War of the Roses

[Bison]

I blew my money on some high speed heavy armor and helmet.  It did not make me better.  I will say I cannot play with the visor down on my helmet.  It cuts out too much of the view.

[bob48]

Like this in fact;

[Bison]

OK I might have figured out the combat in this game and on the path to being a medieval warrior badass.   I had a 9 in a row kill streak going including an epic battle where I was outnumbered 3-1 and managed to kill them all, heal myself and go kill more sword wielding dudes.

[LongBlade]

OK I might have figured out the combat in this game and on the path to being a medieval warrior badass.   I had a 9 in a row kill streak going including an epic battle where I was outnumbered 3-1 and managed to kill them all, heal myself and go kill more sword wielding dudes.

Sweet!

[Toonces]

Can any of you guys recommend a good book on the war of the roses?  I have Alision Weir's book The Wars of the Roses, but I'm having a lot of trouble sticking with it.  A browse of Amazon.com isn't really helping because so many of the books are rated so poorly.

[jomni]

It is chaotic, but there is also order.  It's like some sort of zen swirly yin yangy thingy majiggy.

Yup.  Just stay in bunches.  Go solo and do crazy stuff and you get swarmed by the enemy.

[besilarius]

It was a thoroughly choatic time.
Try the article in the Encyclopedia Britannica.  It's not as clear as we'd like, but it has a good timeline and identifies all the major players.
Actually, in representing the factionalism and changing of sides, the old AH game Kingmaker is not a bad experience.

[Bill Runacre]

Can any of you guys recommend a good book on the war of the roses?  I have Alision Weir's book The Wars of the Roses, but I'm having a lot of trouble sticking with it.  A browse of Amazon.com isn't really helping because so many of the books are rated so poorly.

Robin Neillands's book is pretty good and readable: The Wars of the Roses, (1992).

It's not an easy war to get a good grasp of, which is probably why you're struggling with Alison Weir's as she is a good writer.

An alternative approach would be to just read about one of the campaigns/battles and then develop your knowledge from there. Bosworth and Richard III have always been of a lot of interest to me.

[RiO_]

Guys,

I currently own and play Chivalry, and I like it a lot! The combats are brutal and pretty realistic 1-2 nice strikes and they're gonne for good, and the Team objectives games are great with a nice variety.

Im watching a lot of WotR videos and I can see that the graphics and the overall UI are more polished/professional, bur Im failing to see the combat mechanics and realism on it. All I can see is a lot of spamming where the one who strikes more strikes wins, and usually there's a lot of 1x4 fights......

Well all I'd like to ask are the real strong points about WotR since it seems so arcade and combat wise lacking of realism.......Am I that wrong?

Rio

[Bison]

For me its simple.  I find it to be fun.  Its in 3d person so you lose the 1st person "realism" perspective, but there are tactics to the combat.  You can spam attacks and sometimes win, but more often the one who plans an attack with an aimed strike will win.  The ability to spec your character with perks and gear is also pretty awesome.  I've got two builds so far.  A heavy armor knight who eventually will end up being a mounted knight and a medium armored two handed ax wielding machine.  Finally the combat mechanics are very similar to Mount and Blade which is one of my all time favorite games.

[Toonces]

Whew!  Marathon session tonight...about 2 hours straight and I went from level 1 to level 8 or 9.  However, I have about 20-30 hours in the beta, so I have some idea of the mechanics.

I'm a big fan of these drop-in multiplayer games (like this and L4D2).   We had a couple of epic battles where we were initially losing big and then came back for the win.  One or two matches were done in less than 10 minutes, but a couple went almost to the end at 20 minutes and one full-on timed out at a half hour.  Lots of great fights.

I do find the game more tactical than it seemed in the beta.  I might just be getting better at it, but I sure seemed to feel like I was controlling my swings more- thinking about what direction to swing based on what the other guy was doing.  I had a couple of 1v1 fights that were quite prolonged. 

Anyway, I played about half on Crossbowman and then switched to Foot Knight for the second half.  The last fight we had, about 25 minutes, I accumulated almost 9k experience....the battle just went on and on and on forever.  I'm definitely enjoying this game.  They seemed to have fixed a lot of the balance issues from the beta.

[jomni]

This game is damn buggy.  It always crashes on me or it gets graphics corruption.  Looks like my video card isn't keeping up.  But it only happens in this game. :/

[Gusington]

Bison are your wins against random bots in an MP game or against other humans? From most of the posts above I still am interested, but I wonder how long everyone else will be. I don't want to take the plunge and then get stuck  playing with myself, pun intended.

[Bison]

The only single player mode is a training grounds which is good for learning the combat mechanics.  You'll only do that for maybe an hour.  The rest is played on multiplayer battlegrounds with usually 20,32,64 man servers.  Its just a drop in and play game.  There is no storyline that accompanies the game.  The cool part is that your gold/experience you earn rolls over from battle to battle with your characters that you spec for combat.  Like I've said right now my favorite spec is an ax wielding medium armor build focused on sheild breaking and healing.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Bison are your wins against random bots in an MP game or against other humans? From most of the posts above I still am interested, but I wonder how long everyone else will be. I don't want to take the plunge and then get stuck  playing with myself, pun intended.

I'll join ya Gus, but you gotta play as the black chick.