- FFA servers!
- Enemies dropping weapons so that you can pick them up and use them
- Throwing all weapons: Let me throw my 2handed swords and axes at my enemies, even if it’s not the most effective way to play.
- Character customization: not only visual, but with talents/perks. Maybe even active skills like in Mirage.
- Matchmaking system and the ability to queue up as a group.
- Climbing up small ledges (like you could do in Mirage)
- Duel mode
Posts made by sanastro
RE: Chivalry 2 Idea Thread!
RE: First impressions thread!
My first impression on Alpha#2 compared to Alpha#1: Combat feels more weird now.
I can’t really figure out what’s different. Maybe it’s the changes in game speed, but combat in Alpha#1 felt way more satisfying for me. (I’ve mostly played Taurant in both alphas)
First, It seems that vypresses are faster and it’s hard to survive against multiple enemies if they are just charging around you like crazy.
It’s also more frustrating to play against alchemancers for me.
In the last alpha it was okay to fight someone while an alchemancer casts projectiles at you. Somehow I’ve managed to block both, the projectiles and the melee atatcks. In this alpha it seems that alchemancers cast a lot faster, which makes blocking everything almost impossible.
I can’t really figure out whats the big difference. Maybe it’s because of the maps and game modes, which force you in different combat situations…
Maybe I’m just wrong and remember things wrong because the last alpha test was 3 weeks ago…
Falcon Ridge: Vaulting and Collision
I’ve explored Falcon Ridge for a while and found some spots, that I would like to share with you:
This ruin looks like you could climb its walls and walk on top of it. Unfortunately, invisible walls stop you from doing it:
There is a pillar which looks like it would allow vaulting. You can even reach the first tier, but if you try to climb higher, you can’t. If it’s not intended to climb these pillars, maybe it should also be disabled on the first ledge. I’ve found myself trying to climb this pillar several times if I wanted to escape a fight, and it always resulted in jumping against the wall and getting slaughtered ;)
The last thing for now is the other pillar on the map. It really looks like you could climb it. There is some flat space on top of it, but you can’t stand on it.
Ok that’s all for now. If I find more on this map, I’ll post it here.
RE: Thoughts from a 2.5k hour comp chiv vet
Footspeed: IMO a sprint button is essential for a melee game, it really adds impact and let’s you move with the urgency that certain timed objectives create. However I can see the reason for ditching this mechanic to lean towards a more thoughtful footwork approach that encourages awareness of surroundings similar to the original Halo games. If that’s the case then the footspeed is in dire need of an increase as all the classes right now feel sluggish and I find my pinky finger constantly trying to pick up the pace with shift.
At first I thought the same, but after playing for a while and seeing all the different abilities, I don’t think a sprint button is really neccessary. There are a variety of movement skills which can be used to escape and keep the pace up. I think it’s in a very good spot now.
Regarding the TO objectives: Please don’t make them all cart pushes. I can’t think of any other comp title where casters are excitedly discussing the number of peasants killed in the first push and that’s part of what made Chivalry’s TO so amazing. It would be great to see similar diversity in Mirage.
I second this :) Bazar is a fun TO map, but more diversity in map goals would be great! Then again, I’ve only seen one TO map now, so let’s see what awaits us in the future
First of all, I’ve played a lot of Chivalry before, so I’m used to the server browser. Especially in Chivalry, I like the ability to pick my own server. Sometimes I want a crowded server, at other times I prefer a half-full (or half-empty :)) server.
But if you have a look at other new “arena-fighting” games, where small groups of people fight against eachother (e.g. Overwatch, For Honor, …), they always provide a matchmaking system. In these games, server browsers are either totally removed or only second choice if people want to start a game.
Let’s discuss the pros and cons of a matchmaking system!
Better learning curve for new players:
New players are automatically matched with people of the same skill-level. They don’t get smashed by more experienced players over and over again and this keeps up their motivation.
In Chivalry there were “Low-Rank”-servers. That wasn’t a bad idea and most new players had some time to get used to the game. But the transition to the “real” servers was just too harsh for some of the players. A lot of them gave up, when they had to face more advanced tactics/moves, which were not frequently used on the low-rank-servers. This problem would be gone with a matchmaking system.
Rank system: Motivataion for new and more experienced players:
I think the details of a ranking system should be discusses in another topic.
I just want to show briefly, which benefits any ranking system could have:
If a matchmaking system is in place, there already are numbers which can easily be used for a ranking. It doesn’t even have to be a classic ELO-Rating, but could be something more abstract like leagues. (bronze, silver, gold,…). This usually motivates a lot of players because they can easily see where they stand and if they make progress. They have a similar system in “Rocket League” and it keeps me playing, although I’m somewhere in the bottom leagues, because it feels good if you climb up a little bit higher and see your progress ;)
Even if you are on a losing streak, you still have motivation to play because you want to get your rank back or your rank became so low that you are going to win again ;), Also, winning and losing will actually feel more important, if you see that a number/rank changes after a game.
The most fun I had during alpha was against opponents, who were at my skill level. Crushing newer players can be fun, but only for a short time. Getting your ass handed to you by better players may teach you one thing or another, but can be very frustrating, too.
You cannot just join and play instantly. Sometimes you have to wait untill there are enough other people queuing
Incoming flames: "This matchmaking sucks!"
I guess it’s quite predictable that there will be people who will flame the matchmaking, regardless of how good or bad it will be. Losing can be a frustrating experience and if people lose 5 times in a row they may think it’s the matchmaking’s fault.
"Matchmaking will only work with a very high player count"
It may be right, that a game with a very high player count can provide a better matchmaking system, because there is a bigger player pool to chose from. However, I think that it wouldn’t be too bad if there are occasionally better or worse players joining the game to fill up the gaps.
Of course it needs some time to plan and implement such a system. Also matchmaking would need some serious testing with more people.
Moreover, I believe that a matchmaking system would only make sense if it’s fully implemented before the game releases. Release will be the time when most new players arrive. At this point, a matchmaking system can help keeping the playercount high in the long-term. If it’s added after release, when the acitve playercount slowly decreases (like in every other game) most people who are looking for long-term motivation will be already gone.
All in all I think the game would benefit from a matchmaking system in the long-term. Even after release, it would help to keep new players playing, because they would feel more satisfied if they fought people of their own skill levels.
And if they have a nice first experience with the game, they would also be more likely to stay :).
Moreover, a rank system could be a low-hanging fruit in development which could be easily added, after a matchmaking system is in place. This would motivate new and experienced players to stick with the game and offer some kind of progress for experienced players. Although this comes at the cost of development time and a lot of neccessary testing.
Ok that’s enough from my side :)
What’s your opinion on this topic?
edit: changed formatting
RE: Update on European server issues
@Vesros the server was full (6v6) for a while. Later it was only 2v2, but since I’ve started playing on this server it worked just fine. Never experienced any lag and people on the server even said that the issue seemed to be resolved. So I wasn’t the only one who experienced it that way ;)
Edit: I’ve seen a conversation between seklay and Crustacean Soup at the discord channel #eu-playtesting. Looks like there were some change made in the server config at ~10pm CEST? Maybe this change has helped with the lags (at least on this server…didn’t test any other servers at this time).
RE: Update on European server issues
Thanks for the heads-up.
Just another info for you to help you resolving the issue:
EU servers are offline since 01 am CEST now.
I’ve played on EU 711451 for the last 2 hours since 11pm CEST and this server was stable. There were no lags at all during this time.