Mount fights unfair?

[Bloody blade]

If your in a mount fight with someone, wouldn't the person with the higher strength and close combat skills win? Such as if an ork warrior who pwns at close combat gets in a mount fight with a mirdain rogue, his hits hurt a lot more than the mirdain rogue (granted he might strike a little faster, but can't kite). If the mirdain gets of his mount, this gives the ork an advantage. There is little room for the mirdain to use sneaky moves. Unless the ork sucks at mount fighting, he will usually win.

Also, does casting on a mount make the spells harder to aim and take longer to cast?

[Byggin]

rogue? sneaky moves? warrior? casting on a mount?

what is this blasphemy!

[Jonkar]

Also, does casting on a mount make the spells harder to aim and take longer to cast?

You can only use melee weapons on your mount.

[Rhynn]

There's no casting or archery from mounts. There's also no "rogue" class. If a light armor wearer with two knives wants to straight up melee an orc in heavy plate, I don't think it's too far-fetched that the Orc is likely going to win. Pick your enemies better, imho.

[Bloody blade]

You can only use melee weapons on your mount.

Oh, thx

[Scabre]

That's why rogue-type players won't want to get into a straight up fight with someone who specializes in it, mounted or no. The mirdain in question will want to either sneak up on the orc and get him from behind or pick him off with a bow. You know... rogue stuff. He lost his chance to use "sneaky moves" the moment he charged in yelling riding a big cat.

Also, ranged combat on mounts is out, so I'm assuming that applies to magic as well.

[Razmuffin]

Mounts don't protect you from cannon fire, Mages and Archers. you can get to ranged characters faster but if the mount dies it costs you some Gold. spend more get better stuff, but if you lose it too bad, Risk = Reward, Gold = finantual Risk

[Bloody blade]

That's why rogue-type players won't want to get into a straight up fight with someone who specializes in it, mounted or no. The mirdain in question will want to either sneak up on the orc and get him from behind or pick him off with a bow. You know... rogue stuff.

Also, ranged combat on mounts is out, so I'm assuming that applies to magic as well.

What I'm saying is what happens when they meet each other by accident. Should the mirdain run away (but i guess that depends on players choice)?

[Ghetis]

There's no casting or archery from mounts. There's also no "rogue" class. If a light armor wearer with two knives wants to straight up melee an orc in heavy plate, I don't think it's too far-fetched that the Orc is likely going to win. Pick your enemies better, imho.

This


If your character is not made for mounted combat, then don't fight someone that is.

[Forgin]

You can't expect to be a rogue kinda character and still be able to take on an Orc on Deathpig, that's why you're a rogue. This isn't WoW.

[CaffeineBadger]

beef up a weapon skill, thats what you need.

[Silky]

the 'rogue' should just turn around and run away and hope to be able to find somewhere safe to ambush him

[Scabre]

What I'm saying is what happens when they meet each other by accident. Should the mirdain run away (but i guess that depends on players choice)?
You could fight, and if you're really good you might win. But if you specialize to the extent that your char can't deal with a given situation, then yeah, you're screwed. In darkfall, it's the player's responsibility balance themselves, not the dev's.

[Darkfalz]

Also, ranged combat on mounts is out, so I'm assuming that applies to magic as well.

Even Mount and Blade, a 350 mb game, has archery from horseback. WTF? Darkfall just cuts and cuts features like there's no tomorrow, it seems like.

[Rhynn]

Mount&Blade isn't multiplayer though, is it?

[Kelya]

Even Mount and Blade, a 350 mb game, has archery from horseback. WTF? Darkfall just cuts and cuts features like there's no tomorrow, it seems like.

By not allowing people to do things like cast or "bow hunt" from a mount gives people a reason to get off their steads and fight. By allowing ALL types of combat from "horse" back it would be just people fighting with a speed boost all the time.

"Look at me I permanently have a horse attached to my crotch" some people might like that ... but what happens in a private show in Tijuana should stay in a private show in Tijuana. LOL

[Xarthas]

If you feel in a disadventage while fighting mounted try to scape, if you can´t fuck you, i mean, this game is like this.

[Darkfalz]

What's really the difference between swinging a sword from horseback and shooting an arrow? So what if you can run around in circles arrowing some lunk with plate armor and two-handed sword... is that a bad thing? Outsource your missile and magic capability if you really want to specialize to that extent.

[Darkfalz]

By not allowing people to do things like cast or "bow hunt" from a mount gives people a reason to get off their steads and fight. By allowing ALL types of combat from "horse" back it would be just people fighting with a speed boost all the time.

"Look at me I permanently have a horse attached to my crotch" some people might like that ... but what happens in a private show in Tijuana should stay in a private show in Tijuana. LOL


Ok fine, good point. I am just not a fan of not letting us do things to make game mechanics or even balance easier. If mounted magery is the fucking win in medieval FPS, I'd kind of like to know that.

[Shads]

If your in a mount fight with someone, wouldn't the person with the higher strength and close combat skills win? Such as if an ork warrior who pwns at close combat gets in a mount fight with a mirdain rogue, his hits hurt a lot more than the mirdain rogue (granted he might strike a little faster, but can't kite). If the mirdain gets of his mount, this gives the ork an advantage. There is little room for the mirdain to use sneaky moves. Unless the ork sucks at mount fighting, he will usually win.

Also, does casting on a mount make the spells harder to aim and take longer to cast?

Dude, it's all about the player skill. Your character's skills might help a bit, but they are in no way determining for the outcome of the fight.

[cosimo84]

It still sounds like people who specialize heavily in melee combat will benefit more from mounts than someone who specializes more in casting or ranged.

Is there anything like a riding skill to improve mount speed/maneuverability/damage?

[no-one]

I wouldn't worry about any of this until the game comes out.

[cosimo84]

I wouldn't worry about any of this until the game comes out.

blargh no this game is clearly unbalanced already, abandon ship!

[Xarthas]

Mounted melee combat is ingame because it´s different from walking melee combat, the horse turn speed is different, the range is different a lot of things are different so it doesn´t look like "fighting with a horse attached to my bottoms" it´s a different style. So in order to add mounted archery and magery, first devs should make them also different from walking. In example:

1) While doing mounted archery the crosshair should move a lot when the horse runs.
2) Same with magery and a very increased casting time.

Or something like that. The objective is, that they don´t feel the same like walking with a speed bonus and that they are ballanced. Right now IMHO they aren´t ballanced because melee fighter have the chance to fight mounted and archers & mages haven´t it.

What do you think?

EDIT: inb4 "there aren´t pre deffined classes, pick a melee skill". Not all the people will do it.

[Dagger]

There's no casting or archery from mounts. There's also no "rogue" class. If a light armor wearer with two knives wants to straight up melee an orc in heavy plate, I don't think it's too far-fetched that the Orc is likely going to win. Pick your enemies better, imho.

no shit.

[Rhynn]

It still sounds like people who specialize heavily in melee combat will benefit more from mounts than someone who specializes more in casting or ranged.

Is there anything like a riding skill to improve mount speed/maneuverability/damage?

How so? The Ranged/Magic users have a nice big target to shoot at/root/stun/mez/snare while he's riding around. I'm guessing there's a riding skill to improve speed and damage, as well as a mounted combat skill, yes.

[Ferox]

If your in a mount fight with someone, wouldn't the person with the higher strength and close combat skills win? Such as if an ork warrior who pwns at close combat gets in a mount fight with a mirdain rogue, his hits hurt a lot more than the mirdain rogue (granted he might strike a little faster, but can't kite). If the mirdain gets of his mount, this gives the ork an advantage. There is little room for the mirdain to use sneaky moves. Unless the ork sucks at mount fighting, he will usually win.

Also, does casting on a mount make the spells harder to aim and take longer to cast?

unfair... rofl...

I know lets balance everything so everyone and everything is the exact same thing!

[Xarthas]

unfair... rofl...

I know lets balance everything so everyone and everything is the exact same thing!
Starcraft is the most ballanced game and not every race´s units are the same.

[StormZ]

Im sure skill would have a lot to do with mount fighting. Im sure mount fighting will need some time getting used to so im sure that will play a factor in mount fighting. Also the Orks may have more strength but it would make sense for them to move slower and attack less often then a human or a mirdain.

In the end, its all the players choice.

[Ferox]

Starcraft is the most ballanced game and not every race´s units are the same.

starcaft isnt a mmo...



bottom line to this whole stupid thread is... USE YOUR DAMNED BRAIN..

darkfall is free... use your damned brain instead of complaining about balance, we don't need the devs to fiddle or code it differently.

[phyvo]

By not allowing people to do things like cast or "bow hunt" from a mount gives people a reason to get off their steads and fight. By allowing ALL types of combat from "horse" back it would be just people fighting with a speed boost all the time.

"Look at me I permanently have a horse attached to my crotch" some people might like that ... but what happens in a private show in Tijuana should stay in a private show in Tijuana. LOL

If you had played Mount and Blade you'd realize that shooting from horseback isn't so easy in that game. Of course, it has innaccuracy modifiers. Moreover, if this was more of a medieval simulator buying mounts for everyone would be too expensive, especially against infantry with pikes or archers who can shoot you more easily than you can shoot them (because while you're both moving targets relative to each other, the mounted person has to deal with the bumps of the moving horse). Cavalry could be very frightening because of its speed and ability to exploit weaknesses, but a square of pikemen has no weaknesses to cavalry and is a whole lot cheaper.

That said, Darkfall isn't a medieval simulator and being an MMO it's crazy enough that it has any action gameplay elements in it at all.

[Valdsator]

darkfall is free...

No it's not. But uhh, balancing works like this...

If the player chooses a skill like Less Sound, (Agility I would think.) he/she needs to know how to use that to their advantage.

Good:
"There's a melee ork right there! Better go by this rock with my gray armor and shoot his head off!"
You sneak to the rock and the ork can't hear you because of the skill you just got. Then you shoot him and he's like D: He looks around but can't see you because he's panicking. Shoot him more and then maybe run out of the rock and he's like, "OOHHHH LOL DIE ASSASSIN" and you stab him a couple of times, and then he dies.

Bad:
You get your new skill that makes your footsteps quieter. You see an ork. You charge right into his face.

Basically, not all skills will help you charge into battle and own everybody. You'll have to use tactics to get an advantage using your skills.

[Beorg]

If you're more skilled at fighting off your mount, you will be more skilled when you're fighting on your mount. If you're fighting somebody who is less skilled off their mount, they will fight with less skill on their mount. It also depends on which weapons they use. If they're using a lance, and you're using a sword, you can bet that the lance would win. There are some variables, but it would be an almost-certain victory for the lancer.

Also, why would a mirdain use a rouge's weapon while mount fighting? It makes little sense. If you're using a shortsword that's better for slicing necks and stabbing, why would you even try using it against a polearm or spear? It's just stupid. You have to use common sense when you fight--whether it be on your mount or on foot. You must use the terrain, your skills, and hide your weaknesses. You must use your enemy's flaws against him, and then, you will be assured a win.

[El-Diablito]

Do you know what we call a heavilly armored guy with huge muscles and a massive sword on a mount on a battlefield? Heavy cavallery.

Do you know what we call a lightly armored nimble chap on a mount on a battlefield? A suicidal idiot.

Tbh i'm pissed off, if i'm on a boat as a melee char, I can't attack distant ships like casters can!

Clearly, my sword needs a range-buff so its fairer.

[Unfriendly]

If your in a mount fight with someone, wouldn't the person with the higher player skills win?

there... Fixed your dumb ass question.

[James-Noth]

Do you know what we call a heavilly armored guy with huge muscles and a massive sword on a mount on a battlefield? Heavy cavallery.

Do you know what we call a lightly armored nimble chap on a mount on a battlefield? A suicidal idiot.

Tbh i'm pissed off, if i'm on a boat as a melee char, I can't attack distant ships like casters can!

Clearly, my sword needs a range-buff so its fairer.

even if you are melee, you can still learn a few basic spells