Bandit ambushes are supremely anti-player

[Schimpanzini Bananini]

I'm 30 hours in with a brave horse and good equipment, and every couple of hours I get absolutely yeeted from my horse out of nowhere when going top speed.

You'd better be wearing your heavy armor at all times in the open world otherwise you're almost entirely screwed when this happens. The lock-on system is so awful that it doesn't matter how unskilled and poorly armed they are, they spazz out your camera so bad that it's easy to lose track of the action. It doesn't help you can't configure the vertical FOV separate from horizontal because your only choices are tunnel vision and fisheye, in the melee-centric game.

Even in daylight or on lesser wooded roads, I'm still finding myself getting yanked from the horse, even when passing nowhere near the decoy bandit. AI loves teleporting in and out of combat. Running from a fight almost never works unless there's enough terrain to cheese the bad AI and getting back on your horse is a stupid rodeo of constantly mounting and being thrown off.

I guess I need to stop treating this like an RPG and wear my heavy plate even when going hunting because there's just a "sorry, radiant event, you lose your last hour of progress" checks.

EDIT: I like the game overall. I think lots of aspects are very well done, but these random encounters are a constant slamming on the brakes.

[Lovecraft's Cat]

I agree with you, the ambushes and random encounters with multiple hostiles are unfun. KC:D is a good game, but the combat against more than one opponent is just bad game design in my opinion. Even if Henry is maxed out, he still loses in 1v3 or higher.

The reason is that every hit staggers. Doesn't matter how weak the opponent is, if he lands a hit in the back he screws up attacks and blocks, and the stagger also makes retreat impossible. So the combat system puts the player at an unfair disadvantage! Being a single adventurer is the whole point of the game, so why on Earth would they make life harder for the player? Boggles the mind.

Sadly, I doubt the combat will change, seeing how KC:D is a few years old by now. When it was still fresh, many people shut down criticism of the combat mechanics by claiming that "it would happen in real life too". That's such a lame excuse and very untrue. A superior fighter with plate armor would not stagger irl, attacks won't get interrupted by a hit in the back, and getting an arrow in the back certainly wouldn't make you lose momentum when you're running away. Stagger is pure fiction invented by video games.

[Skipper]

I played this game in the first week of release, despite it's many bugs and glitches and believe me.. it made Cyberpunks release look stupid, managed to get through it since then how ever...

There are too many things in the game which are entirely anti player and ruin the experience, I do not believe some of the "hardcore" features should exist as they are because it puts players in almost no win situations and in order too win in those situations requires favorable RNG, not player skill.

First things first: Get the mod that allows you to save when you want. Otherwise you need to invest time and effort into alchemy to get savior schnapps, this is doable but you also want to play the game.

There is one mod that allows you to equip a full helmet but no obscure your vision completely, it can other open up your vision a little more OR you can opt to have the blackened out areas reduced to say 80% transparency. This way you maintain immersion.

Yes, either wear plate or don't, there are advantages to wearing light armour and i do believe that some of the chest pieces are "light" versions of heavier armour work effectively, the combat jackets you can buy from the tailors are also nice and fanciful and look good in conversation.. when aren't all torn up.

As for the rest, there isn't much you can do ive already got a thread running regarding how combat is still quite BS, at least until I see proof that it ain't, which I haven't.

[vine]

Yes you two guys found yourselves together to share the misery. Don't hate me, please. There've been plenty of threads already about combat, its impact on player experience and expectation from the game itself.

Now i will make one point - mainly aimed at argument by Scyth. If it is unclear yet, the game shows that not every situation can be resolved favourably, not everything can be won. No matter how hard you try, how prepared you feel.
I accepted the fact that running into 4 armored guys is a suicide. I avoid them.

Just recently i started Johanka's part of Woman's Lot DLC, and there's escort mission of one wench from Ledetchko bathhouse to Sassau. I insulted the dude, Henslin, earlier in the quest, so he and two of his buddies ambushed us in the forest. This was my first time playing it so i was surprised and got kicked heavily, failing multiple times.
Eventually i came victorious, one of the dudes ran away, two were killed - by managing space, getting bow out to drop one, then i remember being left 1v1 somehow. Again, i failed multiple times. It is tough as nails.

So in closure some situations just.. you can't survive. Deal with it. The arguments that an arrow in back will not hinder you in any way.. hmm yes sure. No.
This game is as realistic as it gets. There've been plenty of threads with multitude of similar arguments to yours, and there are a myriade of ytb videos showing real HEMA fights 1v many. That's about it from me..

[Lovecraft's Cat]

Originally posted by vine:

The arguments that an arrow in back will not hinder you in any way.. hmm yes sure. No.
This game is as realistic as it gets. There've been plenty of threads with multitude of similar arguments to yours, and there are a myriade of ytb videos showing real HEMA fights 1v many. That's about it from me..

There's not a single historic instance where an arrowhead penetrated plate. Ever. And it also doesn't make any sense at all that such a hit would stagger you and make you lose momentum. The same is true for sword slashes and the like.

I've seen footage of people getting shot in the back on liveleaks, believe me they keep on moving for a while and collapse later if they received fatal injuries. As I said, it's video game logic divorced from reality. I've also yet to see a single video where a HEMA or MMA fighter staggers around like a right plonker after every slight hit he took. Again, video game logic, not based in reality.

Honestly I don't mind 'video gamey' mechanics, but this instance is purely to the detriment of the player when a more realistic approach would be preferable. For the record I enjoy KC:D immensely but the combat is sometimes very frustrating for no other reason than fake realism.

Edit, forgot about that one

Originally posted by vine:

I accepted the fact that running into 4 armored guys is a suicide. I avoid them.

That sounds nice in theory, but in practice you're often getting ambushed by 4 guys while fast traveling, you can't retreat and have to load an older save. This is a game about a single traveling adventurer, and it's actively punishing the player for being alone and outnumbered. If you had an adventuring party then the constant ambushes would be fine.

[Schimpanzini Bananini]

So you periodically get instakilled because "muh realism?" There's a huge difference between a game being immersive and realistic, and games should strive for the former whenever possible.

You know what isn't realistic? Henry healing grievous wounds after an 8 hour nap instead of being in bed for 8 weeks and spending the rest of the game as a cripple. Being able to teleport gear between your horse and you wherever it is in the world. Every inn having a teleportation chest with your inventory ready to go. Or how about the very, very low odds Henry would have gotten a chance to be a hardcore knight at all and instead you have to spend 60 years in game shoveling manure.

These conveniences don't hurt it as a sim. If it was 100% realistic, it would be real life, and probably not very fun. I'm not even entirely against not being able to save freely, as it makes you commit to fixing your mistakes more often.

And don't even try to call this game's combat "realistic." I do HEMA. It's virtually impossible to replicate the thousands of little nuances of real swordfighting with a mouse and keyboard. There is going to be give, (I'm pretty sure you can cut from more than 5 fixed axis IRL.) Except this game can't find its footing between arcade and realism and suffers a lot for it. Yes, having 3 opponents at once is tough, but unlike HEMA, you don't end the fight when they strike you, you end when you keel over from pain or death. If you have heavy plate and are a trained knight, 3 brigands with falchions and a fish club aren't going to be your immediate end.

Mordhau is debatably more arcadey and cheesable in its combat but that doesn't mean it lacks depth. It's a lot more fun and mechanically satisfying too, giving you the feeling of pulling off moves a skilled bladesman can do.

Even if I bought your argument that 3 opponents should automatically equal death, why are these ambushes all over the place? Why are they always on awful terrain? Why do the bugs happen that I mentioned? This game picks and chooses its realism, usually pretty wisely, but don't pretend it's fully realistic or that they made good choices where to place it.

Can we please get a random chance of catching typhoid and dying and losing our save file? Hey, that's pretty realistic.

[TyresTyco]

Meanwhile I look foward to them most of the time but hope they arent 4 fully armored guys hacking on me. Yes.. thats where the devs failed. It isnt fun backstepping until you get some lucky masterstrikes or normal hits in.

The AI is always trying to pummel you instead of making it a lil bit fairer just for the sake of fun. It would be far far better if only ever 2 guys charge you.. while the others use a bow. 2 guys are manageable at the same time.

I mostly tend to use poison arrows to get rid of at least one. But if there are 4 with full plated armor.. also possible with a lot of space to backstep but its very hard and not fun at all.

A game should make fun. 1vs1 or 1vs1+ archers is fun. But more than that... meh. I hope they address that in the next game. If they ever make one.

It actually makes imho a lil bit sense that they mostly try to rush you. You are most of the time a rich, awesome knight. I would try to hack you down with my friends too.

But again, games should be fun and if the intention of that is that you shouldnt win every fight, to encourage you to flee. They shouldnt make it so hard to actually flee.

Can you outrun anyone with full armor? I can't, only naked or with lighter armor I never use. Now.. you cant change the gear once getting attacked so that also isnt a option... only getting lucky with the horse it is.

Mostly I just try it and die. Either lose some progress or none. I enjoy potion crating.

[MacSuibhne]

Short answer and best answer: There is no answer. And nothing will change that.

This game is unplayable for all but those willing to accept the game design as it is and learn the game mechanics.

[Mary]

Hmm. I play extremely slowly; I haven't been ambushed yet.

I imagine, though, that a lotta surrendering will be going on when I get to that point, though! The G-key is still an option against them, yeah? :O

[Valden21]

Originally posted by 76561198081022103:

Originally posted by vine:

The arguments that an arrow in back will not hinder you in any way.. hmm yes sure. No.
This game is as realistic as it gets. There've been plenty of threads with multitude of similar arguments to yours, and there are a myriade of ytb videos showing real HEMA fights 1v many. That's about it from me..

There's not a single historic instance where an arrowhead penetrated plate. Ever. And it also doesn't make any sense at all that such a hit would stagger you and make you lose momentum. The same is true for sword slashes and the like.

I've seen footage of people getting shot in the back on liveleaks, believe me they keep on moving for a while and collapse later if they received fatal injuries. As I said, it's video game logic divorced from reality. I've also yet to see a single video where a HEMA or MMA fighter staggers around like a right plonker after every slight hit he took. Again, video game logic, not based in reality.

Honestly I don't mind 'video gamey' mechanics, but this instance is purely to the detriment of the player when a more realistic approach would be preferable. For the record I enjoy KC:D immensely but the combat is sometimes very frustrating for no other reason than fake realism.

Edit, forgot about that one

Originally posted by vine:

I accepted the fact that running into 4 armored guys is a suicide. I avoid them.

That sounds nice in theory, but in practice you're often getting ambushed by 4 guys while fast traveling, you can't retreat and have to load an older save. This is a game about a single traveling adventurer, and it's actively punishing the player for being alone and outnumbered. If you had an adventuring party then the constant ambushes would be fine.

Maybe a DIRECT hit on plate mail would not have gotten through, but what about bodkin points in a weak spot? No matter how heavily armored someone is, there's gonna be weak spots, like the neck or the armpit. That's a given with armor. Bodkin points can get through that. I think that's what an insta-kill from an arrow represents, the arrow hitting the weak point.

[Sonya]

Idk, I don't think I've ever got thrown off my horse in 60 hours of playtime. You just double-shift past them, is it not working for you? Even the cheapest slowest horse in the game let me escape every encounter literally 100% of the time, the only reason I even know enemies can do that is because I tested it at one point when I tried to mount right next to enemy. If anything, I was a little upset with how safe I am on a horse.

I also did made an escape once before getting a horse - made some distance first by spending all my stamina (so the swords are grey), took all the gear off to maximize my speed and took off with ease.

I don't think I'm even particularly good at the game tbh, feels like you're doing smth wrong.

UPDATE: Btw, you do realise that if you were able to separately configure vertical and horizontal FOV, the image would just squish/stretch, right? I am now curious what weird games you've played that had such a bizarre feature, unless you're just confusing FOV with something else.

[setsuna6009]

yes, i gad an ambush with 3 fully armored bandits...i did not have a good time...heck they took what time i had and shoved it deep...lol.

[DargonBlak]

Realism ??? Naw - get over it. The game is brilliant in many ways and just has some bad design mechanics - and it would be WAY to easy without all the added Ambush sites.

Ambush Realism?:
5 peasants with sticks against a fully armored soldier? Why would the peasants even attack? They must know at least a couple will die? Well, it turns out that they attack in KCD becuz they can actually win - becuz of the bad melee mechanics - camera lock, over staggering, etc. - and the ability for an untrained peasant with a stick to kill an armored soldier (except for when Henry is the peasant with the stick of course). Never mind that every Ambush enemy knows Perfect Block and Master Strikes. No Realism there - at all - Ambushes were simply added to make the game actually challenging in Open World - and added poorly.

Surrendering is not a bad idea - but Half my Money ? I'd rather be dressed in light armor and simply run away - provided you can get beyond the camera lock... (was it the Shift Key to unlock the camera?)

I liked Mac's answer best - "for all but those willing to accept the game design as it is and learn the game mechanics" - since complaining won't change a thing.

Either play and learn how to play better or don't - that's really the only choice - other than participating in yet another pointless ranting discussion.

And to the OP - there is a Main Level Skill called "Scout" that will improve your chances of avoiding an Ambush or allow you to "Scout" the situation before you are close enough to aggro the enemies. This at least gives you options for improved survivability

[Mary]

Originally posted by DargonBlak:

Ambush Realism?:
5 peasants with sticks against a fully armored soldier? Why would the peasants even attack?

IRL: "YO, GRAB HIS ARMS!" -- "Hold him down!" -- "Take his sword!" etc.







If you can't kill 'em, grab 'em! :D

[DargonBlak]

Originally posted by Honey Mary:

Originally posted by DargonBlak:

Ambush Realism?:
5 peasants with sticks against a fully armored soldier? Why would the peasants even attack?

IRL: "YO, GRAB HIS ARMS!" -- "Hold him down!" -- "Take his sword!" etc.

If you can't kill 'em, grab 'em! :D

Ha ! A funny, visual, and partially valid response - i like it.

But watch Forged in Fire on Netflix - watch when they make a sword and see the real damage it can do against unarmored opponents. Disemboweling in one stroke. Or for a Hammer, Axe or Mace - crushing a skull with ease.

Peasants are trying to survive - not get dead. I doubt they would risk it, but i do suppose "it depends".

[setsuna6009]

Originally posted by DargonBlak:

Realism ??? Naw - get over it. The game is brilliant in many ways and just has some bad design mechanics - and it would be WAY to easy without all the added Ambush sites.

Ambush Realism?:
5 peasants with sticks against a fully armored soldier? Why would the peasants even attack? They must know at least a couple will die? Well, it turns out that they attack in KCD becuz they can actually win - becuz of the bad melee mechanics - camera lock, over staggering, etc. - and the ability for an untrained peasant with a stick to kill an armored soldier (except for when Henry is the peasant with the stick of course). Never mind that every Ambush enemy knows Perfect Block and Master Strikes. No Realism there - at all - Ambushes were simply added to make the game actually challenging in Open World - and added poorly.

Surrendering is not a bad idea - but Half my Money ? I'd rather be dressed in light armor and simply run away - provided you can get beyond the camera lock... (was it the Shift Key to unlock the camera?)

I liked Mac's answer best - "for all but those willing to accept the game design as it is and learn the game mechanics" - since complaining won't change a thing.

Either play and learn how to play better or don't - that's really the only choice - other than participating in yet another pointless ranting discussion.

And to the OP - there is a Main Level Skill called "Scout" that will improve your chances of avoiding an Ambush or allow you to "Scout" the situation before you are close enough to aggro the enemies. This at least gives you options for improved survivability

The problem isn't really with the 5v1 in it self, but the mechanics of how it locks on to a particular npc right in front of you when tying to guard against the ones flanking. it make it very hard to win.