Jump to content


Photo

Cavalry Fall Damage


  • Please log in to reply
54 replies to this topic

Poll: Cavalry Fall Damage (119 member(s) have cast votes)

Should cavalrymen receive less damage when they fall of horses?

  1. Yes, they should receive less damage (34 votes [28.57%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 28.57%

  2. No, they don't receive too much damage now (85 votes [71.43%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 71.43%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Homer

Homer
  • 1375 posts
  • 12689 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 13:40

What do you think about the fall damage? Do the cavalrymen receive too much damage when the fall off horses? Now it depends on the horse speed and the max damage is 25. You will receive it if you ride Courser at the maximum speed and have a Riding level of 10. But normally you'll receive 19-20 damage. You receive the same damage when you fall off a low castle wall.

#2 Noimar

Noimar
  • Member of Sanguine
  • 31 posts
  • 41305 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 13:49

Damage seems alright at the current level (most of the time). I do feel that they are slightly disadvantaged due to the fact they don't get up too quickly, so they take damage and then the person can still hit them and then they die whilst if they would have gotten dismounted last version then they may not have died unless several people hit them. I do know that this would have happened as you would have been strapped onto your horse but let's not get sucked into realism.

 

Would be nice to hear other people's opinion on this....

Edited by Noimar, 11 April 2014 - 13:56.


#3 Tywin, Veteran of the Stormcrows Mercenary Company

Tywin
  • Member of Stormcrow
  • 2090 posts
  • 19325 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 13:52

Well that's the point, isn't it? If a damn knight fell off his horsie, he would be damn dead amongst a group of enemies and no help whatsoever.

 

So, in short, yes, keep the damage, cavalry must learn they cannot go derp-rambo if they want to keep their precious K/D.


#4 Gazz, in the army now woo o o

Gazz
  • Member of Crusade
  • 2566 posts
  • 26361 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 13:52

I've recently bough meself a horsie and I don't think the fall damage is too low or high, I think it's pretty solid at the moment.


#5 sandorra, The God of (In)Justice

sandorra
  • Member of Korpi
  • 7479 posts
  • 26065 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 13:59

Haven't been playing with sausages lately, but they seem to take enough damage when I drop them. Often 2-3 arrows will be plenty enough to get the dismounted tincan to drop dead.


#6 Celtic

Celtic
  • 1668 posts
  • 3359 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 14:11

Well, 0-13 :P

 

I haven't seen or heard anyone complain about that falling damage yet, I think it's perfectly fine as it is :)

Edited by Celtic, 11 April 2014 - 14:18.


#7 Kory Le Peasant, Women.

Kory Le Peasant
  • 37 posts
  • 2235 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 14:20

Nuff.

#8 Homer

Homer
  • 1375 posts
  • 12689 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 14:47

I haven't seen or heard anyone complain about that falling damage yet, I think it's perfectly fine as it is :)

I saw some players complaining about the damage being too high, not only on this forum. I think it's fine but I'd like to check my guess. :)

#9 LastKnightOfCydonia, EIN CLAN, EIN DERP, EIN CYDONIA. HAIL THE PURPLE ONE.

LastKnightOfCydonia
  • Member of BOC
  • 3387 posts
  • 20431 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 14:48

There is a negative thing about the whole "cavalry fall damage".

 

Cavsters are not as fond of my pike as they used to be.

 

But I guess I can live with this.


#10 The_Bear_Jew, I don't care about ur meaningless words, megamen.

The_Bear_Jew
  • 164 posts
  • 23 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 15:18

Well Homer, that are the people who only play Cavalry themselves probably :P

Edited by The_Bear_Jew, 11 April 2014 - 15:19.


#11 SKITTLE

SKITTLE
  • 3 posts
  • 6287 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 15:32

CAV IS OK


#12 Kory Le Peasant, Women.

Kory Le Peasant
  • 37 posts
  • 2235 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 15:48

Hi sikitil ))))))

#13 Euronymous, When you're in hell, only a devil can point the way out.

Euronymous
  • Member of Legion
  • 2034 posts
  • 15949 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 16:00

Imo, fall damage is pretty good as it is now.


#14 Dawlish, Un-Officially retired

Dawlish
  • Member of Korpi
  • 3378 posts
  • 63632 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 17:09

Increase it ten fold imo


#15 Shemaforash, aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Shemaforash
  • Member of Chosen
  • 400 posts
  • 10352 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 17:20

decrease to ZERO cav is REALLY UNUSABLE NOW if u dont listen I WILL NOT be afraid to TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION


#16 Wololo, ITZ NOT FUNNI!!!

Wololo
  • Member of Legion
  • 1264 posts
  • 16741 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 17:53

Unusable? Since when was cavalry's main purpose to perform ground dives into enemies?

  • assasin_nietsmmar likes this

#17 Celtic

Celtic
  • 1668 posts
  • 3359 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 18:02

You remind me of Lieutenant Commander Data


#18 Viator, the White Wolf

Viator
  • Member of Dayne
  • 1657 posts
  • 34855 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 19:53

I used to be quite unhappy about that damage. My main class is cavalry, yet I do not use courser nor any sarranid horse. I've got the charger and going like "RaMBo CHaRGe!" doesnt belong to my tactic. But still I recieve alot of damage, even though my horse isnt really fast.

 

I guess that damage is a nice add to the mod as it is way more realistic. But in my eyes it disadvantages the use of heavy horses even more.

 

Cons for H(eavy)H(orses):

  1. They're expensive.
  2. They're slow.
  3. They have quite a little maneuver.
  4. They've got a high difficulty.
  5. One still recieves much falling damage even though one is slow.

Pros for HH:

  1. They look badass. Thats actually why I bought the charger.
  2. They got 40 HP more than a courser or a sarranid horse.
  3. They got more body armour.
  4. Their charge actually is three times as much as the lighter horses ones.

So sometimes I wonder why one should buy a heavy horse. Those arguments above are quite valid. The price-earning ratio isnt really good. One has to give people a reason to buy them. But all I get is another negative aspect for those heavy horses and horses in general. Whether or not the damage is now based on speed, it does not matter.

As a veteran player of merc I know the benefits of an heavy horse, but why should a new player spend his well or not earned money on a horse which is as expensive as the best armour?

 

I've already stated out (in this post or in older posts) that there is a point which could make HH more attractive. It is the charge damage. I am considering the arguments we already had about that, that such a high damage easily makes HH overpowered. But then again, yeah, those HH were overpowered in the middle ages. That's why real knights used them in battle and spit on light horses. And that's why (or not?) those horses cost twice as much as normal horses. And now I ask myself: Why is the fall-off-horse damage implented. Correct me if I am wrong, but I guess we got it to lessen cavalry and to add more realism. And again I proclaim:

If we are at the realism part, why not increase the charge damage of HH to make them more attractive.

 

Yeah, but to summarize I have to admit that the falling damage makes it even more easier to smash those light cavalry even as a HH user.

Edited by Rock_Solid, 11 April 2014 - 19:57.


#19 sandorra, The God of (In)Justice

sandorra
  • Member of Korpi
  • 7479 posts
  • 26065 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 20:45

There's a difference between upping charge damage and implementing falling damage.

You most likely fall from a horse only once on an average round. You however can be bumped by horse 10-20 times a round. Pretty much best tactic for cavalry IS to bump the opponent. 


#20 Viator, the White Wolf

Viator
  • Member of Dayne
  • 1657 posts
  • 34855 kills

Posted 11 April 2014 - 20:50

Yeah, that IS an argument, indeed, but still heavy cavalry is disadvantaged.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users