Melee Counters to Mounts

[Kaemik]

mounted build should be better than foot on flat terrain end of the story if you argue that foots can fight mounted on terrain that favors mounts that is nuts in mo2 there is so much stuff to mess with mounted and you guys want to nerf it more I like mortal because you could do different build if I wanted to play everyone has same build game I would play warzone.

foot fighters have advantages in forest and hill areas mounted are the kings of the open step why are you guys trying to homogenize the game. A core aspect is different builds are better in different circumstances If ppl can play foot anywhere and counter everything why would anyone play anything but foot. It would be boring

There is very little perfectly flat terrain in this game. Even the flattest areas tend to be dotted with small hills and rocks. But MOST of the game is what I would consider good cav terrain, and the areas worst for mounts are also some of the paths least likely to be taken. You basically can't move from one city to another without crossing some kind of place mounts will have a HUGE advantage if they're they are the uncontested master of any flatter ground.

No. I do not expect lancers to beat halberdiers 1:1 in a head on charge because they are in the open field. I do not expect MAs to beat longbowmen 1:1 because they are in the open field.

I expect a good heavy lance charge to break absolutely anything BUT polearms. I expect MAs to flawless infantry that don't work ranged abilities into their build. I expect in large battles mounts to unleash devastation if they have allied infantry preventing enemy polearms from setting up a brace. I expect who is stronger 1:1 to matter very little if you outnumber the enemy by a large enough degree.

And I expect, as always, the MO community to never disappoint in their resistance to change / inability to adapt, and many stubborn fools to not run mounted counters and whine endlessly when some heavy lancer wrecks their day while they are fighting with a greatsword, sword and board, or some other weapon that should be near useless in stopping a mounted charge.

Edit: Actually I don't expect any of this other than MO vet inadaptability if the rest of it happens. I just HOPE to see it.

 

[Evelyn]

Make the Elementalism spell Air Burst have a very high or 100% chance to blast a rider off their mount if they don't manage to avoid it. Not for any good reason, I just think it would look funny,

 

[Eldrath]

I would like to point out that just because MO1 had a dismount mechanic, this does not force SV to put this into MO2.

There are other and IMO better ways to balance mounts than adding a 5 second stun to the game.

For example if certain attacks made a horse slow down/stop for a short amount of time that might be enough to kill the horse. If that was the case there would be no need to remove the rider from his mount, effectively denying him the usage of a big amount of skillpoints. You would retain control over your character, but your ability to escape would be reduced.

This would also give a good reason to ride heavy mounts with more mitigation and HP as MC, but less charge damage, stamina and speed. If there are foot weapons that dismount 75-100% going for a sturdy mount as a MC would be idiotic.

I speak obviously solely from a balance point of view and have no need for realism. Although it would be fitting if a f.e. a halbert would be good at this kind of thing while a dagger might be suboptimal.

 

[agui]

Wait cant use my dismount dagger anymore? Dam

 

[Eldrath]

Wait cant use my dismount dagger anymore? Dam

Well, you can still weakspot through the oghmium molva armour.

 

[agui]

U didnt see my mercy dagger with sledgehammer head yet

 

[Kaemik]

I can screenshot it from the FAQ if anyone needs to see it again, but realism is intended to be a part of this game. Yes it's "A GAME" but I think for this particular game blending realism and fun best does what this game sets out to do which is create a highly immersive experience while also being very brutal and competitive.

Therefore realism and fun are both things I try to consider, make work together when possible, and balance against each other when not. I consider this dynamic for basically all of my suggestions. Fun is weighted much more heavily than realism in my mind, but people who deride consideration of realism clearly do not understand the intent of this game or the developer's vision.

Also worth noting every person playing this game has a slightly (or sometimes radically) different definition of "fun" while realism is far less subjective.

 

[bbihah]

no, a horse isn't going to climb a rocky 60 degree slope so don't put it in game

Any slope a person can WALK up, a horse should be able to walk up.

Anything else is just asking for the mountain slide wonkyness of mo1.

Mountains should not be where people would want to ride their mounts, but having to dismount, tell your horse to follow you and then running over it just to get your mount to the other side is the stupidest shit ever.

 

[Eldrath]

I can screenshot it from the FAQ if anyone needs to see it again, but realism is intended to be a part of this game. Yes it's "A GAME" but I think for this particular game blending realism and fun best does what this game sets out to do which is create a highly immersive experience while also being very brutal and competitive.

Therefore realism and fun are both things I try to consider, make work together when possible, and balance against each other when not. I consider this dynamic for basically all of my suggestions. Fun is weighted much more heavily than realism in my mind, but people who deride consideration of realism clearly do not understand the intent of this game or the developer's vision.

Also worth noting every person playing this game has a slightly (or sometimes radically) different definition of "fun" while realism is far less subjective.

Any system deals with abstraction. No one knows how often actual unhorsing happens compared to a horse getting straight killed or injured beyond usefulness. A lot of cavalry equipment was designed to keep riders in their saddles and I woud assume for a good reason.

I don´t think that having any dismount mechanic is necessarily more realistic than having none. Realistically speaking there are too many factors that woud have to be considered to determine if and how someone is being thrown from a horse.

Not to mention that in other regards realism is completely abandoned. Looking at armour, bleeding, organ damage etc.

 

[Kaemik]

It was meant less as a direct issue with the lack of dismount and more the fact two people have taken a swipe at the importance of realism in this thread, so I thought it was worth bringing up once again that a certain level of realism is part of this game's vision.

The non-dismount system... I don't know. Depends on how the slows work out and stuff. Accounting for the potential factor of a dismount is something I put serious consideration into for many of the mounted builds I've been working on. Dismount immunity until mount death would certainly make me favor the less foot-viable builds I've been working on over the more foot-viable ones.

I'd prefer something like trained riders do a roll and standing rather than a stun when dismounted to removing it entirely as I think that creates less need for build variety. But I could see some upsides if the new anti-mount mechanics were balanced very well. I'm not sure how much confidence I have it would be.

I do feel there is need for dismount resistance though, and I would support being able to stack it up to 100%. This could be an added property to dex. Certain mount gear could provide this at the cost of additional weight for the mount to carry. Potentially even a new primary skill. A fully dismount-resistant build should have to make some sacrifices that make it not no-brainer move for all mounted combatants though.

 

[Jackdstripper]

I liked how mounted combat was before the breeding patch that brought on super horses.
The early horses were viable but not invincible, and you had to make hard choices between speed, hp, manouverability, etc. No one horse had it all. Mounteds where useful but by no means op.

then the breeding patch came and the super horses with 57 speed, 500hp, 12 int, etc came out . After that mounted combat was just broken. Sitting in a jet fueled tank in full steel with limitless stam to swing the heaviest weapons.

say no to super horses. Horses should be for travelling and quick hit and runs. And no mount should have it all. There should always be trade offs.

 

[Bogler]

I loved being a thursar khallard with a bull horse back in the day, MA tank. I could always kill the other MA horse before they could get mine because of the hp difference. But I could NEVER get away from a group of players on jungle/desert horses. Way better times, had to choose what you wanted to play with.

I really like the idea of polearms doing tons of damage / insta dismounting mounted players.

 

[Floky]

I wish I never saw this topic cuz I have to say my biased opinion about mounted fighting. For me I don't care about balance I love MA/MC/ FAT MAGE builds so having them be better than foot is a + for me. yes I can say if you make a special weapon you can dismount mounted from foot fine i can take that but that weapon better be a chungy boi I don't want to see a 3kg dismounting me. My biggest concern is that the map it is huge so roams looking for pvp or just the casual bit of raiding and plundering the tindremic countryside will be on mounted is this good or bad idk the game is not out but if mounted fighting works like mo1 but not as janky I for one will be a very happy customer.

 

[Kaemik]

I have a rather similar opinion in that I am playing mounted and want it to feel good, but if it feels TOO good, then it becomes Mounted Combat Online. Not only have a lot of people expressed they don't want that. I don't want that. Because if everyone plays mounted then my reasons for wanting to play a mounted build no longer exist.

That's why I like polearms:

1. They are historically accurate and logical as counters to mounted opponents.
2. They take 200 primary points to train into.
3. They are currently considered bad/trash in fights against other infantry.
4. Spear stance as I describe it (1 second + 50 stam to activate, interrupted by melee damage, can't be reused for 3 seconds) leaves infantry that focus on countering mounts weak to other foot infantry. Giving people multiple more reasons to play foot builds.

To draw on another game. In Age of Empires II, heavy cav are some of the most expensive units in the game and are countered by the spearmen line. One of the cheapest units in the game. So are heavy cav considered bad? No. They're considered amazing because they are fast and good against essentially everything but specific counter units like spearmen and camels.

But unlike Age of Empires 2 we aren't units controlled by a single player. We're characters we fully control meaning "micro" is amazing and we're a lot less likely to impale ourselves on polearms if we're paying attention.

 

[MolagAmur]

I don't care what they do. Just don't make it weapon specific for dismounts. That shit was dumb. I'm okay with some being better than others at it though. I just don't want to be forced into a specific weapon (heavy ass weapons) if it becomes a mounted meta again.

 

[Rulant]

I don't care what they do. Just don't make it weapon specific for dismounts. That shit was dumb. I'm okay with some being better than others at it though. I just don't want to be forced into a specific weapon (heavy ass weapons) if it becomes a mounted meta again.

what you d;ont like having to train a completely useless weapon type and carry around a giant bron double greataxe?????

 

[ThaBadMan]

I don't care what they do. Just don't make it weapon specific for dismounts. That shit was dumb. I'm okay with some being better than others at it though. I just don't want to be forced into a specific weapon (heavy ass weapons) if it becomes a mounted meta again.

what you d;ont like having to train a completely useless weapon type and carry around a giant bron double greataxe?????

Listen guys this is the way! Who dont want a broken axe in order to dismount people ?

 

[JimLit]

Hear me out... Multiple riders on a horse.

 

[Kaemik]

Hear me out... Multiple riders on a horse.

That would be pretty useful. 2 riders per horse would be a good addition to the game.

Beyond that, rideable campadons (elephants) are confirmed. I'm going to be greatly disappointed if they can't fit a minimum of 2 passengers beyond the mahout.

 

[JimLit]

if you can read this jerkin the alvarin fell off