Life is Feudal Official Forum

[Apep]

Greetings!

This topic I made is basically a series of questions about mounted archery in the game. I searched the forums to see if it's been already asked and answered, with no results (forgive me if I missed something and there already is a topic about this), so here I am:

My main question is: Will there be mounted archery in the game?
I think that it was a pretty major aspect of war in the middle ages, from the nomadic eastern cultures to the mounted crossbowmen of the west, but I think you all know this. So, my opinion is that I think it should be implemented into the game aswell, it would suit raiding-heavy factions or groups best.

Is there any chance of this being put into LIF? Would it bring too many balance issues with it?

Thanks for reading!
- Apep

[Siegbert]

God, I hope not... Mounted archery is a pain in the ass in Mount&Blade.
Though it might be realistic I do think it unbalances the game.

[Mortimer]

Mounted archers and xbowmen were a pain in m&b, true. I think the bows are disabled for now and horses don't exist so Right Now it's not possible. Ask the question in the correct topic which is lif yo interactive faq and you will be answered by the devs.

[Alfie]

My guess would be "maybe". Lances are present (or least were), so mounted combat is going to happen eventually. Not sure it'll be in the alpha though.

They were trying to get archery "ready" before the steam launch, but don't think they did.

Combat is their least worked on system so far (from what Bobik was saying anyway) and that's where they're shifting development focus to next (after bug / stability patches).

As far as mounted archery goes, I'm not sure. Balance could be a huge issue as mounted archery is so very strong. I think I'd like to see it though.

[Apep]

Thank you for all the replies!

If this is the wrong section of the forums, I'd love to see my topic moved in order to avoid posting the same thing twice, if that's an option.

On the subject of balance I came up with these:

1. Mounted archers could be balanced by making them "glass cannons", so to speak. They'd be lightly armored, and so they'd be vulnerable to basically all kinds of attack. Maybe archers in formations could counter them?

2. Bows would have a reduced damage and/or accuracy when used mounted.

3. Mounted archers would have no formations (would suit the combat style actually) thus receiving no bonus, making formation combat useful against them.

4. While shooting a bow or aiming with it, you couldn't change the direction in which your horse is running, or the horse speed would be decreased.

[Siegbert]

I don't really fear them in a organized battle since there as you mentioned are proper ways to counter them.

I'm thinking of groups of casual mounted archers roaming the country side and picking up on individuals who don't have the proper means to fight back...
What do you do if you're just on foot with a sword? The mounted archers keeps circling around you, shooting from every angle. That's my Mount&Blade (persistent world mod) experience at least.

Being on a horseback is beneficial enough. It doesn't need you to be able to hit your enemy from every distance.
Although in other contexts like "Napoleon Wars" or "Persistent Frontier" mounted pistol wielders were quite fun. But in that game everyone has a pistol or musket.

[Risky]

There are 2 threats to the mounted archer.

Longbows/long range crossbows
Heavy 2 handed units (halberd, axe, billhook)

The only reason why people would complain about the mounted archer is because they wanna be swordsmen.

[Siegbert]

The only reason why people would complain about the mounted archer is because they wanna be swordsmen.

Well, we can't all be ranged classes, can we?

[Apep]

Wouldn't be threatened by any group, not just a group of mounted archers, if you travel the countryside alone with no ranged weapons too?

I imagined they'd need balancing in group vs group combat.

[Risky]

The only reason why people would complain about the mounted archer is because they wanna be swordsmen.

Well, we can't all be ranged classes, can we?

No of course not. I highly doubt cav are gonna be in the game as it'll be too unfair for newbies and new server players. You could make the upkeep as difficult as you want, there will be a point where certain people will find a way to maintain a horse as well as balance all there other needs.

Unless the developers put in a progressively more difficult mechanic in for horse owners, which would then make horses obsolete, I doubt we'd see horses in the game as it'll make things too unbalanced whichever way it goes.

[Risky]

Wouldn't be threatened by any group, not just a group of mounted archers, if you travel the countryside alone with no ranged weapons too?

I imagined they'd need balancing in group vs group combat.

Yes balancing will be very important. I have a sneaky suspicion that most would go for the heavy sword and shield unit.

As a result my my ideal class would be the longbow and the short sword and just go for speed and discretion.

[Siegbert]

Of course we will see horses in the game. We actually already do, they're just not mountable as of yet.

[Calinir]

What absolute nonsense.
Of course there will be both mounted archers and lancers/swordsman.
Have you even seen the loading screens, cavalry will be a major part of combat.

There will be formations and abilities to kill horses.

Seriously have you guys even played the game yet?
Under the combat skills tab there are multiple skill regarding mounted combat, ie. Warhorse handling etc.
Also under spear skill one of the benefits at higher levels is formation of a spear wall which will seriously damage or kill cavalry if they run into it.

Both are planned and should definitely be in the game.
They will be powerful but there will be ways to counter them with skills and planning.

[Apep]

Imo, if horses will be expensive to obtain and maintain, and would be killable in battle, I think people would seriously consider if they bring their horse to fights.

Seriously have you guys even played the game yet?
Under the combat skills tab there are multiple skill regarding mounted combat, ie. Warhorse handling etc.
Also under spear skill one of the benefits at higher levels is formation of a spear wall which will seriously damage or kill cavalry if they run into it.

Both are planned and should definitely be in the game.
They will be powerful but there will be ways to counter them with skills and planning.

I do not own the game yet (waiting for my monthly paycheck), and I have found no mentioning of mounted archery on the game wiki, neither at the mounted combat page, nor at the ranged combat page, and I found no results of this topic when searching through the forums, as I stated in my opening post.

[Mortimer]

Everything will become a commodity at some point in time, sure you might have that thought when you have 2 horses in your stables, at the point when you will have 20 you won't notice that loss anymore.

[Calinir]

Everything will become a commodity at some point in time, sure you might have that thought when you have 2 horses in your stables, at the point when you will have 20 you won't notice that loss anymore.

Sorry if my post sounded somewhat aggressive but it wasn't aimed at you in any event.
You asked a valid question, the answer to which should be given by an actual Dev.

What gets me steamed is other people trying to claim that an entire fundamental core aspect of this game shouldn't be included simply because they don't like it due to it conflicting with their preferred playstyle.
They always scream it will unbalance the game (which it won't if implemented correctly and with counters as is already planned)

I absolutely detest when people are too lazy or biased to even contemplate a system because they simply want their own playsyle to be the focus.

Finally balance doesn't and shouldn't mean everything will be equally good in every situation as everything else, rather it means that each playstyle has the ability to counter another if their skills are used correctly and they use some brainpower.
Ie make a shield wall/spear formation, have foot fighters with range ability in a group.

[Mortimer]

My problem with mounted archery is that being a berzerker type footman I wouldn't have enough skills to get archery, and I doubt throwing weapons would be good enough to deal with mounted archers. Basically nullifying my playstyle entirely.

But I'm Not against putting that in the game. My playstyle will be countered and I'm sure so would the mounted archer be.

Right now, looking at the skills though there is no mention of mounted archery.

[Apep]

@Calinir

I didn't find your answer agressive at all; exactly the reason why I mentioned balance issues, because in games where there is horse archery, I either found it too overpowered (in Mount and Blade, imo) or too underpowered (Skyrim), but it's certainly one of my favourite playstyles, followed up by light cavalry and then heavy cavarly. (Yes, I'm THAT much of a cavalry fan! )
On a second note, medieval steppe cultures are one of my favourites (tatars, khazaks, mongols, kipchaks, pechenegs, magyars, etc), so whenever possible I seek to try out the closest thing possible in games.


Back on the topic of mounted archery, I was wondering that in order to avoid any problems at all, the devs decided to remove it, or it's so far away in development that it's not even mentioned yet.

[Siegbert]

What gets me steamed is other people trying to claim that an entire fundamental core aspect of this game shouldn't be included simply because they don't like it due to it conflicting with their preferred playstyle.
They always scream it will unbalance the game (which it won't if implemented correctly and with counters as is already planned)

I absolutely detest when people are too lazy or biased to even contemplate a system because they simply want their own playsyle to be the focus.

I guess, that's addressed at me...

I would argue for mounted archery if I found it to be a common thing in the age the game appears to be set in (which would be high to late middle ages).
It was common practice among nomadic people from the East to have mounted bowmen which apparently became obsolete once armor among Western armies got better.
Also they did not aim to kill precisely. They would rather shoot in the air from afar to let many arrows rain down on the enemies.

In a game you would rather ride towards your enemy, aim and shoot at specific individuals.

In later middle ages mounted xbow men became a thing. I would be okay with that actually as it takes a while to reload. Also you don't typically shoot that while riding. You need to stand still.

[Calinir]

My problem with mounted archery is that being a berzerker type footman I wouldn't have enough skills to get archery, and I doubt throwing weapons would be good enough to deal with mounted archers. Basically nullifying my playstyle entirely.

But I'm Not against putting that in the game. My playstyle will be countered and I'm sure so would the mounted archer be.

Right now, looking at the skills though there is no mention of mounted archery.

This is exactly where customisation of skills would come in, you could chose to be an excellent melee character, in which case you would destroy a hybrid character in toe to toe melee combat (if your player skills are sufficient) but for that advantage you would be sacrificing the ability to fight back against mounted archers.

On the other hand, if you chose to drop some melee and take some archery then you'd be able to fight back against mounted archers however you'd probably not be able to take on a pure melee build and win without some miracle (or if you opponent was really lacking in player skill)

It's all about choosing, you should NOT be good in every situation and there will be times when other will beat you because you're unlucky to run into an enemy who's specialized against your weaknesses.
That's what makes a fun, diverse and interesting game.

Being able to win in outright in every situation makes for a bland experience.

I'm not saying melee players should be able to do something.
For instance horses should be terrible on mountainous terrain and there should be an ability to pull a horseman off if he's below a certain speed.
Also with the terraforming I can easily imagine a scenario where melee players lure mounted players into a pit and kill them once they're stuck if they fall in.
So using terrain and brainpower should always be an option.

However on flat terrain against a purely melee skilled character, mounted horsemen should dominate, unless the melee fighter is extremely good at using terrain or the horseman makes some stupid choices and gets dismounted.

[Calinir]

What gets me steamed is other people trying to claim that an entire fundamental core aspect of this game shouldn't be included simply because they don't like it due to it conflicting with their preferred playstyle.
They always scream it will unbalance the game (which it won't if implemented correctly and with counters as is already planned)

I absolutely detest when people are too lazy or biased to even contemplate a system because they simply want their own playsyle to be the focus.

I guess, that's addressed at me...

I would argue for mounted archery if I found it to be a common thing in the age the game appears to be set in (which would be high to late middle ages).
It was common practice among nomadic people from the East to have mounted bowmen which apparently became obsolete once armor among Western armies got better.
Also they did not aim to kill precisely. They would rather shoot in the air from afar to let many arrows rain down on the enemies.

In a game you would rather ride towards your enemy, aim and shoot at specific individuals.

In later middle ages mounted xbow men became a thing. I would be okay with that actually as it takes a while to reload. Also you don't typically shoot that while riding. You need to stand still.

I would totally agree with your suggestion for mounted crossbowmen needing to stop to reload or otherwise having terrible wobble and poor aim while riding, possibly even needing to dismount to reload, unless they were using an extremely light and low strength crossbow.

As for mounted archers, I think the key thing is that they need to be realistically implemented.
Only shortbows should be capable of being used from horseback, which the option to use asymmetrical bows if a large amount of skill points are sunk into the skill branch.
The final skill with max points could be a Parthian shot, shooting behind oneself but only at a maximum use of skill points (100 In the last skill of the branch)
Regular players who want to be effective on foot as well as mounted shouldn't have access to those kind of high end bows and skills.
This would make the true mounted archers very specialized but also very narrow in their advantage, they wouldn't be effective in forests or mountains and if dismounted they would be at a major disadvantage, if not easily killed outright.
Also collisions at high speed with static objects like trees, rocks and buildings should both dismount a player and heavily injure the horse.

[Apep]

I saw that there'll be composite bows in the game, which suits the mounted archery combat style perfectly.

On the subject of precision shooting: No kind of ranged weapon was meant to be used for precision shooting, volleys were always dominant in each and every kind, same goes for crossbows, longbows, shortbows, composite bows too.

[Camelmountain]

IF I HAVE A BOW, CAN I USE IT? OR is it not working?