War of the Roses

[Maniacal]

Hell no. Combat is awkward, clumsy, and generally inferior to Mount&Blade or Dark Messiah. Hell, Skyrim's combat is more reliable. Hit detection was pretty hit and miss and armour didn't always seem to matter. I repeatedly saw and experienced someone land several hits (doing damage with each one, except the one or two that clearly hit but the game decided not to detect) only or the other player to be able to just 1 or 2 hit the guy back in return. The worst case of this I experienced was when I was a night and attacked an archer from behind, and despite swinging a claymore at and through his head and landing another 4 damaging hits on him and then he managed to hit me twice and kill me, even though I was in full armour and this is far from an uncommon experience. The upgrade system serves mostly to cover up how shallow and limited the game is otherwise. They also seriously need to hire better animators.

I'll be surprised if Fatshark keeps up their support, they abandoned their last game (and it wasn't amazingly good either). They also really didn't listen very well too the beta testers either. Don't waste your money on this game.

EDIT: Also does no one do a basic check before making a thread here anymore? http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=460602

 

[Angst]

That's definitely not the experience I've had. I'm pretty happy with my purchase.

I'd argue that Mount & Blade multiplayer is much more shallow, however! The engine always screws up and lags when you're supposed to do whatever. Mount & Blade basically translated into Be Naked Nord And Swing Axe Accurately And Hope For The Engine To Not Kill You or Be Archer With Constant Headshots Due To Bad Archer Mechanics. Well, it had an in-depth singleplayer dimension to it which was good, but it never caught my attention. War of the Roses' ranged combat system seems like Mount & Blade was fixed.

But I admit, I play shieldsword or xbow much more often than twohander, so I might be missing out on these epic problems you seem to have found.

 

[Silverbow]

I've got it. I can't shake off the feeling of Medieval Counterstrike, but it's fun. Didn't try any ranged classes yet, but I've got a mounted knight and foot knight fully geared up that I switch between depending on the map.

Combat is kinda spammy at times, and the game's not without it's share of problems - shield bash having basically no cooldown is downright broken (you get stuck between two guys, one of them with shield and knows how to use shield bash, you're dead meat), and archers are ridiculously overpowered (can't count the number of times an archer one-shot my barded heavy horse from under me from behind). But it's still fun and kinda addictive.

Not sure I'd recommend buying it at full price though.

 

[Maniacal]

Yeah that was a major complaint I and a lot of other people have expressed. Spamming is far too effective and trying to block with anything but a shield is difficult when detection is already iffy enough as it is. I take it they nerfed the horses though, they were practically invincible during the "beta" (which was really more of a marketing demo and a way to weed out non-gameplay related bugs).
===
Xbow is really the only part of it they didn't entirely screw up, but watching someone run off or attack you after you shoot them in the head from close range and there is clearly a bolt sticking out of their brain isn't fun or indicative of good design.

I don't know what issues you are having with M&B's engine constantly giving you problems, but I haven't really had the engine screw up and most of the problems I've had are all connection and server based when you're stuffing 150-200+ people on a server (dunno about native, but since NW's release people really upgraded their servers to handle 200 players much better). I know archers and polearms can do pretty well in pub native and cRPG servers but that doesn't mean you can't do very well with other weapons. It also changes a lot in the various mods, and NW removed the speed bonus for spinning around in a circle with a bayonet (not really the most effective tactic anyway, it mostly only worked because most NW players suck at blocking).

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Merged threads.

 

[Angst]

Thanks for the merge!

 

[sophie]

Hell no. Combat is awkward, clumsy, and generally inferior to Mount&Blade or Dark Messiah. Hell, Skyrim's combat is more reliable. Hit detection was pretty hit and miss and armour didn't always seem to matter. I repeatedly saw and experienced someone land several hits (doing damage with each one, except the one or two that clearly hit but the game decided not to detect) only or the other player to be able to just 1 or 2 hit the guy back in return. The worst case of this I experienced was when I was a night and attacked an archer from behind, and despite swinging a claymore at and through his head and landing another 4 damaging hits on him and then he managed to hit me twice and kill me, even though I was in full armour and this is far from an uncommon experience. The upgrade system serves mostly to cover up how shallow and limited the game is otherwise. They also seriously need to hire better animators.

I'll be surprised if Fatshark keeps up their support, they abandoned their last game (and it wasn't amazingly good either). They also really didn't listen very well too the beta testers either. Don't waste your money on this game.

On the upside. The 2 videos of Sips and Sjin playing the game were really, really funny.

 

[Yeekim]

The crunchy sound when you are crushed by a cavalier excites me in particular.