Life is Feudal Official Forum

[Rheinhardt]

I've spent quite a large part of the last few weeks playing LiF as a part of a mid-size settlement, and one thing we've come to agree on is that Move Out, in its current state, is broken. Case in point; an attempt to raid a neighbor 'Indian-Style' with a stripped-down archer wearing only a simple bow was met by a Royal Chain-wearing sword and shield infantryman. After exhausting my arrows, I hit the flee button and expected to vanish into the forest. Not so! Having grouped another member of his village, the warrior was able to freely use Move Out whenever it suited him as a personal speed boost with his compatriot behind his walls. Without Move Out, he was constantly stopping to catch his breath and was easy to keep a distance from, even to shoot at. With Move Out, he over-ran a speed 100 character. While my flee command had a long cooldown, Move Out could be used several times over. Needless to say, although I ran in straight lines and dragged him across half the map, he was able to eventually kill me.

Now before anyone dismisses this as sour grapes, consider if it is appropriate for top-tier metal armored soldiers to run down and kill naked players at 100 speed. This should be a feat only possible with horses or if the pursued make poor decisions or have empty hard stamina pools at the start.

Before suggesting solutions, I want to build consensus on the premise; should fully-armored individuals with Move Out be capable of chasing down any player who doesn't have Move Out? Does this not force all players seeking to PvP to acquire Move Out simply to be able to compete?

[Orsus]

Welcome to an Alpha game, sorry had to say it before someone else did.

It does sound like it needs the bonus reduced on move out and possibly the reuse timer increased a little bit.

[Rheinhardt]

I'm glad you got it out of the way. It is an alpha; hence the feedback.

I think Moveout should be a 'road march' skill, given as an order to the group at the start of a long trip, maintained as a buff so long as the troops do not draw weapons, and lost immediately when the players are hit, draw weapons, or the timer expires. This can be useful to either quickly charge across the open or travel a long way through the wilderness, but would no longer be useful as an in-combat speed bonus.

The bonus should only be half or so of the bonus that flee gives. I do not know the precise figures, but I presume flee is 25%, same as paved roads, so move out could add 10%, like clay pavement (ever elusive). This means move-out on a road has 35%, rather than 50%, which would be rather extreme.

[Ethanfloodworks]

move out is overpowered so you want to make naked men over powered instead? Move out takes a long time to invest in, you have to be in a unit, and it drains stamina. Even with it you said you ran the guy all over the map. With out move out, a character in armor has no defense against a raid from naked men and then no one wears armor anymore. By contrast having no armor is available to every troll that joins the server from the very start. I can't tell you how often I use move out to kill trolls that are bothering new players. Horses aren't in the game yet, so that suggestion means about as much as telling people they should only be able to go over walls with a siege ladder.The other thing is, you can use move out too, then the armored man won't catch you. So you are essentially complaining that you wanted to kill a better prepared opponent and weren't able to. Poor guy.

[Rheinhardt]

In order to defeat an opponent with move out, one has to have move out. That is why it is broken. It is as broken as adding a machine gun as a top-tier item; the only way to beat it is to have it, QQ that you haven't gotten a machine gun yet.

[Ethanfloodworks]

In order to defeat a weapon you need a weapon. It is a poor argument. I kill guys with move out all the time. They take two crossbow bolts just like the rest of us. Now if an armored guy runs away using it you will have a hard time catching him without it. But right now move out is the only option to stop the naked man blitz. A naked man should not be more powerful than an armored man, and once again everyone has access to move out, and crossbows, and two handed swords, and if they are added, machine guns.

And the more I read your story the less sympathy I have for it. Naked with a simple bow? there are only two reasons to do that, either you are trolling, or you aren't confident in your PVP so you are trying to loot deny. A simple bow costs what? Two plant fiber and a stick. That puts the targets of your "indian-style (troll-style) raids" at a huge disadvantage, they stand to lose everything and gain a simple bow. That is exactly what Move-out is for.

Even if you aren't a troll, and just new to PVP, what you are asking doesn't just weaken this enemy of yours, it strengthens the trolls on every server. They player who has invested more time and effort should have an advantage, over a newspawn.

[Rheinhardt]

Very well. Suppose the raider and victim has move out in its current incarnation. Naked raiding is deterred 90 skill points, and now the problem is even worse because you can't catch them. It remains broken because you have to have move out to PvP and you have only reinforced that. The real solution to the 'naked man blitz' is a weapon, preferably a crossbow, or a palisade and a crossbow. Telling all players to grind up Unit and Formation to have a chance to resist the other players grinding up Unit and Formation... how does that solve anything?

Let equipment weight and speed operate as intended without a mechanic that makes it irrelevant.

[Ethanfloodworks]

Equipment weight and speed do function as intended. If both characters are either buffed or not. If a naked man gets away from me using moveout fine, at least he has invested enough in the server to train up the skill, and he is playing with friends. Your method benefits only trolls. Why should only crossbow men be able to stop a naked man blitz? Melee fighters need moveout to be viable. Or every server turns into naked crossbow men, which is no fun.

[Rheinhardt]

Armed and armored men can easily kill 'naked man blitzers', they just can't catch them unless they take off the armor. I don't think you have a point anymore.

[Ethanfloodworks]

your point is that you want to be able to troll and loot deny players that spend time in the game, but they kill you, so you are mad. My point is that the system, as is, allows players who spend time in game to have an advantage over trolls. Rust is a great game for being able to arm up fast and troll. LIF is not, there are counters, Move out is one.

Why should our smiths find 100q ore, smelt it and forge it, while our farmers get the highest quality leather they can so that we can make a nice set of armor that takes hours of training to wear, only to have to take it all off to be able to compete with a freshspawn troll? Move-out exists to level that playing field and it works great.

Imagine you are on a server when a freshspawn comes over your walls, glitches into your house, grabs a bunch of stuff and runs off. The lone admin isn't online, or maybe it isn't against the rules to glitch. With move out you get our stuff back. Without it you lose progress.

And your argument that high-level pvp relies on move-out is silly. It also relies on weapons, should we take those away if all players don't have them? No, if you want to PVP with the big boys learn the big boy skills. If you just want to harass and troll them then they have move out to stop you.

[Rheinhardt]

You are making this a tremendously personal argument and assuming quite a number of false motives while ignoring the issue. If you don't have a valid argument to repudiate a point, don't make fallacious ones. The claim is that move out is too powerful; both relative to flee and in combat for overcoming armor encumbrance on the fly. Trolling, banditry, theft, grief, server rules, walls, skill investment; none of this has anything to do with the claim. Please stay on topic and impersonal.

[Ethanfloodworks]

I disagree, I think it is personal for you, because you died, and you are ignoring all the people on all the servers move-out helps. I haven't made any fallacious points, my arguments are valid and you have yet to show me why they aren't, and your reddit 101 style of argument isn't impressive. The scope of your claim is too narrow, of course if you ignore all of the skill's practical applications and only focus on the part you are upset about you will be able to make it look like a bad skill. Once again I can say "crossbows are bad because they do too much damage" but it isn't helpful then to dismiss claims that long reload time balance out the damage because it wasn't part of the original claim. All of the points I've brought up matter, they are the in game applications of the skill. Flee is a free skill that requires no time or investment, and move-out doesn't actually overcome armor encumbrance in a meaningful way unless you have the stats (again an investment) to do so. Have you ever tried using move out, the bonuses don't make much a difference if you don't have the stats. My guess is that your opponent had similar speed to you in armor because he had higher strength, and move-out was used mostly to offfset stamina penalties.

Simple question: why don't you just use move-out yourself?

I already know the answer, but maybe you should ask yourself.

[Xtream]

What if i play solo only?
I should never get away from a zerg?

[Rheinhardt]

Xtream, you would never be able to get away from a zerg, as they would have moveout and the solo player would not. You would have to rely on flee, which as it currently exists, is insufficient.

Crossbows do plenty of damage, when they hit / if you're expose to fire / since shields currently perform badly. This is why you should stay on topic rather than making strawmen; not all game mechanics are broken, so don't compare broken ones to mechanics with counters. Likewise horses will allow faster movement than anyone can hope to run, but a spear is a cheap, time-honored solution.

The fact that there are builds that combine moveout with crossbows and plate armor to create nearly uncatchable high-end raiders is another reason moveout is overpowered; without the skill they are too slow to flee a lightly-armored pursuit infantryman, with the skill they are untouchable. Unless, of course, that man has move out. Once again; it is a 90 point barrier to compete in PvP, ie, broken.

[W015]

I have to agree that move out is broken. The cost to wearing armor should be reduced movent. The benefit of course less damage taken. At the moment you can easily negate the cost using move out and high strength. At best move out should be an efficient way for Squads to gain some speed. It shouldn't be a sprint ability for heavily armored players. Naked players should move faster, as they have lowest defence or armor rating.

Realisticly plate armors should not be possible to use at high speeds, even with max strength.

One thing they should fix is to up plate mail weight, so that you had to have high strength to use it. Being a slow moving tank even then. Which is why plate armors in the medieval days were use by knights on horse back.

The cooldown on move out should be increase, maybe with some stam costs. That unarmed characters can't run away from a player wearing the equivalent to an iron stove is ridiculous. And naturally an unarmed character should move faster than one that is armed.

tldr: move out is too strong at the moment, my two cents

[Crushinator]

I agree that move-out should have a longer cooldown, but that isn't the only problem. I am involved with Battle of Nations which is modern medieval combat. We wear full armor and wield blunted weapons. Armor doesn't slow you down as much as y'all seem to think and I can easy sprint with people who wear nothing because I train in it. It is actually a pretty common misconception with armor. Now I can't run as fast for as long as a naked man could, but the real issue is that if I hit a naked man with a sword, he isn't going to be okay. At the very least he won't be running again, at worst he will be dead.

So what should be changed is a longer cooldown period on Move-out, but naked men should take way more damage,like a lethal amount. And without armor you should receive a debuff, like crippled, that drastically slows your movement speed. That way the armored man can't abuse the skill but the naked man can't troll him either. This makes things realistic for all parties. Move-out is slowed and attacking naked is no longer an option, as it truly wouldn't have been.

Also if you play alone in LIF you are always at a disadvantage and I believe that is how the Devs intended it.

[Rheinhardt]

I will agree with you to a point, Crushinator, that armor does not hinder a person as much as some believe. Arma and other schools of European martial arts have taught me this much, including stories of a knight who, advertising an armorer's superb harnesses, would perform minor acrobatics and climb the undersides of ladders backwards. You grant that full armor will hinder a man compared to plainclothes for longer periods of effort, and this is also plainly apparent. I think for a historical precedent we can look to the first formations of Roman velites, formed ad-hoc out of young, fit men who abandoned their armor for a target shield, sword and javelin. The real solution to a 'naked man' is a well-equipped 'naked man', equipped as best as he can be without losing top speed; not a mechanic that lets a fully-armored infantryman chase him down.

Receiving damage of any sort could cause a 'shocked' debuff, say a second or two of 5% speed reduction, while strikes to the foot or legs could cause a longer-lasting 10% reduction. This would be enough to force a turn-and-fight response against pursuers or prevent running around in the general melee; a player fleeing could also score a hit to his opponent's leg before making a break for it. I recall a certain game's "Hamstring" ability that let a melee class keep a target in range during combat.

Move-out's cooldown could be longer, but as a road-march skill for groups that may not solve it. I've outlined it before, but to reiterate; move-out could make all party members in 10 meters receive the buff, putting all their weapons away regardless of combat or normal stances. The buff goes away after a minute or if any weapons are drawn. In this way you might burn it to catch up and strike a target once, but would be waiting a long while to use the buff again.

[Crushinator]

Getting hit with a weapon by a trained martial artist, while naked, doesn't leave you with a 5% reduction to move though, it leaves you dead or wounded so bad you are crawling. The recent buff to damage was good but I think we need a severe buff against unarmored opponents, even light leather makes it hard for a sword to cut you and changes the damage to blunt force. But a naked guy should either die, or be left worthless from a sword strike. Otherwise I agree that moveout is the best way to deal with trolls, especially back when pitchforks were OP. Naked man still is, and always has been OP.

[Rheinhardt]

The balance between realism and gameplay is one I'm well familiar with as a retired developer for Project Reality. Realism would be one stab wound to the chest being fatal over the next week; where we compromise is the question.

The problem is that I don't think there is a way to increase weapon damage specifically against an unarmored target without another round of increases overall. I think once the armor weight penalties are reduced by skill points, as currently not implemented, we will find the speed difference between a brand new character and a lightly-armored veteran is negligible to non-existent. Someone trained up in padded or leather with a sword should have no trouble at all dispatching the sort of grief-raider people seem concerned with.

Specific values of speed debuffs for being struck are not in question, the concept is in question. If taking damage reduced speed momentarily, it would lock two melee combatants into combat in a way that currently doesn't exist. At what value do you think that is achieved, or do you think it unworkable?

[Orsus]

So I did some reading up on the move out ability. Apparently it requires you to be in a group, which has been mentioned previously, and it is supposed to require different player (other than the one activating the ability) in the unit to be in the formation with the unit leader (more players from that unit in the formation the more powerful the buff becomes) for it to buff the players speed.

So it does appear to be bugged ATM. From the description of what happened the armoured player was receiving the speed bonus, without anyone in his formation as required by the abilities description.

It is described in the http://lifeisfeudal.com/mmorpgsandLiF/S ... -is-Feudal

That is if I read it correctly.

Also as pointed out, about the only reason to go naked into combat against an armoured opponent if to be able to kite the player. To counter that all the player needs to do is to equip a ranged weapon as well. From there the naked player is toast.

[Falcion]

From my perspective there are several things that will need to be fixed to make this all work. And they would have to be fixed all at once to not challenge the balance we have now.

Things that need to be fixed:
* Move out and other formations- working only if other people from he group are in the formation
* Damage - Rebalanced for no armor vs.. armor
* Speed with full inventory - speed should also be reduced when inventory is being filled. Now a thief caught red handed and naked will run like a wild horse and outrun a person in leather armor that has nothing else in backpack.
* Mounted combat to deal with crossbow "Indians" attacking forts
Rebalanced the combat skill tree - light armor's -> heavy armor's, lighter weapons - heavy weapons (sword - two handed sword)
* Crossbows at the end of range combat!!! (please why did Indians use bows? Did they invented and used crossbows before and decided bows were better? )



Idea for rebalance of armor vs. no armor:
no armor 150-200% dmg
padded - 100%
leather - 70-80%
chain - 50-60%
scale - 40-50%
plate 35-45% or 30-40%

That is the overall dmg you do meaning if I can hit for let's say 50 I will do
no armor - 100 dmg
padded - 50
leather - 35-40
chain - 25-30
scale - 20-25
plate 15-20

Then goes the armor vs.. dmg type ;et's say a plate would go like this
+80% armor vs.. slash
-20% vs.. pierce
- 60% vs.. blunt
(also add novice vs. royal armor differences I won't debate on those currently)
So we had a basic of 50 hit a plate that reduced it to 15-20
Now we have
slash 3-4 dmg
pierce 18-22 dmg
blunt 24-32

Now we have the balance. At the same time giving armored people a good defense against the attacker if he's not using a designated weapon for the armor, and the increase dmg when dealing with those who try to counter the weapons with their constitution. I believe in a high penalty for a person who tries to block a sword with his arm. At the same time armored person should not be forced to hide from bow made with a grass string.
of course it can hurt him but it will take a lot of effort to actually bleed out an armored giant with that pea shooter.

It should also work for even for crossbows or we'll have a bunch of naked crossbowmen who will run fast and hit hard. I believe this will be the hardest to manage in the game.

[Arrakis]

Please report this issue via mantis bugtracker: how-to-properly-report-bugs-t2222/