This needs some balance.



  • Hey. I have played this game for quite a while and like it a lot but it got some serious balance problems. Mainly I will speak of duels because thats where is comes up the most when you focus on one opponent only and they can use all cheapness they can. I should also add that I do fairly good in duels, and lose horribly only if it is just really a bad day for me on chilvary. I have tested out many combat mechanics and in different weapons and classes, and the only people who were completely happy with the game as it is in my experience is the ones who used those very unbalanced things in their advantage. Now, before anyone rages, I do not mean that they were bad, but they still only happy because they do not have to deal with those issues or exploit them. To back that up I have fought those people with my usual weapon set and they would destroy me, but when I swapped to their set it would be a very close game.

    So what are the issues I am talking about? One and the biggest is the one handed weapons. Before people start defend it let me point out that now nearly everyone who is at the top of duel board is using one handed and since the patch you see people use it everywhere. The problems that I see with one handed is that it is pretty hard to block. That does not mean I can’t block it, I have all strategy on beating people by blocking it. Yet is it much harder to block than two handed weapons and sometimes it just simply goes through block especially if they spam in your face, and thats what most of them do. The blocking box, or how else you call it, on one handed weapons needs to be larger. If it’s already the same as two handed, then still something needs to be done. I never have problems blocking any two handed unless I make an error, but with one handed some of those hits might just go through even when you looked right at them while blocking, yes I mean the tip.

    What I find funny is that main argument that people use in defense of one handed is that the reach is low, the dmg is low and that you got to get in to even land a hit. To all that, once I got hit with one handed from where my two handed did not reach while both of us stood still, that might have been just lag and probably was but point is that reach is not that bad on some of them but it should not be good to begin with because it’s one handed. On low dmg… Well, you can two hit vanguard with some of them, and thats what people use, and sometimes even knight, had that experience, so dmg is more than fine. On getting in, you can simply walk straight up to anyones face with no problems, so that is not an achievement.

    Blocking part is annoying but the biggest issue I have with one handed their amazing ability to block two handed weapons and most of the time not being knocked back and their ability to recover as fast from being blocked. In details why is one handed being able to block two handed weapons and even make a counter after this? There got to be some punish that would at least knock them back or some recoil where they wont be able to attack as fast again for a moment so they can’t simply spam you in close range with very little effort. Another thing that just makes me insane is how one handed is able to block the counter. To all people that don’t know, counter is when you overhead right after you blocked and it should land a hit. That worked like a magic for me till recently for some reason. What puzzles me is why have a counter in the game if it does not even work? Sure I landed it many times but it is very frustrating when some pesky one handed sword is able to counter the counter whole day long. One handed weapons should have a long enough stun on being blocked by two handed weapons so the two handed weapon user can land a counter hit unless they dodge it. Why? For the sake of balance.

    It may look like I want one handed to be nerfed too much but even if all those things were to be fixed the only thing it would do is provide some balance and maybe then we would see people actually thing before running at you and spamming attacks at your face. Everyone now simply exploits these mechanics. And I do have more trouble with spears and for some reason hammer than one handed but I feel like the blocking it should be easier and counter should work.

    Now the second topic is faints. There many posts that hate on them and for the reason. You may get beat by some very unskilled players just because they abuse that mechanic, especially annoying when with one handed when it’s already much harder to block. No one seem to have defined answer on how to deal with faints and the only one is to watch your opponent and learn their tactics, which works, but you still will get killed the first time or more. There need to be way to deal with them without being owned by it at first or being total turtle and attacking blindly. The solutions that I got for it are: One of them is to have faint work as cancel into block only. Second is have delay before the next attack or make dmg of following attack significantly lower. Third is to add feint to blocking and then it would really be up to players reaction.

    These are my thoughts and I tested things out for a long time before making claim to any of them. The game is great but needs balance. Thank you.



  • Blocking a bigger weapon with a small weapon such as a hunting knife will drain your stamina much quicker.

    Great post btw.



  • So there seems to be a lot of complaints on blocking but I use a shield for the most part so I’ll not comment.

    Of course I do not agree with being blocked and automatically be able to land a hit - that makes no sense.

    Feints is the last good reason to have a shield but I did suggest you should only be able to feint in the first half of the windup but I doubt they will make any changes.



  • I agree that parrying is broken and it is unbalanced now.

    But counter definitely should not grant you a free hit… it would be 1000 times worst than the feinting mechanics are now. I mean, what mistake the player that is being countered make to deserve an unblockable overhead? What did the guy that is countering do to deserve to land a free hit? You don’t need a lot of skill to parry an attack and then counter, that is just a basic game mechanic (a bit unreliable at the moment, but that will be fixed, hopefully).



  • Feint is a feint… a mindgame.
    If you get feinted - the problem is on the player. Not the mechanic or the opponent. It is up to the player to over come it.

    There are many ways to deal with a feint.
    1. Composure - Get out of the bad habit of nervous blocking. Blocks can be done very late.
    2. Initiative - Strike out of turn with your weapons quickest attack (usually stab). This sends a message to the opponent that they cannot always feint as they may get stabbed.
    3. Shield
    4. Stamina - Feints cost stamina. If you can draw out the battle… you will have the edge in the long run if you conserved your energy.

    Getting a free-hit on a 1-hander because you blocked their attack and immediately strike. No… just no.

    =============

    In regards to 1 handers getting in your face and spamming.
    Well… 2 handers get to spam swings at range. If a 1-hander gets himself in, he should be rewarded, it should be his advantage. And it is up to the 2-hander to keep composure and get a block in. Yeah, its hard to deal with a 1-hander up close… but it is also hard to deal with a 2-hander from a-far. With that nifty spamming of attacks (the good old over-head into stab).

    This one is a difficult issue to discuss. I believe it is difficult to discern if there is, in fact, an issue. You have to take into account hitboxes; hurtboxes; speed; recovery; damage. It’s hard to weigh them all up.

    Free-hit mechanic is already in place with stamina drain. We don’t need one for simply being blocked. And I believe there enough cons to feints, as there are pros. Blocking is near instant - so you can wait really late in their animation. Or you know… give the shield a real purpose.

    ========

    Finally.
    The game shouldn’t be balanced towards a duel mentality. This is primarily a team game (right?)… and the game needs to be balanced with that in mind.

    MAA should have the advantage 1v1 - assassin style
    Knights should feel comfortable in the meat of battle as slow tanks who brawl with meaty swings
    Vanguards fill the other roles
    Archers are support

    And all classes have such a varied arsenal to choose from - they can change up the style of their class to better suit their personality; load-out a better match-up; or completely counter pick.

    This keeps a good dynamic battle-field. Gives all the classes character/personality.

    Take Capcom fighting games. They make their games with characters purposely more better than others. They look to balance the game by making sure nothing is OP (post-patching unexpected stuff)… but they keep personality by not making all characters equal. This is a purposeful design decision.

    Chivalry is a… fighter.
    Footwork, spacing, timing, execution, dexterity and mind-games are key. Weapons, class, match-up and load-out come last.



  • MAAs should not dominate 1v1, that’s the role of knights, the most highly trained and vicious warriors. MAAs should be support and those who pick off stragglers, as originally intended. This latest patch has made MAAs into the real knights.



  • @Magnificent:

    MAAs should not dominate 1v1, that’s the role of knights, the most highly trained and vicious warriors. MAAs should be support and those who pick off stragglers, as originally intended. This latest patch has made MAAs into the real knights.

    I disagree highly. from my experience the weapons like the sword of war and long sword dominate TO and dueling at a very high level. Even the Maul or pole axe are wonderful weapons in themselves let alone the LMB happy messer i think knights are fine.

    A knight can beat a MAA any day of the weak SOW is fast as balls and they can even change weapons with a great shield to what the man at war is using save axes.

    @g0dLyk:

    Getting a free-hit on a 1-hander because you blocked their attack and immediately strike. No… just no.

    I agree this is such crap. I hate getting instastabbed or overheaded when they look down because i got blocked.



  • No class should dominate duels and all should have a good chance cause if one class would be duel op than why even have a class choice, and knowing most people they will just go for that class just like everyone went for one handed after the patch.
    On one handed being able to get in and for that should be rewarded. That is would be a good idea if getting in was not that easy. Like I said, you can literally walk into anyones face, or even dash in with maa after their swing with very little effort, or use a shield, or just ran in. Getting into someones face is really not hard at all so it should not be rewarded. I don’t use one handed and shields but here an example. On one of my good days when I was really alert and up for the play, I had 4 vs 1 and won with gs vanguard. While fighting two initially and reacting to charges from behind. Now why do I boast about that? Cause on my bad days I die over and over like if it’s my first day. So on one of those bad days I had ratio of 2-6, I swapped to knight sword and shield and before I knew my ratio was 22-9. That is on my bad day with already lack of experience with one handed and shield combo. You can literally come up to anyones face and spam attack and sure some will block it, but some will die even when it looked like if they blocked.
    On counter, I can see how people see this as bad mechanic and I get that. Why I brought it up then? For sake of balancing one handed. It should absolutely not work on two handed vs two handed but one handed needs some sort of punish. Just the fact that one handed weapon that is much lighter and wielded with one hand can block two handed or being blocked by it and have no punish but then enjoy all the advantages of one handed is ridiculous. If counter did work, that does not mean free hit, they can still get out of the way, and some do now. Just walk around or dodge back as maa.
    Why do I think that one handed needs a punish? If what I said above does not clarify it then here is a summary of what we have now. With two handed you got to keep them away and manage your hits right and being able to block one handed that sometimes still hits you for some reason. With one handed blocking two handed is easy and you can ran into anyones face just by turtling and waiting for first swing, ran in before the second one and block it after, start spamming in there face and no matter how good they are, they just might miss a few hits (speaking from experience). Counter would make one handed users think a little harder before walk into your zone that carelessly. Game as it is now is pretty unbalanced, I am sure I am not only one in duels who notices that when people start lose their ground with two handed vs two handed, they pull out their one handed.
    Feinting, all the resolutions but one that listed wont do much good. Stamina recovers very fast and you can get enough back for another block easily. Blocking the last second sounds good and I did that before but when it comes to blocking one handed, it gets a little problematic cause not only it’s faster, which is ok, but there also a knowing that it might hit you anyways. I had duels with people who are really not that good and they would win the first game just cause of feinting, now it does not mean I lose to them every time. They just need to reduce dmg on following attack after the faint or add a feint to block so you could feint out your block and block again, that way it still would be up to players skill and reactions while removing cheap deaths from feints.
    Lastly, why did I speak of duels? Cause thats where most issues come out for me anyways. When it’'s one on one, you can judge strenghts and weaknesses much easier.



  • 1: Let’s not forget that realism takes a back seat to game design.

    2: If you are designing a game from a team play standpoint then, yes, it is OK to have a class that stands above the rest one on one. Just like it’s OK to have a class that sucks one on one. You are not balancing around duels and I wish people would understand that. The game isn’t paced or directed in such a way.

    Stray hits, friendly fire, longevity, defense, support, holding objectives, dealing with ranged… all these things and more must be considered when designing characters for a team based game. I survived much longer playing vanguard than I do playing MAA but I have more control over situations as a MAA and am more effective with a single backup. As a MAA I can get to objectives and do things quicker but I can’t hold out like I did as a Vanguard nor can I settle battles as quickly (leads to backup eventually arriving out of my favor) or deal with multiple enemies at once.

    All considerations that don’t exist in duels. So balance may be occurring in areas you haven’t even considered. I don’t want Archers able to 1 v 1 melee as well as other classes.



  • Just in regards to the different classes:

    I agree that post patch, MaA is the class to play in Duel mode, although Vanguards are good and Knights are still viable.

    The only problem with MaAs is that in any other mode they can be very easily dispatched if caught in a group and aren’t that great at defending an area. Knights are now true Tanks in that they’re best for tactical play; defending objectives and assisting other players. Vanguards are best for front line attacks due to reach, damage and speed and MaAs pick fights they can win, kill and move on.

    I personally play Knights almost exclusively in every mode except duel when I move to a MaAs with a falchion.



  • I’ll re-affirm.

    There must be discrimination between classes. This game needs to be balanced as a team mindset first; Duel mode last.
    Otherwise you’ll have to buff the archer. You can quickly close the gap on an archer in duel mode maps - nullifying their bow. And then the archer just becomes this weak little guy with no armor and no damage out-put. And I’m sure everyone can see the UTTER CHAOS the game would fall into if archers got buffed to be on equal ground. TO mode would be packed with archers (they already frequent 30-50%); ruining the spirit of the game.

    ======

    In regards to the apparent op’ness of 1-hander?
    I’ll answer with… stick with the mentality of ‘balance to team’; Not ‘balance to duel’. 1-Hander may be good 1v1. But it isn’t all that great when there are multiple opponents on screen.

    So to conclude. No matter what balances are done. First and foremost… keep the spirit of ‘team-game’ in mind.



  • If we just fixed blocking and parrying this wouldn’t be an issue. As it stands, 1-handers noclip through shields and parries like a hot knife through butter, and it is quite lame. I’ve quit dueling for this reason.



  • @g0dLyk:

    I’ll re-affirm.

    There must be discrimination between classes. This game needs to be balanced as a team mindset first; Duel mode last.
    Otherwise you’ll have to buff the archer. You can quickly close the gap on an archer in duel mode maps - nullifying their bow. And then the archer just becomes this weak little guy with no armor and no damage out-put. And I’m sure everyone can see the UTTER CHAOS the game would fall into if archers got buffed to be on equal ground. TO mode would be packed with archers (they already frequent 30-50%); ruining the spirit of the game.

    ======

    In regards to the apparent op’ness of 1-hander?
    I’ll answer with… stick with the mentality of ‘balance to team’; Not ‘balance to duel’. 1-Hander may be good 1v1. But it isn’t all that great when there are multiple opponents on screen.

    So to conclude. No matter what balances are done. First and foremost… keep the spirit of ‘team-game’ in mind.

    At first glance, this post sounds like a bunch of silly talk. Of course archers are underpowered in duels.

    But the logic is all sound. We would need to hugely buff Archers for duel mode. And that would hugely skew other game modes, where the Archer is balanced.

    I would assert that Team Objective is the primary game mode around which we balance the game. Anything else is a secondary concern. Duel will take on its own metagame, and if we can balance around that without sacrificing for TO, fine. But the moment TO suffers for it, that’s where the changes stop.



  • @g0dLyk:

    I’ll re-affirm.

    There must be discrimination between classes. This game needs to be balanced as a team mindset first; Duel mode last.
    Otherwise you’ll have to buff the archer. You can quickly close the gap on an archer in duel mode maps - nullifying their bow. And then the archer just becomes this weak little guy with no armor and no damage out-put. And I’m sure everyone can see the UTTER CHAOS the game would fall into if archers got buffed to be on equal ground. TO mode would be packed with archers (they already frequent 30-50%); ruining the spirit of the game.

    […]

    You should talk to this guy: http://www.chivalrythegame.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=10950



  • I don’t really see the point of this post, it sounds like a pretty poorly thought out rant to me.

    As mentioned, balancing around TO is probably the best way to go. If developers decide this is going to be some 1v1 centric game, it will be pretty much an arcade fighting game with less depth, which is obviously pretty silly. It should be a team game, where a balanced team is the one which wins. For example, in a game like DotA 2, or even any MMORPG, would it make sense to balance every hero around a 1v1 scenario, or a silly fun mode like only mid; would it make sense to balance healing/support classes in MMOs or even games like TF2 based on a 1v1 scenario? No, that would be plainly idiotic. Each classes has its merits in their own way. An archer plays as a ranged support class who needs to be covered and protected, given space to perform to succeed, and ultimately lose in equal footed melee combat. MAAs should technically be the best 1v1 classes, but are arguably not (knights ultimately are the kings of 1v1 atm whether it be intended or a mechanical flaw,I have no idea).

    As it stands, there isn’t much of an issue in terms of class balance besides probably the vanguard being a tad underpowered, but I won’t argue class balancehere. Regarding your point about “failing to counterattack,” the community grows every day in skill and you probably eventually got outskilled or people learnt to deal with cheap counter lookdown overheads which work against newer/slower players. I notice these days most people have at least learnt the basics and play pretty decently well. There are plenty of ways to make a slower weapon very effective in gameplay, and the recent ESL 2v2s/duels have truly shown how unjustifiable the crying rants have been on these forums. Buff the maul, 2Hs are underpowered, etc. etc. Look at the 1v1 ESL duel winner, he used a maul. 2v2 showed plenty of weapon combination (and mass knights) are pretty much effective in all scenarios. Until skilled competitive players actually stagnate or plateau in skill level, there is not really much discussion that should affect balance discussion significantly beyond developer opinion.



  • I wont post a very long reply to this due to shortage of time. I do not post something I “poorly thought of” or did not think enough. What is really so bad about wanting a good balanced duel? People who seem to bash my post ignore the very first thing I did say, is that I only base this on duels because thats is where most issues come out. Obviously this is a team game but how does this stands in a way of balancing duel? I am not sure why this is a news to everyone but dev could give completely different stats in duels to classes from any other modes, I am pretty sure thats possible. Now before anyone starts saying anything on that, that was just an example, does not mean I think that would be a good idea.
    Another thing is “crying rant”. People seriously need to start learning difference between those and actual feed back and ideas. It seem like if you post anything and does not post right under it that you are just bad and how everyone else is better than you, people feel a need to challenge it and call the posts out. I did not just posted a few lines saying how unfair and bad game is and how I can’t ever win, now that would be a crying post. I did not post that cause I can never win either, my score normally is fine but I feel like game needs a balance.
    The counter issue I mentioned. After testing that out more, I admit that my first idea was bad and after better look into it I do say it’s fine as it is now. As far as being outskilled or people learning the cheap tactics. Well, I will explain this just because it adds up to why I think some things need balance. I do not use cheap tactics when I play, means I do not just turtle back and only counter and I do not feint (yes feint is extremely cheap, and I can explain why in very good details), I do not just put on one handed and ran in and spam in peoples faces (I do not mean to say that this will kill everyone, cause good players can deal with this but from time to time even good ones will go down to this). So while playing gs vanguard, not feinting, not spamming one handed, not turtling, I do manage to win with a good score. Sure there better players but most that keep good score just cheap people out and thats a fact. Some may call it playing smart, but cheap is cheap. It’s smart bringing a gun to a fist fight but it is cheap, now if someone can’t follow that example then time to take off your blind fold and ear plugs.
    So why did I felt like I need to state all that? Cause the game got issues, and for some reason most people did not even respond to the ones I find the biggest ones. Classes are unbalanced but thats is not the worst part. One handed spam that goes through blocks, and feints are. One handed may simply hit you even when you are sure you will block it, and with some one handed being able 2-3 hit a knight, that is an issue. I may lead fight and have full hp, with my opponent being one hit away and they start spam one handed and 3-3 hits going through when I am looking at the tip, that is an issue. I did though that maybe it is weapons speed and me not being exactly precise at times, in that case it would just be a matter of sharpening your block reaction, but even then it would give one handed users a good advantage over anyone who is below pretty good. Still that is not the case, I can go blocking 5+ one handed hits on a row pretty close up but then just somehow missing 3 on a row when I am sure I blocked it. I am sure many people experienced that, I do see “I blocked that” in chat very often. Something needs to be done about blocking one handed.
    As it remains now, maa and knight are best for duel mode, and I don’t get why people are so fixated on it’s being a “team game” when most top scoring people really don’t play that much as a team and often hit team mates in order to get that ks. Sure this is a team game, but how does this makes a duel mode balance not an option? I wont go too deep into this cause I already posted way more than I have intended but they could give vanguard a slightly more hp (not fully sure on that yet, just feels like they go down way too easy for second most armored class), but mainly just make one handed less impossible to block at times, increase stamina drain on some actions and solve feints by either adding feint option to block or making kick possible as block interrupt.



  • I only have trouble blocking or parrying two weapons in the game and those are the dane axe and one of the 1h swords….i think its called the falchon? except that in chiv its more of a gladius.
    Problem with the dane axe is its preposterous reach on one of the over head attacks and i hadn’t expected it to reach as far as a 2h weapon.
    The Falchon’s hit box is like a doubleheaded tennis racket.



  • @giantyak:

    I only have trouble blocking or parrying two weapons in the game and those are the dane axe and one of the 1h swords….i think its called the falchon? except that in chiv its more of a gladius.
    Problem with the dane axe is its preposterous reach on one of the over head attacks and i hadn’t expected it to reach as far as a 2h weapon.
    The Falchon’s hit box is like a doubleheaded tennis racket.

    It’s called a falchion and is actually a very historically accurate weapon and nothing like a gladius.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falchion


Log in to reply