Differences between Chivalry and Age of Chivalry



  • Hello there,

    As you may or may not know, Chivalry: Medieval Warfare didn’t come out of thin air. This game is the evolution of a Half Life 2 mod called Age of Chivalry (AoC), based on the source engine and still available on Steam. The people behind the mod eventually formed the Torn Banner Studios and gathered enough money via crowdfunding to develop Chivalry.

    So, what I’d like to do here is collect the various changes that were made when the game transitioned from a mod to a fully fledged out game and discuss whether you like them or not.

    I have played Age of Chivalry for a short time and it really got me hooked. This was my first true melee fighting game, even before Mount and Blade. Maybe the mod has changed over time, I can’t tell you because I did not play AoC for that long. These are my memories of it.

    The Looks
    AoC was a modification for a already pretty old game, so there is no denying that the pure graphic power of Chivalry is superior. But what also changed is the art style, especially the character models. The old AoC-models looked a lot more fantastic and cartoonish and also the two factions had a very distinct, stereotype good vs. evil style rather than the current western European vs. eastern/nordic mash. Ive always been a fan of more “grounded” fantasy, I prefer the new look by far. Remember the hilarious looking Mason knight with the huge black horns that would hinder him so much in combat… yet this guy has become my favorite character both in appearance and voice in Chivalry.

    Oh, and the character animations were… not that good. I am not going to discuss this any further.

    The Gameplay
    The greatest difference I “feel” for myself is that AoC felt a lot more deadly. No matter what class you were, nobody could take a large amount of hits. I usually played Archer or Guardsman because they felt the most noob-friendly to me (in both cases because of the range) and I could actually kill stuff with it. The Guardsman’s halberd could one hit archers and two hit everyone else including heavy knights. And archers were freakin’ deadly! In Chivalry, I have less ranged kills than I have fingers on my hand while in AoC you could snipe people all day. And headshots were a lot more like in Counterstrike, which means pretty much instant death. I got wrecked by people playing Crusader Knights with longswords just chopping away at head-hight. Now that was some serious spamming.
    To me, Chivalry feels like a straight up improvement in this point because you can now actually fight your opponent on a regular basis instead of either you or him dying in seconds. Also, advanced combat mechanics like feint or combo either weren’t there or I just never figured them out. And guess what, sprinting drained your stamina - and once drained, you couldn’t even attack.

    As I already hinted, there were more classes in AoC, but each came with a pre-selected weapon loadout. Hope I can name them all, I think it was 7 classes with three different armor types (first three low, next two medium, last two heavy ?). So there were the Archer, Crossbowman, Javelineer, Sergeant, Guardsman, Crusader and Heavy Knight. The first three are self-explanatory; Sergeant can be compared to the Man at Arms and the Guardsman was something like a less armored Vanguard. The Crusader was a less armored knight with shield and the heavy was the brute with either warhammer or doubleaxe but without a shield.
    Looking at both games, I’m not entirely sure which alternative I prefer, but I’m leaning towards Chivalry because it hit a nice balance with only four, but more distinct classes that you can customize.

    AoC had more gamemodes, but Torn Banner is currently working on it so I don’t really want to discuss that, too.

    A minor thing I want to mention just for the giggles - friendly fire was often turned off. Have a siege weapon fire blindly into the melee and wreck up kills without hurting your team was hilarious, especially since the catapults, once aimed, would always hit the same spot. Though anyone who got killed this way probably hated it - especially since on some maps you could shoot as far as the enemy spawning point.
    Personally, my greatest accomplishment in AoC was hitting a moving, fully loaded siege tower’s top with a catapult shot and wiping out the entire enemy team in the process.

    Custom Content
    Its probably not fair to compare Chivalry to AoC because Chivalry is still rather new, but in AoC making custom content was as easy as creating a new source map and introducing it into the serverbrowser. I fear Chivalry will never be that easily accessible, but time will tell. So far, just to have mentioned it: aoc_helms_deep

    Ambition
    Age of Chivalry was merely a mod, but its ambitions were truly great. It was set to create a radically new gaming experience, converting the baseline game into something entirely different besides the first person view. At the time, it totally blew my mind and sucked me in.
    But not only would the gameplay be something entirely new. They even tried to get the game to tell an overlying story arc while keeping the build of a round-based multiplayer game. The idea was something like this: You have the backdrop of the Mason-Agatha war. The first map on the server would be on some kind of neutral battlefield and the upcoming map would be determined by whoever wins the current match. If the Agathians won, the next map would be somewhere on Mason territory and vice versa until one faction gets to a final map where it could end their story arc and win the war by winning the map. I don’t really know if this ever really worked, but this feature seems to be missing completely in Chivalry. The maps in Team Objective seem to tell some kind of story with the landing of the Agathian fleet (hillside I think?) being the first one and the assault und the capital of Agatha (battlegrounds?) or the slaying of the King (stonestill) being the last one - though I still think the guy marked “king” is not supposed to be the heir to Argon but rather the local lord of Stonestill who is mentioned in the map description.
    Sadly, I never heard or read about the “coherent campaign” feature in Chivalry and I think that’s a shame - the idea was rather simple in execution but could give soo much more atmosphere and lore to the game. I’d love to see some kind of official server following this pattern!

    So, feel free to bring up your own points or discuss the ones I already made - what is different, what you liked better, what you remember.

    Have fun!



  • Literally the only thing I liked better in AoC was the Javelineer class. It also had more map variety, but Chivalry is working on catching up in that department.



  • I like the map progression thing, though I only ever saw it in Dark Messiah multiplayer, having never played AoC. It would get kind of annoying if the team are trading wins and playing on the same maps all the time rather than having a rotation, but I prefer the concept. Simply having the choice between Progression - Rotation map styles on a server would be great, especially since the content update soon would be fleshing out the “story” of the map progressions.

    Also, was every map available for every gamemode in AoC or is the limited pool a feature of both games? For example, LTS never seems to get played on Battlegrounds or Hillside unless you vote for them specifically. Fighting in the third Hillside area is fun, I don’t get it o.o?



  • I still wonder if there is ever going to be a canon story arc or if the game will have different endings for each faction (or none at all). I already heard a rumor about ab Mason leader model being added, what would that be for if not a “slay the Mason general (Malric)” - map?

    The map I currently miss most is the siege map where Agatha is supposed to rescue a prisoner from a Mason dungeon. Not only did I like the map itself, it also provided some interesting lore. But I just cant remember its name :(



  • @SlyGoat:

    Literally the only thing I liked better in AoC was the Javelineer class. It also had more map variety, but Chivalry is working on catching up in that department.

    Pretty much the same, I’ve even uninstalled AoC now (after years!) as I don’t see any reason to play it anymore now Chiv is out.

    Like you, different / more maps, and better Javelineers are the only thing I can really think of.

    Hopefully they’ll fix the Javelineers to work like AoC ones at some point.



  • @Daiyuki:

    Also, was every map available for every gamemode in AoC or is the limited pool a feature of both games? For example, LTS never seems to get played on Battlegrounds or Hillside unless you vote for them specifically. Fighting in the third Hillside area is fun, I don’t get it o.o?

    In AoC, the maps were just team objective style. There weren’t any team deathmatch, ffa or lts modes. But there were a lot of different maps. I hope to see some similar ones in the future on Chiv.

    Nice read though Don_Kanaille. I loved AoC and it was great for its time.



  • only thing aoc has over chivalry still is recording, you can record demos so easy with source engine



  • Oh also, I like spectator mode better in AoC :P



  • @Don_Kanaille:

    I still wonder if there is ever going to be a canon story arc or if the game will have different endings for each faction (or none at all). I already heard a rumor about ab Mason leader model being added, what would that be for if not a “slay the Mason general (Malric)” - map?

    The map I currently miss most is the siege map where Agatha is supposed to rescue a prisoner from a Mason dungeon. Not only did I like the map itself, it also provided some interesting lore. But I just cant remember its name :(

    That was my favorite map as well. It is called aoc_siege. The oil pots, treb/siege and rooftop fights were hilarious.



  • The main differences:

    -Server browser works
    -Server browser doesn’t work



  • I liked the menu music in AoC. And guarding the bottom of the well in that map where Agatha had to free the prisoner was hilarious when they got stuck in the water.

    I like how Chivalry made it possible to murder peasants and burn their houses down manually. There was an AoC map where you had to hang peasants that would spawn in the noose over time, and each time you killed one more of the map would automatically catch on fire.

    Oh and what about that tavern that was fists only?



  • @KillerKeg:

    Oh and what about that tavern that was fists only?

    I totally forgot about that. That was hilarious.



  • @Don_Kanaille:

    @KillerKeg:

    Oh and what about that tavern that was fists only?

    I totally forgot about that. That was hilarious.

    Lol! that was fun as hell. I think that one was called aoc_barfight. It had the 2 peasants sitting in the stools. was a small part of the village map i beleive.



  • The only change I genuinely dislike is feinting.



  • As I have stated before, I really wish they had kept aiming with the arrow point for Chivalry instead of using a crosshair. Minor thing but added a bit of authenticity.



  • I liked the ability for servers to have custom code to enable certain features beyond just the server settings such as seeing damage done and welcome screens, etc, and of course those background windows that enabled you to do your own personal vote kicking. Of course I know UT doesn’t quite allow for the same UI experience as Source, I think this kick function should be used. Using a punish/forgive system where after so many punishes the person gets kicked and doesn’t require the mob of the server to weigh in or be annoyed. Of course I don’t think vote kicking in general is bad, but most of it could be left automated, triggered by tk’s to the player.

    I also really miss VOIP (and mute players) on source. I know there’s VOIP on this engine too, but it is rarely used, cuts out a lot, or only transmits to certain players. I would really like to see TEAM voip be established too, rather than just global chat.

    And of course there’s the source server browser which worked great and is yet to be replaced


Log in to reply