You had numbers during the Holiday, I did not. Never fear though, The Legion will be around in mass to choke the life out of you when we aren't preoccupied with living life outside of a computer monitor.
Mounted Wishlist. What we do, and do not want to see.
- Thread starter Viknuss
- Start date
![[AF]Tyrone](/forums/data/avatars/m/1/1296.jpg?1608403145){kind=avatar}
Oh no, im just making a joke. No idea who you fought brother. Im waitin until the next patch. Already played enough of this current combat xD
Agree. It was also more enjoyable having to choose the right mount for the job.
Agree.
If there is craftable mounted armor, I think a player on a desert horse made with a light recipes and light mats should absolutely be a glass cannon. An insanely fast glass cannon. Those types of builds would be for chasing runners, scouting, or plowing into a flank/taking out mages and archers then getting the heck out.
If you're on a full metal armor bullhorse or molva beast, you should absolutely destroy anyone who isn't using an anti-mount polearm in a head to head fight. Heavy cav were linebreakers and they were meant to take a beating. Whether they were in MO1 or not, heavy cav should be insanely expensive to kit compared to a foot soldier. Unlike MO1 the system, MO2 should work more like Conan Exiles where if you're wielding something like a sword you can stay on a target and apply consistent damage rather than relying entirely on charge attacks as any kind of mounted melee build.
But due to being powerhouses with superior mobility, they absolutely should have powerful counters if you are running them. An army of 100% infantry that is designed to have strong cav counters should have a huge advantage against cav in a head-to-head fight. But cav should absolutely destroy any force which has too few cav counters.
Cav should also have applications even against a force that has those counters if they can get off a good flank charge while the enemy is preoccupied. And those counters should be seperate builds from the builds that will be most effective in killing people on foot.
That's the reason why you run cav. They should have superior mobility. They should have the ability to absolutely destroy targets that don't have good countermeasures. And they should be insanely expensive with those expenses increasing exponentially the tankier they are. If all infantry, even sword and board, are superior to them head-to-head, then that defeats the point of having any kind of heavy cav build. But if a good well rounded infantry group can't beat them head to head then nobody will play infantry. So infantry overall should be the strongest fighters when you take out factors like mobility / the ability to avoid an unwanted fight. But you should need to have the right countermeasures for cav worked into your force for that to stay true.
If you're on a full metal armor bullhorse or molva beast, you should absolutely destroy anyone who isn't using an anti-mount polearm in a head to head fight. Heavy cav were linebreakers and they were meant to take a beating. Whether they were in MO1 or not, heavy cav should be insanely expensive to kit compared to a foot soldier. Unlike MO1 the system, MO2 should work more like Conan Exiles where if you're wielding something like a sword you can stay on a target and apply consistent damage rather than relying entirely on charge attacks as any kind of mounted melee build.
But due to being powerhouses with superior mobility, they absolutely should have powerful counters if you are running them. An army of 100% infantry that is designed to have strong cav counters should have a huge advantage against cav in a head-to-head fight. But cav should absolutely destroy any force which has too few cav counters.
Cav should also have applications even against a force that has those counters if they can get off a good flank charge while the enemy is preoccupied. And those counters should be seperate builds from the builds that will be most effective in killing people on foot.
That's the reason why you run cav. They should have superior mobility. They should have the ability to absolutely destroy targets that don't have good countermeasures. And they should be insanely expensive with those expenses increasing exponentially the tankier they are. If all infantry, even sword and board, are superior to them head-to-head, then that defeats the point of having any kind of heavy cav build. But if a good well rounded infantry group can't beat them head to head then nobody will play infantry. So infantry overall should be the strongest fighters when you take out factors like mobility / the ability to avoid an unwanted fight. But you should need to have the right countermeasures for cav worked into your force for that to stay true.
Last edited:
Personally I'd love to see this as well. Coupled with insanely expensive armor and tusk blades that are required to make them pop-off, stam mechanics that keep the moving slower than infantry over long distances despite having a nice charge speed (so a huge stam pool and good sprint speed but slow stam regen and a slow walk), and a berserk mechanic that turns them into an aggressive NPC the rider has no control over temporarily if you do enough damage of certain types to them (For instance a volley of flaming arrows).
You actually could make the berserk mechanic something that increases the cost of the campadon without gear by making it so all low-level campadons berserk very easily to the point of being near useless or even dangerous to use in PvP, and it requires extensive training time to get them to raise their berserk resistance to a level they become effective to deploy in battle.
Campadon riders would fill a role kind of like supercaps in EVE, especially in the days supercaps were less affordable. Campadons should be something a guild invests in getting and that play huge roles in battle. But kind of susceptible due to low mobility if you just take them on a roam, and a huge loss for your guild when they go down. So you wouldn't be getting ganked by campadon riders while you're out picking herbs but when you see a few on the battlefield you know shit just got real.
Last edited:
God. Just talking about this kind of stuff gets me hard. I realize this is like 99% fantasizing and little of what we talk about is likely to make it into game. But this is what I mean when I say the game should emphasize "tactical depth" over twitch skill.
Real-world battles weren't primarily decided by which side had the soldier with the best shot or could slip the most hits through parries. They were decided by middle-aged men in tents deciding what ridgeline to set up on. Troop composition. Supply lines. Tactical decisions.
Entire formations of infantry getting mowed down like grass because they don't have pikes in their ranks and their enemy brought heavy cav. Figuring out compositions that can hold off that mounted charge but also have the ranged power to address the fact that new "Mongol Horde" group fit out all their light lancers with bows so they don't have to charge pike formations. Groups that run too pike heavy getting plowed into and cut to pieces by sword and board formations. That's what I would really like to see deciding who wins and who loses most battles. Tactical decisions.
Real-world battles weren't primarily decided by which side had the soldier with the best shot or could slip the most hits through parries. They were decided by middle-aged men in tents deciding what ridgeline to set up on. Troop composition. Supply lines. Tactical decisions.
Entire formations of infantry getting mowed down like grass because they don't have pikes in their ranks and their enemy brought heavy cav. Figuring out compositions that can hold off that mounted charge but also have the ranged power to address the fact that new "Mongol Horde" group fit out all their light lancers with bows so they don't have to charge pike formations. Groups that run too pike heavy getting plowed into and cut to pieces by sword and board formations. That's what I would really like to see deciding who wins and who loses most battles. Tactical decisions.
This is a game.
Also reminder, this guy literally bragged about wanting to play a pet user. Basically the lowest position on the totem poll for 'ability to play'.
Mortal Online is never going to mimic the real world 1:1 and you're never going to see superior 'tactical depth' trump twitch skill.
It's going to be groups that are composed of people from their teens to early thirties who work together really well, have good twitch skill, and communicate accordingly. That is who will be winning the majority of the fights in PvP - because it's a game. Not some tactical, real life simulation for a medieval battlegrounds.
The best group composition, in my opinion...
50% Foot Fighters
30% Full Mages (Excluding dominators, tamers, and pet users - pets take up mana from healing, better used for players)
20% Mounteds.
10 players? 5 foot fighters, 3 mages, 1 MC & 1 MA (OR) 1 MA & 1 FM.
This gives an optimal ground back bone, with sufficient healing and or magical damage output, along with two highly mobile players who can harass the other groups mounteds or ground targets. A mounted combatant and a mounted archer would be really good against a group that is mage heavy, both on foot and mount; while a mounted archer and a fatmage would be really good against a fighter heavy group, mounted or on foot (Weakspots, EQ MC's near foot group, etc.)
I personally like rolling 70% foot fighter 30% mages in normal scenarios. But if you wanted to 'win' that is the magic numbers IMO.
Absolutely. I find the fact there are builds that have lower twitch-skill that can beat some higher twitch-skill builds hilarious. I have no shame in wanting to play a dominator/necromancer, and the fact that pisses of twitch-elitists is part of the appeal to me, though a good mounted combat system is the most likely thing to make me reconsider that. As much as I love the idea of killing melees with a build that requires no twitch whatsoever if mounted combat plays and feels fun I'm capable of summoning enough twitch prowess to play a mounted hybrid or something.
A game shouldn't try to mimic real-life 1:1 but I think some people see forced first-person and real-time no-targeting combat and think "Great, fantasy Counterstrike the MMO!" when that doesn't actually seem to be the point of the game. The game also has highly detailed crafting systems, realistic riding mechanics where you spur your horse from walk, to trot, to canter, to gallop and one of the most realistic fishing simulators in any game ever. Now they're trying to do the same with hunting.
The common thread in every system in this game is a deep emphasis on realism and immersion. Fun > Realism and in scenarios where realism isn't fun then go with fun first. But I think increased tactical depth is fun, and has a much broader appeal than some moronic concept of making the game unplayable to anyone past their early thirties when you're probably talking greater than 50% of the existing playerbase already being that old. And tactics absolutely were more important than twitch skill in real ancient/medieval combat. Experienced troops were a great asset but still went down like chumps if you allowed yourself to be entirely outplayed as a commander.
A game shouldn't try to mimic real-life 1:1 but I think some people see forced first-person and real-time no-targeting combat and think "Great, fantasy Counterstrike the MMO!" when that doesn't actually seem to be the point of the game. The game also has highly detailed crafting systems, realistic riding mechanics where you spur your horse from walk, to trot, to canter, to gallop and one of the most realistic fishing simulators in any game ever. Now they're trying to do the same with hunting.
The common thread in every system in this game is a deep emphasis on realism and immersion. Fun > Realism and in scenarios where realism isn't fun then go with fun first. But I think increased tactical depth is fun, and has a much broader appeal than some moronic concept of making the game unplayable to anyone past their early thirties when you're probably talking greater than 50% of the existing playerbase already being that old. And tactics absolutely were more important than twitch skill in real ancient/medieval combat. Experienced troops were a great asset but still went down like chumps if you allowed yourself to be entirely outplayed as a commander.
Last edited:
I can’t tell if some of these “twitch skill” crowd are trolls from lif or some of those who shall not be named intentionally trying to destroy the game, but they’ve almost succeeded.
I never thought someone as far off from being a pro gamer as myself in terms of speed and accuracy would be too much for this game to handle.
They literally put a speed cap on how fast you can move your mouse because people got destroyed too hard sad
I never thought someone as far off from being a pro gamer as myself in terms of speed and accuracy would be too much for this game to handle.
They literally put a speed cap on how fast you can move your mouse because people got destroyed too hard sad
On the subject of builds with a high skillcap. I'm curious that people who are proud about their skills aren't wanting an MA build that allows for 180 degrees aiming in both directions (So 360 aiming but a block that prevents you from turning farther than directly backwards without switching sides). Like being skilled at swordplay is impressive and all but find me someone who can maintain 90%+ accuracy while having good movement on horseback and I'm going to have a higher level of admiration for their twitch skills than any footfighter.
Like that's a build that honestly deserves to absolutely fucking wreck people just like it actually historically did. And it's a skillcap that few people will ever reach. Which is what many of you say you want. So why so little hype for MAs?
Like that's a build that honestly deserves to absolutely fucking wreck people just like it actually historically did. And it's a skillcap that few people will ever reach. Which is what many of you say you want. So why so little hype for MAs?
Last edited:
I used to main an MA way back when and loved getting marksmanship headshots, this was before I recorded.On the subject of builds with a high skillcap. I'm curious that people who are proud about their skills aren't wanting an MA build that allows for 180 degrees aiming in both directions (So 360 aiming but a block that prevents you from turning farther than directly backwards without switching sides). Like being skilled at swordplay is impressive and all but find me someone who can maintain 90%+ accuracy while having good movement on horseback and I'm going to have a higher level of admiration for their twitch skills than any footfighter.
Like that's a build that honestly deserves to absolutely fucking wreck people just like it actually historically did. And it's a skillcap that few people will ever reach. Which is what many of you say you want. So why so little hype for MAs?
idk if you'll enjoy this
I was comfortable enough with a bow to foot archer with it, but alas this is a dead era gone and never coming back. Too many people screaming to punish other play styles and the devs are eating out of their hand unfortunately
That's cool. And definately some skilled play. But the skillcap is capable of going so much higher. If they allow for 360 aiming radius (Which is realistic as long as you need to switch sides as my picture shows) you could do things like mowing down light-cav while riding straight forward as they try to close on you from behind.
Like nothing has a higher potential skillcap than MAs if they are implemented realistically, and the way I think they should be.
Like nothing has a higher potential skillcap than MAs if they are implemented realistically, and the way I think they should be.
Well I get the sense that you're trolling, but generally with ranged the idea is NOT to be wildly swinging your mouse because you're preaiming. In a game like mortal where the enemies aren't hidden behind cover you would almost never need to do a flick shot, and skills like crosshair placement don't apply as again there is no cover.
Everything in MO is more or less raw aim.
you could kind of shoot behind you, you needed to move your horse to the side. Shooting behind you is the only reason you'd need to do what you're asking. Which I of course would have no problem with.
Nah, not wild swinging, but the ability to aim directly backward while riding forward. It's a real thing called a "parthian shot" and it was employed to allow MAs to completely dominate anything that tries to give chase to them.
Not trolling at all. So few people could reach that skillcap that I greatly doubt it would ruin the gameplay for anyone and I'm kind of fine with those players being worth several players of lesser skill.
I'm all for it, but yeah to reiterate its rare that you would need to adjust your aim much with a bow unless its for someone directly behind you, which in this case it is.
an oldie but a goodie, you'll see that you don't want to be adjusting aim in general
That's really cool and I'll likely implement that the next time I play something like Overwatch but it's very different from what I'm talking about. So in MMOs ranged play tends to be less about clearing corners for 1-shot kills and more about consistently getting shots into a target.
The type of skill I would really respect is someone who can pick out a target from a crowd as they ride by on the horse, slowly panning their camera so they can continually fire shots at their target as they ride by and land 90%+ of those shots. It's the combination of movement, constant fire, and accuracy that makes it so impressive and powerful because obviously if you just sit there on a horse firing into a melee you have the advantage of being able to ride away if a foot-fighter decides to break off and come at you, but you're a huge target for enemy archers. But being able to land shots as you gallop full speed makes you both a difficult target and deadly.
Like theoretically MA's are damn near unbeatable by anyone who isn't a foot archer and even a challenge for a good foot archer. But it's the insanely high skillcap of that playstyle that means few people will ever truly reach that level and foot-archers will remain a hard counter to every mediocre MA.