Al_Wombat

I believe this belongs here: https://community.knightsofhonor.com/forums/forum/14-bug-reports-and-technical-support/

I agree with what you said about game publishing and RTS battle mode, but Archers did indeed compose the main force of armies, at least in England. Henry V is believed to have fielded 1k Men-At-Arms along 5k archers at Agincourt. According the the books on medieval history and warfare I‘m currently reading, it was normal for armies to have 3-4 Archers for every ManAtArms. Up to the point where “Archers” became synonymous with “Infantry”. That being said, the archers had to be used wisely. Also, this was a development that was spurred by Agincourt, 1415, ie in the very late middle ages, BECAUSE of that battle, and also BECAUSE of the English Longbow which is very different in power than other bows.

This thread is about what players and devs think about the Real Time Battles and what suggestions they might make. Many would agree that it's still work in progress but the devs decided to release now since so many people have been waiting for so long. Is the game fully ready yet? Maybe not, but then again, which game is at day one? Haven't yet played myself but I'd still like to mention the issues being talked about on twitch streams or reviews. AI seems to be sending Generals on solitary death rides into the enemy lines. This unit being essential makes this bug even nastier. See German magazine Gamestar's youtube channel. Balance: Archers may be OP in general Heavy Cavalry may be underpowered in close combat against archers. Terrain: According to Gamestar has virtually no effect on the battles. This is what other people said. From the gameplay I've watched I personally would have hoped for archers to behave more historically accurate. (Archers didn't used to send volley after volley of precious arrows into the skies, but rather waited until they could actually see who and where they were shooting at, exactly. Arrows are VERY hard to make and weren't thrown around like it's been going on in strategy games all the time of course, endless ammunition.) Maybe the devs could nerf the archers like that: Let them have less "rounds" which would still be very effective, the damage depending on the distance significantly, as well as on training and experience, of course.. This might open up a range of wagers and strategies: The closer to the enemy I have my archers loose the more damage they will make, felling them, while maybe saving arrows, too. But if if goes wrong the whole unit can get hammered by a shield charge and flee the battlefield in panic. Opinions, quotes, and ideas, please!

Well my post is based on a single person's opinion after a day since release. I'd love to hear other players' opinions. Game definitely deserves a chance. We do have indications though that the real time battles aren't near ready yet, whereas the game itself looks grand already. German gaming magazine Gamestar found that the enemy Generals keep galloping to a stupid quick death all the time, urging to patch this blunder asap.

Hi, this feedback I got off a german streamer today on twitch: He found the archers to be op, melting Heavy Cavalry too easily whereas the Knights don‘t get to blast archer squads apart in order to counter the archers’ strength. Generally he regarded the rt battles as too easy once you know how to cheese your road to victory. Kinda on a good way but quite a bit to go yet… Any thoughts from players or devs? Is the battle system to be regarded as work in progress still? Or are people expecting too much from it?

Dear Devs, I am watching people play on twitch and I’m very impressed with what you have created. What almost shocked me, though, was to see a region called Deutschland alongside regions like Bavaria and Saxonia. This makes absolutely no sense, at all! There is no kingdom called “Germany” in the middle ages. Why are you ignoring this? What’s the point? Is there a connection to the “Holy Roman Empire”? If yes, how does that affect gameplay? Does the Emperor have a role like the Pope does? But why not call that empire by its name? If no, what’s the point of all this? Thank you.

From what I read you need significant resources for a holy war, both money and faith. If you beat the player, you don’t need another crusade. If you don’t, I believe faith drops. And you also need to be wary of rogue crusader kings. In any case, you won’t be able to spam crusades all over the place. These are intelligent people. If they take long to develop it’s because they are considering lots of different options for good gameplay. Adding a broken holy war mechanic certainly isn’t one of them.

„…almost the entirety of the world looks down on [Pagan kingdoms], which has its effect on diplomacy.“ …surely, this would be mitigated by power? ____ It is nice to imagine also for a very powerful kingdom to force some of their pagan rites onto a rival of any religion which the clerics of the opposition would hate, but would aid diplomacy and public opinion of said kingdom.

Surely not pleasant, but just forgetting about any high ranked court member and swapping them for a new one would be unrealistic and too easy, wouldn’t it?

Completely agree w everything said in this discussion!

Will rhese be in the game: Wagon Forts?

Hello, I just watched the Dev Diary 10 Video and I really like how you are aiming to implement the concept of the *traditions* into the game. I. How traditions should NOT come into being: Just please do not allow kingdoms to simply buy a new set of traditions. I understand that players want to experiment and change things round, and in RPG games they love to take the body of a tiny mage and turn him into a superstrong melee warrior. But this doesn't fit here, at all. Traditions are, well, traditions and should only develop over time. You can't change hundreds or even thousands of years by simply buying recalibration points in the fantasy store. So I want to neglect, abandon traditions? Sure. Develop new ones? Definitely! But spending a big bunch of resources to simply become a completely new type of kingdom over knight seems ridiculous. This completely denies the very core definition of a tradition. II. How a kingdom's traditions should rather develop (main factors): 1.) Cultural background. What creation myths does a kingdom have? What and who do they believe in? Who are their historic of fictional heroes? 2.) Geography. Tell me where you live or come from and I'll tell you lots about your ways of living. 3.) Experience. What does a dynasty actually do? The factuality of concurring deeds. 4.) Special events. Some special events might trigger new traditions. Say, a fire catastrophe or a terrible defeat in a battle might lead to certain reactions.

It‘s completely fine to be of other opinion. Thanks for your post, which according to you represents 99.9 % of the players‘ opinion. While that seems a bit overconfident, I will concede that my opinion is particular. If you want to call it „nitpicky“, great, that‘s an honour, since in my experience it’s nitpickery which leads to excellence rather than reliance on thinking about majority’s taste or sensitivity. ————— Back to the lingo: I didn’t say that I‘d not enjoy the game, only that imo immersion would be enhanced by using British, rather than American English, ideally spiced by some words anyone would consider „olde“. Surely, you‘d agree that, regardless of the branding issues, ingame „middleagey“ language would be appreciated by a vast majority of players, regardless of the language?

Hello, dear devs, dear community, I have a question concerning conquest and culture. Forgive me if someone has already asked the same question, and if so, gallantly refer or transfer me to the according thread, thank you. Will it be possible to conquer cities, even lands, without imposing my home culture and religion on them? From reading the according Dev Diary this wasn't clear to me. In history, there have always been both approaches: A) The Wipe It's what Macchiavelli suggests in "The Prince", i.e., forcing everyone to adopt "my" religion and other core cultural assets, that's what Isabella and Alfonso (among others) did during and after the "Reconquista". B) The Inclusion It's what (among others) the muslims did successfully for centuries in Spain: allowing people to keep their religion and other core cultural assets, as long as they remained loyal to the sovereign, paying taxes, sending troops when asked for, etc. Both approaches surely had (and have) their pros and cons, and that should be reflected by the game mechanics - could you elaborate on that in a more detailed Dev Diary about conquest, please? To me this is a crucial aspect of the game. I do hope for variety in the crucial aspect of conquest (and reconquista). What do you honourable developers plan? What do you gallant supporters think?

…rather than "Knights of Honor"? And shouldn't the whole English version be in BE, not AE, given that neither did American English exist in the Middle Ages nor did knights, honourous or not, EVER hop around in North America. I know this is "just" a detail, but since immersion in a game's world is all about details, and you guys are really showing much love for the smaller things, I wanted to raise this linguistic topic. Personally, I would definitely be reminded of the US production company every time I read a word in AE, rather than feel I am in the middle ages for a couple of hours. Ideally, thou could even go forth and add some Oulde English lingo, that would be even better. (I don't know how to write "Oulde English", but you get the idea… 😉 )