maps so far. I know you guys are working on more.

    I really really love Tinker’s new mines, really cool.

    I don’t really care too much for the walljumping, but it is a bit disappointing it’s gone. Can’t wait till you guys are done working on the movement stuff ;-;.

    Ok this has been on my mind for a while: ripostes. I think universally they are too fast right now. This is just personal opinion, maybe I’m still bad.

    Really dislike that there is no CD reset upon death, really unfair for the team that gets wiped.

    Really dislike that there is only one spawn for many maps. I think the easiest fix for potential spawn camping is just to add more than 1 spawn exit.

    To end the post I want to talk about Alchemancer’s abilities for a bit.

    Right now, as Height outlined in his post, Alchemancer feels like a class that is like purely damage, nothing else. It’s kind of fun in a big teamfight to do loads of damage, but I could see it getting boring after a while. I feel like so many of his abilities could have added effects, or entirely new abilities. The biggest thing I see as a problem for him is that all the utility abilities he has are for himself.

    I’d like to see Alchemancer get some crowd control. When I think of crowd control I think stuns, slows, disables, debuffs etc. I brainstormed a few ideas for some potentially cool abilities.

    1. He shoots out a projectile sort of like barrage, except when it lands, it explodes into every direction and anyone hit by the projectile is damaged moderately and slowed moderately. If you need something to visualize it, look here the explosion part is what I’m trying to visualize with the video.

    2. Puts down a zone where enemies standing in it (insert anything, are slowed, take more damage, reduced healing, etc)

    3. Infuse your surrounding teammates with magic increasing movespeed for a brief duration.

    That’s it for feedback for now, I’ll add more later if I think of anything.

  • The different roles that the classes could take on in chivalry are more class based than weapon based in mirage right now.
    The Entropist being the healing/support class - he got the healing well added to his arsenal of abilities this patch. I could easily see him also having buffs and no access to offensive attacks.
    The Vigilist is a tank, with held shield and iron dome, and also surge and ward strike, which could easily act as a parry and deflect projectiles instead of colliding with them.
    The Taurant is the heavy damage dealing melee class that has the head on battles.
    The Vypress is the sneakybeaky flanking class with lots of movement abilities and a couple of ranged ones as well.
    The Tinker is a defensive class with mines, traps, and such, while also having the ability to single out one enemy with the grappling hook and pulling them into your team to get wiped out asap.
    The Alchemancer, is dull and boring right now. Though he has the stronger ranged attacks, which can be used to harass enemies at any given time. I think he would be better off with a melee weapon and having some ranged abilities that stack, similar to the Vypress chakram.

    Now I don’t mind having two types of weapons, the shorter, faster, lower damage one, and the stronger, slower, and longer one. I don’t really think there needs to be a third weapon, especially not a third weapon with the exact same animations; I wouldn’t mind having a 2handed weapon for the vigilist and a 1handed for the taurant however, something to mix up the fighting style.

    Speaking of map design.
    I defo agree with wizardish, capture and push objectives are fun, but they’re not always optimal, different types of other ojectives would be more fun, be it pulling levers, burning market stalls, destroying statues, killing a certain important person. All of that is far more interesting and really spices things up.

    I do not agree that stoneshill has the best layout however, due to the wall that attackers can’t get up on, the attacker spawn is also really far away and without a stacked team getting past the 2nd objective is rather tough. In regards to objective varity, yes the map is great, but there are a few design flaws that makes playing attack anti-fun. (24p perspective).

    Other than that I think you should try to balance the objectives for both teams, making it as easy to attack as it is to defend. A good example on how to not do this is the 3rd objective on outpost. The attackers spawn way too close to the objective while the defenders are really far away. I’ve never seen this one be defended, ever, meanwhile all the other stages on the map can easily be completed by either team.

  • Developer

    Thanks for the feedback.
    Alchemancer will be recieving a lot work now that we’re done with pax, we’re changing up his main attack set again, every point on him here and elsewhere has been very valid and we’ll try to adress all the issues in the coming months.

    Also. if you could add headers like:



    Random notes

    “#### Random notes”

    It would make it easier for us to read through it, Level designers coming in for example would be much more likely to see your feedback with this.

  • @Vesros Yeah sure, no problem. I’m not very organized, so my bad. Will do that in the future!

Log in to reply