A Small Wishlist of Tweaks



  • To be honest, as an aspiring game developer myself, I love seeing games like this coming out of indie developers. However, as I play, I can’t help but feel that a few things need to be done to make this game perfect.

    1. Polearms should be completely ineffective when the gap has been closed.

    This is something that really needs to be added as an element of realism and to force a little more strategy into the Vanguard class. The fact that a polearm still does it’s full damage when someone is past the striking head and essentially is hugging the person is a bit unrealistic and still encourages Vanguards to keep using their polearm in close quarters. The idea of a polearm was to keep people at range, but considering that the damage is the same, regardless of how far or close the person is to you. In reality, a person with a polearm against another opponent would probably favor a backup weapon in he has to fight alone, and favor the polearm when fighting in a group.

    My suggestion is to add a deadzone, where the weapon swing of a pole arm will do no damage if the enemy is close enough to you that a swing would cause the striking portion of the weapon to swing past them. The animation to let you know this should be a deflected attack, like a parry, as hitting an armored enemy with the shaft of a weapon won’t really hurt them. This won’t, however, cause any stamina drain. It’s still technically a connected attack, just a very ineffective one.

    Another idea, if this is implemented, is to offer a sort of “choke up” to viable twohanded weapons, like the Zweihander (That’s what that little leather strap past the hilt on the blade was for), spear, brandistock, fork, bardiche, halberd, and the like. Decreases range significantly, decreases damage slightly, but removes that deadzone.

    2. Change stamina costs for weapons based on the weapons heft.

    This was an issue I ran into as I was leveling my daggers. The weapon boasts a superior attack speed, but punishes you for taking advantage of it in the form of utterly draining your stamina as though you were swinging this massive sword. Three stabs later after killing one enemy, I was almost out of stamina, and the only thing I had done was those three stabs and a few parries. By comparison, a dagger to a claymore, is a butter knife. Swinging it should not cost nearly as much stamina. Have a weapon’s attack drain a more realistic amount of stamina.

    Also, have stamina drain on parry be determined more by the weapon swinging at you. It’ll take a lot more energy to stop a claymore with a dagger than parrying a claymore with a zweihander. Conversely, blocking a dagger isn’t going to drain as much stamina as trying to parry that maul that wants to splatter your brains all over the ground.

    3. Fix player size and animations when using a siege weapon.

    This is just needed. A giant knight with a tower shield shouldn’t become the size of an Oompa-Loompa the minute they try to use a ballista, nor should they float around as the ballista turns. Have em stay the size they are, and use the ballista like a normal person. Catapults do this to a slight less extent, but it still shouldn’t change.

    4. Punish LMB Spam

    Put in caps as it is one of the more annoying issues of this game. Just like a fighting game like Tekken or Street Fighter, LMB spammers are those people who button mash and are still able to contend in a fight. I don’t care really what is done to fix this, but it needs fixing. Have it drain more stamina or something the more times they chain the attack. For example, a small combo won’t drain more than it does now, but combo in three, four, or five more attacks on top of it, each additional attack drains more stamina to swing than the last, signaling the player tiring from trying to swing like crazy. Without something to punish players for using this and not exploring other tactics, as more people learn to combat it, it will become less effective over time (which is good) but will frustrate newer players that come along in later generations of the game and may leave a bad taste in their mouth. This isn’t just for people like me who would like a little more fight out of their opponents, but this is for all of the people playing Chivalry to get them to really explore the depth of the combat system.

    These are the immediate three things that come to my mind that need fixing. Feel free to post if you have something you think needs to be added to this list.



  • ya you forgot the most important one “Optimize game for performance” 8-)



  • @dirtyjob:

    ya you forgot the most important one “Optimize game for performance” 8-)

    I never really notice this one considering my computer is just overkill. (3930k six core processor, HD 7970 3GB graphics card, 16GB Quad Channel RAM) So if you wanted to put that on here, I need to know what they need to optimize. And I need a better and more specific answer than “Everything”. XD

    Only reason I say that is because, again, I can’t really check it myself.



  • 2. Change stamina costs for weapons based on the weapons heft.

    This was an issue I ran into as I was leveling my daggers. The weapon boasts a superior attack speed, but punishes you for taking advantage of it in the form of utterly draining your stamina as though you were swinging this massive sword. Three stabs later after killing one enemy, I was almost out of stamina, and the only thing I had done was those three stabs and a few parries. By comparison, a dagger to a claymore, is a butter knife. Swinging it should not cost nearly as much stamina. Have a weapon’s attack drain a more realistic amount of stamina.

    Also, have stamina drain on parry be determined more by the weapon swinging at you. It’ll take a lot more energy to stop a claymore with a dagger than parrying a claymore with a zweihander. Conversely, blocking a dagger isn’t going to drain as much stamina as trying to parry that maul that wants to splatter your brains all over the ground.

    I believe your first paragraph is actually describing your second paragraph ;)

    Stamina drain on parry is already based on weapon size; hence why fighting with your dagger you were out of stamina after the fight, since only missed attacks drain stamina (and combos - so if you just spam combos you’ll be out of stamina quickly, thus I don’t think #4 is a problem either), however when you block a heavy weapon with a dagger you lose quite a chunk of stamina. The most extreme case being the maul - it drains 1/3 of your total stamina when parried with a dagger, meaning the third hit will stagger you and leave you completely drained.

    Next patch misses with twohanded weapons will drain twice as much stamina. I don’t believe there should be much distinction between swinging a dagger and swinging a mace, honestly - or swinging a claymore and swinging a zweihander. Most of the energy you expend while swinging is just the motion itself, because regardless of how heavy the weapon is you’re going to put as much force into the blow as you can - even twohanded swords aren’t heavy enough to make much of a difference to a trained soldier, not to mention how well balanced the weight is to make the swinging motion as natural as possible.

    Though it is very true that polearms and fantasy weapons like the double-axe, grand mace and maul would be much heavier and more awkward to wield than a sword, they also wouldn’t be used the way they are in-game (or at all, in the case of the fantasy weapons) - so I think it’s still fine that their stamina drain isn’t super high. Maybe a little more middleground for gameplay purposes would be feasible - 5 stamina drain for daggers/shortsword/saber/cudgel, 10 for onehanders, 15 for “light” twohanders (swords, spears), 20 for “heavy” twohanders (axes, blunts, polearms).

    #1 is an interesting idea which has been proposed before, but I don’t think it’s a worthwhile endeavor at this stage of development. The game is already structured around weapons behaving relatively the same (though more with some unique mechanics are in development, like the Flail), such a huge overhaul of mechanics for polearms would be hard to implement this point. I do like the idea though, if it could be implemented well and not disrupt balance; but it just seems like a lot of work which could be committed to improving the current core gameplay.

    And of course #3 is just a bug.



  • A few things to add to the wish list:

    1: Reflective surfaces.
    Hard surfaces, like stone, iron, armor, shield and such, should have a reflective property on projectiles if hit in a right angle. For example; A archer shoots at a knight. If he hits a little off the side of… let’s say, the helmet, it’ll bounce off without doing much or any damage, fly off in a different direction, and lose speed. But if he hits at 0 degrees, it’ll do full damage. So the damage is determent by the angle, and thickness of the armour. Of course, the projectile would still do damage if it hits anyone after bouncing off.

    2: More realistic armour.
    Have you ever seen a knight in full armour get killed by a archer, using arrowheads designed for light armored units? And I’ve too many times thrown a spear at a knight to the head, and he still runs around, with half the spear through the middle of his head : :| :? :|
    And not to mention weakspots, between plates on plate armour, and chainmail would absorb arrows/bolts better than leather and plate armour.

    3: Stealth assassinations
    I’m sorry to say this, but I think the game needs a assassination move, especially for archers who have lost all the arrows, and only has a dagger. So, if a unit has a dagger, and sneaks from behind a enemy, and attack, he’ll assassinate the target, kind of like Assassins Creed :D



  • @SlyGoat:

    Stamina drain on parry is already based on weapon size; hence why fighting with your dagger you were out of stamina after the fight, since only missed attacks drain stamina (and combos - so if you just spam combos you’ll be out of stamina quickly, thus I don’t think #4 is a problem either), however when you block a heavy weapon with a dagger you lose quite a chunk of stamina. The most extreme case being the maul - it drains 1/3 of your total stamina when parried with a dagger, meaning the third hit will stagger you and leave you completely drained.

    Good to know, but still, being able to attack quickly doesn’t mean anything if a flurry of three attacks (which I consider reasonable for someone fighting with a dagger. If you design a weapon for fast attacks, make sure it’s viable for it, after all) leave you with half of your stamina left. I’m not suggesting anything gamebreaking, but if you’re a trained soldier and you exhaust yourself almost completely after three dagger swings, I think you picked the wrong profession. ;)

    @SlyGoat:

    Next patch misses with twohanded weapons will drain twice as much stamina. I don’t believe there should be much distinction between swinging a dagger and swinging a mace, honestly - or swinging a claymore and swinging a zweihander. Most of the energy you expend while swinging is just the motion itself, because regardless of how heavy the weapon is you’re going to put as much force into the blow as you can - even twohanded swords aren’t heavy enough to make much of a difference to a trained soldier, not to mention how well balanced the weight is to make the swinging motion as natural as possible.

    Very true. My post was more concerning the fact that it seemed to take as much stamina to swing a dagger as it did a zweihander, which, unless the zweihander was made out of incredibly lightweight space age metal or the dagger had a bunch of weights strapped to the handle, is completely unrealistic.

    @SlyGoat:

    Though it is very true that polearms and fantasy weapons like the double-axe, grand mace and maul would be much heavier and more awkward to wield than a sword, they also wouldn’t be used the way they are in-game (or at all, in the case of the fantasy weapons) - so I think it’s still fine that their stamina drain isn’t super high. Maybe a little more middleground for gameplay purposes would be feasible - 5 stamina drain for daggers/shortsword/saber/cudgel, 10 for onehanders, 15 for “light” twohanders (swords, spears), 20 for “heavy” twohanders (axes, blunts, polearms).

    Sounds perfect to me, actually. Again, I understand that true realism would ruin a lot of fun of the game, but there are just some bits of reality that need to be a part of this.

    @SlyGoat:

    #1 is an interesting idea which has been proposed before, but I don’t think it’s a worthwhile endeavor at this stage of development. The game is already structured around weapons behaving relatively the same (though more with some unique mechanics are in development, like the Flail), such a huge overhaul of mechanics for polearms would be hard to implement this point. I do like the idea though, if it could be implemented well and not disrupt balance; but it just seems like a lot of work which could be committed to improving the current core gameplay.

    Oh no doubt. Again, I’m an aspiring developer myself, so I understand just how much code and work goes into a game like this. To do this, a lot of things would have to change, so I’m perfectly aware that this isn’t a minor patch or fix. Where I disagree, however, is the idea that something isn’t worthwhile simply because that stage of development is done. Patches are released all the time to change and affect gameplay, and the idea of patches is essentially either to fix something or to add in something that wasn’t a part of the original game. I’m not saying it’s easy, but it would make the gameplay much more in depth and require more strategy. Just a suggestion. :)

    @SlyGoat:

    And of course #3 is just a bug.

    Just wanted to address it before someone came in claiming “You forgot about that.” ;)



  • @Zrehael:

    1. Polearms should be completely ineffective when the gap has been closed.

    Do you have any idea how easy it is to ‘close’ this gap? That would make polearms completely ineffective in general. Besides, they’d still be able to stab. So all you’re doing here is making fights boring and/or ruining Vanguard.

    @Zrehael:

    4. PUNISH LMB SPAM

    Spam is easy to counter if you’re anything of a decent player. You want everyone to trade strikes, one at a turn? Spamming is a high-risk high-profit factor, it’s only effective now because a lot of people don’t know how to properly place a block and/or utilize movement to naturally evade strikes. With other words, lots of complaining about spamming, since there are still a lot of noobs and more coming every day (Which is a good thing, the more famous Chivalry get, the better), but do put a step backward and think a while to learn the game before you post something like this.



  • @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    1. Polearms should be completely ineffective when the gap has been closed.

    Do you have any idea how easy it is to ‘close’ this gap? That would make polearms completely ineffective in general. Besides, they’d still be able to stab. So all you’re doing here is making fights boring and/or ruining Vanguard.

    Do you have any idea just how ineffective a polearm was in actual fights when you were alone? Any soldier using one that had half a brain scrapped the polearm for a backup sword when he was on his own BECAUSE of how easy it was to close that gap. A spear or polearm was more effective in dealing with cavalry units (As it could take a knight clean off his horse with little effort) or used behind a shield wall to get over opposing shields. It was never intended as a one-on-one weapon of choice.

    The idea here is to get the vanguards to work with their team and really play to the polearm’s strengths, which was it’s reach. Giving the vanguard the ability to strike around allies without hurting them while staying out of harm’s way was the point of polearm weapons.

    And again, you want to deal with someone closing that gap and are stubborn about switching over? Read the second part about adding the “choke up” option.

    @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    4. PUNISH LMB SPAM

    Spam is easy to counter if you’re anything of a decent player. You want everyone to trade strikes, one at a turn? Spamming is a high-risk high-profit factor, it’s only effective now because a lot of people don’t know how to properly place a block and/or utilize movement to naturally evade strikes. With other words, lots of complaining about spamming, since there are still a lot of noobs and more coming every day (Which is a good thing, the more famous Chivalry get, the better), but do put a step backward and think a while to learn the game before you post something like this.

    I have learned the game, but this is something I like to call the Smash Brothers Effect. A player button mashing is just as effective as one that knows how to fight. This, combined with the fact that nothing really punishes a player for just charging in, swinging wildly, and decapitating enemies and teammates alike, adding a mechanic that punishes this and makes it more of a non-option would be more beneficial to the noobs in the long run and would lead to more interesting fights for the experienced ones.

    I can deal with the spam, I can counter it. The problem is when one of my teammates charges in behind me, swings wildly with this, and kills me, or when you’re in a game with people that do nothing but this. It makes the game boring for the people who love the intense fights because you’re just dealing with the same old, and frustrating as your teammates using the same tactic often kill you as a result. Thank you for your blatant assumptions and narrow-minded insight though.



  • My advice on LMB spam is to make same attacks clash…therefore you introduce sword fighting into the game. Check my post on advanced chivalry dynamics for more info.

    horizontals clash, overheads clash and thrusts get tangled.



  • I agree with everything except point number 4.
    LMB spam is quite easy to counter, and it would be even easier if the stamina drained more quickly.

    I’d also add to the whole stamina costs issue,
    1. The less stamina you have left, the more damage you should take in case you are hit.
    2. When you’re hit with an axe or a mace while trying to strike yourself, your strike should be interrupted.



  • @Zrehael:

    The idea here is to get the vanguards to work with their team and really play to the polearm’s strengths, which was it’s reach. Giving the vanguard the ability to strike around allies without hurting them while staying out of harm’s way was the point of polearm weapons.

    And again, you want to deal with someone closing that gap and are stubborn about switching over? Read the second part about adding the “choke up” option.

    Making a class completely dependant on teammates is a very bad idea for an open game. By doing this you will make them useless in pub fights. Granted, it would give a nice touch in coordinated and competitive play, but that’s not the only aspect of a game.

    @Zrehael:

    I have learned the game, but this is something I like to call the Smash Brothers Effect. A player button mashing is just as effective as one that knows how to fight.

    He most definitely is not.

    @Zrehael:

    This, combined with the fact that nothing really punishes a player for just charging in, swinging wildly, and decapitating enemies and teammates alike

    He won’t survive long. That is, if the other players know what they’re doing. He might get a couple of lucky kills when approaching undetected, sure, but that’s about it.

    @Zrehael:

    I can deal with the spam, I can counter it. The problem is when one of my teammates charges in behind me, swings wildly with this, and kills me, or when you’re in a game with people that do nothing but this. It makes the game boring for the people who love the intense fights because you’re just dealing with the same old, and frustrating as your teammates using the same tactic often kill you as a result. Thank you for your blatant assumptions and narrow-minded insight though.

    Did you even read my previous post? You get in a game with a lot of LMB spammers because the game is new and there are still a ton of players figuring Chivalry out. They’re all LMB-spamming because it is an easy option that rewards them versus other noobs. As time passes however, they will become more experienced and the number of noobs will gradually decrease.

    And besides, I actually find fighting an extremely agressive player always intense. I have to time and position my attacks directly (I rarely use LMB), in contrary to him who doesn’t care about trading hits or using overhead/stab. In the long term however, I will get more rewarded. You won’t use high-level mechanics like feints for example, but that doesn’t mean a fight can’t be intense.

    @Zrehael:

    Thank you for your blatant assumptions and narrow-minded insight though.

    You always get this offensive and rude when people outright disagree with you? Not really a good attitude for the OP of a thread.



  • @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    The idea here is to get the vanguards to work with their team and really play to the polearm’s strengths, which was it’s reach. Giving the vanguard the ability to strike around allies without hurting them while staying out of harm’s way was the point of polearm weapons.

    And again, you want to deal with someone closing that gap and are stubborn about switching over? Read the second part about adding the “choke up” option.

    Making a class completely dependant on teammates is a very bad idea for an open game. By doing this you will make them useless in pub fights. Granted, it would give a nice touch in coordinated and competitive play, but that’s not the only aspect of a game.

    It doesn’t. You still have a secondary weapon. If you can keep someone out of reach of the polearm, then by all means use it, but in reality, it was ineffective once someone closed that gap. I don’t really see how it would affect Vanguards too horribly. You’re talking about it like I’m saying let any weapon one shot them and let them only use daggers. And once again, you ignore the idea of “choking up” on the weapon to keep it viable in close quarters. IT’d be one extra button press. Is that really such a horrible imbalance?

    @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    I have learned the game, but this is something I like to call the Smash Brothers Effect. A player button mashing is just as effective as one that knows how to fight.

    He most definitely is not.

    Yes, he is. A player swinging wildly with no thought for the combat system still has about an even chance against the average player of getting the kill. You speak of it as though it’s already a non-option, but the problem is that it’s still effective in group fights for people who only care about getting enemy kills and don’t care about TKing. A person swinging wildly can still end up with a solid KDR and have the false illusion of skill when using a technique that, 1v1, is easy as all hell to counter.

    @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    This, combined with the fact that nothing really punishes a player for just charging in, swinging wildly, and decapitating enemies and teammates alike

    He won’t survive long. That is, if the other players know what they’re doing. He might get a couple of lucky kills when approaching undetected, sure, but that’s about it.

    @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    I can deal with the spam, I can counter it. The problem is when one of my teammates charges in behind me, swings wildly with this, and kills me, or when you’re in a game with people that do nothing but this. It makes the game boring for the people who love the intense fights because you’re just dealing with the same old, and frustrating as your teammates using the same tactic often kill you as a result. Thank you for your blatant assumptions and narrow-minded insight though.

    Did you even read my previous post? You get in a game with a lot of LMB spammers because the game is new and there are still a ton of players figuring Chivalry out. They’re all LMB-spamming because it is an easy option that rewards them versus other noobs. As time passes however, they will become more experienced and the number of noobs will gradually decrease.

    And besides, I actually find fighting an extremely agressive player always intense. I have to time and position my attacks directly (I rarely use LMB), in contrary to him who doesn’t care about trading hits or using overhead/stab. In the long term however, I will get more rewarded. You won’t use high-level mechanics like feints for example, but that doesn’t mean a fight can’t be intense.

    I did read your previous post. The problem is, the game doesn’t encourage or even want to acknowledge that there’s a better strategy than W+M1 for new players. It nets them an average KDR with little to no effort. Why would they bother taking the time to learn the game when just charging in and swinging wildly is just as effective? And honestly, unless the person is charging into a 3v1 or 4v1, he still has the same chance as any other player, regardless of skill, of coming out without being killed.

    I find aggressive players more intense when I have to actually learn their playstyle and how they like to come at me. The guy who swings and swings and swings is boring because I know exactly where to parry, I can fake him out for a quick shot and then he just loses his mojo and dies from there. And he’s going to wonder how I killed him, and he’s just going to think that he shouldnt’ get faked out and parry more. Never mind the fact I was easily blocking his attacks because all he used was the same attack.

    The game has a beautiful combat system that new players should explore, but the fact that W+M1 is just as effective may leave the game with a false sense of depth and strategy. Feints shouldn’t be a high level mechanic. There shouldn’t even be levels of mechanics. Players should be looking beyond this, but there’s really no reason to. That’s why the game needs to punish it: to give these new players reason to explore other strategies.

    To be honest, I think it might disappoint players more, because as more people learn to combat LMB spam, like I have, it will become less effective, but nothing encourages the player to try anything else, so they’ll get mad, tell everyone this game sucks after never really giving it a chance, and then Chivalry suddenly has a bad rep as a game that promises a lot in combat, but never delivers (even though that’s not true to anyone who plays it). The same thing happened with Super Monday Night Combat. Once people really started to figure that game out, there was a very high skill ceiling created by the players, which frustrated new players who were constantly dying, constantly losing, didn’t know why, didn’t know what to do about it, and just quit. It’s still a good game, but it’s player base is only a few hundred people at most, and it was free compared to Chivalry’s $25.

    It needs to be punished and it needs to be stressed to actually use other tactics in combat. I’m not saying we have to hold the hands of the new players, but give them more guidance and more reason to try to use overheads and stabs, to feint, to jump after prepping an overhead to get over a shield, to use the realtime strikes to their advantage to delay a swing or trick their enemy into not parrying by prepping a stab to your immediate right and bringing it in right as it hits. Right now, no reason exists. They get kills and do fine charging into groups their team is fighting, TKing and all.

    @Siegfried:

    @Zrehael:

    Thank you for your blatant assumptions and narrow-minded insight though.

    You always get this offensive and rude when people outright disagree with you? Not really a good attitude for the OP of a thread.

    Hey, I don’t appreciate a presumptuous attitude towards suggestions. The fact that you assumed that I knew nothing about the game (telling me to go back and learn the game) and essentially dismissing my arguments and suggestions as the whinings of a butthurt player will strike a nerve with anyone. You don’t want an offensive and rude response? Don’t do it to others. Simple as that.



  • Lets hope Santa finds your wishlist and gives you what you want. All points are valid and I vouch for them. Punish LBM Spam!



  • @Zrehael:

    It doesn’t. You still have a secondary weapon. If you can keep someone out of reach of the polearm, then by all means use it, but in reality, it was ineffective once someone closed that gap. I don’t really see how it would affect Vanguards too horribly. You’re talking about it like I’m saying let any weapon one shot them and let them only use daggers. And once again, you ignore the idea of “choking up” on the weapon to keep it viable in close quarters. IT’d be one extra button press. Is that really such a horrible imbalance?

    I have to agree with Siegfried here. Your suggestion is nice on paper but it would basically make polearms useless.

    Trust me when an aggressive player with a fast onehander wants to get close he can with little effort. Switching to your secondary at that moment will only get you killed.

    Bottom line is the Vanguard class does not need any kind of nerf at the moment. The class is considered to be pretty weak as it is.



  • @AgentOrange:

    @Zrehael:

    It doesn’t. You still have a secondary weapon. If you can keep someone out of reach of the polearm, then by all means use it, but in reality, it was ineffective once someone closed that gap. I don’t really see how it would affect Vanguards too horribly. You’re talking about it like I’m saying let any weapon one shot them and let them only use daggers. And once again, you ignore the idea of “choking up” on the weapon to keep it viable in close quarters. IT’d be one extra button press. Is that really such a horrible imbalance?

    I have to agree with Siegfried here. Your suggestion is nice on paper but it would basically make polearms useless.

    Trust me when an aggressive player with a fast onehander wants to get close he can with little effort. Switching to your secondary at that moment will only get you killed.

    Bottom line is the Vanguard class does not need any kind of nerf at the moment. The class is considered to be pretty weak as it is.

    I still don’t see this. Again, I play this game as well, and I know that coming at a vanguard with a one-handed weapon with a quicker attack speed than his polearm, not letting him keep me at his polearm’s reach, is already a solid way of taking them down. Polearms are already easy to defeat. The problem I have with them is why the wooden shaft of the weapon is still able to kill me through plate armor.

    You wanna get that aggressive player away from you for a moment to switch weapons? Kick him, back pedal a bit, switch, done. Or, you could go back and read up on the idea of “choking up” on a weapon, since this idea seems to be getting ignored and all people are focusing on is the hitbox being reduced to only the striking head. It’s hardly a nerf, it just adds a new mechanic that Vanguards have to factor in, and it was one that anyone with a real polearm had to factor in: What happens if I get some aggressive S.O.B. that gets inside my polearm? I could either grab the weapon further up to get him back within striking range of my weapon, or I could use this convenient back-up.

    To be honest, the class is only really weak because their charge attack doesn’t do enough when attacking head on, which is the whole reason to play the class. Ambush with that charge attack, and it works wonders. I’ve played the vanguard, I’ve unlocked the weapons, and I have to say even I feel a little cheap when I get a polearm kill with my enemy essentially hugging me because I know that there was no way in hell that should have hit him.

    Not to mention you completely downplay the effectiveness of one-handed weapons. Sure, a one-handed charge attack is incredibly useless, but the trade-off on reach vs attack speed is well worth it and makes fights much easier.



  • @Zrehael:

    You wanna get that aggressive player away from you for a moment to switch weapons? Kick him, back pedal a bit, switch, done.

    Yes this can be a good tactic only it is too unreliable for my taste. If the kick misses you are sort of caught with your pants down because it prevents movement when performing the kick.

    To be honest, the class is only really weak because their charge attack doesn’t do enough when attacking head on, which is the whole reason to play the class. Ambush with that charge attack, and it works wonders.

    I agree the charge attack could use some sort of buff.

    I’ve played the vanguard, I’ve unlocked the weapons, and I have to say even I feel a little cheap when I get a polearm kill with my enemy essentially hugging me because I know that there was no way in hell that should have hit him.

    Well I actually use the stab when someone is hugging me because it is harder for them to see it coming and it’s faster. I only use slash when fighting multiple enemies in close proximity.

    Not to mention you completely downplay the effectiveness of one-handed weapons.

    My personal opinion is that one handers are generally better than two handers at the moment. That is the reason I don’t agree with your suggestion, as it would tip the balance futher in favor of the one handers.



  • Hahahahahahaha. This thread is so full of something, but I won’t say what. =p

    First off, a large number of players (myself included) managed to see into the depth of the system without someone holding our hands. No, wait, that’s not entirely true. I did the tutorial. My point is, nothing -needs- to be included to encourage people to move on from M1 to other forms of attack.

    I completely disagree that M1 spam in a melee rewards people. Sure, they might get a good KDR, but if they’re not functionally retarded, it’s probably a safe bet to say that they will eventually figure out that a high ratio with a bad score means something. One does not need to bop someone over the head to instill them with wisdom, and I think you would benefit from a bit more faith in our community. =p

    That being said, I think it’s a worst-case scenario. In most of the melees I’ve fought in, M1 spam rarely works except from behind; one of those three guys in front of you will block it, leaving the other two open to attack you. Maybe you’ve just been unlucky.

    I believe that the two most important factors in one’s personal success in this game are footwork and awareness. Footwork should be obvious: if your weapon has more reach, stand where you benefit from that; don’t waste movement (if it gains you something, it’s not wasted) and you won’t get yourself killed. Awareness is a little more complicated: sometimes it’s knowing which path to take to the objective; sometimes it’s knowing how many people are in melee and what they’re doing and where they’re standing; sometimes it’s knowing where the enemy is going to attack, and thus where you must defend; sometimes, it’s just knowing when you shouldn’t fight. It has been my experience that a solid effort towards a dancer’s footwork and Gretsky’s awareness will turn you into the Juggernaut. If M1 spam is still getting at you, try something new.

    I’ve been seeing a lot of arguments for both side of the vanguard issue. It seems to me that the class is perfectly fine in pubs, but has no clear place in competitive play. I’d need more experience to comment on that one. But as for pole-arms doing damage in melee, have you ever been hit in the head with a ten-pound hunk of wood with some muscle behind it?



  • @Zrehael:

    It doesn’t. You still have a secondary weapon. If you can keep someone out of reach of the polearm, then by all means use it, but in reality, it was ineffective once someone closed that gap. I don’t really see how it would affect Vanguards too horribly. You’re talking about it like I’m saying let any weapon one shot them and let them only use daggers. And once again, you ignore the idea of “choking up” on the weapon to keep it viable in close quarters. IT’d be one extra button press. Is that really such a horrible imbalance?

    When I play a Vanguard, I don’t want to run around, using a one-hander 80% of the time. I’ll play MaA or a Knight to do that. One handers aren’t exactly a Vanguards strength, and by this suggestion, you’re confining them to use their weakest point the most (in pub-games).

    @Zrehael:

    Yes, he is. A player swinging wildly with no thought for the combat system still has about an even chance against the average player of getting the kill. You speak of it as though it’s already a non-option, but the problem is that it’s still effective in group fights for people who only care about getting enemy kills and don’t care about TKing. A person swinging wildly can still end up with a solid KDR and have the false illusion of skill when using a technique that, 1v1, is easy as all hell to counter.

    Yes, it is effective, against people that don’t know how to counter it (new players). Go ahead and put a LMB spammer on a server where he is the only one spamming and all the rest are decent, experienced players. You won’t see him performing well at all. On the long term, skill still pays off more.

    In a one on one a spammer does have a somewhat even change against an average player, as I’ve said before. But the thing is, the average player, that does not LMB spam, but blocks and uses stabs (to utilize his range) and overheads (for more damage) will become better at positioning his attacks (harder to hit an enemy with a stab/overhead) so he’ll hit his target every time. And thát, is far more viable than LMB spamming. More difficult, but better.

    @Zrehael:

    I did read your previous post. The problem is, the game doesn’t encourage or even want to acknowledge that there’s a better strategy than W+M1 for new players. It nets them an average KDR with little to no effort. Why would they bother taking the time to learn the game when just charging in and swinging wildly is just as effective? And honestly, unless the person is charging into a 3v1 or 4v1, he still has the same chance as any other player, regardless of skill, of coming out without being killed.

    I just have to plain disagree on this one. I believe a skilled player has more chance of coming alive out of any encounter than a LMB-spammer.

    @Zrehael:

    I find aggressive players more intense when I have to actually learn their playstyle and how they like to come at me. The guy who swings and swings and swings is boring because I know exactly where to parry, I can fake him out for a quick shot and then he just loses his mojo and dies from there. And he’s going to wonder how I killed him, and he’s just going to think that he shouldnt’ get faked out and parry more. Never mind the fact I was easily blocking his attacks because all he used was the same attack.

    Here you prove yourself how the issue is going to solve itself. LMB spammers will still get owned by more decent players, thus they will stop spamming, and start learning some actual skill.

    @Zrehael:

    The game has a beautiful combat system that new players should explore, but the fact that W+M1 is just as effective may leave the game with a false sense of depth and strategy. Feints shouldn’t be a high level mechanic. There shouldn’t even be levels of mechanics. Players should be looking beyond this, but there’s really no reason to. That’s why the game needs to punish it: to give these new players reason to explore other strategies.

    They will do this. Once they see what they’re capable of doing when not mindlessly berserking through crowds of people, not differentiating teammates or enemies. In the end, everyone wants to be good at a game, and sooner or later the illusion of LMB-spammers (that they’re good players) will get shattered. I know this, because I did so myself. Now I only use LMB when I’m facing multiple enemies with no teammates around me and while using a decent long ranged weapon. And those occasions are rare indeed.

    @Zrehael:

    To be honest, I think it might disappoint players more, because as more people learn to combat LMB spam, like I have, it will become less effective, but nothing encourages the player to try anything else.

    A ton of people will try out new strategies themselves, and come to the conclusion LMB spamming isn’t that good at all, and others will change their opinion and tactic by seeing experienced players in action.

    @Zrehael:

    It needs to be punished and it needs to be stressed to actually use other tactics in combat. I’m not saying we have to hold the hands of the new players, but give them more guidance

    This is actually something that can and should be done. Perhaps some devoted clans could put up training servers? That way they can help out Chivalry, the skill of the general player, and perhaps recruit some new members.

    @Zrehael:

    Hey, I don’t appreciate a presumptuous attitude towards suggestions. The fact that you assumed that I knew nothing about the game (telling me to go back and learn the game) and essentially dismissing my arguments and suggestions as the whinings of a butthurt player will strike a nerve with anyone. You don’t want an offensive and rude response? Don’t do it to others. Simple as that.

    I never said something as rude as explicit as you have. I had good ground to believe you were still a relatively new player somewhat subjective to certain issues. Hence I said you should sometimes wait a bit, take a couple of steps backwards and get a more complete, objective view. Also, I encounter a lot of people in-game complaining about LMB-spamming, while they’re doing nothing different themselves. If you found anything offensive in my posts, then it is merely because you were searching for it.



  • Massive post ahead.

    @Funkmaster:

    First off, a large number of players (myself included) managed to see into the depth of the system without someone holding our hands. No, wait, that’s not entirely true. I did the tutorial. My point is, nothing -needs- to be included to encourage people to move on from M1 to other forms of attack.

    You’d be surprised how many people play games and miss the obvious. People are more inclined to blame “bad game mechanics” when they really haven’t experimented any with the system or tried anything beyond just mashing that left mouse button. I’m not saying do it so it’s completely hand-holding, because that’s more frustrating than just getting killed repeatedly. I’m suggesting a tweak to the game in which players who are struggling to contend have a chance to learn new strategies and then develop their own to suit their playstyle.

    @Funkmaster:

    I completely disagree that M1 spam in a melee rewards people. Sure, they might get a good KDR, but if they’re not functionally retarded, it’s probably a safe bet to say that they will eventually figure out that a high ratio with a bad score means something. One does not need to bop someone over the head to instill them with wisdom, and I think you would benefit from a bit more faith in our community. =p

    The problem is that score really doesn’t mean much. Sure, a few players like myself enjoy that high score over a high KDR, but most people are concerned with how many kills they’ve racked up and accumulating the least deaths possible to do that. Score means little to the players, and most new players are going to see it as fluff at best.

    I’m not trying to say anything bad about the community, but I know a lot of gamers are inclined to miss the obvious and instead blame other things instead of themselves.

    @Funkmaster:

    That being said, I think it’s a worst-case scenario. In most of the melees I’ve fought in, M1 spam rarely works except from behind; one of those three guys in front of you will block it, leaving the other two open to attack you. Maybe you’ve just been unlucky.

    I usually avoid those scraps nowadays because I literally watch as someone who’s already started the LMB spam as they’re running into the fight barrels in and just keeps slashing with no thought for their teammates. Occasionally, they won’t get a single kill. Other times, they’ll take two or three heads with them (50/50 chance on it being a TK or not).

    My point is, if this simple system works for someone, and they’re able to even get a few kills with it, what’s the point in learning anything else when that’s just as effective in a 2v1 or 3v1?

    @Funkmaster:

    I believe that the two most important factors in one’s personal success in this game are footwork and awareness. Footwork should be obvious: if your weapon has more reach, stand where you benefit from that; don’t waste movement (if it gains you something, it’s not wasted) and you won’t get yourself killed. Awareness is a little more complicated: sometimes it’s knowing which path to take to the objective; sometimes it’s knowing how many people are in melee and what they’re doing and where they’re standing; sometimes it’s knowing where the enemy is going to attack, and thus where you must defend; sometimes, it’s just knowing when you shouldn’t fight. It has been my experience that a solid effort towards a dancer’s footwork and Gretsky’s awareness will turn you into the Juggernaut.

    I’d like to add to this about studying your opponent in a fight as well. If you notice a common pattern of how he likes to attack, you can exploit it. For example. If you notice that after a swing, he tends to back off and try to parry, expecting you to match him blow for blow, bait him. Throw a feint to keep him like that and then hit him. I suppose that could go under awareness, but to me, awareness is more “Oh crap, a vanguard is charging into combat to assist this knight and I’m all alone. Time to get the hell out of here before I get outnumbered”.

    @Funkmaster:

    I’ve been seeing a lot of arguments for both side of the vanguard issue. It seems to me that the class is perfectly fine in pubs, but has no clear place in competitive play. I’d need more experience to comment on that one. But as for pole-arms doing damage in melee, have you ever been hit in the head with a ten-pound hunk of wood with some muscle behind it?

    I have, actually. Used to be a part of a few LARP groups (Yes, I’m that much of a nerd) like Dagorhir and the SCA. It hurts, but it’s nowhere near as damaging as the head of the weapon, especially when the hunk of wood hits platemail and chainmail. The reason I bring up the polearm thing is I actually used to use a glaive as a weapon, and using it was a fun experience. I could team up with someone having trouble against a guy using a shield and manage to manuver my polearm around the shield with my ally defending me to get the kill and help him out. I also had to deal with people charging into that gap where the “blade” of the glaive didn’t reach, and invested in a backup weapon. As much as people say that in this game it isn’t viable, I know differently.

    To me, if that were implemented, I would have to say now, the following changes would have to be implemented to keep players content with it: Buff polearm damage a bit to give a reason to want to use it. Buff the charge attack to make it useful for something other than ambushes. And finally give the vanguard another niche that makes people want to play him. I’ve seen improved health regeneration suggested multiple times, and for a class that should be played like a skirmisher instead of a brick wall (like a knight) it would add some use so long as the health regen wasn’t overkill.

    @Siegfried:

    When I play a Vanguard, I don’t want to run around, using a one-hander 80% of the time. I’ll play MaA or a Knight to do that. One handers aren’t exactly a Vanguards strength, and by this suggestion, you’re confining them to use their weakest point the most (in pub-games).

    I’m not saying you should, but again, you really downplay the effectiveness of that backup weapon. Setting up a good primary weapon and then having a solid back up weapon as an “Oh shit…” button is hardly a bad tactic.

    @Siegfried:

    Yes, it is effective, against people that don’t know how to counter it (new players). Go ahead and put a LMB spammer on a server where he is the only one spamming and all the rest are decent, experienced players. You won’t see him performing well at all. On the long term, skill still pays off more.

    In a one on one a spammer does have a somewhat even change against an average player, as I’ve said before. But the thing is, the average player, that does not LMB spam, but blocks and uses stabs (to utilize his range) and overheads (for more damage) will become better at positioning his attacks (harder to hit an enemy with a stab/overhead) so he’ll hit his target every time. And thát, is far more viable than LMB spamming. More difficult, but better.

    It is, and I agree completely. But the problem is that by not encouraging a player to look at new strategies and simply hope they learn from their 500th decapitation is sort of a coin flip as to whether or not a player will become better. By keeping LMB spam even somewhat reliable, you remove any will for a player to try out anything new. In the meantime, the players who did decide to experiment with their playstyle, who evolved beyond LMB spam and became better fighters by learning the more difficult method of combat in this game, will create a skill ceiling far out of the reach of the LMB spammers. These people will either try to experiment with their playstyle too late, or get frustrated that their usual tactics are so easily deflected by opposing players (rather than just not being viable at all) and, in the end, will blame this game for it. I’ve seen many examples of people who have simply whined and complained “This game sucks, <insert video=”" game="" with="" sword="" fights="" here="">is better" as they’re going 2 and 20 with a low score, trying to go outside LMB spam but getting punished by LMB spammers. Shouldn’t this game encourage new playstyles and tactics, not punish them?

    @Zrehael:

    I did read your previous post. The problem is, the game doesn’t encourage or even want to acknowledge that there’s a better strategy than W+M1 for new players. It nets them an average KDR with little to no effort. Why would they bother taking the time to learn the game when just charging in and swinging wildly is just as effective? And honestly, unless the person is charging into a 3v1 or 4v1, he still has the same chance as any other player, regardless of skill, of coming out without being killed.

    @Siegfried:

    I just have to plain disagree on this one. I believe a skilled player has more chance of coming alive out of any encounter than a LMB-spammer.

    The more people in an encounter, the more likely LMB spam is going to be effective because a new player:

    1. Isn’t worried about teamkilling. They’re new, after all.
    2. Is trying to get the kill, so he’s not doing anything bad intentionally
    3. The more people engaged in a huge clash of blades, the less anyone will really have time to pay attention to and react to another player charging in swinging wildly.

    @Zrehael:

    I find aggressive players more intense when I have to actually learn their playstyle and how they like to come at me. The guy who swings and swings and swings is boring because I know exactly where to parry, I can fake him out for a quick shot and then he just loses his mojo and dies from there. And he’s going to wonder how I killed him, and he’s just going to think that he shouldnt’ get faked out and parry more. Never mind the fact I was easily blocking his attacks because all he used was the same attack.

    @Siegfried:

    Here you prove yourself how the issue is going to solve itself. LMB spammers will still get owned by more decent players, thus they will stop spamming, and start learning some actual skill.

    A bit of a slippery slope. Some players may do that, but many players will get frustrated that, moving to this new style of actually using distance, feints, and stabs/overheads to their advantage. Their inexperience with that style,the style we both know is superior in the long run, is going to be punished by people still barraging them with LMB spam and it’s going to either drive them right back to LMB spam or it’s going to make them give up.

    I almost think we should make those YouTube video tutorials that Shara did part of the tutorial in game, as that helped me much more than the in-game tutorial ever did. Sure, the in-game tutorial teaches you the absolute basics of the game, but it never goes beyond that. It doesn’t teach you about mouse-dragging to take advantage of realtime strikes, or jumping after the wind-up of an overhead to easily counter most knights who turtle with shields. It gives you knowledge of the controls, but doesn’t really encourage you to put more controls to practice than just W+M1.

    @Zrehael:

    The game has a beautiful combat system that new players should explore, but the fact that W+M1 is just as effective may leave the game with a false sense of depth and strategy. Feints shouldn’t be a high level mechanic. There shouldn’t even be levels of mechanics. Players should be looking beyond this, but there’s really no reason to. That’s why the game needs to punish it: to give these new players reason to explore other strategies.

    @Siegfried:

    They will do this. Once they see what they’re capable of doing when not mindlessly berserking through crowds of people, not differentiating teammates or enemies. In the end, everyone wants to be good at a game, and sooner or later the illusion of LMB-spammers (that they’re good players) will get shattered. I know this, because I did so myself. Now I only use LMB when I’m facing multiple enemies with no teammates around me and while using a decent long ranged weapon. And those occasions are rare indeed.

    Right, but I also drag my mouse in those situations too, so I usually end up slashing a 120 degree arc or more at the same time. New players aren’t going to know what we know about the mechanics, about how to play them to our favor. I’m not saying LMB isn’t a viable attack, I use it for feints, getting around shields, and dealing with two enemies because the 1v1 I started turned into a 2v1 and I need to end this quickly. I just hate that mashing it and charging forward still is any sort of effective unless you’ve really mastered the mechanics to the point where you’re in the mindset we’re in. I’m not speaking so much on this wishlist for me as I am for those players who are trying to learn this new system, struggling to put it to use, and are getting punished for it by a system that, by it’s very nature, should be less effective.

    @Zrehael:

    To be honest, I think it might disappoint players more, because as more people learn to combat LMB spam, like I have, it will become less effective, but nothing encourages the player to try anything else.

    @Siegfried:

    A ton of people will try out new strategies themselves, and come to the conclusion LMB spamming isn’t that good at all, and others will change their opinion and tactic by seeing experienced players in action.

    This brings up something I really should have posted in the original list, a spectator mode. There was an archer not to long ago that could use a bow like you wouldn’t believe and I wanted to see his strategy and aiming tactics to try and emulate them and adapt them to my style, but the lack of a first-person spectate makes this near impossible. The combat in this is so fast paced that trying to learn from your mistakes is rough unless you already know what we know about the combat.

    @Zrehael:

    It needs to be punished and it needs to be stressed to actually use other tactics in combat. I’m not saying we have to hold the hands of the new players, but give them more guidance

    @Siegfried:

    This is actually something that can and should be done. Perhaps some devoted clans could put up training servers? That way they can help out Chivalry, the skill of the general player, and perhaps recruit some new members.

    To be honest, this would probably be the most effective method: Boot Camp servers. I remember an FPS I played a long while back (can’t remember the name for the life of me) had boot camp servers that focused on teaching newer players how to really contend. A few visits to those and I was playing with the best of them in no time.

    @Zrehael:

    Hey, I don’t appreciate a presumptuous attitude towards suggestions. The fact that you assumed that I knew nothing about the game (telling me to go back and learn the game) and essentially dismissing my arguments and suggestions as the whinings of a butthurt player will strike a nerve with anyone. You don’t want an offensive and rude response? Don’t do it to others. Simple as that.

    @Siegfried:

    I never said something as rude as explicit as you have. I had good ground to believe you were still a relatively new player somewhat subjective to certain issues. Hence I said you should sometimes wait a bit, take a couple of steps backwards and get a more complete, objective view. Also, I encounter a lot of people in-game complaining about LMB-spamming, while they’re doing nothing different themselves. If you found anything offensive in my posts, then it is merely because you were searching for it.

    The way you implied it seemed to carry more of an arrogant, “GTFO noob” sort of tone to it. I wasn’t searching to be offended by your post because you disagreed with me, but to be honest, this is neither here nor there. Let’s drop it and focus on the topic at hand.</insert>


Log in to reply