Competitive TO Maps fit for 5v5
A demo system
Stat collection tools
Make halberd best weapon in game
Alchemancer, as far as I’m aware, is going to be getting a rework. For what it’s worth I never see them top the scoreboards in my games, but that might be because I play Vigilist which just counters the fuck out of alchemancer. Or it might be that your team doesn’t have good Vigilists…
Hey! Great feedback. I was wondering if the reason why Ark objectives feel more balanced might be explained by the following:
There is definitely a learning curve to the different gamemodes. Mirage is a game where a numbers imbalance of just one person in an engagement can be nigh insurmountable unless you have a God on your team. This puts a heavier focus on team play and grouping up. Ark pushing objectives work great because the center of the fray is always singular, and who has spawn advantage changes to prevent steam rolls.
For example, if attacking team 1 is having difficulty pushing the ark at the start, their spawn proximity will eventually give them numbers advantage so long as they are able to take out one or two people on the enemy team in an engagement. Then when spawns come in, you’ll have 6 vs the 5 or 4 left and be able to get momentum that way. If the defending team trickles in against spawns, they’ll just be fighting a disadvantageous fight. In Ark modes, though, the Ark will eventually reach a middle point and then a point closer to the defending team’s spawn, so you’ll get the exact opposite spawn cycle (assuming your team stops trickling in one at a time into a mob of the other team and getting demolished so you never build a proper spawn wave to kill one or two of the enemy team).
In other game modes, while the glyphs or such still serve to localize combat, the locations of these objectives makes grouping up for spawn waves less intuitive. You can often find people wandering by themselves on the other team and initiate duels, 2v1’s, or other examples of low player number engagements. And if the other team is doing this too, then this works perfectly fine. However, approaching every objective as a team of 6 (this doesn’t mean you can’t use flanks, just use them in ways that add to the battle for the objective rather than try to create an engagement that gives you 0 advantage and hurts your team when you die) would still be the best option unless you feel the other team is stronger as 6 and would start to mirror your grouping (which they will if they are remotely trying… it doesn’t take long for a player rushing headlong into 1v6’s to understand the power of numbers).
Players that have been organically grouping up in Chiv will feel this much more intuitively in Mirage. They’ll know when to group up and when they can push advantage to catch someone on the other team out. So if a team has even an imbalance of a couple people that know how to group, then right now it will appear pretty stompy. Add to that that some of the pre-alpha players have much more than 10 hours in the game so they will swing things as well while the majority of the players are just getting used to things…
Increase communication to the player as to the importance of grouping.
1a) Loading screens with tool tips to this effect.
1b) Introduce a magical aura mechanic that buffs something if you are close to your teammates (this solution may interfere with other systems.
1c) Put queues in the map design or player UI to indicate the importance of proximity to teammates better at a behavioral level. A glow of the tattoo, a spawn indicator with gems that light up more depending upon the percentage of your team in your spawn area.
Alter spawn wave mechanics for non Ark Non LTS objectives to promote more grouping (would require fleshing out if this option is possible/viable without affecting other systems).
Matchmaking to provide organic transference between skillbased metagames (the new player meta will differ widely from the dedicated player meta for example) so that the amount of grouping up each team does per gametype will match the player’s skill level more appropriately.
I should note that the individual solutions are not exclusive, and that the entire list is far from exhaustive. Just some thoughts.
Okay. Back from work.
TO_Bazaar Test Focus:
Only thing I’d add from what I’ve seen in other feedback is that it feels poor having that bar fill up so slowly. It feels like “So what if I took this point,?I have to hold it for frickin’ ever to make it feel like I’ve made progress”.
My Suggestion: Change First Objective Progress Bar Speed: I think it is a bit defender stacked anyways. I’m always a fan of First Objectives that are Attacker-stacked slightly, so perhaps speeding up cap time slightly and increasing the rate at which the bar fills up would make the Attackers FEEL a bit more like they are doing more and increases likelihood of reaching the second part of the TO map.
I’d also echo what I’m sure you’ve heard a thousand times, which is fix the potential spawn camp! If there are a couple good Bashrani, you can just cheesed to death with abilities. Not sure if it’d come up at PAX, but better to be safe than sorry if you have the resources. Potential ways to do this:
Our dedicated server app has had several memory leak issues fixed; how do servers feel to play on?
SO. MUCH. BETTER. Thank you so much. I no longer have to preparry things 24/7. I can finally feel like I’m actually playing a game with consistent melee. It made me realize that a lot of what I thought was things going through my parry was actually just my inability to track desync’d animations with the more narrow parrybox. Now that I can actually trust that my opponent’s weapon is somewhere by where it looks on the screen, it makes me like the narrow parrybox SO MUCH (though obviously the parrybox not reflecting torso-bending has problems Xylvion has mentioned that I’d like to echo). I actually feel like parrying takes a lot more skill, which favorably impacts the skill ceiling for the game. The people who come from Chiv to this might be thinking, “This feels weird. This would’ve blocked if it were Chiv.” But I think the VAST majority of people who haven’t played Chiv in the last year or two would be, "Wow, this feels more dynamic. I really have to look at where the weapon is going to connect with me. That’s makes defending more active/fun, and also makes attacking more fun because you get parried less and get to hit your enemy more.
What’s your favourite character class? Vigilist. I like to play utility/healers/tanks/long-range melee in the games I play if those options are available. She is all of those rolled into one.
What’s your least favourite character class? Alchemancer. I love the idea of a ranged specialist class, but I will go on below about why I think this current iteration is a bit less than ideal.
What’s your favourite ability? So many good ones! I’m surprisingly loving the Vigilist Shield Strike and Taurant Shove. They are abilities that feel so right for the characters, but would feel out of place on others.
What’s your least favourite ability? Any of the Flying Fackoon Mobility abilities, but I’ll elaborate on that in a bit :P
What’s fun and what’s not?
FUN: A LOT!!! The combat. Wall jumping (last build tho, not this one, though I know you’re workin on movement stuff right now). The narrow parrybox making me actually have to pay attention to my opponent’s weapon. The game looks beautiful. I can read feints (kinda. 100 ping sadlife :( ) easier. Like seriously, this was just an awesome patch.
NOT FUN: Rat class. Playing as him, it feels like all of his abilities are about damage and just different ways to deliver it. If you’re just gonna have one ranged dominant class, why not take advantage of the versatility that “magic” allows to have him do some really unique things. Ideas:
Magic that supports Teammates. It hits them, it buffs or heals them. It feels like that is something that the alchemancer could be suited to doing very well. It feels good to help your teammates, and as a teammate it feels good to get buffed. Make his phoenix passing through a teammate increases their speed slightly. Stuff along these lines roughly.
Magic that applies crowd control. How about if you get caught in the explosion on Chaos Orb, your base footspeed gets lowered by some small flat penalty? What about stuns? What about vision distortions on the player’s screen? What about smoke screens (that can’t be removed by a remove particles command) that are more opaque to the other team.
Currently he plays like a mix between a Chiv Archer (primarily proj damage and annoyingness) and a Chiv MAA (ratness). I would mention here that combining the two most annoying playstyles in Chiv for the vast majority of players doesn’t have the same effect as a double negative where one annoyingness cancels out the other…it’s more of an exponential relationship (at least for me :P. I feel it’d be so much less anti-fun if his autos weren’t flinching so often (could have it not flinch but do slightly more damage, or you can charge it up and it’ll flinch if it hits but does less DPS [Adds depth and player decision-making])
ALSO NOT FUN: Using all your abilities in a fight to the death, dying, and then coming back with 2/3 of my abilities on CD for like 25 seconds. I feel like I can’t go into the fight. It is a delicate balance to strike between the horrible feeling of not having your abilties up and not just resetting CD’s on death since then you could use all your abilities in a fight to kill your opponent, only to basically reset all his CD’s. Possible solutions: Increase CD Charge Rate while dead (a multiplier dependent on average death timer which isn’t something I can test right now). You could also take seconds off CD’s upon spawn.
Thoughts on the game balance?
The weapons are currently a bit imbalanced (no reason to use anything other than the Heavy Tabar as Taurant. Other than that, to be honest, the five classes in this build are awesome and have a decent balance for picking up and playing.
If you could change only one thing in Mirage, what that would be?
It would be change the Alchemancer as I mentioned above, but I honestly would want that change to be a fleshed out mobility system that includes multiple wall jumps, possibly a wall-run ability for Tinker (which I think would be a real cool F ability, a speedy wall run).
The game feels SO MUCH better in Melee now. Now that there is significantly less lag for me, I can feel like I’m actually playing the melee game instead of preparrying everything.
I have to echo the sentiments of everybody who has said that the wall jumps feel worse with the horiztonal distance nerf. To be honest, I really want an EXPANSION of the wall jump mechanic to jump off of multiple walls (which would synergize PERFECTLY with the great verticality on these maps so long as we could test it sufficiently long to get a lot of the possibly abusable areas edited). The effect it had on the freedom of mobility just cannot be stated enough.
I’m loving the build though. Will write up more feedback when i get back from work.
I got to thinking about a few things concerning map balance that might be obvious but I thought they should be articulated just in case.
So one of the detriments of Hillside (from a competitive perspective) from Chiv is that it had a defender stacked, non-progressible (all or nothing) first objective. Before teams got good enough to attack that map well, the beginning days of Chiv saw a lot of 1st objective DNF’s with attackers just running through the choke and getting hammered. It took players a while to get good enough to even get to see the other objectives against an equally matched opponent. There was another problem with that first objective requiring manual tracking of any possible metric of progress. The only way a team could claim to have made more progress than another team if both were DNF’d on the first objective would be to say that they got closer to burning the pyre, but the game never kept track of the closest to burning that the pyre got. And even then, it would feel bad for a team to get it almost burnt 4 times but the other team gets it almost burnt one time but that one time is closer to a full burn so they win, but tracking cumulative burn progress made throughout all attempts would be even messier and go against the win condition philosophy we had for team objective (see bottom of post for unrelated aside for those interested).
Thankfully it seems like having all progressible objectives is going to take care of that second problem, but the thing I’m worried about is setting up spawns so that more of the map gets played, but stomps are still relatively short. I personally feel the optimal way to plan out the balance for a 3 stage Team Objective would be something similar to:
1st Objective- Only attacking teams that get stomped don’t complete this objective.
2nd Objective- Most attacking teams can complete this objective vs. a similarly skilled opposition.
3rd Objective- About 50% of attacking teams complete all the objectives vs. a similarly skilled opposition.
This works really well because stomps (which aren’t fun) would be shorter so people can get on to better games, most even games get to play the whole map (which promotes more diverse experiences since the same objectives aren’t just being played over and over), but the map is still ultimately as close to 50% Attack and 50% defender stacked so there is significance in both the competitive narrative (My team accomplished more on our attacking run than yours) and the map’s self-contained narrative (My team won! or My team held! Huzzah! [If the map isn’t balanced this way then it promotes more complaints of unfairness]). This is easily accomplishable via spawn placements and progress completion rate manipulation (which, btw, I feel like the progress in Bazaar should be supercharged more if you hold two points… if an attacking team is making progress, it is nice for them to feel like they are making a chunk of progress. Adds more to suspense for the defense as well. Currently holding two points just doesn’t feel worth it, and even just holing one point feels like the progress is really slow which feels a bit unsatisfying).
This was way longer than I expected it to be, but just thought I’d give my two cents.
ASIDE: Our competitive match win conditions were designed to take into consideration the unique spirit of Team Objective. Darkforest Stage 4 is a perfect example of this. The Mason’s objective here is to kill the royal family, so that is obviously their first priority. But should C be worth more points because it is much more difficult than A or B? If you get one door down but my team got all three doors to within an inch of their life, who should win? What if I got all the doors down but killed only nine royalty but you managed to slaughter all the 10 royalty you had access to but you left C untouched? This is one of the beautiful things about Team Objective: it isn’t limited just to payload-like objectives. With this awesome variety comes questions like those above though.
So basically what we did was prioritize things this way:
Giving MAA’s a shieldless option and giving players the ability to vote for different duel maps (even if they aren’t in the rotation) should be easy enough. Reliable stat tracking would be great but I understand if that isn’t gotten around to, but the previous two are such easy fixes that I can’t see why they couldn’t be done.
Hello. We’ve gone through a bunch of builds since the Balance Council first started meeting and we’ve gotten things to a point where we are starting to like them. Now we’re making a concentrated effort on getting YOUR feedback. There’s already a reddit thread but we’d like to reach out to the official forums as well and see what your opinons are on the matter.
Remember: As much as we’d like to do more, so far what we are doing is trying to balance primarily by number changing. This means things like javelin bug, shield bugs, etc. aren’t any different from live for the most part and won’t be fixed for a while if ever (unless YOU are a super awesome programmer who wants to help out that is :P).
So yeah, lets keep it civil and try to get some productive opinions. Lets try to keep this from devolving into insults and accusations of idiocy as well.
DAY ONE SCHEDULE
| Time EST | # | Team 1 | Team 2 | Map | Host | Ref | Streamer |
| 12:00 PM | 1 | Ðark | vs | ℜangers | Darkforest | Karasu | Waterboy | Spook |
| 12:00 PM | 2 | Ǥenesis | vs | ƓŏƉ | Darkforest | Simon | Raw Boner | Teripper |
| 1:30 PM | 3 | Ðark | vs | ƓŏƉ | Stoneshill | Karasu | Waterboy | Spook |
| 1:30 PM | 4 | ℜangers | vs | Ǥenesis | Stoneshill | Simon | Raw Boner | Teripper |
| 3:00 PM | 5 | Ðark | vs | Ǥenesis | Hillside | Karasu | Ronny | Sarge |
| 3:00 PM | 6 | ƓŏƉ | vs | ℜangers | Hillside | Simon | Raw Boner | Teripper |
| Time EST | # | Team 1 | Team 2 | Map | Host | Ref | Streamer |
| 3:00 PM | 7 | †Hell-ish | vs | ℋunter ℒegion | Darkforest | Keyes | Skillz |
| 3:00 PM | 8 | ℱight ℭlub | vs | Yoshioka-Ryu | Darkforest | Height | Feisty | Zebra |
| 4:30 PM | 9 | †Hell-ish | vs | Yoshioka-Ryu | Stoneshill | Simon | Keyes | Skillz |
| 4:30 PM | 10 | ℋunter ℒegion | vs | ℱight ℭlub | Stoneshill | Height | Feisty | Zebra |
| 6:00 PM | 11 | †Hell-ish | vs | ℱight ℭlub | Hillside | Keyes | Unborn |
| 6:00 PM | 12 | Yoshioka-Ryu | vs | ℋunter ℒegion | Hillside | Height | Feisty | Zebra |
| Time EST | # | Team 1 | Team 2 | Map | Host | Ref | Streamer |
| 6:00 PM | 13 | Immortals | vs | Moorland | Darkforest | Ronny | Salt | Will_1231 |
| 6:00 PM | 14 | ℳeta | vs | ℱourth ℒegion | Darkforest | Simon | Chris | Teripper |
| 7:30 PM | 15 | Immortals | vs | ℱourth ℒegion | Stoneshill | Ronny | Salt | Will_1231 |
| 7:30 PM | 16 | Moorland | vs | ℳeta | Stoneshill | Simon | Chris | Teripper |
| 9:00 PM | 17 | Immortals | vs | ℳeta | Hillside | Ronny | Salt | Will_1231 |
| 9:00 PM | 18 | ℱourth ℒegion | vs | Moorland | Hillside | Simon | Chris | Teripper |
By the way, the first post has been updated with the groups/schedule. :D
Buckler a buff - obviously you never used it
If javelineers get nerfed with the patch I would probably ignore mercs for catering to the professional players, the few weapons they use and ignoring everyone else.
I’ve actually used it in probably 15 or so scrims… even tho I’m not an archer main I top the board quite a few of those times because short spears are dumb. Buckler allows you to not get feinted so its easier for you to sit on objectives and wait for your teammates.
I personally swap to short sword non-buckler in melee cuz shortsword is dumb, but buckler has saved me a number of times too when I haven’t had time to swap down so yeah.
what position have Torn banner with Mercs mod? There is hope to see some balance patch based on mercs features?
My hope is that they will wait until the finished project to have a position on it :P We’re still workin’ out kinks.
Isn’t the buckler enough of a nerf for jav users?
As a short spear user why would I ever aim at knights again if I need to land 4 torso hits to kill 1 knight. Same goes to other archer nerfs, knights aren’t even an option to shoot at now.
Many people consider the buckler a buff because there are a bunch of times where the enemy doesn’t do wonky shit on it, but it is inconsistent so yeah… it’s sometimes a savior and sometimes a useless pos. At any rate, they still have a wicked fast fire rate, decent enough headshot damage, and can now counter-arch (if you get in jav range, you have a faster weapon, a buckler, and faster rate of fire than the other archer pretty much) effectively. Also, remember that 3 Knight meta will probably not be as prevalent in MERCS. Archer changes + the way FHF interacts with certain weapons will open up multiple Vg comps as well. Some possible changes may even make 2 MAA pretty good (it already can be situationally good now, but muy situationally). Short spear to the torso still bring vg’s down to 1-shot by weapons like halberd or poleaxe.
SkiLlZz Response - I have no doubt that you have recordings of people saying it should be a “support” class… That does not mean it wasn’t said outside of members of the council meeting. I really do not feel like pointing fingers, this is not a blame game Height.
This still doesn’t address the issue of what I said. What I said was beside the fact that everyone gave assent to it being a support class, that the difference between “support” and “assist” doesn’t make sense to me.
SkiLlZz Response -Yes, lets call it a “Test” the council created and voted for these changes. Of course they will be happy with them and finalize them… Though you are right, I will try not to judge this too quickly. I will give it a shot.
That’s like saying, “Of course X will happen, though you are right, I shouldn’t pre-judge and say X will happen”. You’ve already pre-judged. I’ll just assume you were typing stream of consciousness, but in the future there is a delete button :P
SkiLlZz Response - I can bring you 50 different scenarios of how these are not significant damages. Like I said in my previous post, I agree that a lot of the changes are okay and should be official. What I do not agree with is your argument. You are basically saying that “because an archer can damage a melee class to the point of being one hit away from dead by a specific weapon from another melee class. The archers damage needs to be nerfed to the point where this is not the case” Is this correct? If that’s your argument why not just nerf the damage of certain melee weapons? Why do archers have to get the full force of damage reductions?
And I can bring you 50 different scenarios where they are. That’s why you need to weigh the likelihood of X Scenario happening and give it the appropriate weight. Like, for example, the likelihoood of a vanguard getting shot by an arrow to the torso and then any other primary weapon… Also, summarizing my argument as “because an archer can damage a melee class to the point of being one hit away from dead by a specific weapon from another melee class, The archers damage needs to be nerfed to the point where this is not the case”" makes no sense. The block of text you’re referring to contains the sentence: “Warbow bodkins and Crossbow bringing Vg’s into 1-shot range of EVERY Knight and Vanguard primary.” I think you misread something or I have.
SkiLlZz Response - Did you forget about the health regeneration nerf? If I’m not in line of sight of my target they can just hide and regenerate their health. Then they are back to full health in no time. There are things you are not taking into consideration with this argument.
Nope, didn’t forget about it. Firstly, when we talk about weapon synergies, there’s always a possibility to exit the fray and regen, and having that ruin the “htk” of the synergy. Regen starts about 7 seconds in, and the regen in mercs only doubles while standing still from around 4 hp per second to 8 hp per second. That means it would take 8 seconds of this person hiding before they are able to come out again. Since a melee usually can’t afford to not do things for 8 seconds just so that some weapons not longer one shot you but others will, melee usually don’t do this except in the circumstance where they are waiting for their team already or they tell their team to hold up and wait for them to regen. So really, this primarily only affects hp between fights. Once the melee in an engagement start heading towards the defense or once the fight commences, it isn’t like they are going to stop and regen. Personally, I’m fine with people regenning between battles faster so far (I’m still evaluating the regen personally as I’m not entirely sold on it yet for how it can affect blockading an enemy). At any rate, this is why htk’s are taken into consideration: because out’ve the 4 phases (pre-advance, advancing on enemy, engaging enemy melee, Optional: running engaging enemy archer if archer is not at melee’s location), this only has an impact on pre-advance. Even then, it still has an impact. If I’m defending and I shoot a melee, and the attackers hold back to make sure he’s regen’d out’ve that hit to kill, it gives my team time to get there if they just spawned and set up a blockade, to get in position if they’re there, or advance on the enemy if we don’t want to give him time to regen and we’re all already there and within 8 seconds of the attackers. So no, I didn’t forget about the health regen buff… I just didn’t think it was really applicable enough to weigh heavily at all in this scenario.
SKiLlZz Response - 30 damage to knight torso is an even htk from before? I disagree… Though I do agree that the archer flinch coming back will make things easier for our mele to get kills.
Reread what I was responding to when I said that. I quoted your sentence, “We are now weaker in mele by being more inclined to be taken out of the fight by 1 mele hit and have very little damage out put to heavier mele classes…”. I was referring to the being taken out of the fight by one melee attack… basically saying that only the weapons that can 1shot an archer in live can one shot in MERCS. EDIT: Bearded Axe and Messer do now as well. Forgot they didn’t do so in live. I think that’s okay and balance of these weapons will incorporate the fact that it can 1 shot archers if that stays. We haven’t changed any of those values. I should’ve only quoted the first part of your sentence as that was the part that was objectively inaccurate (the latter half being, in my opinion, still being probably inaccurate but not objectively proven to be so).
SkiLlZz Response - The fact that you think my argument is meaningless tells me that you’ve made up your mind about these changes and are not truly open to changing your mind. Even if you say you are… YES, as an archer I have the ability to deal damage from far away. IM AN ARCHER ITS MY ROLE, and yes this will wound the enemy team going into battle. This was just a rough example of how archers are losing their ability to be effective against knights. Instead of just nerfing one of our main advantages, why not consider other solutions? HOW ABOUT A STRATEGY?! When Tempest fights Nemesis, (which btw is now my new rival) I am forced to focus Antsii because he focuses me. Antsii positions himself in such a way where I am almost not able to shoot his mele and be effective from far range, Antsii puts pressure on me because he’s a good shot and knows how to protect his melee. If you had an archer that actually positioned himself in a match to put pressure on me. I can guarantee you will not feel my pressence as much as you normally do when you fight Tempest. You are nerfing that main “advantage” archers have to mitigate lack of strategy. Try it. It works for Nemesis. One of the top 2 clans in Chivalry.
1. Just because I think your argument about something is meaningless doesn’t mean I am already convinced of the conclusion such that I won’t change my mind. I’ve had my mind changed by arguments on the balance council… just arguments I felt were good. The one that I am talking about here is what even you admit is " a bad example" of a scenario… so yeah. I’m not referring to your whole post here, just what I quoted…
2. Let me see if I understand you: “Archers have ability X. Ability X is mitigated by direct nerf Y and/or strategy Z. Because Strategy Z (which relies on a good archer) is sufficient, Ability X can be sufficiently mitigated without a direct nerf to Y if Strategy Z is encouraged.”
If this is the case, then I’d say that this strategy still requires an absolute top tier archer to match the other and can’t be executed with a mid-tier archer (who are still good archers mind you). Then of course the question is how much advantage should having a top-tier archer yield a team? I mean Anstii in the last tourny, who you were arching against, topped his team going against you, a top-tier archer. How much more so is he going to (an does) stomp teams with non-top tier archers? The proposed changes may potentially make it so that they aren’t rewarded enough, but if that’s the case we’ll adjust numbers to find a happy medium because right now it’s too much. If I was drafting a team and you told me I could either have 5 mediocre melee and 1 top tier archer, or 4 mediocre melee/1 mediocre archer/1 top tier melee, I think every team would take the first option for good reason. We’d like to bring it to a balance.
SkiLlZz Response - After hitting a target I switch to another target. I attempt to wound the entire team before they reach my team. Seriously forget I even used the 2 knights as an example. I was trying to point out how ineffective archers will be when shooting a knight. I can easily switch this up and focus the same knight. (using this same example) If I hit the same knight twice, he has 40% of his health left. A good clan will be able to 2v1 without getting hit. Or even having the other knight 1v1 to let his teammate regenerate. One way or another if both knights are still standing the chances of me going down like a sack of potatoes is highly likely.
I will forget you used the 2 knights as an example (because I could say more about it :P). I’ll address the “it sucks vs knight” argument below.
SkiLlZz Response - And if the enemy archer applied the proper pressure then I would either be dead or pinned down and the enemy also used throwables fire pots on us. Like I said we can add onto this scenario and keep going… lol
I’d have more to say, but abandoning this scenario.
SkiLlZz Response - First, I do not do this for easier shots. I play close to my team so if the need arises I can easily switch to melee and support my team. Go ahead and watch the grand finals tape or better yet watch one of the Tempest scrims sometime. A lot of my kills are melee. Second, without a pavise shield to make up for the lack of ammo to ACTUALLY BE EFFECTIVE an archer has to be stationary to reload. You can use a projectile to flinch the archer… Oh and btw cover isn’t always around… And if I was really far away to get more then 2 shots off and the enemy melee is still running after me and not the objective then that’s just a bad call. I prob still wouldn’t be able to kill them due to the nerf…
First, You’re correct about the advantage of being close to the fight. Of course you and I have talked about this, so you’ll know I’m justified when I blame writing a late night post and rushing it up so that I can fill in for our scrim we had after we scrimmed ya’ll last night :P. Second, usually when you able to get more than 2 shots off on the enemy its because you’re on the objective and they aren’t choosing between running to the objective or running to you, they have to run to both. I also know cover isn’t always around, so I specified “whatever cover is available.”
SkiLlZz Response - Please stop referring to this example, It was a bad example and I’ve made my point in response to your other comments, scroll up…
This is where you refer to that as a bad example btw if you were wondering what I quoted above :P But yeah… agreed as you’ll see above :P
SkiLlZz Response - It is weird… I’ve had people completely disagree with this as well. Low ammo with pavise or normal ammo without a pavise… The obvious option is to choose the extra ammo. Why would a xbow archer play xbow without his pavise? He will be exposed to enemy archer fire and stationary at that. This may be easier to do on the defending team but not at all on offense. The bow archer will have a major advantage. All this need to be taken into consideration.
It has been considered. It would mean those who go extra ammo will need to find safer spots to reload. Those who want pavise will just have to visit an ammo box more often. If you’re attacking and have trouble getting an ammo box, you can use the pavise to allow you to fight with your team and drop to melee afterwards (which archers already do for other reasons as you mentioned above). I mean, we ran into snag with the extra ammo count anyway, so this may just be fluff, but yeah. I’ll probably be replying to JP’s post about the tradeoffs between warbow and lightcrossbow, so just be on the lookout for that.
SkiLlZz Response - Not everything was discussed. Also the changes mentioned didn’t turn out to be what actually came to pass…
If not everything was discussed then it was because you didn’t bring it up when I asked you what you thought of it… I wasn’t going to go line item by line item :P The one thing you advised when we talked was to make it so archers weren’t 1shot by 1h’s, something that took a bit of effort in reworking the entire sheet to accomplish…
SkiLlZz Response - Thats awesome =)
I think it’ll work out nicely too :D
SkiLlZz Response - I’ve listened. If I’m mistaken about anything it’s because I was given the wrong information or the person giving me the information wasn’t specific enough. There have been more discussions then I can count…
Well I know you listened to Omega :P And yes, you were showed a different sheet when I talked to you, but the reworked one retained almost identical values to xbows if I recall.
At any rate, just play the changes and give us feedback. Just remember that people thought the SoW being nerfed back in the day was gonna render it unusable because its combo did a 4shot on knights… still most popular weapon in the game. Let’s just see where the dust settles.
Take out backstab, fine. Take out flinch, okay. Mercs nerfed short sword by increasing windup, alright. Instead of patching Light Xbow and short spear, it’s just a total blanket nerf on everything because we aren’t supposed to kill, we’re supposed to tickle apparently. Please reconsider, put Skillz on the counsil.
Backstab was meaningless more or less, just broken with javs so TBS took it out. This build has you getting flinch back, and the ability to flinch instead of hit-trade buffs the shortsword.
See my above response to why this build is far from “tickling”, though we will see once we test. These values are not final in any way. Please try not to jump to conclusions. Jumping to conclusions is easy… being patient and intelligently appraising situations is the only way the community is going to do this.
Well I’d like to preface this all by saying this is a TEST BUILD. We’re just testing things to see how they work… to criticize it before you’ve tried it is already presumptive. To do it on the TBS forums trying to “speak up against this…for everyone” sounds… yeah…
I will agree that the changes to archer is based on a great idea which is (Archers should only be a support class while in competitive play) Key word “support”. Which I agree with completely, after playing and practicing with every archer weapon and over the past two years I realize that our class is considered a high risk high reward class. If you play the class and aren’t good then you will barely be noticed, if you’re good then you can carry a team which is what we want to eliminate to conduct an appropriate balance… But not at the expense of an archers independence… I’ve been told by multiple people on the council that it not so much to support as it is to only “assist” the mele class which I do not agree with at all. Support yes, only assist no…
I mean besides the fact I’ve never heard anyone on the council say it shouldn’t be support (and if you absolutely wanted I’m sure I could hit up Spook to get the recording of pretty much everyone on the council agreeing it should be support), what would that even mean? Assist and support are more or less the same thing. If you support someone, you help them accomplish something. If you assist someone, you help them accomplish something. I don’t understand…
I have posted a link to the changes that the council will be moving forward with sometime within the next 7 - 14 days.
As I mentioned above, this is a TEST Build. I’ve gone on record (before this post was made and Spook can probably show you the recording) in saying I actually think its quite likely the numbers that go through finally will be less of a nerf, but we’ll have to play to find out. So just keep in mind that “changes” means “TEST changes”.
These damage nerfs make it so an archer would barely make a dent in taking down a target other then an archer which would make sense if you’re looking at it in terms of (only assisting mele and mele being the sole output of damage to the enemy) which I think would be a big mistake. Taking away incentive to play a class is never a good thing…
Well besides the fact that “taking away incentive to play a class” is technically true of any overall nerf so you’d have to commit yourself to the position that overall nerfing any class is never a good thing (which I don’t think you mean to say), is this just hyperbole of what you actually believe? If Warbow bodkins and Crossbow bringing Vg’s into 1-shot range of EVERY Knight and Vanguard primary with one torso shot is “barely a dent”… maybe. We also upped headshot multipliers so even shortbow bodkin (which now has archer flinch, will be a bit faster than in live, and has more ammo than ever) takes out half a knight’s health with a headshot. Don’t get me started on Heavy Crossbow or the Javs… how are these not significant damages? Many of them are actually more than or equal to tons of melee weapons that are common…
I will give you an example: Regular xbow setup
Regular crossbow nerf - 30 damage torso hit to knight (4 shot kill) 48 damage to vanguard (3 shot kill)
2h sword buff/1h sword buff (most 2 handed swords can now 1 shot archers)
I mean 48 damage to a vg puts them 1shottable by EVERY knight and vg primary weapon the game, and most 2 handed swords could always 1 shot archer. We literally haven’t changed any htk’s for them…
We are now weaker in mele by being more inclined to be taken out of the fight by 1 mele hit and have very little damage out put to heavier mele classes…
Certain attacks do more damage, but htk’s are pretty much even. we’re talking about one type of attack doing 10% more damage that changes incredibly little. In melee, every bit of damage can matter because the melee classes are a bit tankier so there’s more opportunities for damage to stack up. In live, you’re either one shot or two shot if you’re an archer. It’s the same way here… though there are much fewer trades against archers now because of first hit flinch. Archers can flinch easier without as much fear of hit-trade, so yeah.
For argument sake lets say I’m in a 5v5 scrim on defense stones hill first objective. Like the pesky bitch we all know I can be I’m trying to hold the left hill by making sure no one can get through me. Also for argument sake two of my teammates have died to the enemy and we are losing the mele engagement (it is now a 3v5). My team is overwhelmed and I have two knights rushing me and I’m now the only player left standing. each knight has the majority of their health and they want me dead. I average a 50% accuracy rating and a decent reload speed with reg xbow so I know I am only able to get two shots off before they reach me depending on how far away I am… They are zig zagging to try and dodge my arrows. Lets say my experience kicks in and I make both shots and shoot each knight to the torso. (which is where most archers aim). They are now near 70% health and I’m forced to go mele. 2 knights… 1 archer… 1 hit till death… Do the math… Due to ammo reductions if I want more then 10 bolts I have to lose my pavise shield so I’m exposed to axes which sucks even more as I’m reloading, I may not even be able to reload if I want more then 10 bolts.
So here is why this is a cherrypicked, inapplicable, and virtually meaningless argument:
1. You start this scenario after the melee have already engaged. Archers have ranged dominance and is the class BY FAR most capable of affecting the fight before the melee engages. You’re basically saying lets evaluate how effective archer is in this scenario after one of their largest advantages has been negated. I mean, if they’re able to break off two knights to run at you… actually…
2. You picked a scenario where their core is breaking off to fight you? MAA’s I can see… Vg’s even. But two knights? This very very rarely happens. If one is an MAA, they’re 2 shottable by your weapon. If they’re a Vg, then you can get them heavy kickable. Of course, that’s if you hit the same one… which why wouldn’t you? I mean, once one is low, wouldn’t u want to aim at that one again instead of hitting one of each? Speaking of which?
3. Wait, so these are two FULL health knights? They just got shot at before the engagement, got through throwables and firepots, and engaged in the melee, and they still haven’t been touched?
4. And they can get to you before you can get 3 shots off? Shoot, 3.5s (reload, recover, aim), shoot, 3.5s (reload, recover, aim), shoot. That means that knights, the slowest class in the game, are zig-zagging and trying to use what cover they can while still moving forward and yet they still get to you in 7 seconds? This is probably because you play very close to your team, but you do this for easier shots. If this happens, its a good downside to have.
5. This is a situation you have relatively no chance in even in LIVE. Instead of 2 of them at 70% health (each 3htk with shortsword stabs), you’d have 2 of them at a bit under 50% health which would be 2htk with shortsword stabs. What you’re basically saying is “I don’t want this 98% impossible situation to become 99% impossible”… I just don’t see that as meaningful.
These changes leave no incentive to play crossbow, the new meta will be warbow because that is the only weapon remotely close to being strong enough to make a dent into the enemy’s force. Don’t get me wrong I do agree with a lot of the archer changes but some of them are just ridiculous. However the community has taken the reigns of developing and balancing this game so I will let you be the judge.
This scenario would be difficult if it was just 1 knight…
It’s weird… I’ve had people say that the relative balance of bows vs xbows with these changes will give no reason to go bows over xbows.
I was told by one of the council members that this post won’t make any difference which I assume means to just accept and take these changes the way they are presented… However I’ve talked to a lot of people who are also not happy with these changes so by making this post I hope that I’ve represented your concerns by giving it a voice.
It’s weird… I actually talked to you briefly about the values and you said you were okay with them if I recall correctly… Remember when you, me, and omega were in ts3?
Moving forward I would like the balance council to actually take into consideration the concerns the rest of the competitive community is expressing which is what I thought your role was to begin with. Not to simply make decisions according to what you think is right but to discuss the concerns of those in your clan you are supposed to be representing.
I’ve done this with my clan, have talked to others about their opinions (including you briefly btw…), and have encouraged all council members to do the same. In fact, we just started talking today in a meeting about a way to have class specialists vote on the council only on specific items that affect thier class to allow more community input. Hell, I even go on random MERCS servers just to ask people what they think.
Rathion so far has been the only one on the council who has really listened and taken consideration to what I’ve had to say by allowing me to get my point across without arguing with me before I can do so. So I wanted to give you recognition. =) youz mah new bae.
By the time I showed up in TS3, you seemed pretty good with the changes and said as long as the values for your xbow were what they were in the sheet that you were good more or less. I know at least Omega has talked to me about what you think during our balance discussions. That said, I think you may be mistaking disagreeing for not having “really listened and taken consideration”.
Anyways… I would be really interested in hearing the opinions of the rest of the community, the spreadsheet is posted in this thread so you are fully aware of the changes.
I do appreciate the council for taking out the time to help this game grow, it shoes dedication and I am grateful. Though if no one on the current council is willing to speak up against this then I will do so for everyone.
Flame and Dofoo have been vocal about trying to minimize archer nerfs. Flame is a large reason for the 200% head damage multipliers for bows hitting melee.
Sorry for the long post guys… If i had a potato I would attach it to the bottom.
Now if you don’t remember, the general reaction around the release of those mods, was mostly the same. The active members of the comp scene tried out the changes, everyone got hyped, people posted about how amazing the changes were, how they would never go back to vanilla, and how they only wanted to scrim on the modded version. Yet here we are. Again.
Except, as Stan pointed out, the community was quite divided. I remember attending a meeting of 9 or so clans where the subject was basically: “How to kill promod” (I myself being someone who was skeptical of promod, though I was by far the most moderate person there and took issue with the subject). Promise. The scene recognized a lot of the bad crap in that patch, but at the same time Promod was viewed as badamod and lots of people felt live was livable and that Promod would be an unnecessary deviation that would only seek to fracture the community.
Separate versions of the game only works to widen the divide between the “competitive” and “casual” player. And not in a good way.
I think one of the current strengths of MERCS is that when we’ve put it on public servers, non-comp players generally have no idea that is a mod or notice any of the changes. This is not promod. Sure there will be noticiable change, but I know I’m personally going to be advocating for a build that eases the transition while expanding upon the depth of combat. We’re still in the early stages, so we’ll see how this goes, but that’s where I’m personally coming from and I know that I’m not alone.
Like I said, the only way to keep that from being an issue would be to get everyone playing the game onto the mod. And that comes with its own slew of issues. Mostly coming from the fact that no one is ever going to be happy no matter how good it might be. So going ahead and changing everything could very well drive even more people away from the game. Or it might bring people in, I don’t fucking know. I just know that there needs to be cohesion between “versions” or you just end up isolating yourselves and further starving what’s left of the comp scene.
I was skeptical of MERCS too, but whereas promod was not universally recognized by the community as being superior to the live build (especially not to an extent where the NA scene at least didn’t worry more about the community), MERCS seems much less controversial. I’ve heard complaints about it of course, but I feel like we have MUCH more unity than has ever existed before in the scene. The clans represented in the council and others that I know support MERCS alone are about as many clans that played live a few months ago. I’d recommend we all see where this journey takes us before jumping to conclusions.
another thing to keep in mind would be: the further you get from vanilla the less likely it is TB would be willing to adopt these changes.
Right now really the only big changes are First-hit flinch and half handles on certain weapons to make them more consistent. It could be that these are the biggest changes that occur and the rest is fine tuning, or we could stumble across an arena of balance that we think is worth the risk. Either way, just stay tuned. Stay skeptical (I always approve of skepticism). In that same vein, don’t dismiss it before we see where it is going. While we may not know yet where the chips will fall, we know that their current state is a game that won’t fix itself.
Now here’s the part thats important to me personally. I dread the moment that TB decides to hand off game balance to some self entitled so-called “elite” players. I have nothing against these people in the slightest, but I don’t know any other way to express my point without sounding like an ass to a select few.
I’ve been lurking on these forums for a long time so don’t be fooled by my register date. Going by what I see posted on these forums on a regular basis…. Mercs to me is a potential precursor to Chivalry: Knights vs Vanguards.
While Karasu raises the point that “who better to balance it than comp players?” I actually sympathize with your concerns. If there were a game where the way to succeed in a current meta was getting a rocket launcher and killing people easily. The people who succeed in this game are almost singularly the people who launch rockets the best. When balance is turned over to the “elite” players, what ends up happening is the “elite” players are all rocket launcher lovers who lack a critical analysis of game design and push the rocket launcher meta even further.
On the other hand, say that game’s council consists of some people who have mastered rocket launching but that players of all the other weapons who utilize a variety of playstyles and are sick of the rocket launcher meta are called upon. I’ve advocated for some people to be put on the council who I straight out disagree with, but I feel their opinions are going to be vital to the establishment of a well-rounded balance. We aren’t in this to make a mod where we can stroke our own epeens. We want a balance that will truly result in a more fun game and unite the community around a better product rather than polarize it. If we wanted that, the top few teams could have dictated the balance entirely. This is our attempt at a democracy, and the first thing on our board rather than individual specifics was a discussion on balance principles.
Yeah lets not clutter the thread. But I realy want to join the balance council. I got some good ideas for new weapons and classes.
Unfortunately we’ve got a ton of people in it already, but what we want to do is have the community hit up members of the council with their ideas. PM the people on the list (including me) and we can relay ideas and discuss them with you :)
I’d rather have TBS balance tbh.
You’re allowed to have your preference :) The question I’d have though is how do you know that you prefer TBS balance to MERCS Balance when we don’t know what MERCS Balance looks like yet? You can have your skepticism and think it’s headed in a bad direction, but I’d just ask you wait a bit before casting judgment. I was skeptic of Crushed SOW Flinch Mod too, but now after talking with folks about ideas and knowing it is FAR from a finished project atm made me want to be a part of it rather than dismiss it as Promod 2.0.
That said, I’d like to leave the comments here up for people to see but I’d like to ask that any further thoughts be left to PM’s or other threads/forums where they would be more appropriate. Contact people on the Balance Council to discuss ideas you have. Talk to other people and hash out ideas. The Council will represent you and, while members aren’t required to agree with you, they’re encouraged to at least listen and I know I’m open to having dialogues with most any folks.
Now that TBS has moved on to their next game, the community now needs to take the task of improving the game upon itself. After discussion and consideration, some of us have decided to form a balance council that will discuss and implement changes to Crushed’s MERCS mod, a mod already heralded by the majority of the competitive players as being an improvement upon the current live patch.
Careful selection has gone into sending individual invites to the council. We did our best to ensure a well-rounded selection of players from multiple classes and clans. Multiple personality types, opinions, and a base level of maturity were all necessary considerations as well. The list of the Balance Council is:
Our goal will be to balance MERCS and make it as good as it possibly can. FHF will save us from the current Caveman Meta to a large degree, but it will be more than that. For the first time in history the community can take complete charge of the game’s fate. We have a chance to break a stagnant meta game and un-break broken weapons. We have a chance to give players reasons to pick up those weapons they’ve wanted to play without saddling them with a huge disadvantage. There will be contention and different beliefs on how to best go about this, which is why it is imperative that the council members canvas the community as well as have the community contact these members with their input. While the council members themselves will be the ones voting on systems of changes, each of us can benefit from multiple perspectives.
This thread is an announcement and won’t be used to discuss individual balance changes, but it will be used to communicate to the community the mod’s progress and other updates that people might be interested in.