This game shoots itself in the foot

  • Here we have Chivalry Medieval Warfare, an online sword and shield combat game with a brilliant fighting system that is easy to learn, but difficult to master.

    Having now put nearly 20 hours into this game, I can say with some remorse that this game shoots itself in the foot. On the one hand, we have this genius combat system that works very well. On the other hand, we have now hordes and hordes of new players who bring with them the online shooter mentality.

    This means that 99% of all games end up playing like any other FPS on the market, just with swords and shields. There is little to no reason for people to play as a team, and we end up with the same story playing out over and over again on every single map:

    Spawn, sprint to combat, kill or die, repeat.

    Aside from flanking, there is absolutely no incentive for players to think tactically. The tutorial boldly states “A line of knights with tower shields can block all access through a gate or chokepoint”, but having played for 20 hours I can honestly say this has never happened ONCE in all of my games.

    And I really didn’t expect people to coordinate their movements in the slightest. I’ve played online multiplayer for years, and no matter the game it is seemingly impossible to get people to work together if there is no reason for it, like in Chivalry.

    So how can this be overcome? A system of incentive. Battlefield 3 has the “Squad” system that gives the player extra reward for sticking close to and supporting his teammates. I’m not saying Chivalry needs a “points” system like that, no, I’m saying the game needs to reward players for thinking and acting as a team.

    Teamwork needs to be promoted and rewarded, not forced. It needs to be demonstrated to newbies and veterans alike how much better their team would do if they all worked together to form a line to prevent the enemy from flanking or taking the objective.

    This is just a rant I’ve put together in 10 minutes about my thoughts on the game. I’m putting forward a suggestion, not crying because I’ve lost too many rounds. Does anyone agree?

  • I’d laugh if I saw people trying to form an actual shield wall as a viable tactic. As you mentioned, flanking is a common tactic and it’d be great to have so many knights out of commission at one time at a predictable place on the map. Unless you’re trying to roleplay or something there isn’t much point in trying out traditional military formations. For one thing, those kinds of formations don’t work when you only have a dozen or two players - one of the advantages was making it easier for reserve forces to swap in and out as people got exhausted. There is no reserve force and there are no supply lines to defend, so lose a lot of the justification for traditional strategy right out of the gate.

    If you really want that kind of stuff to come into play you should stick with strategy games. There might be some discussion of traditional tactics and formations here, but none of it will hold up to a strong enough band of skirmishers.

  • The problem with sticking next to your teammates is all that stupid LMB spam friendly fire…

    I agree teamwork should be used a bit more (this even coming from myself, a self proclaimed one-man-army who rushes into battle alone most times with his trusty maul). I have seen a lot of teams use real teamwork and dominate and teams simply not work together and get crushed… Teamwork is important, just not so important that everyone feels like they have to play as a unit. One person can (and usually does) change the outcome of the game in public servers.

    I try to ask for help with trebs and say “hey guys, im at 3… lets get this one first” only to have treb 2 and 4 drop while I stand at 3 waiting on support.

  • How do you suggest you “promote and reward” teamwork? How would you suggest such a system would work without being incredibly contrived or simplistic? I’ve worked with UDK and programming in such a system would be incredibly difficult and likely not worthwhile. Programming in a points system based upon proximity to your teammates would be relatively simple, but to what purpose would such a system exist? What would teamwork points earn for you? What would stop players from huddling together in a hidden corner just to rack up “Teamwork Points.”

    I’m sorry and this may sound facetious, but welcome to the internet. Most people just want to kill other players and say nuts to any objectives. Chivalry imo hasn’t been like what you described though. Most TO games I play the players are actively working towards the objective.

    When I get frustrated by lack of teamwork in a team game, I just go and play deathmatch and blow some steam off. No point working yourself up over what other players will or won’t do. If you can’t beat 'em, join 'em I say.

    If you really want to be on a team that “works together”, then join or start a clan.

  • Only a fool would join a pug and expect tactics and strategy.

    Join a clan, derp, and work with them to play with all the tactics you wish.

  • I have actually formed a tower shield wall with a couple of other random players once before. It was when the corpse cart almost reaches the last gate. The shield wall was in front of the cart and we had a couple of archers with us as well. Nobody got through.

    Only happened once and in my early hours of the game. But I usually find you can kinda tell who is up for actually trying things just from the atmosphere on the server. I much prefer it when players are getting into the spirit of the game and almost role playing it rather than DEADLY SERIOUS COMPETITION 24/7. :P

  • @Ragnar:

    What would stop players from huddling together in a hidden corner just to rack up “Teamwork Points.”

    I got a mental image of a bunch of guys “huddling together” in a “hidden corner” and I lolled so hard. :lol:


  • Like any other game, you can’t really expect any advanced tactics from the new and inexperienced. If you play enough on clan servers you’ll definitely see clan stacks working together as a team and absolutely destroying everyone, though - the basis for teamwork is definitely there, and things like shield walls (very loose shield walls because you don’t have that many people to wall with) definitely work. A combination of knights with tower shields, vanguards with spears and archers is extremely deadly when they can stay in proper formation.

    Unfortunately I don’t think any game will ever have a system good enough to encourage random people who haven’t played much to work together. I don’t think any game has a better “teamwork incentive” than Natural Selection 2, which has one player on each side playing as a commander able to issue orders to the rest of the team and basically decide how the other players will play the game by choosing what gets upgraded and built - but only if his team can actually listen to what he’s saying and commit to the objectives. In my time with that game I haven’t seen much organization from random players even with all of that in place.

  • There should be diferent commands for like “follow me” “form up” so you could strategize and not need to have a mic since most dont use or like to use in public games. I used to play for ps2 Tribes: aerial assault(BEST GAME EVER) had a nice communication system with different commands you learned intuitively while playing for so long like triangle triangle square so forth, they have it in-game already but should make it more customizable and in-depth

    Torn Banner need a new game to make millions off of?… Ok jetpacks, mountains , 2 bases with generators, flags at each base, and no weapons except for a grenade launcher and a aim system with a general idea where to aim ahead of the opponent to hit but still have to learn and feel wheres right to aim at. MY dream :red:

    make it and I will give complimentary handjobs for the whole Torn banner staff!! :o

  • Here is a broad outline of a system that I think is full of potential:

    Spawn every player in formation.

    Archers and Men at Arms form the first line.

    Knights and Vanguards form the second.

    Depending on the map, the initial distance between the two lines is lesser or greater. The bigger the distance between the two lines will allow the faster classes (archers and maa, the 1st line) to skirmish and engage one another, followed by the slower but more durable 2nd line, which will commence the main melee. The time to allow skirmishers to actually skirmish is critical, because the outcome of that fight will inevitably dictate the outcome of the one immediately following.

    When people can get a feel for the actual role in warfare the in-game Class is based on, they might start to see the bigger picture. If we can divide the classes in this manner, people might start to contemplate utilizing their specializations to the fullest, when used in tandem with that of the other classes.

    Strictly controlling the location and set up of the initial spawn will do this. It’s just up to the player to actually understand it.

    Keep in mind this is just a basic framework. I’m not a developer, I just play a lot of games.

  • Developer

    I just want to ring in and say in my experience with AoC the mod, more advance tactics appeared later, this game is still in its infacy, i have seen some mighty shield walling in dark forest, protecting the royals.

  • Yea, I know when I play an archer, I want to be on the front line.


  • @Slaughtervomit:


    What would stop players from huddling together in a hidden corner just to rack up “Teamwork Points.”

    I got a mental image of a bunch of guys “huddling together” in a “hidden corner” and I lolled so hard. :lol:


    Bahahaha. You filthy-minded bastard.

  • I think teamwork would be more of a viable option on larger servers… there’s just no real reason to do it right now. I went on a 64 player server last night and it felt as if it was a whole different game. It was laggy as hell because of everyone’s high ping, but still, it was AMAZING. I could really see things such as shield walls helping in that situation, since there was no way the other team were getting through without some sort of organized plan

  • @JHoersten2:

    Yea, I know when I play an archer, I want to be on the front line.


    It’s funny you should say that, because in reality archers would deploy almost exclusively as the front line, to fire off a few volleys at the approaching enemy, before retreating back behind the infantry to continue volleying at units farther back.

    Because as an archer, YOU SHOULD NEVER SHOOT INTO COMBAT. You probably do it all the time, though.


    I think teamwork would be more of a viable option on larger servers… …I could really see things such as shield walls helping in that situation, since there was no way the other team were getting through without some sort of organized plan

    This is what I’m talking about. When the conditions are right, this game can start to feel pretty authentic. What we’re trying to communicate to you all who think the game is fine the way it is, is how much BETTER the game could be with a few subtle but serious tweaks to the core structure of teamplay.

    For instance, most team objective maps feature a chokepoint or two at certain stages, where the defenders could almost certainly win every time if the right tactics are employed by at least 1/2 the team. But because the game doesn’t promote it, no one knows to do it.

    And it works both ways. If the offense can surround the pushable with shields covering at least 180 degrees facing forward, it would be nearly unstoppable. But instead we just have players randomly running around trying to be heroes. It’s maddening.

  • Sounds like you would get more enjoyment out of joining a clan and partake in organized clan matches. Why not head on over to the Clan forum? There are a bunch there recruiting new members.

  • My problem with clans is two things - One, I will likely have to plug in my mic, and Two, I work the night shift at my restaurant exclusively. This means that when most people are playing, I’m working.

    Here’s another idea. Bear with me:

    Okay, so you know how there are floating objective markers showing what to do on most maps? Well, most players end up turning them off once they’ve either reached the destination or are familiar with the map.

    So, this means that everyone has read it, and will read it when it changes.

    Instead of “Extinguish” “Defend” “Push” and “Pillage”…

    It should be more detailed, but not over-complicated. Such as:

    “Deny the Enemy access to the fire! Form a defensive perimeter at the main gate!”

    “Hold back the Bomb Cart at all costs! Form a shield wall at the bridge!”

    “Push the Corpse Cart through the forest! Shields up front, Enemies ahead!”


    “Form up outside the Town and commence the assault. The streets will run red with the blood of our foes!”

    This way, the game isn’t forcing you to do anything at gunpoint. Instead, it is simply implanting the notion in your mind of how you COULD work together with your team. The incentive would be a much higher chance of winning. If you still want to be an ass and go rogue, just turn off the marker and disregard it completely. This way, all new players will automatically start off thinking, “I’d better stick with my team.”

  • @Uncle_Uzi:

    Having now put nearly 20 hours into this game

    stopped reading there

  • Capture the flag, CTF, capture the flag, please give us capture the flag and all problems shall be solved! 8-)

  • @rumpelstiltskin:


    Having now put nearly 20 hours into this game

    stopped reading there

    Oh look guys, we’ve got ourselves a badass. Just get out of my thread, you little punk. Some of us have to work for a living and can’t play 25 hours a day.

Log in to reply