New knight class | Forums

[Kharneth88]

Actually that sounds awesome minus the navy seals and cavemen because those are way too 'out there'

well really just the navy seal im good with the caveman

This game cannot attempt to be realistic whilst adding in warriors from antiquity. Warfare evolves. History is 90% an evolution of how to kill other people in large numbers. The warriors of antiquity are outclassed by the technology of the future.

The medieval knight is to the greek soldier as the navy seal is to the knight.

[Ricochet3]

This game cannot attempt to be realistic whilst adding in warriors from antiquity. Warfare evolves. History is 90% an evolution of how to kill other people in large numbers. The warriors of antiquity are outclassed by the technology of the future.

The medieval knight is to the greek soldier as the navy seal is to the knight.

Who cares? I just want to be a jaguar pelt wearing mofo

edit: Also there is a clear difference between a modern solider who uses "modern" guns and all other soldiers from history. Youre just trying to act like a smartass.

[AveImperator85]

Who cares? I just want to be a jaguar pelt wearing mofo

edit: Also there is a clear difference between a modern solider who uses "modern" guns and all other soldiers from history. Youre just trying to act like a smartass.

He's not wrong, though. Hence why this is a stupid idea and I REALLY hope Ubi doesn't decide to go the Deadliest Warrior route and add in weird, random **** from all over the place.

[Gojema]

The game starts with a video showing an undefined catastrophe leading to 1000 years of technological stalemate and war and it doesn't even use the real world map. I don't think we should be to petty about from which era a class is, as long as it fits in a melee "sword fight" scenario.

[AveImperator85]

The game starts with a video showing an undefined catastrophe leading to 1000 years of technological stalemate and war. I don't think we should be to petty about from which era a class is, as long as it fits in a melee "sword fight" scenario.

Sorry, I'm going to disagree with you there. It's already ******** that the Warlord's short sword can cut through full plate armor like paper, but some primitive with a chunk of obsidian? No, that's just going too far.

[Kharneth88]

Sorry, I'm going to disagree with you there. It's already ******** that the Warlord's short sword can cut through full plate armor like paper, but some primitive with a chunk of obsidian? No, that's just going too far.

To be fair, an Aztec Jaguar warrior would be way more effective against a knight than the Warlord's viking sword. Those obsidian clubs were, in fact, clubs and while the obsidian would just chip and break against the armor, the club part would be quite devastating. Nothing compared to a flanged mace, war hammer, or morningstar, but certainly more effective than a dark age's viking sword.

[Kharneth88]

Who cares? I just want to be a jaguar pelt wearing mofo

edit: Also there is a clear difference between a modern solider who uses "modern" guns and all other soldiers from history. Youre just trying to act like a smartass.

That's actually not true. To a novice onlooker it might appear that the 14th century knights were pretty much the same as the antiquity era greeks, like the Spartans, but that's not true at all.

The technology was far superior. The bronze equipment of the spartans, for example, could be relatively easily cut through by the tempered iron and steel of the knights in the late medieval period. The spartan's short swords and spears would have little effect due to their shape. They are very broad and effective against flesh and any armor they can cut through, but against iron and steel they would not be able to squeeze through the gaps and would be unable to do really anything. The only thing they'd be able to would be bash the knights with the edge of their shields, while the knight's longswords would be able pierce right through the bronze armor.

In addition, the earlier period soldiers hadn't really developed cavalry uses much, outside of asia, and their horses hadn't yet been bred to carry people in armor until hundreds of years later. A knight's cavalry charge would decimate soldiers of the antiquity, as was seen whenever the western asian cavalrymen showed up, at least, the ones who weren't mostly archers.

We can also mention the english longbows and the powerful medieval crossbows, or siege equipment, too. The technology advanced quite a bit over the 1000 years from BC into the Dark Ages and further on through the middle ages and into the Renaissance. They are all melee weapons. There weren't any/many firearms until late. But don't be deceived. The common people have a very huge misunderstanding of weapons and armor from those days. There were huge differences. It's not just style choices or making the weapons look different. They evolved greatly in hundreds of years of continuous arms races.

[Choffee22]

So I came looking for a conqueror strategy guide but this is far more entertaining. ---->10/10 funny and informative Af. very well researched facts on both sides.

[SoUl_CiNdEr]

Anyone willing to get back on the subject

Seriously how the hell we get from Rapier class to Aztec panthers and navy seals

[Aidames]

I think a Duelist would be great. But no dagger please, it would be way too similar to the PK. One rapier and one bare hand, so he can throw in some donkeypunches between deflects. I'd also recommend it be a fast counter-attacker, with insanely cool looking and effective combos off of blocks and parries, with low health and slow dodges.

Edit: oh, and of course a feathered hat.