PDA

View Full Version : Chivalry: Medieval Warfare - Thoughts and other things.



Cosm
17-10-2012, 07:34 PM
This game is not getting near enough attention, so hopefully I can spread the good word around here at least and give my impressions of the game so far, after 30 something hours.

So basically, Chivalry is a brutal FPSlasher; think Counter Strike/Battlefield set in the middle ages with an intense, deep melee system. It's multiplayer only, supporting up to 64-players (though these servers are rare and most battles tend to be around 16-24) and gametypes you'd find in any competitive game like this (deathmatch, TDM, team objective, last team standing, capture the flag, and soon a 1v1 duel mode). You pick from four classes:

Knight, the heavy, tank class. Slow, but good at absorbing damage, fighting at the front lines with powerful two-handed weapons or playing defensively with the largest shields.

Vanguard, the 'assault' class that wields large two-handed weapons with a ton of reach like the spear, bardiche, and claymore. They have a charge ability, where they can sprint and leap into battle with a devastating attack.

Man-at-Arms, a lightly armored but quick warrior, that wields one-handed weapons with or without a shield. This is the fastest class, and they're great at dancing around the knights and vanguards with their dodge ability, but if hit, die quick. My personal favorite so far.

Archer, the cowardly long-range class. Great at picking off enemies from afar and supporting a charging group of melee fighters. They can use bows, crossbows, and javelins with a shield, are appropriately weak at close range, and are generally great at being a nuisance . They have their uses for sure, but man do I hate these guys for picking me off in the middle of an awesome fight. I love to kill 'em though.

So that's a basic overview I guess. The gameplay itself is intense, mainly because you're constantly up in people's faces, fighting for your life, where mistakes are punished severely and timing is key. Ranged attacks are about what you'd expect (aim and fire), but melee combat is where this game is really focused, and it is awesome. You have four attacks; a horizontal slash which is the easiest to connect with, a stab/thrust that is generally the quickest and longest reaching, an overhead slash that can be tough to hit with but usually does the most damage, and a shove/kick/shield-bash used to interrupt your opponents and throw them off balance. These are slightly different depending on the weapon and class you're using however. All these attack can be chained together if timed properly to make for some devastating combo moves, feinted to throw your opponent off your timing, and moved around based on the direction you're aiming so you can batter time a swing (blocking is directional as well). It can feel somewhat random when first playing, but once you get used to it, it is anything but. I almost always know what mistakes I made in combat that got me killed, and I'm learning how best to exploit my opponents mistakes. It's one of those games that really gets your blood pumping and leaves you with battle shakes. This video explains it much better, and shows you what it looks like in practice.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=llnRxtazljg

Massive brawls with lots of people swinging are chaotic as hell though, as they should be.

So now that that's out of the way, here's what I think of the game so far: without a doubt the most fun I've had in a multiplayer game in a long time. The intensity of the battles, and the sense of progression that comes from learning how to handle different situations and perfectly time your attacks, rather than unlocks and ranks is really satisfying. These are present too though, but ranks are just numbers, and new weapons (which unlock based on the number of kills with that 'class' of weapon) vary only slightly, and don't offer advantages to players using them but new opportunities to try new styles of fighting. Basically, just use whatever weapon you like the most, and figure out it's advantages and disadvantages.

The overall atmosphere is awesome. Maps are designed in a way that they feel huge, but are sized well for the relatively small scale of the battles (compared to Mount & Blade). Objective matches shine here in particular; in one, as the rebel 'Mason Order', you must pillage a village, slaughtering peasants and burning down homes, before you move on to escort a ram to knock down the door of a looming castle, where, once inside, you have to kill the king (the middle ages were dark and brutal, and the game doesn't shy away from it). Sounds of battle constantly surround you; peasants scream in terror, warriors shout and taunt eachother (the voices are hilariously awesome by the way), and catapults fire off in the distance. The maps just look fantastic too, and are impressively varied.

Not sure what else to say, I've already typed more than I planned, but no doubt I didn't cover everything, so feel free to ask whatever. Inevitably the game will be compared to Mount & Blade and War of the Roses because of the setting, but I honestly have not played either enough to give a fair comparison. I hope some of you guys will check the game out, and give me a shout if you do. It's fun as hell.

A few more gameplay videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0kTAW-Un9o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ijb69jekYw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxFl4MNvdJs

TL;DR: Game is awesome, melee is awesome. Just... just watch the videos.

Edit: Missed RPS's article about it posted today, so I'm glad it's getting more attention than I thought, haha.

Patrick Swayze
17-10-2012, 08:56 PM
I was going to ask if its better than War Of The Roses but you havent played...

Patrick Swayze
17-10-2012, 09:04 PM
I think Ultimately I'd like to know which is the mechanically sounder of the two games.

Watching the videos of Chivalry it looked a lil glitchy in its movements, almost reminding me of skyrim.

Cosm
17-10-2012, 09:06 PM
Yeah, unfortunately I haven't played Roses yet, but Total Biscuit put up a comparison video today actually.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73Q7FETIxZw

gundato
17-10-2012, 10:00 PM
Well, I think TB may have sold me on getting Chivalry as well. I like War of the Roses, but it definitely is floaty and is VERY dependent on grinding to unlock the better stuff.

Also, those morally ambiguous objectives (or objectives period :p) entices me.

alset85
17-10-2012, 10:16 PM
Well, I think TB may have sold me on getting Chivalry as well. I like War of the Roses, but it definitely is floaty and is VERY dependent on grinding to unlock the better stuff.

Also, those morally ambiguous objectives (or objectives period :p) entices me.

I think Chivalry is more grindy than WotR, so if that's a problem for you ....

Cosm
17-10-2012, 10:46 PM
I think Chivalry is more grindy than WotR, so if that's a problem for you ....

What makes you say that? It doesn't feel grindy to me at all really. At least, I never felt like I was using something just to unlock something else. I like the mace, so I used the mace, and after 25 kills or so with it, unlocked the next mace. Weapons are the only thing to unlock, save for the alternate helmet, so I just felt rewarded for focusing on a certain weapon type. I mean I guess it's technically grinding, but I never felt like I was going out of my way to unlock the next weapon I suppose.

gundato
17-10-2012, 11:07 PM
Yeah, my point is more that new players are SEVERELY disadvantaged against veterans in Roses. The video makes it look like a lvl 1 stands a decent chance against a lvl 500 in Chivalry. Could be wrong though

Cosm
17-10-2012, 11:27 PM
Yeah, I would definitely agree with that. Weapons are all about your fighting style really. Each has pros and cons depending on your situation. I still use the first mace sometimes because it is faster than the second, and has longer reach than the third. As far as I can tell, every weapon type is essentially like this.

Protoman
18-10-2012, 12:47 AM
I like it more than WotR (albeit I haven't played it much, but the ~30 minutes I l played weren't as good as chivalry, also no ponies) and better than mount and blade (I like the blocking mechanics way better than MnB's, also no ponies.)
I think I may play quite a bit of this before I'm done with it.
Seriously, the fact that it's infantry only alone makes it way better than MnB and WotR in my opinion. I hate ponies. Also the objective mode is really fun (you get to pillage a village, burning it down and slaughtering screaming peasants... wow, that sounds kind of grotesque when you type it out doesn't it?)


I think Chivalry is more grindy than WotR, so if that's a problem for you ....
How? Today I unlocked the highest tier of greatsword on the vanguard, and It took like 2-3 hours to unlock the entire tree. Not to mention I didn't even use it, and kept running my claymore.
And it wasn't like "I've got to use my greatsword to unlock the next tier!" it was more "oh, look, I got a new greatsword! Cool!"

celt
18-10-2012, 05:48 PM
I'm interested in getting a 4-pack of Chivalry on GamersGate. Using the IGN discount it comes to 15.94 each. It's a Steamworks game. I'd take 2 of the 4, so I need 2 other people that are interested. As usual with such things, it has to be first come, first served. If interested, email me at the.celt@comcast.net and please pay regular attention to your email after that until complete. Once paid, I'll probably just copy 'n' paste the Steam code and send it via email unless you prefer the GamersGate gifting system.

I like what I'm hearing about this game! =)

Spider Jerusalem
18-10-2012, 06:08 PM
I was going to ask if its better than War Of The Roses but you havent played...
approximately 40 infinity better than wotr.

i love this game to pieces. it's brutal, it's fun, it's team-centric, there's a yell button, and the community seems pretty chill from my experiences during beta and now after launch. the unlocks come at a good pace, basically serving as a hands-on weapon tutorial and then you move on to the next (if you choose). the classes feel quite different. you feel slow and tankish as a knight, and nimble and dodgy as one of the nimble/dodgy gits, etc.

great game.


I think Chivalry is more grindy than WotR, so if that's a problem for you ....
huh? you've got to get to about lvl 40 (?) or so before things get interesting with wotr's unlocks (or at least that's how it was in beta). there's a huuuuuge entry barrier. i unlocked everything (and i mean everything) on chivalry in one play session of 4 hours. and that was including the things i had no interest in using (and were completely avoidable).

the main difference is that i can choose what unlock to work towards. if i want the t3 spear, i use spears until i get it. i don't have to go through 20 shitty unlocks i don't care about to get the one i want (and it only takes a few rounds to get it).

Duckee
18-10-2012, 11:10 PM
The combat is quite good, but it irks me so much that everyone just flails around with 2handers. Then again why wouldnt they? Stupid things one shot you with the shafts and pommels, so wild flailing is too good to be true. Sigh.

It also has some annoying bugs with multiplayer, but I am sure they will be ironed out soon enough. I hope the same will happen to the 2 handers.

Shooop
18-10-2012, 11:23 PM
It's even less fluid and intuitive than Skyrim's combat. I know this is medieval combat, but everyone moves like they're underwater. It all comes down to people just running in circles swinging until they get lucky.

This was the worst $25 I've spent.

Patrick Swayze
18-10-2012, 11:46 PM
Okay, how does this compare with Dark Souls's's's's combat?

Protoman
19-10-2012, 04:33 AM
The combat is quite good, but it irks me so much that everyone just flails around with 2handers. Then again why wouldnt they? Stupid things one shot you with the shafts and pommels, so wild flailing is too good to be true. Sigh.

It also has some annoying bugs with multiplayer, but I am sure they will be ironed out soon enough. I hope the same will happen to the 2 handers.
In most of the games I've played, vanguards who mindlessly flail about end up killing a lot more of their own team members than the enemy team. On the other hand, when the enemy is trying that, it's easy as hell to counter, literally just parry then swing and they die in like 5 seconds.
Seriously though, if you're wielding a greatsword the worst thing you can do is to sideswing while your teammates are around. They WILL get hurt. I die from that way too often.


It's even less fluid and intuitive than Skyrim's combat. I know this is medieval combat, but everyone moves like they're underwater. It all comes down to people just running in circles swinging until they get lucky.

This was the worst $25 I've spent.
I've heard this said before, and I honestly wonder what game they're playing. It's like they give TF2 medieval to one person out of every hundred who buy it instead of the actual game or something.
Spamming does not work well in any situation. There is a button on the right side of your mouse. You should try using it.
The movements don't seem to have any difference to MnB/WotR footwork. I have no idea what you're talking about... Played like 8 hours now, I think I would have noticed something if it were bad enough to be "like everyone is moving underwater."

Shooop
19-10-2012, 01:52 PM
I've heard this said before, and I honestly wonder what game they're playing. It's like they give TF2 medieval to one person out of every hundred who buy it instead of the actual game or something.
Spamming does not work well in any situation. There is a button on the right side of your mouse. You should try using it.
The movements don't seem to have any difference to MnB/WotR footwork. I have no idea what you're talking about... Played like 8 hours now, I think I would have noticed something if it were bad enough to be "like everyone is moving underwater."

Are you another one of those "LOLLOLOL U JUS DUN KNOW HOW 2 PLAY!" jackoffs? Then I have nothing more to say to you because you're a flaming idiot.

The act of swinging a sword should never take as long as it does in this game. Especially if you're swinging it in a vertical arc thanks to the strange wonder called gravity. But yet everyone in this game swings a weapon no matter how heavy or light like they're stuck in perpetual slow-motion.

And people are spamming away with more success than anyone trying to use blocks and dodges - they throw attack after attack while moving back and forth until someone gets lucky and actually hits something. Blocking an attack doesn't help because by the time the attack animation is even half done, your enemy has already moved away or is now attacking again.

There is a brain in that large sphere-like object on top of your neck. You should try using that.

Cosm
19-10-2012, 03:50 PM
Anybody who watches any of the gameplay videos can see that what you're saying just doesn't make sense. Honestly you're the only person I've seen complain about the speed of swings. The guys that just spam slashes with their huge swords never come out on top on the scoreboard because blocking is way more effective than you make it sound, and you can't move away or attack again quick enough when blocked to make spamming effective. Generally these guys just murder their own teammates. No need to be so hostile either. It doesn't help get your points across, it just makes you look like a dick.

gundato
19-10-2012, 03:52 PM
You know what I miss? The Dark Messiah multiplayer. It was simple, but surprisingly fun.

Shooop
19-10-2012, 04:34 PM
Anybody who watches any of the gameplay videos can see that what you're saying just doesn't make sense. Honestly you're the only person I've seen complain about the speed of swings. The guys that just spam slashes with their huge swords never come out on top on the scoreboard because blocking is way more effective than you make it sound, and you can't move away or attack again quick enough when blocked to make spamming effective. Generally these guys just murder their own teammates. No need to be so hostile either. It doesn't help get your points across, it just makes you look like a dick.
I don't take kindly to "Learn 2 Play!" shitposts. I thought RPS was the last place I'd get jokers telling me that when I mention I'm disappointed with a game.

The videos I saw made this game's combat look very fast and vicious. What I'm getting instead are attacks that take two seconds at least and are far slow to be effective against anything more mobile than a training dummy. I've just played the game yesterday and I'm saying from personal experience blocking isn't effective in it. No one even bothers with it because it's much safer and effective to just dance back and forth while using polearm stabs.

It looked like fast-paced melee like the Condemned games in the Kickstarter videos but the finished product is instead exactly like the War of the Roses beta without horses. If I wanted that slower-paced combat I would have bought War of the Roses instead and gotten horses too.

Protoman
19-10-2012, 11:35 PM
I don't take kindly to "Learn 2 Play!" shitposts. I thought RPS was the last place I'd get jokers telling me that when I mention I'm disappointed with a game.

The videos I saw made this game's combat look very fast and vicious. What I'm getting instead are attacks that take two seconds at least and are far slow to be effective against anything more mobile than a training dummy. I've just played the game yesterday and I'm saying from personal experience blocking isn't effective in it. No one even bothers with it because it's much safer and effective to just dance back and forth while using polearm stabs.

It looked like fast-paced melee like the Condemned games in the Kickstarter videos but the finished product is instead exactly like the War of the Roses beta without horses. If I wanted that slower-paced combat I would have bought War of the Roses instead and gotten horses too.

I'm playing a pub game right now (not even experienced players) and ALL of them parry and counter in melee, that is the entire system. Just went up against a spamming vanguard, and I blocked. Then I swung twice. Then I stabbed, and now he's dead. He couldn't attack between them because his weapon isn't fast enough to do that, and he couldn't be bothered with blocking so he moved back, and I moved forward and stabbed. Not only that but he killed his teammate trying to kill me. That's from personal experience.

The greatswords/spears/etc are slow, but- have you ever swung a greatsword? They're just that slow. If that irks you, just play man at arms- his weapons are much faster.

Frankly, you can't refute an argument by saying "you're just one of those l2p jerks!" It's just as bad as an actual "l2p" post. We just have absolutely no idea how you're drawing these conclusions. You don't have to love the game, and I'm not forcing you to, but you're probably turning off a lot of persons who would otherwise like the game.

Finicky
20-10-2012, 12:15 PM
I don't take kindly to "Learn 2 Play!" shitposts. I thought RPS was the last place I'd get jokers telling me that when I mention I'm disappointed with a game.


What? he was pretty kind about it and told you why what you complain about doesn't work... and what you should aim to do.
If it were me responding: https://profile.callofduty.com/elite/register?redirectUrl=http://www.callofduty.com/elite
Have fun.

Xari
20-10-2012, 06:11 PM
I don't take kindly to "Learn 2 Play!" shitposts. I thought RPS was the last place I'd get jokers telling me that when I mention I'm disappointed with a game.


Oh wow, please don't appeal to the community and pretend like you're being victimized here. He was perfectly reasonable and you decided to take it personal and lash out at him.



The videos I saw made this game's combat look very fast and vicious. What I'm getting instead are attacks that take two seconds at least and are far slow to be effective against anything more mobile than a training dummy. I've just played the game yesterday and I'm saying from personal experience blocking isn't effective in it. No one even bothers with it because it's much safer and effective to just dance back and forth while using polearm stabs.

It looked like fast-paced melee like the Condemned games in the Kickstarter videos but the finished product is instead exactly like the War of the Roses beta without horses. If I wanted that slower-paced combat I would have bought War of the Roses instead and gotten horses too.

It definitely sounds to me like you're describing a different game. I've logged more than 10 hours since friday on the game and the combat always felt remarkably authentic and visceral, and my best moments were dueling people who knew how to feint and block 1v1, sometimes extending those battles up to several minutes (!). The fact that such a thing is even possible stands testament to the possibilities of the combat system and dismisses your assumption that spamming attacks are the way to win. The only people I've seen doing that are douchebags who don't care about teamkills and new players who end up at the bottom of the scoreboard.

It's fine not to like a game; but you shouldn't make arguments that are clearly and objectively false and then react so emotionally when people refute your points. It'll only garner you even more frustration.

Hanban
22-10-2012, 01:53 PM
When I at first read the comparisons to War of the Roses and M&B I scoffed derisevely at the notion that Chivalry would be better. Having played and enjoyed quite a bit of M&B's combat and thought WotR to be OK, I figured that Chivalry deserved a shot.

After having played it I have to admit that I thought it was quite wonderful. In the few hours I have put in I have had some of the most adrenaline pumping and exciting sword dancing to date in any game. I only played WotR in the alpha and beta and I would sometimes feel that some of my deaths were unfair. In Chivalry I'm always achingly aware of why my head ended up on the ground. Which to me is a good thing!

I have a few times had people just run up and spam dagger attacks at me but these people strike me as being few and far in between.

Thouroughly enjoyable I say! If you like lopping heads off (or if you want to experience first hand what perspective a severed head would have from 1st person view) then I suggest you try it out!

Snakejuice
23-10-2012, 02:34 AM
This game makes me wonder why multiplayer games ever stopped shipping with a FFA mode!

Tarcek
23-10-2012, 02:43 AM
Charge in > Go Berserk > Remember that you can block > Amazing damage models do the rest.
I think its a great game.


The combat is quite good, but it irks me so much that everyone just flails around with 2handers. Then again why wouldnt they? Stupid things one shot you with the shafts and pommels, so wild flailing is too good to be true. Sigh.

It also has some annoying bugs with multiplayer, but I am sure they will be ironed out soon enough. I hope the same will happen to the 2 handers.

That sounds about right, for how big medieval weapons worked.

Manco
23-10-2012, 03:45 AM
Not really, A two-handed sword really wasn't swung like a simple club. For example I'm still waiting for a game that allows me to half-sword my weapon.

Anyway, for a fantasy melee game it's pretty damn good, though I constantly notice relatively low production values.

Tarcek
23-10-2012, 11:05 AM
Not really, A two-handed sword really wasn't swung like a simple club. For example I'm still waiting for a game that allows me to half-sword my weapon.

Anyway, for a fantasy melee game it's pretty damn good, though I constantly notice relatively low production values.

That may be a question of how We imagine clubs being swung, because Im not imagining haymakers :)

gundato
23-10-2012, 01:44 PM
God damn it, now I really want this.

Ah well, I am busy for the next month, so hopefully it is in the Thanksgiving/Black Friday sale (and that Steam does another one of those)

Berzee
23-10-2012, 03:41 PM
There is a brain in that large sphere-like object on top of your neck.

I'm confused and curious about how you selected the head from among three body parts (brain, head, neck) in that sentence as the best candidate for abstraction. "There is a brain in that head on top of a flexible, cylindrical base" seems equally valid, but I feel your selection was not arbitrary. Expound?


In relevant news, I just realized that I've spent a long time feeling sad that hardly anybody plays Pirates Vikings and Knights mod for HL1 and HL2...and I never updated my sadness to happiness when this giant swath of First Person Sworders came out! Even after playing Mount & Blade for many hours, I forgot to be happy. And now here are a couple of promising-looking games that look even closer to PvK style combat.

Let my errors be a lesson to you all -- when you feel sad about some terrible trivial tragedy in your hobby, take a moment to survey the landscape every few years and see if your regrets are still applicable or if it's ok to smile now. =P

McDosy
15-11-2012, 04:57 PM
there's a yell button,

The yell button is the single greatest gameplay feature of the decade.

AlonePlusEasyTarget
15-11-2012, 05:44 PM
The yell button is the single greatest gameplay feature of the decade.

Oh the sound of our brothers in arms charging to the enemies is such a glorious moment that most of them will cower and just run away. The most memorable one for me is when we succeed in defending the king so about 30 secs left our King command us to charge the enemy with him leading it. I was behind him covering the right flank of the charge and it really gave me a sense of awe.



Let my errors be a lesson to you all -- when you feel sad about some terrible trivial tragedy in your hobby, take a moment to survey the landscape every few years and see if your regrets are still applicable or if it's ok to smile now. =P

That really is good way to put it and as you said it's applicable to most of the things.

Shooop
15-11-2012, 05:54 PM
I'm confused and curious about how you selected the head from among three body parts (brain, head, neck) in that sentence as the best candidate for abstraction. "There is a brain in that head on top of a flexible, cylindrical base" seems equally valid, but I feel your selection was not arbitrary. Expound?

There are almost no words to describe what you've just said. This clip is about as close as anyone will ever come to describing it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq-v1TTUyhM

Shooop
15-11-2012, 06:10 PM
Oh wow, please don't appeal to the community and pretend like you're being victimized here. He was perfectly reasonable and you decided to take it personal and lash out at him.




It definitely sounds to me like you're describing a different game. I've logged more than 10 hours since friday on the game and the combat always felt remarkably authentic and visceral, and my best moments were dueling people who knew how to feint and block 1v1, sometimes extending those battles up to several minutes (!). The fact that such a thing is even possible stands testament to the possibilities of the combat system and dismisses your assumption that spamming attacks are the way to win. The only people I've seen doing that are douchebags who don't care about teamkills and new players who end up at the bottom of the scoreboard.

It's fine not to like a game; but you shouldn't make arguments that are clearly and objectively false and then react so emotionally when people refute your points. It'll only garner you even more frustration.

First of all telling someone "You just don't know how to play the game" is pretty personal. Unless you know for a fact the other person hasn't actually played the game, that's purely an insult. Don't do that.

Secondly, what I've described is exactly the experience I've had. I've seen nothing but people flailing with their weapons until they hit something and that's irritating.. My experience obviously isn't like everyone elses', but it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

If the weapons swung faster I'd at least have had some intense, vicious combat. But all I got was people swinging swords and poking spears at doorways that happen to be the only ways through the map. I didn't like that. I was looking for something much more fast-paced.