If we’re going to focus on one thing I think it should be lockout timings. Shield up and shield down time is very frustrating and just really take away from the fun because you can’t actually control your character and should be removed or at least reduced by 50%.

Shields suffer because their weapons are shorter, deal less damage and are less reactive while not offering anything over holdable parry button. That’s why classes with longer, two-handed weapons are more effective. Take a look at Flail + Heather Shield. It’s mostly useless because of its short range and shield ain’t compensating for anything really. People can easily attack you and get out of range while you have to get at least one hit on your shield to come close enough. Or they can kick you and get a free hit… You can use any other mace-type weapon with one hand and come off better as parrying will speed up your next attack.

before this patch, chivalry ran perfect. it had smooth performance and a good fps. now after the patch the game runs really slow and choppy. I know its not my pc because its brand new. does anybody else have this problem?

After each patch Chivalry seems to reset your graphic settings and puts v-sync on. That’s what’s messing with my FPS, but once I tweak the settings again everything comes back to normal.

Other than this I see no ‘abusing’ or things that might make it less competetive and when I mean competetive I’m talking about teambased fights not duels.

I meant abusing as used constantly. It’s used in every fight between each combatant, because the only ways of countering this (other than fighting fire with fire) is being an archer and picking targets from afar or using long range weapon and using distance and positioning over speed.

So millions of people who bought this game stopped playing because they were getting owned by people who “abused” their way to victory? Its not realistic to state that. There is a deeper issue here than just l33t player making millions of players rage quit and I’ve already explained that deeper problem.

You think so, but your opinion might not be correct. If we have a game centred around combat and combat feels wrong or bugged, etc. then having flawed combat will make players leave. Take distance into consideration. The closer you were the worse parrying was, because how system works. That’s why the Bubble came into play (it didn’t work and created other issues on its own though). Also attacks like stabs with long weapons were messed up (they were both faster and sometimes came through blocks due to how tracers worked). I could go on and on. Combat in Chivalry is far from ideal, but before we had experienced players this issue wasn’t as noticeable and I know that, because I was a newcomer to Chivalry once. I also heard them saying so in the game.

If people(read casuals) were dissatisfied with how the animations worked then surely you should’ve read more topics about it or even reviews but the reality is that they play it and enjoy it very briefly before moving on to the next best bargains on steam that they can enjoy again very briefly until they stumble upon something that can catch their all too little attention span.

Perhaps. Then again, how many people register on forums to share why they don’t like playing Chivalry anymore? How many of them simply don’t bother anymore after some time and want to play a game that’s less bugged, has better fleshed out mechanics, less “cheaters”, etc.?

Complete bullshit whoever stated that lol

Blessed be those who have nothing to say and yet not put this fact into words.

I think you - and many people - overthink the “skilled” part of the game. On high level it’s mostly a reflect contest between players. The game felt the best early on mostly because very few players - in a growing mass of players sampling the game - realized how you can speed up attacks. Because of that combat didn’t feel like cheating or bugged (I can provide countless examples, but I think most of us knows what I am talking about).

Now many people realized what you need to do in order to be more effective and they abuse(d) that. And other people reflected that behavior to remain competetive, magnifying the problem even further. How the game (combat) works in hands of experienced players is what’s pissing off the casual players. The issue is heritable. It lies in the very design of the game itself. Animations. No patch is going to fix this. That’s - in my opinion - the first and foremoest reason why combat went to hell after some time (there are also others, but less major). Pleasing the pro crowd wouldn’t make much difference here, because it’s very limited number of players and the way they play is not fun for someone who ain’t professional. Which is the majority of people who’re playing computer games.

Chivalry is still great game for me to play. It’s fun. It’s a fresh view into the world of the first person slashers, but if they want to make Chivalry 2 they should take into consideration animations, because all of combat is happening around them and in Chivalry they aren’t good enough when people start to manipulate their weapons around in an extreme measure. It’s not entirely the player’s fault. They’re doing what they’re supposed to (although one can question certain “tactics”), but effect aren’t as they’re expected. And it shows.

Shields don’t need any buffing. You get to hold your block as long as you like, has no one ever seen one knight blocking group of people just by going backwards? I see it all the time and some can deal with drags fine too. You attack faster when you have a shield so no riposte makes sense.

• Did you ever use a shield? Blocking drains stamina with each hit. Maybe you didn’t notice this, but blocking a couple of people is less possible than parrying and countering a group of people. Shield will only buy you some time. After that you’ll be dazed by running out of stamina. With big weapon you have advantage of being able to play more aggressively, which helps against a group of people.

• Shield doesn’t make you attack any faster. Any bonus to speed of attack after blocking is mitigated by increased time for using a weapon with shield in the other hand. That’s why you see knights with one-handed weapons so often. It’s much more efficient that going in with a shield. In case of a Buckler it eats too much stamina per blocking and your attack range is a problem.

Holy.Death, only noobs kick without jumping forward. Pushing S wont help you much if they execute a good jump-kick/bash. However a good shield user will lower the shield and take the kick to the face.

While you’re correct in what you’re saying I was talking about shield bashing…

Well, it’s already very easy to avoid shield bash. Just press S and you avoid being hit while enemy wastes a lot of stamina. It makes little sense to be able to attack through shield in addition to that.

There’s a reason why shields aren’t popular. That reason didn’t change. Shields can do something in team games, but in single combat you’d do well switching to one-handed or primary weapon, especially against Vanguards. You don’t have enough reach, shield drains your stamina and your reaction time ain’t enough. Unless you feint. That’s probably the only way, but then again that won’t work against good player. He’ll either speed up his attack (true against slower weapons), dance (vs shorter weapons) or block and counter with lookdown stab/overhead.

Feint has been with chivalry since the beginning of medieval warfare and ever since there has been a lot of complains about it.

People complained and keep complaining about a lot of thing. To me people seem to complain about feints, because they are used to parry & counter and are angry when somebody doesn’t play by their rules. I really don’t see the point of playing the rules of someone else. Why should I follow them when they try to dance? Why not feint when they expect you to make your attack? How’s feinting worse that parry & lookdown stab/overhead with a long weapon?

How is that wrong that 3 people need to hit you 2 times when you got to land around 12 to kill them?

I am not saying that’s wrong. I am actually liking the idea itself, although I don’t know how it works out in practice.

Not everyone can even win 1 vs 3 in current mw, it takes some skill or a spam with luck. In second case if any of those players is decent, you will lose. Entering 1 vs 3 is not always even your fault, what if your team sucks or what if you just got ambushed. Going 1 vs 3 is fine, it not be like run away situation and only fight when you got advantage or 1 on 1, that would limit the game.

I hear you. Still, I always found it somewhat problematic that all that matters is to hit target in order to deal full damage. It puts a huge emphasis on taking the most damaging, the fastest hitting weapon. Other possibility is reach, either projectile based weaponry or a very long weapons. This is so, because of how combat works in MW. If you wanted to be really effective there wre certain weapons to pick up and forget the others. It’s a real shame, because I actually like weapons as flail and such.

Speaking about limiting, thats what this new tracer system does in DW. Everyone speaks how they like precision and right footwork, look how well it works in dw. Someone who just lmb spams gets first place, someone who tries to actually do some footwork gets punished for it.

Wasn’t it the same in MW?