Is there a tl:dr version?
Is there a tl:dr version?seriously what the fuck? not reading this lol
now im feeling safe :mrgreen: but your post is correct, it's hard to judge only by making test on non moving targets, one of the biggest advantages xbows have over the bows are its almost impossible to dodge, bolts are too fast same is with trowing no one in past was whinning on trowing lances or axes (slow huge damage, ez to strafe) it was all about nasty gay +3 spammable stones :D
Myself and Rico are testing a variety of builds (throwing/archery/crossbow/HA/HX)
now im feeling safe :mrgreen: but your post is correct, it's hard to judge only by making test on non moving targets, one of the biggest advantages xbows have over the bows are its almost impossible to dodge, bolts are too fast same is with trowing no one in past was whinning on trowing lances or axes (slow huge damage, ez to strafe) it was all about nasty gay +3 spammable stones :Dwell you got your wish I dont think i have seen anyone use stones anymore since this revert.
The problem with a static test like this is there is little to no variation and no conditional situations being met. Your tests are not an active field of engagement. They are a basis for potential damage and potential damage alone and potential damage can't be justifiably nerfed or buffed by shooting a target that wants to be hit from a distance that is close range.
Damage decreases as the bolt/arrow travels distance - situationally speaking if someone was that close to you You'd have 1 chance to shoot him with the arb maybe 2 chances with the yew longbow. It is far more likely to deal 0 damage because the person is aware of ur presence near them especially at that range.
While adding PD requirements to xbow might seem like a solid solution it would only complicate things further as the way the engine utilizes the damage and accuracy stat to calculate wpf weight and reticle size.
Myself and Rico are testing a variety of builds (throwing/archery/crossbow/HA/HX) to see if there are ways to tweak them effectively without completely nerfing dedicated builds out of existence as previous balancers have practiced.
They are a basis for potential damage and potential damage alone and potential damage can't be justifiably nerfed or buffed by shooting a target that wants to be hit from a distance that is close range.
Damage decreases as the bolt/arrow travels distance - situationally speaking if someone was that close to you You'd have 1 chance to shoot him with the arb maybe 2 chances with the yew longbow. It is far more likely to deal 0 damage because the person is aware of ur presence near them especially at that range.
While adding PD requirements to xbow might seem like a solid solution it would only complicate things further as the way the engine utilizes the damage and accuracy stat to calculate wpf weight and reticle size.
Someone seems to have punched the number pad to decide the slot requirements for melee weapons. Just scroll down 1 handers and see. 0 slots still pop up 3/4 down the list. Gross Messer 0 slot? What the...You could add some slot requirements on ammo too
Having ladders as well just increases the incentive to take a ranged weapon on your melee character (xbowers). I like ladders because it adds some interesting dynamic to the maps, but if you want to be a ranged character you should sacrifice more in melee for that imo. If you're good at melee you only really need to be able to block and have an OK weapon anyway.
The problem with a static test like this is there is little to no variation and no conditional situations being met. Your tests are not an active field of engagement. They are a basis for potential damage and potential damage alone and potential damage can't be justifiably nerfed or buffed by shooting a target that wants to be hit from a distance that is close range.I'm not picking up what you're putting down here. As far as I understand it, Thryn's purpose was to compare the damage outputs of arbs and longbows. This test being static, without any "variations" other than the ones being measured (arb/bow, armor levels) changing, is exactly what makes it legitimate. There isn't any need to introduce other variables to compare the damage that arbalests and longbows can do, if that's the full extent of what you want to measure. It's not about exactly what happens on NA1, it's about putting xbows and bows into the same scenario so what you're getting is an accurate measurement for the purpose of their comparison. There's literally no other way to do it. The question ¿is the disparity between xbows and bows a problemo? is raised effectively by these results,
Damage decreases as the bolt/arrow travels distance - situationally speaking if someone was that close to you You'd have 1 chance to shoot him with the arb maybe 2 chances with the yew longbow. It is far more likely to deal 0 damage because the person is aware of ur presence near them especially at that range.
The basis for testing in a static environment is so that comparable and reproducible results can be obtained. I did not say that the damage output represented by myamateurishtesting reflected 100% true gameplay experience, but there is one thing to note: you will never be able to test in a manner that produces identical results as to what occurs in a public server. Additionally, the sheer number of variables going into damage calculations means that "perfect" balance is never going to be achieved.
Balance is based upon damage outputs. We can measure how much damage is being done and alter varying factors to further explore the path toward reaching what we believe to be balanced. Now, I understand your argument. You're saying I didn't flesh out all of the other factors that go into ranged damage calculations. Speed bonus, damage falloff due to distance, etc. You are correct, and that's why I didn't make any recommendations regarding the damage values of these weapons because further testing obviously needs to be carried out.
One thing is fundamentally clear: if you meet the strength requirements, you can use a crossbow. Even if you don't have weapon proficiency in crossbows, you can still be deadly with them. In order to play as an archer, you MUST put points into power draw, making you less effective at any other ability that you choose to forsake so that you may use a bow. Crossbows do not require you to give up anything (besides wpf if you want to be pinpoint accurate) in order to be effective so long as you meet a particular crossbow's strength requirement.
Skillful archers can hit these shots close range. Just because people miss shots doesn't mean that a weapon deals too little or too much damage. This would be more of a question of accuracy, and I highly doubt that you will argue that people miss close-range shots because their reticle stretches from corner to corner of the screen. "We can't change damage values because they're hard to shoot when they juke" is saying that "we need to have all melee weapons 1 shot people because they can block and it is annoying when they block all of my swings." The logic on either situation doesn't add up.
Also, your point assumes that archers are static on the battlefield.Most ranged players utilize the WASD keys to move about the battlefield. If you approach them, they generally will run away from you so they may gain an additional opportunity to fire a shot. I think you'd agree with this because you use this tactic yourself.
Someone seems to have punched the number pad to decide the slot requirements for melee weapons. Just scroll down 1 handers and see. 0 slots still pop up 3/4 down the list. Gross Messer 0 slot? What the...You could add some slot requirements on ammo tooPersonally, I don't think there should be any 0 slot weapons past Hand Axe, but I'd like to know how the community feels about this before I discuss any changes with other balancers.
Personally, I don't think there should be any 0 slot weapons past Hand Axe, but I'd like to know how the community feels about this before I discuss any changes with other balancers.
Who'd use the short swords then ? The maces are perhaps overkill, but why would the short swords be rendered useless ?They were 1 slot in 2012/13 and cheaper on average
cheaper on average
No I think thread was created because ranged was destroying everything on EU1 for several hours till the server pop all left
We're in 2017, everyone with some playtime has at least 500k of gold in their pockets. Price isn't a factor in anything nowadaysit will be again
Crossing out everything that I think is just sarcasm and can be ignored. Please do correct me if there was actually something useful.
I agree; We can never achieve a perfect balance due to the number of calculations going into damage. I also want it to be clear that I never said there was no point to test in a static environment I was just pointing out the things left out and there are many more.
I, like you, wouldn't want faulty tests to affect balance in a poor and illogical way. I am glad you agree that a test like the one you did is just the basic groundwork to continue testing. (which Rico and I have already done)
Hold your horses. You can't hide behind "but you didn't take into consideration ALL of muh factorsss." A test like this helps identify a base level damage output. From this point on, damage calculations deviate from the norm based on things like movement speed, distance, etc. It is completely feasible to determine whether or not something is doing too much damage even from a simple test like this. If I hit someone with snowball and it did half health through plate armor, your first reaction wouldn't be "it was all movement speed." It's also important to point out that a majority of players on EU1 have currently been undergoing heavy crossbow damage testing (unwillingly) and it seems crossbows may be a bit out of line. However, because I believe thorough testing should commence before changes impacting players takes place, I'm perfectly fine with going through all the ropes before implementing changes.
While yes anyone can pick up a xbow if they meet the requirement that is the way it has always been. and it should be changed
Not saying its ideal but there are other factors to look at when deciding if someone is a dedicated build or not and sacrifices that people make to increase their ability to project damage from further away. what are these factors? you can't just say you're wrong because of x and not give x
I will not argue with your statement because I have always been fundamentally against no investment xbows being able to produce damage the exact same as someone that clearly makes sacrifices and dedicates to the build for ranged gameplay rather than using it as a sidearm which was a common practice until we increased the slots requirements a year ago? almost 2 years ago? idk can't remember an exact date. That's not even where this argument is. This isn't "I'm a dedicated crossbow player and someone who is not can deal as much damage as me." This is literally "every person has to choose a class except for crossbowman." Never thought I'd stand up for archers but shit, the only way you get any effective damage output as an archer is when you're a strength build. You're going to be easier to catch and be fuck all in melee as opposed to some idiot who can get an arbalest, shoot into melee, deal half a person's entire hp, and then charge in.
Let me explain. As damage increases accuracy decreases (there is no way to counter this) Damage effects both reticle size and weight of invested WPF. While accuracy only effects reticle size.
If we implemented something like PD on top of this formula you'd have a mess. but I already talked to Professor about PD and the possible options there if it were possible.
What I do is irrelevant and yes range and melee both move on the battlefield thank you for that bit of information I don't know what I would have done without it. *sarcasm aside* Its far more likely a Bowman will get additional shots due to their reload speed and the ability to move while reloading. (Just a thought) Here's just a thought, I didn't say anything about changing reload speeds for either bows or crossbows. You said that crossbows only get to fire 1 shot close range. I call bullshit, they run away and reload and they have ample time to fire at range (btw let's not pretend that crossbows don't do damage at range). Now it seems we're at a point where you plan to pick and choose each individual factor to hoist up your argument.
At this point no one has specifically said why we can't make crossbows require power draw other than "messy formula." All of M&B is shitty formulas, put in power draw and make some tweaks. You're goddamn item balancers, test some shit out. As it stands, crossbows have a COMPLETE ADVANTAGE OVER EVERY OTHER CLASS. THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF OVERPOWERED.
Who are you to make demands? It's not like you're suggesting changes, you're demanding them, claiming your subjective opinions to be correct.
Personally, I don't think there should be any 0 slot weapons past Hand Axe, but I'd like to know how the community feels about this before I discuss any changes with other balancers.to me there is nothing to change with slots... or discuss about!
Thryn enlightened me today, please add 6 PD & 6 PT requirement for arb to make it balanced and fair.
Myself and Rico are testing a variety of builds (throwing/archery/crossbow/HA/HX) to see if there are ways to tweak them effectively without completely nerfing dedicated builds out of existence as previous balancers have practiced.[/color]
At this point no one has specifically said why we can't make crossbows require power draw other than "messy formula." All of M&B is shitty formulas, put in power draw and make some tweaks.
Then there also could be an item like a winch or special hook that helps with the PD check when having it in the inventory but takes away a slot and adds weight.
Myth has it that these things will shoot through 100mm oak planks and all that guff, reality is I am afraid different. The impact energy of this bow is similar to that of a 150lb English war bow, so enough to kill at distance and sometimes through armour. The impact energy is around 140J, so a little more than a .22 long rifle round; your basic bullet for rabbits.
So our medieval ancestors took what they considered to be very powerful weapons onto the battle field that in modern energy delivery terms you would use against rabbits.
my point in comparing them was that you need to specifically tailor a build toward high damage to be a powerful archer whereas you can do half a tincan's health reliably with 16 strength and your trusty ARBS
Please put this in the OP.
But I'm not sure I understand the argument. Should a crossbow do less damage than a weapon that can fire more quickly? Or do you believe that there should be more requirements to use a weapon that does more damage, even though it already fires more slowly?
To those that think archery should be nerfed, I tanked 23 shots on NA1 from an archer last night who was using a yew longbow.... With only 61 body armor and 48 head...That Archer was either awful or poorly built his archer, I've been hit in the head with 61 head armour and 10 IF and had only 5% health left from it.
That Archer was either awful or poorly built his archer, I've been hit in the head with 61 head armour and 10 IF and had only 5% health left from it.
Singnificantly increasing the required wpf and slightly increasing the damage on the arbalest while reducing the damage on heavy crossbow could make sense. So the dedicated xbow only player will be rewarded as he should, meanwhile xbowmen who also favor melee will have to sacrifice more.
Reticle for throwing lances(click to show/hide)
shit idea sryn, that means dedicated x bow players would only play with arbalest, thats actually not have its supposed to be.
Arbalest is ment to be a siege defense weapon tbh, the lighter ones are for field battles.
Arbalest and heavy x bow should stay 3 slot, that would prevent them from using 2h's and heavy polearms. That would also mean they would have to use 0 slot 1h's if they want an additional shield.
solved, next problem pls.
I, like you, wouldn't want faulty tests to affect balance in a poor and illogical way. I am glad you agree that a test like the one you did is just the basic groundwork to continue testing. (which Rico and I have already done)
talked a lot last night with desire, there might be something causing loads of extra damage output irrespective of the power draw argument
if someone figures out how or why it seems like crossbows are doing more damage than the previous patch of destiny game build, we might get this conundrum under control
as it stands right now, arbs can two shot a tin can in 70 plate armor
Plate getting 2 shot by arb is bad but 37h 54b 58l heraldic mail getting 1 shot by plate goon with flamburger is ok?
I was 1 shot by Random dude with a flamberger. Was low pop so I went to fight someone else instead of 2 team him but he killed my team mate and came up behind me and 1 shot me before I even made it to young dreamer. There's your proof.
I have survived arrows and bolts to the head before with unloomed kettle helmet.
Full hp, 1 headshot from an archer and Astorga dies, I love realism, but it applies to everyone equally. :lol:
Strength: 18
Agility: 24
Iron Flesh: 1
Head armor:55
http://c-rpg.net/?page=itemdetail&id=5392,5392 (http://c-rpg.net/?page=itemdetail&id=5392,5392)
I was 1 shot by Random dude with a flamberger. Was low pop so I went to fight someone else instead of 2 team him but he killed my team mate and came up behind me and 1 shot me before I even made it to young dreamer. There's your proof.
I have survived arrows and bolts to the head before with unloomed kettle helmet.
you realize this is equivalent to saying "str build flamberge 1 shot me!!11! nerf !11!!"Isn't it equivalent to what your saying about ranged? I didn't run out and make a "the plate problem" thread after it happened either. I guess fast moving plate is ok though, he had to go up hill a bit to get me and you heard him say himself he got a super fast hit on me.
Isn't it equivalent to what your saying about ranged? I didn't run out and make a "the plate problem" thread after it happened either.
If you were the guy that i jump slashed in the face, then yeah, I had a lot of speed in that attack.I only mentioned low pop to show I had received no damage from other sources. I would rather not play on NA server as there are those there that feel they have a right insult you if they are better at the game than you, even going so far as to use you to insult a player you killed. I use to play on EU alot Friday and Saturday nights after na died down and have never been treated like that there unfortunately 190-200+ ping in this game isn't fun.
2 shots from arby should kill a tank, otherwise it feels a bit useless, doesn't it?
Also, seeing as you brought up the "low pop" thing, it really ticks me off how some people play in low pop na1. It's a battle, if you're outnumbered, good luck, if you have the numbers, gank. That's how it should be. The best way to kill someone is when they're engaged with another fighter (and if you spectate eu1 you'll see this happening ALL the time.) Most people block really well and I prefer to kill people quickly to make the odds in my teams favour. That's another reason I hate the "duel me if your team have 4 guys but I am the last man alive". It's entirely possible for the 1 guy to kill all 4 if he's a good dueller and has the equipment for it, but the dudes who fought hard to make it 4:1 now have to submit to this silly "honour" idea?
There are people in NA that I just don't want on my team because they won't help me in a fight. I don't really want them on the other team either because some other dudes on my team will feel "honour-bound" to duel them, and most likely lose.
Some builds/weapons are made for duelling, mine is not and the dudes who hang back all round just so they can be the last alive and duel just kills the fun in NA1 for me. I prefer eu1 or na7 because of it, actually.
Maybe my feelings are completely different to everybody else in NA, and if so I just have to suck it up, but if you're expecting me to duel in a battle server, it's not gonna happen ;)
Make a new thread with a fair OP that discusses more than just damage. There are drawbacks, and crossbows get nerfed all the time. I can't trust a poll like this, because I don't know the motive for the person that favors a nerf. Every nerf vote could be "it killed me so I don't like it!" It also gives no thought to hybrid builds. I'm 113 1-hand / 133 xbow with 7 WM. 184 wpf? That build doesn't have enough points to defend itself in melee even at 8 WM. No, there are too many nuances being ignored here.
unless you weren't riding full speed towards the archer, a shot like that shouldn't kill you :x
Asheram that is unfortunate that it happens on na1 and I'm not innocent I trash talk as well but saying native or eu don't do it is wrong since I've been on both and been shit talked on both by numerous players lolok let me clarify, I said it hasn't happened to me on eu or native, not saying it doesn't happen. Maybe it's because EU doesn't know me well enough to do it. I am even worse at game in EU with 190-200+ ping.
please explain to me how it is fair to do this much damage
Arbalest: 8 bolts per minute on 184 wpf
Archer: 17 arrows per minute on 121 wpf (yew longbow)
Well, I forgot to include this to my thoughts;As much as I hate those cunts who use the spamovaklion with arbalests I disagree, like Cassi said they're supposed to be a siege defense weapon, their reload time should reflect that. An increase in their reload time would balance it out imo.
Arbalest should be 4 slots. There are enough decent 0 slots around to pick from, but it would prevent the user from abusing weapons like spathovaklion and other maces in general, elite scimitar etc. This would give room for maces like german spiral a chance to actually be used in the field. Also all crossbow weights should increase, meaning that playstyle of "when get caught my any melee just run until you can reload" will be less efficient, forcing the crossbowman to either hide real good, or stick with his teammates. As he should.
Bear in mind that this suggestion is the part2 of the first one I made, meaning cutting melee and running capabilities of the arbalest is also supported with higher damage and one shot capabilities.
You said it yourself:
The archer fires more than twice as fast AND can move while reloading which is a major factor outside of a controlled test. Look at your damage examples again, but compare two arrows to one bolt. The arrow wins in the 30, 50, and 70 armor catagories. Your test ignores the defining trait that separates bows and crossbows: speed/mobility versus power.
Bolt do more damage than an arrow. Thats a fact and it should be so
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Gandalf must never have played native if he thinks xbows reload fast here.
This is why I have no faith in public votes. Those 27 people who said archery should be nerfed are clueless, they don't give a shit about balance, they just voted so because they don't like getting shot at (duh!).
I'm a 21-21 built archer with +3 longbow and bodkins, 7 pd. I can barely do any damage. I can't even one shot other archers with a hs. I love playing with a rusbow or horn bow but they're useless. Imagine being a 2hander and your only viable option is great maul or sth.
Make xbows do less damage but reload as fast as native.
can you think of any reasons as to why the developers might not want to go forward with this idea?visitors can't see pics , please register or login
str archer builds are still present and dominant...
now str is all about accuracy and damage agi is just speed rating...
You said it yourself:
The archer fires more than twice as fast AND can move while reloading which is a major factor outside of a controlled test. Look at your damage examples again, but compare two arrows to one bolt. The arrow wins in the 30, 50, and 70 armor catagories. Your test ignores the defining trait that separates bows and crossbows: speed/mobility versus power.
the most funny is now archers have lost their mobility and xbowers who are suposed to be a static class have more mobility than archers ...
and i also dont get why the 3 most powerfull bows have also the bigest accuracy... wich make them wait to powerfull and easy.
there is no point anymore at using something else than yew longbow or longbow .
mw yew longbow : 105 accuracy
mw longbow : 106 accuracy (dafuk its suposed to be a bow hard to bend)
mw rusbow : 105
mw composite bow : 104
mw horn bow : 104
imo longbows should be around 98 and 99 accuracy
rusbow around 100
composite and horn around 103/104 like they are now ...
most of the time i play with horn wich deal no damage, and yesterday i was like dam it i need more damage i will have to use a longbow but because my 18 str i will have shit accuracy then i realize than i was rly much more accurate with a yew longbow than my hornbow
to me it's a no sense and make str build way too accurate...
the most funny is now archers have lost their mobility and xbowers who are suposed to be a static class have more mobility than archers ...
and i also dont get why the 3 most powerfull bows have also the bigest accuracy... wich make them wait to powerfull and easy.
there is no point anymore at using something else than yew longbow or longbow .
mw yew longbow : 105 accuracy
mw longbow : 106 accuracy (dafuk its suposed to be a bow hard to bend and it's also one of the most powerfull)
mw rusbow : 105
mw composite bow : 104
mw horn bow : 104
imo longbows should be around 98 and 99 accuracy
rusbow around 100
composite and horn around 103/104 like they are now ...
most of the time i play with horn wich deal no damage, and yesterday i was like dam i need more damage, i will have to use a longbow but because my 18 str i will have shit accuracy then i realize than i was rly much more accurate with a yew longbow than my hornbow
to me it's a no sense and make str build way too accurate...
I agree, powerful bows should be more 'cannon' like. less accuracy for much higher damage. the shorter bows should be the less damaging sniper bows.
Again get your facts straight, with 120wpf and 10PD, I can't hold my arrow for more than .5 second and have some shitty initial dispersion, meaning I can't shoot beyond 40m and score headshots most of the time; also add to that I can not shoot more than 15 arrows per minute, or an arrow every 4 seconds.
Firstly, I'm posting this in General Discussion because I believe that it will attract more eyes and this discussion needs to be presented (or continued) in a manner that will expose itself to as much of the playerbase as possible.
I decided to test some of the capabilities of ranged builds that are attainable in cRPG. Below is the data that I collected on a character that had 59 hit points (24 strength and no Iron Flesh).▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
I only tested two builds: one for crossbow, one for archery. The crossbow build was designed to meet the basic requirements of using an arbalest (16 strength) whilst the archery build focused on a strength based yew longbowman (30 strength and 12 athletics).
Important info regarding builds:
Arbalest: Yew Longbow Archer:
18 strength 30 strength
184 wpf 121 wpf(click to show/hide)(click to show/hide)
*Note that all shots were taken from the same distance as represented by the "Reticle for Arbalest" screenshot.
On the testing parameters:
Each shot was fired at a non-moving (no speed bonus) target that wore armors at varying intervals. The armor scales as follows: 0, 30, 50, 70. These intervals were chosen to represent base damage, light armor, medium armor, and heavy armor. No ranged weapon tested utilized heirloom points. The archer utilized bodkin arrows and the arbalest used steel bolts.
Now, for damage reports:
Archer:(click to show/hide)
Arbalest:(click to show/hide)
Estimated Hit point calculations:(click to show/hide)
Arbalest: 8 bolts per minute on 184 wpf
Archer: 17 arrows per minute on 121 wpf (yew longbow)
Final note: The arbalest does not have any power draw requirements, meaning anyone who has 16+ strength can use it. Additionally, you do not need to bring bolts into battle because it comes preloaded on spawn.
Seriously, no.
The high accuracy values are here to compensate for the fact that the more damage your bow does, the less accurate it actually is. A horn bow will ALWAYS be more accurate than a Yew Longbow, nearly regardless of WPF.
Now, be careful for what you wish for. If you touch the accuracy values on higher end bows, STR builds will be killed off entirely, while agi builds will remain as ineffective (read : garbage) as they already are. I don't know what you're trying to achieve, but nerfing accuracy this much would basically turn longbowmen into RNG characters more than anything else, dealing the same amount of damage, but with such a low accuracy it'd be comically bad. Agi archers, on the other hand, would be able to make use of longbows, but would still be stuck into the trashcan they're already at because the damage values would be unchanged.
I'll repost this, because it seems neither of you seem to have actually read it.
Tell me more about being accurate when I can't headshot people beyond 50m half of the time.
EDIT :
Here, just to prove you're completely wrong about accuracy, here is a screen comparison, even better that the Yew Longbow I'm using only does 31 damage instead of 32 because I'm too poor to buy a final LP, meaning I should be even less accurate. If you bothered to back your claims about accuracy with screenshots, that'd be great.
Horn Bow : https://imgur.com/a/SOvrq
Yew Longbow : https://imgur.com/a/bvTV0
The damage is alot higher when someone is moving.
Also Arbalest headshot will kill anything in 1 shot regardless of IF or Armor.
dmg can be a lot lower if someone is moving the opposite direction
it depends on what is going on exactly when someone is shot, but if we shoot a static target over and over we can get a pretty good understanding of what average damage output is
Most of the ridiculously high damage comes from the speed and elevation damage bonuses not the base damage. Hardly anyone is not moving when they get shot.
you can't say for certain as for which direction each person is moving at all times and whether or not that shot is doing more or less dmg based on speed bonus
i'd say that arbalest doing ~36 dmg thru tincan is extremely powerful and bumping it up another 8 points with speed damage is saying something
if ur arguing that my test represents on average lower outputs than what you'd experience in battle server, i'd understand your point better
I didn't make any claims about accuracy, only made a suggestion based off of my experience.
That bit was mainly destined to Blackbow, his claims are just wrong. What you said however, I do not agree with at all, if anything, the last thing this game needs is some more RNG, truly not a good idea especially when we're talking about skill-based games.Quotepowerful bows should be more 'cannon' like. less accuracy for much higher damage. the shorter bows should be the less damaging sniper bows.The thing is that it is already the case, and pushing it any further will just throw off the balance completely.
Also, you say that with 10 pd and 120 wpf that you have very a very small window for "accurate" fire. I feel as though 30 strength on an archer should be as hindering as it would for an infantryman with 30 strength; as infantry with a 30/9 build, you would have 3 WM which is 100 wpf in any melee weapon. With that wpf you are are looking at getting stunlocked when you stab, have poor overall timing, etc. Also 3 athletics is going to make footwork impossible. All-in-all you are going to be a 1 trick pony: smashing people's asses in groupfights and maybe getting those lucky hits in duels.
You highlight the drawbacks of not having a lot of AGI, well, guess what, I can't have any footwork either, have even less hp, just 5 wpf in melee, and so on... STR archers deal with the same problems as melee characters focused on STR.
I will do some testing with bows and stats when I get a friend on to test with me. I'll do some tests with low str longbow builds and high str horn bow builds and just see how it all looks. I'm not an archer in cRPG by any means so I'm not trying to be pretentious here, but I've been shot my archers in cRPG for 5 years and have a good feel for how strong they should be against various infantry builds.
You'll likely find the same results as I did :
- you'll be slower to draw your bow
- your arrows will be faster
- your initial spread will be mediocre, regardless of your build (27/15 or 30/12)
- said spread will bloom way faster with a Yew Longbow than with a Horn Bow or any bow with less damage
- initial spread will be tighter with lower damage bows in general (bar the short bow and the regular bow for their very low accuracy value)
Of all the things to nerf (and if a nerf there needs to be), the accuracy of strength builds is the last thing to pick from. You sacrifice already a lot by going for such build.
Lastly, bows shouldn't be pinpoint accurate at more than 50m at all, doesn't that fall under the purpose of a crossbow in the game's meta?
The crossbow, is more anchored into a sniper role because of the unlimited time you can spend with the bolt ready to release; as well as very high damage, speed and base accuracy values, and also no power draw penalties at all, which means even more accuracy. An arbalest shot will always be way faster than a shot from a composite bow and 8 PD (highest arrow speed combination), and currently, the bows at 28 base damage and above are the least accurate of all.
Seriously, no.
The high accuracy values are here to compensate for the fact that the more damage your bow does, the less accurate it actually is. A horn bow will ALWAYS be more accurate than a Yew Longbow, nearly regardless of WPF.
Now, be careful for what you wish for. If you touch the accuracy values on higher end bows, STR builds will be killed off entirely, while agi builds will remain as ineffective (read : garbage) as they already are. I don't know what you're trying to achieve, but nerfing accuracy this much would basically turn longbowmen into RNG characters more than anything else, dealing the same amount of damage, but with such a low accuracy it'd be comically bad. Agi archers, on the other hand, would be able to make use of longbows, but would still be stuck into the trashcan they're already at because the damage values would be unchanged.
I'll repost this, because it seems neither of you seem to have actually read it.
Tell me more about being accurate when I can't headshot people beyond 50m half of the time.
EDIT :
Here, just to prove you're completely wrong about accuracy, here is a screen comparison, even better that the Yew Longbow I'm using only does 31 damage instead of 32 because I'm too poor to buy a final LP, meaning I should be even less accurate. If you bothered to back your claims about accuracy with screenshots, that'd be great.
Horn Bow : https://imgur.com/a/SOvrq
Yew Longbow : https://imgur.com/a/bvTV0
TLDR : Powerful bows aren't accurate with high strength builds, nerfing their accuracy would be a huge mistake. I enjoy archery as a class, but I can't tell how many shots I've missed just because of how inaccurate my character is. While a nerf is what most people want, I think it needs a revamp, separating the bows further between fast, and slow firing bows, and increasing the damage all across the board with a big increase in draw times, so STR builds are heavily penalized for missing due to their low wpf, while AGI and balanced archer builds will deal less damage overall, but have more chances to hit a target in a time window.
Eu1 is dying to ranged spam, then dying to cav spam, if you survive those you die to the groups of 5-6 good players who run around together. Its always been that way.
Some minor things, but in the end people play those classes because they are still fun.
reintroduce instant rearing horses with spears
explain plz because I get reared by any polearm and 2h in polearm mode there is out there
Buff melee, better shields & better spears. Bigger block radius on shields, reintroduce instant rearing horses with spears.
Some minor things, but in the end people play those classes because they are still fun. I get very bored with melee quick, something about the pace it gone. I can see how people enjoy ranged more, its probably way more rewarding gameplay wise. Same with cav, you get fast paced gameplay with a lot of potential oneshot kills. Compared to melee where you struggle to kill anyone because people block and tank so much.
Most of the ridiculously high damage comes from the speed and elevation damage bonuses not the base damage. Hardly anyone is not moving when they get shot.
I'm sure that was changed at some point to nerf longer stabbing polearmsthat change is unacceptable. longer stabbing polearms must do at least 40 p damage on swing and thrust, patching game right now. don't worry, the patch will only break the game for 3 weeks, as normal.
that change is unacceptable. longer stabbing polearms must do at least 40 p damage on swing and thrust, patching game right now. don't worry, the patch will only break the game for 3 weeks, as normal.
that change is unacceptable. longer stabbing polearms must do at least 40 p damage on swing and thrust, patching game right now. don't worry, the patch will only break the game for 3 weeks, as normal.
High shot speed weapons profit the least from movement speed and elevation because their native speed is about a magnitude higher than any impact velocity that can be gained during flight. Throwing weapons are a different story. I explained it here (http://forum.melee.org/game-balance-discussion/longbow-worse-than-pre-patch/msg84296/#msg84296).
Furthermore at some point Tydeus even changed the parameter "missile_damage_speed_power" from the Native exponent(1.9) to a linear relation (exponent 1.0), effectively reducing damage gain/loss from midair projectile velocity change. Dunno if that was reverted though.
There are just too many archers on the server atm
at least 60% either are playing bow or using an xbow
Mercs I'm looking at you you ranged cunts!!
I think you shouldn't be able to have your cake and eat it too. If you want to be a ranged god then you shouldn't be a melee god too. Should make ammo use up slots again and get rid of 0 slot weapons. We're back in the olden days of melee/ranged hybrids that shoot all round then kill with high damage blunt weapons towards the end of the round. We have ladders too so they are safer from cavfyi, bodkin arrows ( the best option for archers) take 1 slot. So, you gotta have a 2 slot bow and 2 quivers of arrows and you're full. If you get rid of 0 slot weapons, what are archers supposed to do? They can't outrun the melee. They shouldn't have a chance fight back either? It's not like one can be a melee god with a mere spiked mace and no 1h wp.
I always thought of throwers as the middle ground between ranged and melee. If you want to be good at melee too you should be a thrower and live with the downsides of a thrower (less accurate compared to true ranged classes so have to get closer to the melee playeres and less ammo)
There is no sensible reason why archers and throwers need to take points away from other areas so they can use their ranged weapon but crossbowers don't. Yet their effectiveness as a ranged class is the same as a bowman
I do have to make sacrifices to use my crossbow, just not as much as an archer. The idea behind it is bows take training, while crossbows are like medieval guns. Just pull the trigger. The balancing factor should be mobility.
You want to talk about the way it used to be? Look at my avatar. At that time, all of those items were 1 slot.
It is simple, really, just put in POWER DRAW for crossbow archers so they are able to even pull back the crossbow.
I will say that the Mercenaries mod added a skill for crossbows called Reload. It increases reload speed obviously, but also ties higher tier crossbows to levels of the skill. 2 skill points for Crossbow, 3 points for Heavy Crossbow, and 4 for Arbalest.
If we just slap a pd requirement on crossbows then literally what is their positives over bows.
Yeah, no. We don't really need crossbows who can also be reloaded in under 1 sec. Just put in power draw requirement for crossbows without increasing the dmg of the crossbow, easy as that.
-Higher damage
-Higher accuracy
-Being able to wait for the right moment to shoot
looks good to me imo
The one where you can also be a decent melee fighter.
HMMM WHICH ONE DO I PICK?
Please Tristan. Less ammo because you shoot less in a round anyway. There is no shot delay. You can't move only in the first part of the reload. STR archers are not mobile at all, and only true STR archers can hold their bown drawn for 5-6 seconds. And they deal 25-30 damage on the body, while an arbalest bolt deals minimum 60 regardless of armor. And an archer shooting the same target twice is much, much harder than a crossbowman hitting his target once. There is no big reason why "reloading" as a skill isn't a good solution.
The one where you can also be a decent melee fighter.
...while an arbalest bolt deals minimum 60 regardless of armor.Actually arabalasts were averaging ~30-35 at mediumish range versus 'normal' plate. With maximum body armor (80), arabalast did at most 35 at closest range.
Notice in this conversation, crossbows require PD and limit their melee capabilities to roughly that of an archer (arguably more WPF)you're right, my mistake.
Please Tristan. Less ammo because you shoot less in a round anyway. There is no shot delay. You can't move only in the first part of the reload. STR archers are not mobile at all, and only true STR archers can hold their bown drawn for 5-6 seconds. And they deal 25-30 damage on the body, while an arbalest bolt deals minimum 60 regardless of armor. And an archer shooting the same target twice is much, much harder than a crossbowman hitting his target once. There is no big reason why "reloading" as a skill isn't a good solution.
instead of nerfing ranged why not buff everything else? Horses are currently pretty much made out of paper
Cavalry are already really strong. I do think that you can buff counters to cavalry though (polearms), but its hard to buff counters to ranged. Cavalry can't always go were the ranged players are especially with ladders, and shields are only really a soft counter. They remove the damage but only when certain conditions are met, and that only works at range. When you get into melee range its then melee vs melee which kind of cancels each other out. I would like melee vs melee to favour a melee focussed character, but then you kind of reduce the skill vs skill nature of the game. I think its better overall to have a mixture of making pure melee classes stronger in melee than they are, and making ranged classes a bit less dominant in groups like they are now. I think a first measure would be to make xbowers adhere to the same sort of build malluses that other classes have (make them require PD so they get fewer stats/skill points to spend), and maybe increase the weight of ranged weapons
The main counter to ranged has always been more ranged. Its like a feedback loop that occurs when people feel there is too much ranged - they play ranged to shoot the ranged guys. You don't go shield to kill them because its not a proper counter
Anyway happy christmas. Its nice to talk about nerf ranged in 2017 (and nearly 2018)
Why have balancers always been so hesitant to do something specifically about xbows though? Since early in the mod there has been some bias there. Its not like they have ever been at a point where they are nerfed so they aren't used.
Anyway I don't want to be too harsh but its been a fact since very early on that xbowers get some elevated status in this mod
In my opinion the issue is ranged can take care of themselves too well in melee. I think buffing the impact WPF has at higher melee levels (say 100+) would fix this as not only would it make melee fights faster and therefore more fun, but it would make non-dedicated melee players less effective against fully proficient melee players. If I'm not mistaken archery is more strength focused now anyway meaning kiting is less of an issue, crossbows however do still have the issue where they can get 100+ in melee, plus 7-8 athletics. This would be fixed by increasing the strength requirement for crossbows as well as the WPF required to be effective with them meaning you need to go all in with a shotgun build with a hunting crossbow or go full ranged with an arbalest but you won't be so effective in melee or be able to kite.
It would nerf strength builds melee builds indirectly though, I don't know what people's stances are on this.
people who QQ about ranged and then can't kill them in melee as infantryman should not be listened to.
I wonder how faster combat would affect people with 70-100 ping though. I feel like the low ping advantage only increases with faster combat speeds.
people who QQ about ranged and then can't kill them in melee as infantryman should not be listened to.
people who QQ about ranged and then can't kill them in melee as infantryman should not be listened to.
I don´t really get this discussion about what should be nerfed and what is unfair. The only thing that is different right now is that people have to get used to having less str. basically every class. Give people more hp or make armors stronger and the whole discussion is over. Or just make the pierce damage less effective, don´t fuck over classes that some people love to play.
I wonder how faster combat would affect people with 70-100 ping though. I feel like the low ping advantage only increases with faster combat speeds.
I know it's obvious at this point, but the dev team, specifically Professor, and our balancers are looking into the issue, and it is taking as much time as it is going to take because we want to actually do a good job of fixing the ranged issue for MORE than 1 class, without fucking up the other classes or making any of them obsolete/useless. It's not as simple as tweaking accuarcy/damage values, and it requires more time to make sure we do a good job with it, instead of another "your mother asshole i tragedy" nerf.
[crossbow] continues to get buffed over and over while everything else is left unchanged.You won! That's the most bullshit statement in the whole thread! Here's your trophy!
I am still convinced the only real issue with archery and xbow is the amount of headshots. in the current state of cRPG, people aim for the head too easily and if you look through "L" logs, you will see around >50% of the ranged kills as headshots.
Thats not how its ment to be. Archers pinpoint accuracy on such a huge distance is pure bullshit tbh, I have no idea why people are not bothered about this.
If we would force ranged to aim mainly for body to land a hit, but make headshots a viable thing for very short distances only the probably would solve itself.
Archers can be pinpoint accurate with hybrid builds atm, thats not how its supposed to be.
Either you are pinpoint accurate but have no melee wpf at all, or you have a healthy looking crosshair and some melee skills aswell.
People like ReD_WaRzzz just have pure bullshit builds sorry. I have gathered screenshots of him when he was dealing accurate headshots into melee duels and that should not be possible. A guy in clothes ruling scoreboard with 12/1 but didnt encounter a single melee duel yet.
Headshooting are supposed to be a rarity, not the common.
If there is a change to combat speed, it must be done through a turn speed buff instead of simply increasing animation speed. Else high ping (and even average ping) will suffer and instant hit sweet points will become aggravating.
The balancer exclusively plays xbow only, but it's only a coincidence it continues to get buffed over and over while everything else is left unchanged.Nothing has been done to buff xbow in the past few months. Even the level revert did not do much, since the difficulties were scaled back in a similar manner.
If there is a change to combat speed, it must be done through a turn speed buff instead of simply increasing animation speed. Else high ping (and even average ping) will suffer and instant hit sweet points will become aggravating.Yes, I am interested in increasing turn speed. It will take me time to figure out what was changed when it was nerfed all those years back, but once I find it, changing it will be simple. Increasing weapon speeds is indeed a bad idea, because not only does it make playing high ping very frustrating, it once again puts strain on the engine, as level 37+ builds did.
cassi wanting to nerf headshots
people who QQ about ranged and then can't kill them in melee as infantryman should not be listened to.Can't really agree with that as a lot of C-RPG players are high skill players, there are plenty of archers who I wouldn't hole a candle to in melee combat simply because they are better at the game than I am. However, that doesn't make an opinion I have null and void. You're ignorant to think that; the only person who shouldn't be listened to here is you.
afaik the spookiest class that prof has been looking at b4 i posted this dumpster fire of a thread was throwing
where arbs and longbow have damage per minute outputs at around 250 and 320 respectively, throwing can potentially reach over 1000
i think san had buffed the headshot damage multiplier making it deal outrageous amounts of damage. if you use a quick reloading crossbow, you can put a hurtin on people if you get headshots consistently
The balancer exclusively plays xbow only, but it's only a coincidence it continues to get buffed over and over while everything else is left unchanged.
Increased the weights.
Increased the strength requirements.
Increased the slot requirements.
Decreased the ammo counts bolts provided (steel and bolt).
Increased the weight of bolts.
Decreased reload times.
Decreased missile speed - thx professor I forgot that one!
Are you referring to those changes?
Are you ignorant of this specific subject or just most things in general?
Am I wrong in thinking ammo used to use a slot too? If I am fair enough, but that seems kind of odd to not need a slot for the ammo. A lot of really good 1 handers became 0 slot too. And you have some 1 slot 2 handers.
Just saying you should try to be fair and balanced when you list off changes. It won't help to attack players like that too calling him ignorant. I remember from years and years ago you fought to avoid any nerfs to xbows. I mean every "nerf ranged" thread there would be some reason why xbows need to be kept as strong as possible.
Now the only class the balancers play is the one that everyone says is OP? Sounds about right. I would suggest trying to get more balancers that see the game from another perspective
Increased the weights.i recomand you to go play archer with the exact same amount of str/agi you play on your xbower
But still able to go for 8ath so weights change nothing (wich is the only ranged class who still can go for 8 ath and dealing so much dmg)
Increased the strength requirements.
16 str for the most powerfull xbow allow you to go for agi builds when it should be around 24 str to compensate the no pd/pt requierement
Increased the slot requirements.
3 slot for arba and 0 slots for bolts, so nothing is pushing you to use 0 slots weapons unlike for archers and so you can keep using your op fucking 1h mace
Decreased the ammo counts bolts provided (steel and bolt).
but only one of those bolts will remove 90% of your hp on balanced and most comon builds
Increased the weight of bolts.
once again weight does nothing coz you are allowed to go for too much agi
Decreased reload times.
still way not enough... the most comon case i see happening all the time is :
you shoot someone (he loose more than half hp)
your ultra athlétic speed allow you to go get cover so easy than the time the guy is coming to get you
xbow is reloaded and the guy is dead.... it's like this all the time...
the most funny part is xbow reload speed is so close now of str bow bending time
Decreased missile speed - thx professor I forgot that one!
and still way too accurate as fuck...
Decreased Bolt slot requirement - Grumps
to allow you to use 1 slot weapons...
why 100% of xbowers are playing with 1h blunt weapon ?
Are you referring to those changes?
i do and those change are a drop of water in an ocean
Are you ignorant of this specific subject or just most things in general?
in what 7 years of crpg maybe i never saw xbow so op and so much played by so many people...
so are you going to faith the truth and doing your item balancer job? or you gonna stay on your position
when everybody is telling you xbow need a fucking nerf
Am I wrong in thinking ammo used to use a slot too? If I am fair enough, but that seems kind of odd to not need a slot for the ammo. A lot of really good 1 handers became 0 slot too. And you have some 1 slot 2 handers. Not sure what other changes might have happened behind the scenes with the code
Just saying you should try to be fair and balanced when you list off changes and it won't help to attack players like that calling him ignorant. I remember from years and years ago you fought to avoid any nerfs to xbows. I mean every "nerf ranged" thread there would be some reason why xbows need to be kept as strong as possible. Now the only class the balancers play is the one that everyone says is OP? Surely you can see why people might feel there is a conflict of interest there. I would suggest trying to get more balancers that see the game from another perspective, otherwise there will always be a sense that you have to have a big "nerf ranged" angry forum thread every time the ranged classes get out of control
edit @ Thryn I was hesitant to increase armor soak because doing so would nullify some damage cut based weapons do more so than the pierce damage standard of range. While yes it would effectively reduce range damage it would also result in the majority of the population's primary weapons dealing significantly less damage. I have done zero playtests of various melee builds I'm not really sure how melee dmg stands atm I'm pretty busy testing throwing/xbow/archery. [/color]
I rarely get shot and if I do its a mistake on my part though even then the damage is laughable. as a medium armored range player seeing an arbalest do a mere 45% of my HP seems a bit off when you compare the stories that people say about taking 90% of their hp.
I have done zero playtests of various melee builds I'm not really sure how melee dmg stands atm
Good joke Blackbow Doing that would make xbows pinpoint accurate...
but its already the case,xbow accuracy is insane with or without 0 wpf, since when str improve xbow accuracy?
is it not suposed to be wpf?
and make 0 wpf a more than viable option so you'd have strength builds with 1 wpf able to headshot reliably from even further than 185 WPF does now.
none of other ranged class can now have so much wpf and deal so much damage so when are you taking that in consideration to balance xbows ?
Not to mention 65 damage just doesn't cut it. After armor soak values and the randomness of dmg you will produce about as much damage as you could do with a stick in melee against fully armored opponents.
this one is pure lie and bullshit ! re watch damage test made by thryn, on a 21/21 char with 7 if and 62 body armor without moving i loose 80% of my hp
Ik this because that is what Raylin attempted to do and it failed very horribly. The rate of fire was incredibly slow and a horn bow out damaged arbalest every single shot. at a more than double the rate of fire. I'm sorry to say but your buddy's balance just does not work, like at all.
i agree he failed at balancing but he tried atleast, unlike you who refuse any change and want to keep your favorit class op as fuck when all ranged class are close to be balanced
even when all the community is telling you xbow are too powerfull you dont listen !
so now its time to find solutions !
Arbalest does around 28-40 damage on average reducing damage by 20 would move the average to a whopping 8-20 dmg range
once again this bull shit, like i said i lost 80% of my hp removing 20 dmg from arbalest should just take only 50 and 60% of my hp
wich is already the double of a medium archery build
Needless to say, weight does have a significant impact on how range players play their class. Increasing bolt weight and xbow weight increased weight of the average xbow user with (1 slot of bolts) by about 50% if they added another slot of bolts they received extra punishment to their kiting abilities.
dude open your eyes plz all xbowers on eu server are still kiting and nobody is able to catch them...
Xbowers are unable to effectively run away if they sport anything that is considered light armor.
once again open your eyes come spec on eu server they all can run away and its the last ranged class who still can
same thing goes for other ranged about light armor...
they can maintain distance but they will be unable to use their primary weapon effectively taking them out of the game.
yeah like archers who cant put any point in melee because they have to spend all wpf in archery with a str build to be able to do a bit of damage
As is you can't even really melee well with the arbalest in your inventory to defend yourself you have to drop your primary weapon and fight near it so you might have a chance of picking it back up again.
actually ofc you can because most of xbowers have around 24 agi so enough wpf to split between melee and xbow
and they dont have pd/pt requierement so xbowers still can put point in power strike where archers and throwers cant.
100% of xbowers do not use blunt weapons the majority of xbowers in NA use cut based side arms.
what is actual na population ? because on eu we are around 100 players everyday and 20 or 30 of them are xbowers
90% of them are using blunt weapons
my build at level 30 is as follows:
16-27
4 athletics
2 power strike
9 weapon master
185 wpf in xbow
77 wpf in 1h.
come eu1 pick some names check their build in database and face reality for once in your life...
they all have 8 ath 8 wm 5 or 6 ps
I use a Stick as a sidearm or a Niuweidao depending on how I want to play.
I am with Heskey on the whole range doesn't really bother me on any of my characters. I rarely get shot and if I do its a mistake on my part though even then the damage is laughable. as a medium armored range player seeing an arbalest do a mere 45% of my HP seems a bit off when you compare the stories that people say about taking 90% of their hp.
you are such of bad faith dude it's insane when ppl speak about 90% it is true but when many people is telling you this you should think about it and start to question yourself
edit @ Thryn I was hesitant to increase armor soak because doing so would nullify some damage cut based weapons do more so than the pierce damage standard of range. While yes it would effectively reduce range damage it would also result in the majority of the population's primary weapons dealing significantly less damage. I have done zero playtests of various melee builds I'm not really sure how melee dmg stands atm I'm pretty busy testing throwing/xbow/archery.
just to resume, actualy xbowers can :
- high ath and kite like archers in old times
Kiting xbowers :lol:
Crossbows are debatedly (important part here) too strong for the cost to character build they impose (compared to throwing and bows) but the fact that they cant kite and never have been able to is their natural weakness/counter part since forever. No need to add imaginary cool points to crossbows to further argue in favor of their nerfing.
Kiting xbowers :lol:dude believe me the kiting power of xbowers never been so op, kiting as an archer or a thrower is barely not possible anymore because the weight of equipement and the str needed for their builds...
Crossbows are debatedly (important part here) too strong for the cost to character build they impose (compared to throwing and bows) but the fact that they cant kite and never have been able to is their natural weakness/counter part since forever. No need to add imaginary cool points to crossbows to further argue in favor of their nerfing.
To the people in the thread who think that our balancers want to have xbows be OP, and refuse to change the class whatsoever, you are grossly mistaken. To those who propose damage/accuracy nerfs expecting them to completely solve the problem, they will not. The truth is, the stats of Xbows are rather complicated and coupled together, in such a way that changes to one stat will cause changes to another. As such, finding a solution to this isn't easy. So, give it time, our balancers are working on balancing the class.
Just give archers more firing speedGOD NO PLS NOT
Kiting xbowers :lol:
Crossbows are debatedly (important part here) too strong for the cost to character build they impose (compared to throwing and bows) but the fact that they cant kite and never have been able to is their natural weakness/counter part since forever. No need to add imaginary cool points to crossbows to further argue in favor of their nerfing.
Anyone who thinks you can't kite with an xbow hasn't tried this build out.
Not only are you going to be the fastest person on the server, you can also 1-2 shot anyone, and you don't even need the Arb or bolts loomed.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
as it stands, i think that xbow does too much damage. however, i haven't said the amount of damage that i'd like it to do. also please keep in mind that when im speaking about xbow, im talking about the arbalest. i did quite a bit of testing with other crossbows with professor earlier but i cannot rightly remember every little detail so im forgoing those items in this post. i think arbalest should not have the ability to 2-3 shot a tincan. i wore 80 armor against an arbs in one of these tests, and i think that a crossbow dealing that much damage is a tad extreme. in my mind, balance for a weapon like arbs should be something like: 1 shot nakeds, 80%-1 shot light armor, 2-3 shot 50 armors, 3-4 shot tincans. i think this helps to balance arbs damage in a way without making it useless. when desire says "8 shots to the chest is ridiculous" she is right. we need to find a middle ground between armor doing little against arbs and completely nullifying its damage. also, headshots with arbs should be 1 shot, but all the other crossbows shouldn't (the goal being to highlight player choice in choosing high damage/low reload vs low damage/high reload).
Can't remember the last time I took part in one of these "balance discussions" but let me tell you a story, since you're all n-e-w-f-a-g-s anyway.
Back in the beginning there were 2 or 3 crossbowmen on the whole server, out of hundreds of players while on the other hand - there were hundreds of archers. Only a few of us masochists used crossbows, not because they were "weak", their dmg was brutal, as it should be, but mainly because they were quite inaccurate, their crosshair was so wide that hitting something bordered with randomness. Unfortunately I don't have any ancient screenshots to show you, only these two that were taken after the first wave of Xbow buffs:(click to show/hide)(click to show/hide)
Imagine having to hit something with crosshair even wider than this. Later on it was buffed a few times and made a sniper, like it probably still is. That's why everyone and their mother is using it. So no amount of crying will ever change it, if you want less crossbows on the battlefield just make its crosshair as wide as it used to be (nothing wrong with its damage, it should be deadly because you know - bolts actually kill people). When all these simple minded easy-mode nooblets won't be able to hit shit anymore they'll just GTX the class in tears and play something else. Simple as that.
Can't remember the last time I took part in one of these "balance discussions" but let me tell you a story, since you're all n-e-w-f-a-g-s anyway.
Back in the beginning there were 2 or 3 crossbowmen on the whole server, out of hundreds of players while on the other hand - there were hundreds of archers. Only a few of us masochists used crossbows, not because they were "weak", their dmg was brutal, as it should be, but mainly because they were quite inaccurate, their crosshair was so wide that hitting something bordered with randomness. Unfortunately I don't have any ancient screenshots to show you, only these two that were taken after the first wave of Xbow buffs:(click to show/hide)(click to show/hide)
Imagine having to hit something with crosshair even wider than this. Later on it was buffed a few times and made a sniper, like it probably still is. That's why everyone and their mother is using it. So no amount of crying will ever change it, if you want less crossbows on the battlefield just make its crosshair as wide as it used to be (nothing wrong with its damage, it should be deadly because you know - bolts actually kill people). When all these simple minded easy-mode nooblets won't be able to hit shit anymore they'll just GTX the class in tears and play something else. Simple as that.
Hi all, this will be my last attempt at explaining things to the thick-skulled among you. So I apologize if you feel my explanation isn't thorough enough.
I'll try to hit everything in detail as I see the need for it.
Gnjus and Paul - While that would reduce the number of xbowmen it would also increase instances of annoying team wounding from those select few that stay with the class but even then I think there are simpler solutions.
Its been quite some time since someone referenced GTX'ing like that. I appreciate the throwback.
The more you increase the difficulty the easier it is for xbowmen to hybridize into even more effective melee builds because you are effectively reducing options giving them a cut and dry course of action into a 100% without choice style of build.
-------------
@ Larvae At the time when i was level 30 I had full plate guards and played in siege I was never more than just a couple of steps away from at least 2 friendly heavy infantry and all I would have to do is hold an attack in place and let my heavy infantry laugh while they had a choice to either block my attack or theirs. Its an adapted build dedicated to just shooting and being stationary as that was most benefitical to my clan and team at the time. *explains why I had 4 ath and 2 ps*
As to ur suggestion about increasing strength to 24. What would be the result of this? have you thought this through at all? - The first change would be xbowmen would become highly hybridized infantry that are now strength builds with 8 iron flesh and 8 power strike with at least 5 athletics. This is a change you would prefer? Because as I see it that is the opposite of what is ideal. You want xbowmen to be Less effective melee builds yet you propose ideas that would result in them dealing, even more, melee damage being moderately accurate and be able to tank as much as any other infantry player... Seems like flawed logic.
So needless to say I appreciate your very common suggestion but I will have to pass on agreeing with that type of balance choice.
Even a fully tinned up player can keep the gap between the 'kiting' xbower close enough to completely hinder the xbower's ability to reload. Reducing their potential damage output to just whatever they can do in melee *UNLESS* the melee player decides to ignore the xbow allowing them to reload.
-----------
@Grytviken, Yes because you are doing so well with your absolutely amazing 1.1 k/d ratio with 23 kills for every 21 deaths lmao.
----------
@Blackbow if for whatever reason the developer team contracted retardation and decided to implement your patch because you are clearly a wise and all-knowing demigod amongst c-rpg players; here would be the result.
1) Arbalest alone would receive a massive buff to accuracy more than double the accuracy it has now. Meaning absolutely 0 investment into this build would be 100% pinpoint accurate.
2) Increasing the strength requirement to 24. Great now we have 100% melee builds with 8 iron flesh 8 ps and full dedicated wpf towards melee running around with pinpoint accurate weapons. Truly inspiring.
3) Though that pinpoint accuracy will only deliver anywhere between 8-17 damage so You might as well not pay the upkeep on this hunk of garbage? I mean Just use a +3 wooden stick and you'll do more damage on average. I'll just pretend you know what you are doing here and tell you straightforward "no" I am not going to completely nerf xbow out of existence. by the time you got down to hunting xbow you'd see damages like 4-11 lmao. If only we had more great minds like yours balancing range it's a true shame we do not.
---------
I'm sure ill edit more in here in just a second gotta go back a page....
Gnjus and Paul - While that would reduce the number of xbowmen it would also increase instances of annoying team wounding from those select few that stay with the class but even then I think there are simpler solutions.
they have anyways atleast 6 psDo you mean the current common build has 6 PS? The build with 16 strength?
Eh what ? Are you saying that the problem would be those "selected few that stay with the class" hitting their own teammates instead of the enemy or am I getting this wrong ? As in, for example:I'm aiming for the arab archer on the left roof and instead I hit one of my own beneath the building ? Cause you sure as hell make it sound that way and we're not talking about THAT much inaccuracy. If you're talking about shooting into melee while they're fighting I assure you: the "instances of annoying team wounding" would be nowhere near the amount you're implying. And even if they were - it would be much less damage than this shitty counter strike we're playing right now. I hope I'm getting you wrong because what you just wrote has absolutely no sense whatsoever and it borders with plain stupidity & ignorance resulting from a lack of arguments in "discussion". I agree that maybe there are other solutions, I just mentioned how it used to be back in the days when crossbows were "normal".(click to show/hide)
Do you mean the current common build has 6 PS? The build with 16 strength?
Hi all, this will be my last attempt at explaining things to the thick-skulled among you.
As to ur suggestion about increasing strength to 24. What would be the result of this? have you thought this through at all? - The first change would be xbowmen would become highly hybridized infantry that are now strength builds with 8 iron flesh and 8 power strike with at least 5 athletics. This is a change you would prefer? Because as I see it that is the opposite of what is ideal. You want xbowmen to be Less effective melee builds yet you propose ideas that would result in them dealing, even more, melee damage being moderately accurate and be able to tank as much as any other infantry player... Seems like flawed logic.
@Blackbow if for whatever reason the developer team contracted retardation and decided to implement your patch because you are clearly a wise and all-knowing demigod amongst c-rpg players; here would be the result.
1) Arbalest alone would receive a massive buff to accuracy more than double the accuracy it has now. Meaning absolutely 0 investment into this build would be 100% pinpoint accurate.
2) Increasing the strength requirement to 24. Great now we have 100% melee builds with 8 iron flesh 8 ps and full dedicated wpf towards melee running around with pinpoint accurate weapons. Truly inspiring.
3) Though that pinpoint accuracy will only deliver anywhere between 8-17 damage so You might as well not pay the upkeep on this hunk of garbage? I mean Just use a +3 wooden stick and you'll do more damage on average. I'll just pretend you know what you are doing here and tell you straightforward "no" I am not going to completely nerf xbow out of existence. by the time you got down to hunting xbow you'd see damages like 4-11 lmao. If only we had more great minds like yours balancing range it's a true shame we do not.
Str doesn't increase accuracy for xbow. Lowering its damage increases accuracy for xbow. by removing 20 damage you are buffing accuracy of arbalest by around 60%.
once again I will repeat myself I do not want no investment hybrids to be an OP dominate presence in EU 1 or any server for that matter. I like you would like there to be SOME difference between having spent nearly a decade playing a class and having picked up the thing off the ground so I like you was met with disappointment when PD wasn't an option. Though Unlike you I will stand by every single class to avoid unwarranted nerfs/changes. I will play test every single class before making changes and I will take my time and not be rushed into decisions based upon by community tears. I am not a person that can be swayed like that.
I appreciate you blessing us with your presence. That probably sounds pretty sarcastic but I do think we have been a bit harsh and you are putting a lot of depth and content into your posts so I appreciate that
This doesn't seem "normal" to me, this suggests the class was not at all appealing to play.
Is it not fair to think that nerfing one class also buffs another?
Is it not fair to think that nerfing one class also buffs another? This whole rock paper scissor thing is real u know.
Cav will be stronger if ranged is nerfed, then melee players will say cav is too strong, true?? or nah
I'm just thinking in a different way to this and i havn't read through all 16 pages haaaa
I'm just saying be careful how you change ranged need to think of what other things might happen, cav will take less damage, hell that might even be a good thing, do horses get 2 shot from ranged? i don't know..
Is it not fair to think that nerfing one class also buffs another? This whole rock paper scissor thing is real u know.
Cav will be stronger if ranged is nerfed, then melee players will say cav is too strong, true?? or nah
I'm just thinking in a different way to this and i havn't read through all 16 pages haaaa
I'm just saying be careful how you change ranged need to think of what other things might happen, cav will take less damage, hell that might even be a good thing, do horses get 2 shot from ranged? i don't know..
I know this sounds bad, but a little weight off of the cav nerf won't hurt anything IMO. I play cav a lot and my horse is often taken down in a single arrow/crossbow/thrown headshot + speed bonus, or one good slash from any melee weapon + speed bonus. Also polearms with shorter length (like the bec) can actually "out reach" a lance; if you release your stab early, the very end portion of the animation (the part of the swing that does NO damage) is still capable of rearing a horse when it dinks it, allowing polearms to use their full length against cav. I play bait cav a lot where i just roll up in groupfights and let my horse absorb hits while my teammates kill the enemies, and my horse goes down in 2 or 3 hits without speed bonus. Kinda crazy. I mean the most annoying cav players are the ones you never even get a chance to hit; the ones that lurk and wait until archers/infantry are fighting/shooting and then charge in.
But i'll wait until this thread has simmered down before I start another balance thread
I agree with this. At the same time though many horses can slow down far too quickly, I'd be up for a big buff to horse HP/armour and a nerf to their maneuverability.
A little sarcasm never hurt anyone.
Haven't read through all of this, I just wonder if we have come to any conclusion so far?
Buff 2h I thinkExcellent post
Buff 2h I thinkbuff 2h and attache a retractable chain on it so you can retrieve it fast after throwing it at xbowman before they can reload.
buff 2h and attache a retractable chain on it so you can throw it at xbowman before they can reload and retrieve it fast.
Actually if my memory serves me right, the general consensus reached in all the previous "balance" ranged threads was to make greatswords be able to shoot lazor beams.
Then melee could just shoot ranged themselves while shouting "filthy ranged scum".
I think the only way the baying crowds of 2h heroes will be happy is if you give them a knightly aura that blocks all projectiles from the dirty peasants who are too afraid to play the game the way nature intended
There's no problem in ranged. The only people complaining are the 2-handers. Crossbow and archery are extremely hard to play with, more at the early stage. First of all the reload of crossbow is to slow and the ammo you have is scarce. Using an arbalest I couldn't even one-shot the leather armoured guy. Secondly, in the early stages, even at level 30, the reticle you have is not completely accurate so you have to cross your finger and hope you hit the target.
Secondly archery. I tried to create an archer. I couldn't even kill a bot in DTV. The damage you make its nearly nullified and on battle you have to be lucky to hit an almost dead opponent. Moreover you should buff those 2 classes not nerf them, let's not speak about cavalry and polearm or we will stay here for an entire year.
In the end I hardly see more than 8 archers in a server divided in 2 teams. I am preoccupied about you people using 2handers spamming the way left and right.
A finite amount of ammo, have to spec completely into it if you want to touch anyone in armour with any real result, HS's are almost necessary for some people who go heavy in armour. Then there are armour restrictions and WPF loss which can be pretty steep. Once swords get close to you're pretty much dead at that point unless you can block or run away. Pushing is more to do with strength and if they catch you with a block at the time. If you're a 2h or polearm without a shield that's tough luck learn to dodge.
I've played an archer in CRPG for a long time and it has changed dramatically since the days of yore. I use to be able to steadily de horse people across the map and hit them on horseback. When I see people complain these days it's mostly 2h/pole that has no shield and gets dunked on by an archer. We could stop a lot of the crossbow things by having them require PD to use, would also kill the class because a lot of the players enjoy the use of 1h weapons with some bite to them, in sharp contrast to archers that have almost to no hand to hand capability
I couldn't even kill a bot in DTV.
yes, if you have 100 people on the mob will charge the archers, if you have 10, the other 8 will quit
My suggestion to that is something with the rules, no range under X amount of players, because I know I've caused people to leave the server due to pews.
My suggestion to that is something with the rules, no range under X amount of players, because I know I've caused people to leave the server due to pews.
lol, if that gets implemented, it means people cant play their class, because melee cant be assed to get shields and work together. Instead they try to avoid it by having a spasmatic attack on their hand.
forcing people to not play or change class goes fundamentally against the crowning ideal of player freedom that crpg tries to embody
can't do this, sorry m8
You're complaining about archers and I'm giving solutions, its more productive than simply screaming NERF every few minutes. We want people to stay on the server yet archers force people away because they are too stubborn to take a shield or accept that they are going to get shot due to lack of protection. Again you are suggesting a nerf to a class that only has X amount of ammo and is most of the time useless in close combat besides blocking. What are archers suppose to do? I know that most cases I cannot afford to put 5-8 arrows in a person, which is the case at times. I have to aim for headshots and that's how I've found it for the longest time.
Thing is, he isn't complaining about archers, but crossbowmen who are able to easily outfight a melee player while archers have to commit to their class and sacrifice melee power. The game needs class balance so not all archers/cavs are put in the same team. Besides, the thing that is just purely wrong with your idea, is the effectiveness of the ranged players on the server : why would a level 34 crossbow main be stopped from entering the server when a peasant with a short bow is already filling that slot ?
We could stop a lot of the crossbow things by having them require PD to use, would also kill the class because a lot of the players enjoy the use of 1h weapons with some bite to them, in sharp contrast to archers that have almost to no hand to hand capability
You're complaining about archers and I'm giving solutions,
I did not complain about archers, I highlighted the disparity in skill point distribution between crossbows and every other class in the game. You should understand this because crossbowmen can shoot down a plate wearing player with two shots and then charge into melee and be HIGHLY effective whereas an archer cannot because you must invest in power draw. I said nothing about touching archers whatsoever, but if you continue to irrationally assume that I lump all ranged together because you believe that I'm a moronic two-hander who hates ranged, there's nothing I can do to quell your fears.
I have absolutely no problem with you making suggestions, but I will shoot suggestions down when I believe I have a valid argument against them (e.g. player choice trumping ranged player count limitation rules)
it's more productive than simply screaming NERF every few minutes.
I didn't scream NERF RANGED OP OP, but instead put forth ideas that looked to improve balance. As for damage done by ranged, it is quite high. After all, even a Chinese player got up and complained about getting two shot by ranged because damage like that is a bit absurd. I also know however that melee players can deal outrageous amounts of damage (i.e. one shotting with a polearm) so that's why the balance team looked at the armor soak option before setting itself alight on the NERF RANGED pyre.
tl;dr we think that everything is doing too much damage so we are messing with tankiness b4 destroying the mod
We want people to stay on the server yet archers force people away because they are too stubborn to take a shield or accept that they are going to get shot due to lack of protection.
I personally want to buff shielders because right now, shielder is much weaker than the other melee builds and that's the truth. You don't get very much of a return on your investment, so by buffing shielders, I hope that we can give players an incentive to pick up the class.
Again you are suggesting a nerf to a class that only has X amount of ammo and is most of the time useless in close combat besides blocking. What are archers suppose to do? I know that most cases I cannot afford to put 5-8 arrows in a person, which is the case at times. I have to aim for headshots and that's how I've found it for the longest time.
I feel like here you are once again grouping archers and crossbowmen in the same bubble which is a mistake.
More so you posted photos of the reticule in very light clothing, you should post screenshots of what the armour does to that and try to shoot from a much further range at a moving target trying not to get shot. Shooting a guy standing still is easy as piss, an even then you can miss 2/3's of a shot due to veeringranged is hard
archers are being examined
I'd just say we need to be careful not to grossly overnerf in this case.
I dont really understand the problem of crossbows when you try to compare them to archers to explain their pre-supposed extreme advantages.
If an archer goes against a crossbowman, he can spam him with arrows and deny the crossbowman reload after a shot. If they go in melee, of course the crossbowman should have an easier time having a build that is better in melee since they are more "clunky" in the ranged category (ignoring cover advantages and such). For me the "but my archer build will always be inferior in melee to a crossbowman" is how it should be in the end, with how reload time is extremely high in cRPG with crossbows. Also, when you inject the skill parameter, even an inferior archer can beat a superior crossbowman melee build so all is good.
The problem is much more understandable when you compare crossbows to pure meleeists, they can have a very nice shot or two on a dude and then go into melee on nearly equal ground, but then the crossbowman have near no melee option except 1h no shield or some inferior 2h/poles and the crossbows cost a lot to repair (maybe not a problem anymore today).
I think it wouldnt hurt to make the crossbows proportionally harder to handle (WPF, pre-requisites) but not much more is needed. Or as james said:
almost every melee weapon a strength build would utilize does by far more damage on average than the arbalest. Even before we toyed with armor soak values. Morningstar especially does almost double the damage output. Arbalest was only able to 1 shot very light armored individuals highly dependent on the targets iron flesh and strength. (basically, everything you said is false)
We are toying with armor soak and damage type multipliers so you should notice that xbow is less damaging. averaging anywhere between 18-41 depending on the armor you roll with.
BIG ANOUNCMUNT
ok guise i hereby confirm that i will be engaging in an experiemtn, a DANGFERUS experitment that may even give me CANCER but im wiling to do it to help the crap pe ge player base
i will delve into the life of a newbie archer and see what it is TRULY LIKE for these annoying CUNTBAGS
tyvm
i will update u when i know more
it is signed, i can only approved,
ladodada, hater of archers, jumper of walls, uwuwu of uwu's, killer of babies.
(psst ay yo if u got any cancerous archer builds hit me up on discord or pm me here i'm fucking retarded and have no idea how to build an archer)
i'm not arguing for a damage nerf like some would assume on the arbs, but how is it fair for pistachio to deal strong damage at range and strong damage in cqc while sexy furry cannot?
Because archers can kite when engaged, while still using their ranged weapon.no they can't, they haven't been able to for years. not unless they play like a 18 str build where your arrows tickle your medium armor enemies, and your plated opponents give you the same treatment the girl I like gives me; pretending I'm not there.
no they can't, they haven't been able to for years. not unless they play like a 18 str build where your arrows tickle your medium armor enemies, and your plated opponents give you the same treatment the girl I like gives me; pretending I'm not there.
With 27 str, +3 weimar helmet, +3 heavy gauntlets, +3 Gothic plate with Bevor a body shot while running towards an xbow brought me down to 20% health. Headshot was instant death. This was a week ago when I tested it.
I think its fixed now.
Once again, running speed does next to nothing to damage because of the high shot speed of the arba.
Yea it was distance from the target + armor soak being off causing the huge damage. Do you mean the target's running speed or the shooters running speed or both, Example: shotgunning a target up close where the shooter and target are both moving.
almost every melee weapon a strength build would utilize does by far more damage on average than the arbalest. Even before we toyed with armor soak values. Morningstar especially does almost double the damage output. Arbalest was only able to 1 shot very light armored individuals highly dependent on the targets iron flesh and strength. (basically, everything you said is false)
We are toying with armor soak and damage type multipliers so you should notice that xbow is less damaging. averaging anywhere between 18-41 depending on the armor you roll with.
Inb4 hordes of XBowers complaining they can't 1 hit kill everything in sight now.
Inb4 hordes of XBowers complaining they can't 1 hit kill everything in sight now.