Rules & Tweaks



  • @Carsha:

    @Vq.|Phoenix:

    lol? im confused…

    I’m also confused. Turning off friendly fire would only encourage players to swarm eachother without any thought for positioning/tracers seeing as they could freely cleave through teammates into enemies.

    Hooray wall of knights/vanguards LMB mashing…

    My point is this: Vanguards are already the weakest class in competitive play. If you have full team damage it will be hurting vanguards the most since their weapons rely on wide sweeps and such. You will be nerfing an already weak class even more. I believe the current team damage system already does its job of stopping spamming near teammates. Nobody carelessly swarms around swinging without really hurting eachother so I don’t see any reason to increase the friendly damage even further.



  • i don’t believe vanguards are weak at all, how do you think they are?

    most of their powerful swings are stab and overhands, not slashes. they’re also the second heaviest class in the game.

    100% FF promotes highly skilled gameplay because it punishes players for carelessly swinging and not actually trying to best their opponent.



  • @Dr.Nick:

    @Carsha:

    @Vq.|Phoenix:

    lol? im confused…

    I’m also confused. Turning off friendly fire would only encourage players to swarm eachother without any thought for positioning/tracers seeing as they could freely cleave through teammates into enemies.

    Hooray wall of knights/vanguards LMB mashing…

    My point is this: Vanguards are already the weakest class in competitive play. If you have full team damage it will be hurting vanguards the most since their weapons rely on wide sweeps and such. You will be nerfing an already weak class even more. I believe the current team damage system already does its job of stopping spamming near teammates. Nobody carelessly swarms around swinging without really hurting eachother so I don’t see any reason to increase the friendly damage even further.

    Vanguards are not weak, just requires a bit more skills to actually do well, use your polearm’s power to force down your enemy, not to mention that one weapon has the most range in the game, except for projectile weapons, the wretched bardiche ;)



  • Yes… full friendly fire is the only real option for competitive play imho



  • @Vox:

    i don’t believe vanguards are weak at all, how do you think they are?

    most of their powerful swings are stab and overhands, not slashes. they’re also the second heaviest class in the game.

    100% FF promotes highly skilled gameplay because it punishes players for carelessly swinging and not actually trying to best their opponent.

    Have you tried fighting high skilled 1vs1s with a vanguard? You’ll be killed by enemies with faster one handed weapons every time. They get in close with you due to sprinting forward and your range advantage is easily eliminated. After they’ve closed in you are in serious danger since they will attack faster than you with any one handed weapon. If you try switching to your own one handed (only the short sword will be fast enough to compete) you’ll leave yourself open and you are still at a disadvantage since your enemy will now be either more maneuverable or have more health and a shield. You might be able to take on a man at arms but knights will destroy you every time.

    Saying the vanguard is the second heaviest is an extremely misleading statement. They have no shield and can be killed from a few hits by any weapon.

    As I said earlier the current friendly fire system already punishes careless players and you WILL be nerfing the vanguard class more than most if you raise the friendly fire.

    TLDR: Do you even lift?



  • I guess my response to that Dr.Nick would be “Why are you basing the balance of a 5v5 competitive match off your experience in a 1v1 duel?”

    TLDR: Waitwut u no maek senz?!



  • @Dr.Nick:

    Have you tried fighting high skilled 1vs1s with a vanguard? You’ll be killed by enemies with faster one handed weapons every time. They get in close with you due to sprinting forward and your range advantage is easily eliminated. After they’ve closed in you are in serious danger since they will attack faster than you with any one handed weapon. If you try switching to your own one handed (only the short sword will be fast enough to compete) you’ll leave yourself open and you are still at a disadvantage since your enemy will now be either more maneuverable or have more health and a shield. You might be able to take on a man at arms but knights will destroy you every time.

    Saying the vanguard is the second heaviest is an extremely misleading statement. They have no shield and can be killed from a few hits by any weapon.

    As I said earlier the current friendly fire system already punishes careless players and you WILL be nerfing the vanguard class more than most if you raise the friendly fire.

    TLDR: Do you even lift?

    Learn to feint and kick > play better. easy as that.



  • sry i havent read all the posts in this thread so far.
    buuut:
    100% ff is nothing to discuss. it just has to be.

    5o5 is the best for tdm, everythign else makes fights too random.
    TO can have more.

    anyone ever thought about removing the health regen? when you are low on hp you can run and hide and prevent the other team form getting kills (in tdm e.g.)

    forbid archers. period.

    now to the rest of your classes:
    when you have problems with a van vs. any other class its nothing new.
    but you still can kill everyone else if you are skilled enough.
    just move back when u see them approach. take your time, u are like miles away. when they open up, hit and aim in their armpit.
    knights are way too slow, just wait for the right moment. maa are fast, but their dash wont get them out of your range, nor will it prevent them from getting hit by ur slash.
    of course its hard but in a teamfight the role of a vanguard is to kill from second line while knights are tanking. there is no need to get in a 1o1 with another class tbh



  • Hello,
    I would like to share with you my perspective on the while thing. And I will start with things I dont wanna see.

    1. Class restriction and weapon restriction
      I really think there should be any, I am sure that if something will turn out to be OP or unbalanced the developers will look into it. The last thing I want is the cos4 history: Oh, here’s stun grenades, red dots, grenade launchers and P90. Sure that’s all op, so we’re gonna ban all that and reduce the game to just shooting…
      Hope you get the point. I want to play Chivalry the way it is designed to be player.

    2. Team objective or LTS
      I think both are possibilities but LTS seems to be the most balanced and best strategywise. I do agree that 5v5 is the most comfortable and easy to organize number for LTS.



  • @funthomass:

    1. Class restriction and weapon restriction
      I really think there should be any, I am sure that if something will turn out to be OP or unbalanced the developers will look into it. The last thing I want is the cos4 history: Oh, here’s stun grenades, red dots, grenade launchers and P90. Sure that’s all op, so we’re gonna ban all that and reduce the game to just shooting…
      Hope you get the point. I want to play Chivalry the way it is designed to be player.

    as i’ve said about 10 times now the only reason a weapon would be banned would be because it’s better than every other weapon. the reason classes are restricted is to promote more strategic play, so you don’t see a team of all knights or all vanguards.

    @funthomass:

    1. Team objective or LTS
      I think both are possibilities but LTS seems to be the most balanced and best strategywise. I do agree that 5v5 is the most comfortable and easy to organize number for LTS.

    how would just killing each other have more strategy then a game where you have to complete a map objective? the game seems balanced until about 20v20



  • @Vox:

    the reason classes are restricted is to promote more strategic play, so you don’t see a team of all knights or all vanguards.

    I think you still don’t get it. If the game is balanced how it’s supposed to be it shouldn’t be useful to spam a class. And if it’s not useful no one would do it, that easy.



  • @afiNity:

    @Vox:

    the reason classes are restricted is to promote more strategic play, so you don’t see a team of all knights or all vanguards.

    I think you still don’t get it. If the game is balanced how it’s supposed to be it shouldn’t be useful to spam a class. And if it’s not useful no one would do it, that easy.

    It’s a team based game when it comes to competitive play, not 8 separate 1v1s in an 8v8. Knights won’t get nerfed to have the same armour as Vanguards because they are designed to be that way. It’s up to us to create our own rules for competitive play, and the 50% rule works nicely, in fact, we’ve just done an 8v8 in RK with the 50% rule and the match was a lot of fun, featuring all 4 classes too.



  • @Vox:

    how would just killing each other have more strategy then a game where you have to complete a map objective?

    i come from a game where u play 2o2 or 3o3 saber only in esl (jedi knight).
    im just saying backstab, map awareness, placement etc.
    and teamwork+strategy > all.

    still i think archers shouldnt be allowed, since a team can just run 50% archers on a good spot and the opponent team will ragequit. i would.
    and now pls dont tell me u can dodge every arrow ;)
    imo it woudl be more fun and more skill dependant if we would play without archers.



  • still i think archers shouldnt be allowed, since a team can just run 50% archers on a good spot and the opponent team will ragequit. i would.

    50% archers will lose every single time, honestly. Feel free to find 7 friends and we’re happy test it with you in an 8v8, even on US servers.



  • @Martin:

    It’s a team based game when it comes to competitive play, not 8 separate 1v1s in an 8v8. Knights won’t get nerfed to have the same armour as Vanguards because they are designed to be that way. It’s up to us to create our own rules for competitive play, and the 50% rule works nicely, in fact, we’ve just done an 8v8 in RK with the 50% rule and the match was a lot of fun, featuring all 4 classes too.

    I agree. Vanquish has used it in a couple of matches and the 50% rule works just like it did in aoc. It makes for a very balanced and strategic match.



  • @cptdno:

    still i think archers shouldnt be allowed, since a team can just run 50% archers on a good spot and the opponent team will ragequit. i would.
    and now pls dont tell me u can dodge every arrow ;)
    imo it woudl be more fun and more skill dependant if we would play without archers.

    Two shield knights just made your point moot for you, enjoy.



  • Do people really believe these things about archers?



  • bad players do, it’s kind of funny to read. if they can’t beat it they don’t want it in the game.



  • @Vox:

    bad players do, it’s kind of funny to read. if they can’t beat it they don’t want it in the game.

    And again you missed the point



  • totally :D

    first rule of internet: everything is said to insult you
    second rule of internet: everyone is less skilled than you

    this is why i get challanged to play on a NA server as a european
    and get called a bad player, just by pointing out that in my opinion archers are annoying.
    but maybe some of u love to get an arrow to their knees while successfully fighting 1on3 :D


Log in to reply