"Some Necrosavants"

[hruza]

Sekata wrote:

1. Mercenaries are not a common enemy. The player usually does not encounter them often over the course of the game. When I have, I see maybe 2 crossbowmen?

They are enemy you will encounter at one point or another. What will you do then? And I have faced mercenary companies with 3 or 4 ranged units.

Sekata wrote:

2. I use a counter archer with anticipation, dodge, heavy points in initiative/ranged def and bow specialty. That role has frequently been killed by concentrated fire. More often, the counter archer in training gets killed before getting specced and the process starts all over again.

Single ranged brother is bit too little for this and specializing him in single role seems like a waste anyway. If you want to counter enemy ranged with your own ranged, you need to bring more. I train all my ranged units as a second line fighters who can switch to pikes or long axes. That gives me some flexibility.

Sekata wrote:

3. More on perfect generation, it’s not infrequent for maps to generate with the backline marksmen simply given the high ground.

It’s equally frequent to generate maps where your back line is on the high ground. It’s not that maps are unfair to player.

Sekata wrote:

It used to be that if you moved out of range, the markesmen would chase and expose themselves. I have not seen that in recent patches.

They still do once you kill one or two of his troops. AI seems to like to turtle but if you manage to score few hits, it will try something. I saw it send few melee forward to threaten me -so much better, I just pull back a little while puncturing them will arrows. In other occasions I saw AI ranged to step forward exposing themselves.

In any case, if AI turtles, that’s a good thing. I can pick his front troops at a leisure. Then just charge once he is down in numbers. But I saw that happen only when I had just single ranged in company. If you bring more, AI will eventually do something.

Sekata wrote:

So in a situation where by diceroll 3-4 marksmen are shooting you from high ground and your own ranged troops don’t have the range to counter, what are you proposing to do?

First, look for weak spots of his line which are not cowered by his range. Second, look if you can attack from angle which obstructs his view/fire. I had battle were raiders spawned on a hill 4 tiles high with 3 ranged units. I got one brother wounded right at the start, before I could even move. What I did was to leave one merc just outside of his range and send rest circling to the left where I first scouted suitable terrain. I was able to approach his position from there and get up to level with him before he could use his ranged effectively. Once on the hill I also charged brother which was left in place to effectively flank and threaten his ranged once he rearranged his troops to face mine coming from his right. At the end I was able to win without loosing anybody. Of course with some luck, but loosing brothers here and there is simply part of this game, you can’t expect otherwise. You have to accept fact, that you will loose brothers. Otherwise it is impossible to play this game. That bye the way means that you shouldn’t treat (and develop) your brothers as irreplaceable. You always should have other brothers who can fill up his place in a battle line. If you don’t you have to hire them.

Also there are fights which you simply are not meant to fight. If odds are against you, retreat to fight another day. Most of my disasters have happened when I have decided to push my luck too far and fight against superior enemy thinking that I might just pull it off.

Sekata wrote:

4. Bringing kite shields is fine in theory, but it also means that once your shields are engaged in melee combat (where your frontline spends most of its time) they have sacrificed a major stat to deal with the skirmish phase. So it basically boils down to pick your death, ranged or melee. In a scenario where your entire frontline has kite shields, but you don’t have a capable archer/marksmen with bullseye and a few more levels, you’re in for a slogfest with a high chance of losses one way or another.

Alternative is to get pelted by the arrows. Which is much worst. besides nobody said that you have to fight whole time with shields, if you want, you can carry secondary 2H weapon and switch once in melee. However bandits are not particularly tough enemy, with exception of their leaders so you don’t really need that much punch to deal with them. And every archer or crossbowman they have is one less melee fighter you will face.

Sekata wrote:

5. Bandit marksmen lack armor, but I’ve mentioned that they have rotation. The AI is smart and crossbowmen usually take cover. When caught, they often rotate out.

You have to engage his melee fighters otherwise AI is smart to protect their archers and will send melee fighters against your flanker. When you catch his ranged without melee nearby, they can’t rotate.

Sekata wrote:

On top of that, any single brother attempting to close with backline marksmen is usually focus fired and rendered incapable of safely chasing. Bandit Marksmen have high initiative, so it’s extremely difficult for an armored brother with a kite shield to actually catch up before being intercepted

That’s why he carries kite shield. Besides, he doesn’t have to necessarily catch his ranged. His main purpose is to threaten his ranged, forcing them out of their cower, exposing them to your ranged, forcing them to waste their APs moving instead of shooting. Aimed bow shot and reload/shot of the crossbow takes full 9 APs. If you force him to move just one tile, you robed him of one shot. Sure, he can still take unaimed shot or shoot and reload his xbow next move. But that’s shot with lower damage and accuracy with bow and one less shot for crossbow in the long run.

Don’t just rush strait for his ranged, move to the position where you can catch him the next move and he will be forced to react, or get caught next turn. Use opportunity as it presents.

And if enemy focus fire your brother, so much better. I rather have them shoot at heavily armored guy with the kite shield rather then one of my more vulnerable ones. If enemy have lot of ranged, send more brothers.

Sekata wrote:

I’ve frequently been in engagements where the enemy raiders have a frontline with shields and chainmail. Raiders have a chance of spawning with leather armor, but they also have a chance of spawning with very good equipment. I build my essential ranged units with ranged defense and anticipation, but have still had some 1st round killed by 3-4 marksmen that were given high ground on spawn. This is a complete diceroll. It’s completely down to chance. A gamble.

But that’s what this whole game is based on :) A dice rolls. All you can do is to make sure odds are as much in your favor as possible. As I said before, you have to accept that you will have losses in this game. Developers have stressed as much.

Sekata wrote:

I’ve also been in situations where i’ll move a unit into a brush for cover and an enemy archer will still target him. The last time there was no brother on any adjacent tile. He hadn’t made an active move after moving into the bush and so shouldn’t have been visible. He was still shot.

I don’t know how “hiding” mechanics works in game, I expected hidden brothers to be invisible just like his units are to me. Was there some dev blog about hide mechanics? Myself I would be interested in this. I didn’t utilize hiding to much so far as it is very situational but I was planing to explore it bit more.

Sekata wrote:

Most of your counter play scenarios require time to implement (leveled brothers), or perfect generation circumstances i.e a poorly equipped bandit frontline. Bandit armies make up what, 40-60% of engagements in battle brothers? Losing a level 6 to a backline of marksmen that spawned on a hill within 5 seconds of the first turn doesn’t do much for me.. Especially when there’s a chance of that happening every few quests/encounters given how often you fight bandits. I’ve defended some of the game design decisions myself. I’ve said before, I want to believe it’s balanced, but when all of the counterplay for a given enemy requires perfect generation circumstances, unlikely given their frequency, you’re gambling and not gaming.

There is chance of loosing any of your brothers in any fight. Hit from 2H raider axe can end your lvl. 6 brother just as good as crossbow bolt. It’s not that crossbows have some insane uncommon damage or accuracy. And raiders, their ranged units including are by far not the toughest opponents out there.

Sekata wrote:

The frequency with which bandit marksmen spawn, their high lethality, the lack of logistical concerns from AI camps means that just by simple eventuality they’ll kill a high level brother and turn the game into a grindfest of attrition. That wouldn’t be so bad if it didn’t take hours to retrain brothers to be prepared for more dangerous enemies in the endgame.

AI can’t pick their fights, you can. Not all but most. That’s major advantage to your favor. One of the more entertaining aspects of the game is to learn what certain enemies are worth of by engaging them for the first time and getting my ass wiped out because I was unprepared. Fighting bandits will not make you prepared to fight goblins. Fighting goblins will to prepare you to fight orcs. And so on. Fact that each faction is very unique not just in their look and equipment but also fighting stile and AI is one of the strongest points of this game.

[Namespace]

hruza wrote:

I don’t know how “hiding” mechanics works in game, I expected hidden brothers to be invisible just like his units are to me. Was there some dev blog about hide mechanics? Myself I would be interested in this. I didn’t utilize hiding to much so far as it is very situational but I was planing to explore it bit more.

They are hidden unless they attack, which un-hides them for the remainder of the turn. You can also see them if they are engaged in melee.

Anyways, you are talking about late-game and sekata is talking about early game if I understand that correctly.
Sure if I already have brothers in heavy armor and my 3-4 archers have 20-30 ranged def with Anticipation they don’t pose that much of a threat anymore. It’s just that early they pose a really big threat but even later the lucky headshot can still happen.
Generally crossbows are the most dangerous weapons in the game because of how little counter play there is for them. Master Archer with warbow is hardly a threat. Same for goblin ambushers. But beware the lucky shot from an Overlord!
Yes, 2-Handed weapons are dangerous too but at least you can counter play with stuns or overwhelm, knockback etc or simply retreat.

[Sekata]

I didn’t say the archer was my only counter. I said he was the specialized counter, I bring crossbowmen as well. The counter archer is a specialist, and I find a well built one to be great for taking out marksmen as well as unarmored units.

Mercs are only ever encountered during missions with clear skull difficulty ratings. Tell me this @hruza: how often have you been attacked on the worldmap by a roaming band of mercenaries outside of any quest event? Does it happen often? By the time you’re righting mercs, you’re usually well equipped to handle them. When you aren’t the event option tells you that you can walk away. Missions that involve bandits are absolutely dependent on engagement. Missions that involve merc events do not. Even if I haven’t been, I’ve been pretty fine with it. They are not every other battle, and usually spawn with nets instead of shields.

We haven’t even talked about numbers yet. So @hruza, how often have you been able to field 15 soldiers instead of 12 to make up for the roles you replaced with crossbowmen? Crossbowmen who, are pretty likely to get 1-shotted by the enemy crossbowmen (perks and all) until they can get to a ripe old level? Never? Shame. This raider defense mission has protection target locations pretty close by, so you’re looking at a 12 vs 22 with 6+ crossbowmen. Damn you world gen rng. I know, you can walk away. The other issue just comes to the fore. On the spectrum of gaming vs gambling, I like video games that reward good play. There is no amount of good play to account for high initiative 6+ marksmen and unfortunate world gen in the early game.

The enemy can and does pick battles. Are you telling me that every single pack of direwolves/bandits/orcs runs straight for you? Absolutely not. Some do and some don’t. That suggestion is a bit silly.

I stand by every single point that I’ve made. My guy might get 1-shotted by a 2h or an orc. That’s fine, I accept and expect it. 2h are usually named enemy units or fallen heroes-high tier units. Berserkers are pure damage/no armor. They run straight at you and have to close to do anything. Marksmen are way more common. 2h and orcs actually have to close with you to do damage, and can very easily be focus fired themselves. Even then they start some distance away and you have a turn or two to stack odds in your favor with proper positioning. Maybe take the high ground. They don’t have ridiculously high initiative like marksmen do to move before anyone else does. Sometimes your soldier isn’t just wounded in that 1st round. Sometimes he’s outright killed. No time to move out of range. Raider frontline is not always unshielded either, so the “Pick off his frontline” is not always an option.

In the current build, enemy raiders usually move to cover exposed marksmen. Not every time, but often, so the claim that they often expose themselves needlessly is complete bunk. With the nerf to bullseye that makes it fairly difficult for your own backline marksmen to take out the priority units. When they don’t move into cover or have high ground they usually have allied cover. Maybe in 1-3 fights I’ll see an archer remain exposed for a few turns, but not too often.

I have argued the point you are making here on the forum. This game is about stacking the odds in your favor. It’s in my forum account history. I’ve also said that you will take losses, here and on other threads. The devs have stressed it. I have too. Again, not the issue. Stop assuming that because I dislike an enemy type that I can’t handle the game. It’s condescending as hell and will instantly turn me into a giant douche-bag. Most of the things in the game can be future proofed against. A shield brother with a shield wall has a heightened chance to at least hold the line against a 2h character. An unshielded character getting rapid fired by high initiative crossbowmen 1st round hardly allows for counterplay. I understand that the map can turn just as often in your favor, but are the stakes for the AI in terms of time spent recovering from an encounter the same for the player? Absolutely not. It is in no way satisfying to take a bandit mission for 900 gold only to lose a brother that took 400 gold to hire and 12 battles to train. Losses are a part of the game. That’s fine. It’s annoying that it comes from one of the most common enemies in the game with high tier perks and rewards that are in no way proportional to the losses.

You still assume great circumstances too. Does the game always allow you to have kite shields, enough crossbows for a full crossbow backline, enough money to buy or replace them? Tools to get the ones you have up to snuff? No. No it does not.

I’m finding it fairly difficult not to type profanities into the reply box. Stop. Assuming. That. I. Can’t. Play. The. Game. Or. Take. Losses. Those aren’t the issues. To be clear, the strategies you’re mentioning work. I’ve used them. Some more than others (marksmen are seldom without cover). The risk involved with fighting a frequently appearing enemy that starts showing up in the early game is not proportional to the reward. That is my issue.

[hruza]

Namespace wrote:

They are hidden unless they attack, which un-hides them for the remainder of the turn. You can also see them if they are engaged in melee.

So letting them wait to act at the very end of the turn would grant them impunity? Unless enemy made their ranged wait as well (but then with their high initiative they would still act before you). Or will they be still exposed at the beginning of the next turn?

Namespace wrote:

Anyways, you are talking about late-game and sekata is talking about early game if I understand that correctly.

No, I am talking about early to mid game. Raiders are meant to be challenging early on. You aren’t supposed to plow through hordes or raiders and marksmen without effort. At last that’s what I think. later there are other challenges.

[Sekata]

hruza wrote:

Namespace wrote:

They are hidden unless they attack, which un-hides them for the remainder of the turn. You can also see them if they are engaged in melee.

So letting them wait to act at the very end of the turn would grant them impunity? Unless enemy made their ranged wait as well (but then with their high initiative they would still act before you). Or will they be still exposed at the beginning of the next turn?

Namespace wrote:

Anyways, you are talking about late-game and sekata is talking about early game if I understand that correctly.

No, I am talking about early to mid game. Raiders are meant to be challenging early on. You aren’t supposed to plow through hordes or raiders and marksmen without effort. At last that’s what I think. later there are other challenges.

We agree that they should be challenging. I’m not suggesting that they shouldn’t be. I am suggesting that one part of the bandit composition, marksmen with crossbow mastery, that can one shot level 6 brothers engagement after engagement given bad rng and effectively stunt the player’s growth/nullify all profits should be toned down since the AI does not have to work under the same restrictions. Or maybe don’t tone them down, but make them less common. I would be agreeable to that. Seeing “Bandit Marksmen” on the worldmap could mean fighting 3 guys with longbows, but it could just as easily mean 3 guys with mid tier crossbows and mastery perks.

Failing that there are other perfectly reasonable solutions. Make a separate classification so different ranged bandits are easier to identify from the world map, or make the risk when crossbowmen are involved worth the reward.

Overhype is absolutely amazing at what they do. They’re capable and the game is fairly decently balanced in its current state. Giant companies with insane budgets fail to balance triple A games properly and can spend years releasing incremental tweaks. I’m trying to understand why its so hard to believe that it’s at least possible that things should be tweaked in BB.

[hruza]

Sekata wrote:

I didn’t say the archer was my only counter. I said he was the specialized counter, I bring crossbowmen as well.

OK, I misunderstood you then. Still, I wouldn’t encourage too much specialization in this game as a strategy. Of course you can do it just for fun of it. Certain level of specialization is necessary of course but too much will hurt you. Having pampered that one merc in to superman in some task just to see him die from lucky crossbow bolt in to the eye must be frustrating. And given nature of this game, he will inevitably catch one sooner or later. Or meet end in some other unfortunate way.

I like to equip my team for each specific battle and that requires certain level of versatility in brothers (and lot of inventory space for equipment). Sometimes I tend to bring only crossbows in to the fight, other time I like all bows (case with raiders). And all my ranged have to be competent in close combat as well. Usually as a second row with polearms or long axes. Or give them sword and shield when facing those damn goblins, because anybody without shield is near useless against them and exchanging fire with goblins is sure way to loose.

I also tend to build reserve, so I have brothers with different levels in learning circling in the battle. That way when I loose somebody, I don’t have to place fresh recruit in to his place and start from the ground. At last not all the time.

Sekata wrote:

Mercs are only ever encountered during missions with clear skull difficulty ratings. Tell me this @hruza: how often have you been attacked on the worldmap by a roaming band of mercenaries outside of any quest event? Does it happen often?

You can encounter mercs during several missions which can have one or two skulls. Notably carry package mission.

Sekata wrote:

We haven’t even talked about numbers yet. So @hruza, how often have you been able to field 15 soldiers instead of 12 to make up for the roles you replaced with crossbowmen?

I don’t know why developers decided to limit player to 12 on the battlefield. There might be some programing reasons. I think more would strain player from management point. However there are plenty of the times when you are facing less then 12 and it’s you who have advantage. So it’s sort of fair. I didn’t take on those huge noble armies so far and honestly seeing them few times in combat I don’t know how’s that even possible. But so far I don’t have 12 swords for hire in heavy armor, with legendary weapons and level 11 and above, so perhaps that’s how :)

Sekata wrote:

This raider defense mission has protection target locations pretty close by, so you’re looking at a 12 vs 22 with 6+ crossbowmen. Damn you world gen rng. I know, you can walk away.

Exactly, you can walk away ;) There will be another quest with only 6 raiders and locations not too close :) There’s very little penalty for failing missions. Except few, and in this particular case you would get small decrease in reputation with the settlement, and settlement would lack certain goods for some time.

Sekata wrote:

The enemy can and does pick battles. Are you telling me that every single pack of direwolves/bandits/orcs runs straight for you? Absolutely not. Some do and some don’t. That suggestion is a bit silly.

They can’t, you can outrun most of them. Exceptions are very rare.

Sekata wrote:

I stand by every single point that I’ve made. My guy might get 1-shotted by a 2h or an orc. That’s fine, I accept and expect it.

You just made me smile (in a good sense) :) Do you know that people in the Middle ages had considered crossbow to be “unfair” and “unsporty” weapon? Gutting each other with swords or axes, smashing skulls with clubs and maces, quartering people or burning on the stake (burning was actually considered good and clean death, which is why it was reserved for women), but crossbows? UNFAIR! Pope have it even outlawed at one point. At last in fights between Christians. For use against infidels it was OK.

Your attitude is pretty close to it. -I love level of historical authenticity in this game :D

Sekata wrote:

In the current build, enemy raiders usually move to cover exposed marksmen. Not every time, but often, so the claim that they often expose themselves needlessly is complete bunk. With the nerf to bullseye that makes it fairly difficult for your own backline marksmen to take out the priority units. When they don’t move into cover or have high ground they usually have allied cover. Maybe in 1-3 fights I’ll see an archer remain exposed for a few turns, but not too often.

They do expose themselves in my game. You need to have more then 2 ranged units however in my experience for that to happen. First they turtle, but once you kill few of his front liners, they tend to start acting more actively. They either send part of their force to charge you or they expose their ranged.

But as I said, if they don’t so much better. I can just pick his melee off one by one. Bringing spare ammo helps of course.

Sekata wrote:

Stop assuming that because I dislike an enemy type that I can’t handle the game.

I don’t assume anything and I newer said you can’t play. I just react to what you have written yourself. You expressed repeatedly that you have issue with bandit marksmen. That’s what I am discussing. I don’t face anything close to frustration you express when facing them. They are dangerous, but nothing exceptional. They did gave me trouble at the beginning when I had underestimated them, but since I learned the hard way not to ignore them, they’re manageable. I am trying to tell you how I do things, in order to fight them, and since I have nowhere as much trouble with them as you, means I must be doing something right.

[Sekata]

@hruza

Let me clarify. They aren’t units I can’t handle. I’ve gotten to the point in-game where they aren’t a concern across different campaigns. I have started and restarted so many games that I’m perfectly happy with my merc band being generically named “Battle Brothers”. My issue again is risk vs reward. For the damage that they stand to cause to your group they are seldom involved in quests that give comparable rewards. They are the BB equivilent of stepping on a lego piece when you wake up at night to use the restroom. I don’t hate them because they’re difficult. I hate them because they make the game unpleasant with the frequency that they spawn. You’re not doing anything that I’m not doing. I’ve said it once, I’ll say it again. “Just because I disagree with you on their balance does not mean that I’m bad at the game or can’t handle them.”

Let me put this in perspective for you.

I’d rather fight the 5 necrosavants on day 39 of a bad playthrough.

I’d rather fight the mercs.

I’d rather fight the 22 strong noble house unit.

I’d rather 5 geists scream at me and send my front line running.

I’d rather a goblin skirmisher 2-shot my heavy with a dagger.

I’d rather a necromancer buff a fallen hero and smash my front line apart.

I’d rather an orc warrior plow through my front line and 1-shot my pikeman.

I’d rather get up at night and step on a lego.

Because these things are not every other encounter, and their unit designations actually tells you clearly what equipment they have. Bandit marksmen are not impossible to handle, but they make early/mid game an unpleasant slogfest. More frustrating is the suggestion that the only way to deal with them is to use a single perk on every brother and play my game EXACTLY the way another player does.

The spawning rate of bandit marksmen takes the game from play and manage well to “pray and manage irritation” when the beginning of every fight starts with 5 of them killing one of your units even when the unit is just some level 1 farmer.

There are dangerous things I love in this game for their style and the dimension that they add. The fact that necromancers now have bodyguards is amazing. Between that and the fact that they can now buff zombies, they are actually dangerous in game. I love the ghoul rework, they can actually kill your units if you aren’t careful where before the enemy type was just boring as hell. I love orc berzerkers. If they get close enough to you and obliterate your brothers plate and all, it’s entirely your fault. 4-5 units killing me on spawn from bad map generation is something I love one hell of a lot less. Especially when I see them. Every. Other. Fight.

And no, you haven’t only been going off of what I’ve said. Several times I have said that handling them itself not the problem. Several times I have said that taking loses and managing risk are part of the game, and you’ve repeated them back to me as though the thought never crossed my mind. My issue is the frequency with they spawn and the risk vs the reward. The AI is not on an even playing field with the player and the field is not in the player’s favor in my mind. This game is not a history sim. It is a game, something designed and coded for entertainment. If I was entertained by gambling, I’d download poker. If I wanted a romp through history, I’d pick up a book. I’m sure a detailed search would show plenty of anachronisms, least of all being the designation of “knights” without lands or horses. We won’t even get into the giant green men running around cutting horses that you never see in half and the little ones riding wolves.

The game could stand for reasonable tweaks. I’ve seen worlds spawn where the most common or valuable trade good is peat. I’ve seen worlds spawn where the most expensive trade good is amber but every other village sells the same thing and it’s hard to get rid of. If villages spawn in one biome more than others, you’ll get a very one sided list of contracts and potentially enemy types. Games do not release in a perfect state. Not in the age of indies, early access, 3 man teams, and and titles that live on after the initial development phase through patches.

The entire reason i joined this forum was because I was under the impression that devs wanted feedback on features and balance. That’s exactly what I’m doing, and exactly what I’ll continue to do. If they decide that marksmen are exactly where they want them, then fine. Their authorial intent on tone and challenge trump every preference I or any other player has. Otherwise I’ll agree to disagree with you. The game needs a balance patch. I stand by that.

[Author]

Posts