So I've noticed how happy melee-ers are. For months they Bit**** and complained about how "overpowered" archery was. So now we are underpowered, happy?
The only thing I see is that melee complains about the only people who can kill them from far away. Ok, so archers could kill you with 3, 4, or 5 arrows to the body. SO WHAT. You could kill us in one swing, we never complain about that, do we?
Either way, I noticed that melee never complained how OP their weapons are? Being able to kill fully armoured people in one hit? Maybe 2.
So if archery gets nerfed. So should melee.
Yes, this is a rant thread. No its not spam. and no, I love melee as well as archery, so trolls and lobbyists --- GTFO
PS: Don't tell us to "stop complaining" because you guys did too, now it's our turn.
Either way, I noticed that melee never complained how OP their weapons are? Being able to kill fully armoured people in one hit
don't be silly, every melee class complains about the other ones eg.
people moan about pole stagger, people moan about 1h left swing, people moan about lolstabbing, people moan about pike wiggle etc
I understand, it's the human nature to want their class to be better and dominant. But theres also a certain point where it goes too far, agreed?I can agree there, people will moan about balance for as long as this mod is alive.
BTW Tzar, your one of them. Especially because you can't get a decent avatar shows me your maturity level. You shouldn't even be allowed in these forums.
Now, if I could get some real feed back, that would be great. Arguments, suggestions, agreeing and so on are all fair game.
BTW Tzar, your one of them. Especially because you can't get a decent avatar shows me your maturity level. You shouldn't even be allowed in these forums.come on, yourself said this is a rant thread and you ask for arguments?
Now, if I could get some real feed back, that would be great. Arguments, suggestions, agreeing and so on are all fair game.
Melee should kill people quicker, because you have to be right next to them to do it, you can hit people with an arrow from a huge distance, it shouldn't be two shotting everyone, cry more.
Plus the good archers have shown archery is still perfectly viable and able to top the score board, maybe you should get better at it.
leesin a piece of steel piercing your flesh is going to hurt regardless of your distance to the attacker.
Melee should kill people quicker, because you have to be right next to them to do it, you can hit people with an arrow from a huge distance, it shouldn't be two shotting everyone, cry more.
Plus the good archers have shown archery is still perfectly viable and able to top the score board, maybe you should get better at it.
leesin a piece of steel piercing your flesh is going to hurt regardless of your distance to the attacker.
If it was up to me I'd just make archery more realistic and have it stick in mail doing barely any damage and bounce harmlessly off of plate for anything less strong than longbow/compound bow with bodkins. But easily kill unarmed and lightly armored.
Melee should kill people quicker, because you have to be right next to them to do it, you can hit people with an arrow from a huge distance, it shouldn't be two shotting everyone, cry more.
Plus the good archers have shown archery is still perfectly viable and able to top the score board, maybe you should get better at it.
bodkins are designed to split maille. plate can stop arrows/bolts, but chain is not going to.
Let's go on with that and I'll correct you, the AMAZING archers have shown that the nerf hasn't done anything to them. But how much of the srever is to that skill level. This is about satisfying the many, not the few.
If it was up to me I'd just make archery more realistic and have it stick in mail doing barely any damage and bounce harmlessly off of plate for anything less strong than longbow/compound bow with bodkins. But easily kill unarmed and lightly armored.
More realistic?? Have you never done archery on a plate target? It penetrated, all arrows do. If this were realistic, it wound't bounce off, it would still penetrate, plate wasn't designed to protect against archers, it was designed to protect against cute attacks. not pierce. So before you post "facts" on a forum, check them out to see if they are actually correct.
BTW Tzar, your one of them. Especially because you can't get a decent avatar shows me your maturity level. You shouldn't even be allowed in these forums.
Now, if I could get some real feed back, that would be great. Arguments, suggestions, agreeing and so on are all fair game.
Being an archer is popular. If there is a too large percentage of archers on the server the gameplay becomes shit, and people become archers to counter archers. Archery's popularity exceeds the the amount of archers the balance can handle. So to weed out a lot of the not so hardcore archers, they make the class individually underpowered, to prevent the class as a whole to be overpowered.
So if you all stop desiring to be an archer so desperately, the individual archer can be buffed.
So you don't think a blond with big boobs jiggling up and down is a decent avatar?
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
More realistic?? Have you never done archery on a plate target? It penetrated. If this were realistic, it wound't bounce off, it would still penetrate, plate wasn't designed to protect against archers, it was designed to protect against cute attacks. not pierce. So before you post "facts" on a forum, check them out to see if they are actually correct.
Derp, your point has nothing to do with what I am actually talking about.
I am glad cRPG is less like Counterstrike now though, kiting archers have to shoot a guy more than twice to kill him, oh the horror!!!.
And now cavalry are too many. yay?
in response to IR_Kuoin
no. only adolescents and virgins think that is a cool avatar.
And now cavalry are too many. yay?Percentage of cavalry is fine.
And now cavalry are too many. yay?
And now cavalry are too many. yay?
I have 8 powerdraw. takes me 8 hits to kill someone...
Either way, this has gone way being what was intended here. I'm going to leave this thread to take it's course, my rant is over =D
BTW: There is no MANLY way to play a game. To think there is a manly way proves your own immaturity towards other peoples POV and ideas. So before trolling a thread with those comments, think about it.
Thanks for the feedback, arguments, and accepting my rants guys =)
nobody said archers needed to pwn, but i take maybe 1/7 damage in a chain skirt vs bodkins on a sunny day. im not a dedicated archer and i can tell there is something wrong with that.
edit: zero iron flesh btw
No worries, I apologize for the snark, I just don't think that shooting modern arrows with a modern bow into a piece of sheet iron suddenly turns someone into a medieval armor expert.
It doesn't make me a medieval expert, but your right, I was shooting a longbow with bodkin arrows and it did kill, then again I wasn't shooting at a moving target. So as I see it your right too. Moving targets would give me more of a chance to glance, now that im not raging and can think about it lol
I also apologies =)
BTW Tzar, your one of them. Especially because you can't get a decent avatar shows me your maturity level. You shouldn't even be allowed in these forums.
Now, if I could get some real feed back, that would be great. Arguments, suggestions, agreeing and so on are all fair game.
Meleers will complain internally about each other's weapons all the time. The whole 1h/shield, polearm, 2h triangle of jealousy and mutual hatred. But they will all unite in their hatred of friendly archery.
Being an archer is popular. If there is a too large percentage of archers on the server the gameplay becomes shit, and people become archers to counter archers. Archery's popularity exceeds the the amount of archers the balance can handle. So to weed out a lot of the not so hardcore archers, they make the class individually underpowered, to prevent the class as a whole to be overpowered.
So if you all stop desiring to be an archer so desperately, the individual archer can be buffed.
So you're saying that every archer regardless of his skill should be able to go 20-0 on EU1?
Let's go on with that and I'll correct you, the AMAZING archers have shown that the nerf hasn't done anything to them. But how much of the srever is to that skill level. This is about satisfying the many, not the few.
Let's go on with that and I'll correct you, the AMAZING archers have shown that the nerf hasn't done anything to them. But how much of the srever is to that skill level. This is about satisfying the many, not the few.
Wow, there's already many rage threads, we should sticky a rage thread and have all ranged whine in there
I used to believe the 2hd lobby was the biggest,whiney, raging, e-peens lobby, but visibly i was wrong..
this shitstorm beats everything I'v seen and iv been roaming on these forums silently for a long time!
So you're saying that every archer regardless of his skill should be able to go 20-0 on EU1?
Nah, I think he's suggesting that archers should have an average of 10-10 as should any class. Not work your ass off to get 1-10 and watch all the noob immature shieldless 2handers do what they want and collect the vast majority of the kills.
No, the game should be balanced so that every class can contribute towards winning the round, not getting kills.
Kills contribute towards winning the round...Derp
hit like a tank from anywhere from two feet (turn + shoot) to two hundred feet away, run faster than most people due to light armor
Kills contribute towards winning the round...
People do realise that that the point of this change was to make archery more skill based instead. I have been killed by one shot to my 58 armor helmet. But survived 4-5 shots to the body. Of course this depends on the bow.
I like this change. If you are up against a bad archer you do not have to be too afraid, but if you are up against a good archer it is hell. One hit to the head and boom dead. At least if it is against a long bow or war bow.
Now headshots really pay off. If I were still an archer I would like this change. It would make me focus more on aiming instead of just firing arrows mindless into the enemy infantry.
the same is true for archers, pew pew and kill horses, wound infantry making them easier for others to kill, kill other ranged etc and you are helping the team, but you might not get lots of kills.
So I've noticed how happy melee-ers are. For months they Bit**** and complained about how "overpowered" archery was. So now we are underpowered, happy?
isnt this precisely the point of an archer?
Anyone who is FOR the archery nerf should try playing archery for a gen.
I did, before the nerf, and I had a hard time playing well and contributing much towards the team...let along getting actual kills.
Nerf unnecessary.
is something wrong with homosexuality.
Homosexuality is a biological anomaly, of this there can be no debate. Does that render it inherently wrong? Depends upon your societal values.
Homosexuality is a biological anomaly, of this there can be no debate. Does that render it inherently wrong? Depends upon your societal values.
The problem is that dev's listen to people complaining, and then they nerf something and completely fuck over the game balance.
Archery is certainly a joke now (coming from someone who's never picked up a bow in crpg). I have 12 strength and 2 iron flesh. With a middle of the line armor that I wear (mail shirt) I can take a shot from a bodkin arrow and only do about 1/7 or 1/8 damage to my health.
The problem is that dev's listen to people complaining, and then they nerf something and completely fuck over the game balance.I didn't see many bitch about the xbow, yet they nerf ALL range.
Archery is certainly a joke now (coming from someone who's never picked up a bow in crpg). I have 12 strength and 2 iron flesh. With a middle of the line armor that I wear (mail shirt) I can take a shot from a bodkin arrow and only do about 1/7 or 1/8 damage to my health.
Just because a lot of people bitch about something, even a majority, doesn't mean catering to them is logical or based on rational reasoning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwsH2Y-I3cI know the reticule is bad and I do believe that archers should get a small accuracy buff. Tho to me it seems like the archer in that video has maybe a little less wpf in archery than pure archers have. It looks bigger than the one I used to have at least.
Watch that video. The aiming reticule might give you an idea what archers have to deal with. Unless you're REALLY CLOSE you can't effectively aim at the head consistently because there is too much randomness regarding where the arrow is going to land. Sure you can try to aim your shots up a bit higher, but you will miss much more often with your arrows while having a marginally better chance at scoring a head shot.
So archers will still have to fire arrows "mindlessly" (which isn't further from the truth btw for good archers) yet there was no change to actually make headshots any more likely.
Now, if missile speed & accuracy were improved across the board I would be more willing to let the recent changes slide, because good archers actually COULD aim for the head a bit better.
Horses have heads too you know.
Played on my archer alt again today. Regular tartar arrows, regular long bow, between 2 and 3 kdr all the time. Where is the problem? It's still good damage.
How people with archery heirlooms complain is beyond me. :?
If they don't 1-2 shot everyone they are underpowered duh!
Played on my archer alt again today. Regular tartar arrows, regular long bow, between 2 and 3 kdr all the time. Where is the problem? It's still good damage.
How people with archery heirlooms complain is beyond me. :?
Any not plate armored fool should be 1-2 shot killed. That's why it's u.p. duh!
How many non head shots did it take to kill a non-plate character or horse? That's the real question. Because for most players the accuracy is not there to get head shots except by luck. The reticle and arrow dispersion is too large.
So don't even compare the two
The bulk of what makes this game great and skillful is NOT Archery or cav.
It's the melee combat system.
There are no 1 hit kills on armored people. With most builds it's always 2-3 hits, depending on holds.
Archery is just aiming and shooting. FAR FAR less skill based then melee. So don't even compare the two
The bulk of what makes this game great and skillful is NOT Archery or cav.
It's the melee combat system.
There are no 1 hit kills on armored people. With most builds it's always 2-3 hits, depending on holds.
Archery is just aiming and shooting. FAR FAR less skill based then melee. So don't even compare the two
The bulk of what makes this game great and skillful is NOT Archery or cav.
It's the melee combat system.
There are no 1 hit kills on armored people. With most builds it's always 2-3 hits, depending on holds.
Archery is just aiming and shooting. FAR FAR less skill based then melee. So don't even compare the two
Also i am under the impression that we have reached a point where further nerfs of any class will result in worse gameplay overall.
So i kinda hope from here on out classes and their gear will rather be buffed to a point where they are equally useful than nerfed to a point where they are all useless due to boring gameplay.
Since rewarding 'skills' is the desirable outcome, I humbly suggest that the damage change also apply to melee. Certainly having to hit the head will force melee to 'adapt' and become more skilful. Which is good, no?
The bulk of what makes this game great and skillful is NOT Archery or cav.Although I support the "no 1 hit kills " argument, everything else is vacuous crap. To top the scoreboards in melee you don't need skills, you just need to stack strength, stick in a group and overhead. It's not hard at all, however certain parts of melee combat are skillful. For example 1 vs groups are very hard, but I do it because I get the most fun out of it. I enjoy getting an adrenaline rush and manual blocking everything and destroying them. It's not easy, but I wouldn't do it if it was, so I would say high end melee takes skill (the likes of Phase and Tor), but to get a moderate score it is not. For ranged however it takes a lot of skill to top the boards, which it should do, since ranged also have support roles aswell as their killing role. It's about as hard as 1h to top the boards, which I also think is now balanced.
It's the melee combat system.
There are no 1 hit kills on armored people. With most builds it's always 2-3 hits, depending on holds.
Archery is just aiming and shooting. FAR FAR less skill based then melee. So don't even compare the two
Also i am under the impression that we have reached a point where further nerfs of any class will result in worse gameplay overall.
So i kinda hope from here on out classes and their gear will rather be buffed to a point where they are equally useful than nerfed to a point where they are all useless due to boring gameplay.
Since rewarding 'skills' is the desirable outcome, I humbly suggest that the damage change also apply to melee. Certainly having to hit the head will force melee to 'adapt' and become more skilful. Which is good, no?
I never really played a full blown archer for more than an hour.
Actually 80% of my time in cRPG was with Pole and 2h Axes of any kind, 10% a Heavy Throwing Axe build and the other 10% would be random respeccing which included basically every possible class - never finished a gen as one of those.
I always go back to melee in some form except for shields, the reason for that is that it's the only kind of combat in this game that gives me an adrenalin rush.
Everything else bores me out after minutes of playing.
What i do not see is how melee players are more skilled players per se.
I run a high str build and lately top the scoreboard from time to time which is kinda sad considering that all i do is placing overheads where fit.
Guess i could agree that melee is more twitch based which makes it more appealing for people who like that.
This does not make melee players superior in any way.
If i had to break it down into different game genres it would be:
Cav - Racing - make split decisions that are hard to change after the window of opportunity has passed.
Melee - Shooter - reaction and twitch based for individual skills, teamplay helps a lot, too.
Ranged - RTS - plan in advance to not get cornered, choose your position, choose the right targets and maintain combat awareness over a larger portion of the battlefield than the other classes - judging your projectile trajectory and speed right as well as leading the target would be experience i guess but that kinda goes for every class.
Sure they are all a mix of at least two of those but non of them is an inferior skill set.
Yeah, the examples lack a bit but there is no class you jump into and instantly dominate due to it's mechanics being super easy.
Now i am not someone who rages at the game but i see how it can be frustrating to get hit by ranged stuff while you try to reach them.
This is mostly a problem for pure 2h/polearm builds who do not see that bringing even the cheapest shield will help a lot.
Reducing body damage by 33% does not change it, it just makes ignoring the factor that you are doing it wrong a bit more forgiving.
I am one on of those shieldless people but hardly ever die to ranged for some reason, might be my epic 'stache.
Ranged does not get that, they are mostly low HP and low armor, if you reach them and they lack melee skill - they die.
I do not have the numbers at hand but i will go with the biggest part of the community plays some kind of melee class, now that ranged got nerfed cav is booming and will soon be the major part of all the whining.
People who still charge straight at ranged people will never be happy until ranged is removed while ranged players will adjust to the current standards and shut up because they get flamed by the melee crowd if they dare to complain.
Also i am under the impression that we have reached a point where further nerfs of any class will result in worse gameplay overall.
So i kinda hope from here on out classes and their gear will rather be buffed to a point where they are equally useful than nerfed to a point where they are all useless due to boring gameplay.
In melee it's rather hard to always aim for the head, I generally only do it when I have a guaranteed opening from a kickslash, but if they buff the damage to head I may actually kill in 1 hit. I find it rather irritating to gain a huge speed bonus from spinning into my swing and slashing in the head doesn't kill someone, but I do not think a change to melee like this is warranted since it will directly buff 1h left-right swings without buffing any actual skill in most classes. I do think your crossbow may need some kind of accuracy buff though if they haven't already done it (I haven't tested crossbows yet).It's easier than hitting the head at range. Direction of movement, sidestepping, aiming, reloading, swinging, all abruptly change the position of the head. As a crossbowman, I have one bolt with which to hit something smaller than my crosshairs, and moving in an unpredictable manner. The body mass is the only part of the model which maintains a reasonable constant to aim at, and thus, a reasonable chance to hit. Unfortunately now my Mastwork Arbalest does the same damage as a standard crossbow did last patch, and my standard crossbow hits like a hunting crossbow, and my hunting crossbow hits for roughly the same damage as a pitchfork with 0 powerstrike and 1 wpf (24p).
But at least you'd be able to swing more than once every ten seconds.This is the part why I am sceptical about adding the change to crossbows, crossbows are incredibly slow and should be heavy hitters to the body, unfortunately I don't think they can apply this change to just archery and not crossbows. For crossbows the change can only be seen as a nerf as anything above the normal crossbow probably 1 shot killed anything with a headshot anyway.
Anyone who is FOR the archery nerf should try playing archery for a gen.
I did, before the nerf, and I had a hard time playing well and contributing much towards the team...let along getting actual kills.
Nerf unnecessary.
You can't put archery and xbow in the same category seeing how both gameplay of each class is different in many ways.
lol I once created a stf alt (back in...december iirc) and I instantly went 20-5 on eu 2 the first map. with a tatar bow and normal arrows
E: allthough I'm a TERRIBLE archer/crossbowman.
I think most of the rage of melee towards ranged comes from those awful ranged vs melee round ends. How many times have I seen or was victim of a mere execution when I was among the last men standing.
My position stands that archery is unbalanced to the point where the troops as a whole are unbalanced. To me, Archery is to balance out the domination of polearm/2h, with the nerf, there are less archers; therefor, more polearm/2h users.
I'm not saying there should be less melee-ers then archers, but the situation that archery is in now is dire. They, we, need an unnerf to restore balance.
Actually, 2h/pole pop seems to be roughtly the same while cav pop has boomed
As to how damaging they are, I don't really know.
(click to show/hide)
Well then that's why ranged needs to be fixed asap.
I don't think so. There have been a lot of polearm weapons on capable of stopping cav recently. I think it's just the people that use them if they aren't doing the job.
Fixing ranged will at least give anybody who went ranged -> cav a reason to go back. And it'll also give a stronger counter to cav because right now there's not much point in ranged firing at horses.
Well, judging from what I've seen, infantry have just as much trouble with cav as ranged do.
Remember that it's only longer polearms who stop horses, forcing you to go down a specific route. Yes, 2h can also be effective vs. cav, but the problem for both 2h and pole inf (and ofc 1h) is when cav masses up. It's ver hard to counter that without organized teamplay with aware and skilled people, regardless of what weapon you have.
Nerf polearms and everything is fine.qft
Ranged is fine (dunno about throwing), 2h infantry is, 1h infantry definetly is, 1h cav is, polearm cav is, 2h cav is. Polearm infantry remains as the only op class. There's not a single good reason why you should not choose a polearm over any other melee class. It can stop horses, it can stagger the opponent and stun his weapon (high weight), it has incredible reach, the by far highest damage overall (31 pierce stab on poleaxe eg) and same/higher speed as 2h (glaive for instance is as fast as danish gs allthough it has 2 less speedpoints according to the site).
Also the shield of 1h is still very usefull, BUT it slows you down alot and ranged is not that much of a threat anymore ('cause most archers are too bad to aim properly)
yea but what happen when you engage combat with 3-4 cav lurking around ?
you get raped
Nerf polearms and everything is fine.
Ranged is fine (dunno about throwing), 2h infantry is, 1h infantry definetly is, 1h cav is, polearm cav is, 2h cav is. Polearm infantry remains as the only op class. There's not a single good reason why you should not choose a polearm over any other melee class. It can stop horses, it can stagger the opponent and stun his weapon (high weight), it has incredible reach, the by far highest damage overall (31 pierce stab on poleaxe eg) and same/higher speed as 2h (glaive for instance is as fast as danish gs allthough it has 2 less speedpoints according to the site).
Also the shield of 1h is still very usefull, BUT it slows you down alot and ranged is not that much of a threat anymore ('cause most archers are too bad to aim properly)
Now, if I could get some real feed back, that would be great. Arguments, suggestions, agreeing and so on are all fair game.
So I've noticed how happy melee-ers are. For months they Bit**** and complained about how "overpowered" archery was. So now we are underpowered, happy?
The only thing I see is that melee complains about the only people who can kill them from far away.
Ok, so archers could kill you with 3, 4, or 5 arrows to the body. SO WHAT. You could kill us in one swing, we never complain about that, do we?
Either way, I noticed that melee never complained how OP their weapons are? Being able to kill fully armoured people in one hit? Maybe 2.
So if archery gets nerfed. So should melee.
PS: Don't tell us to "stop complaining" because you guys did too, now it's our turn.
Effort to see a target, point at it and click < effort to reach a target and defeat it in melee
The life of infantry in cRPG has always been the hardest.
:rolleyes:
There are not doubts about. Or please prove me the opposite.
Nerf polearms and everything is fine.
Ranged is fine (dunno about throwing), 2h infantry is, 1h infantry definetly is, 1h cav is, polearm cav is, 2h cav is. Polearm infantry remains as the only op class. There's not a single good reason why you should not choose a polearm over any other melee class. It can stop horses, it can stagger the opponent and stun his weapon (high weight), it has incredible reach, the by far highest damage overall (31 pierce stab on poleaxe eg) and same/higher speed as 2h (glaive for instance is as fast as danish gs allthough it has 2 less speedpoints according to the site).
Also the shield of 1h is still very usefull, BUT it slows you down alot and ranged is not that much of a threat anymore ('cause most archers are too bad to aim properly)
[...]
You are less powerfull than before. Everything else has to be shown yet.
[...]
[...]
Effort to see a target, point at it and click < effort to reach a target and defeat it in melee
[...]
[...]
The life of infantry in cRPG has always been the hardest.
[...]
I rolled my eyes because we've had that argument to many times. Between us, and other people. It's a matter of opinion joker. It's not something that can be proved...only argued about in an endless circle.
I do appreciate though that you are not looking at the nerf from an overly biased point of view.
Archer need to learn melee as well, so they are überhard. Case closed.
And this is a load of bull.
A greatsword outreaches my poleaxe on 3/4 swings, and has overall higher reach.
The shitty bonus length on the animations in compensated by longer weapon length... Which is a disadvantage since high length + high weight on your weapon makes you run much slower.
And last time I checked, poles and 2h have roughtly equal damage apart from the stab. But then the polestab is outclassed by far by the 2h. And having a high-damage 2h stab would make playing pikeman as a 2h even more profitable.
And you constantly proclaim that poles have higher speed than 2h... Which from my POV is also total bull. Sure the Glavie has fucked up animations due to it's extreme length, but it is definitively slower than the GS's. Unless you got statistics to back that (imo) bullshit statement, then why should anyone believe you?
One thing I can agree about is the weight, where poles tend to beat 2h just, making for a pole advantage there. But I'd gladly have the weight "nerfed" to 2h levels since that would make me run faster.
Oh, and polestagger is bs yes.
Polearms compensate this by amazing versatility and that stupid polestagger.
And by the 360-spin-stab.
Only if you fuck up. If you stop even one of them in their tracks, you then use the horse as cover from the rest and they will usually leave you alone because they know you are dangerous and there are easier pickings.When melee engage 20vs 20 and one team as let's say 3-10 more cav, you re going to hide behind a horse ? really ^^
Besides, there shouldn't be a situation where you are so away from teammates ect that 3-4 cav would have a bearing on you.
And this is a load of bull.Not at all wanting to turn this into a 2h vs polearm discussion - and I personally have no problem with poles except for the strange stagger effect (on the contrary I really like them) - but I think what BM was referring to when he mentioned higher damage output on polearms was weapons such as Long War Axe (44 cut), Great Long Axe (45 cut), Great Long Bardiche (46 cut), Poleaxe (31 pierce) and the German Poleaxe (42 cut). But yes, these values are only slightly higher than what you find on top tier 2handers. Concerning reach and speed I agree it seems somewhat balanced between the two weapon classes though weight comes out in favour of the polearms (despite perhaps not being to your personal taste); when the difference is only a point or two it makes only a slight difference for movement but a World of difference when it enables a player to stun his opponent's weapon.
A greatsword outreaches my poleaxe on 3/4 swings, and has overall higher reach.
The shitty bonus length on the animations in compensated by longer weapon length... Which is a disadvantage since high length + high weight on your weapon makes you run much slower.
And last time I checked, poles and 2h have roughtly equal damage apart from the stab. But then the polestab is outclassed by far by the 2h. And having a high-damage 2h stab would make playing pikeman as a 2h even more profitable.
And you constantly proclaim that poles have higher speed than 2h... Which from my POV is also total bull. Sure the Glavie has fucked up animations due to it's extreme length, but it is definitively slower than the GS's. Unless you got statistics to back that (imo) bullshit statement, then why should anyone believe you?
One thing I can agree about is the weight, where poles tend to beat 2h just, making for a pole advantage there. But I'd gladly have the weight "nerfed" to 2h levels since that would make me run faster.
Oh, and polestagger is bs yes.
Not at all wanting to turn this into a 2h vs polearm discussion - and I personally have no problem with poles except for the strange stagger effect (on the contrary I really like them) - but I think what BM was referring to when he mentioned higher damage output on polearms was weapons such as Long War Axe (44 cut), Great Long Axe (45 cut), Great Long Bardiche (46 cut), Poleaxe (31 pierce) and the German Poleaxe (42 cut). But yes, these values are only slightly higher than what you find on top tier 2handers. Concerning reach and speed I agree it seems somewhat balanced between the two weapon classes though weight comes out in favour of the polearms (despite perhaps not being to your personal taste); when the difference is only a point or two it makes only a slight difference for movement but a World of difference when it enables a player to stun his opponent's weapon.
But the major advantage of polearms over 2handers is the animations. Sure, 2h animations might be more fluid and seem more natural to most players, but not so for any experienced polearm wielder and mostly not so for their opponents. Other than that polearm animations are in my opinion, and I think most other players', not as well-made as 2h animations, and it often looks like they are skipping frames (like most WB weapons but more so), especially when wielded by players with a fast, twitchy style. Stabs are the worst of cource, here the character will lean slightly backwards while doing a thrust animation that can be exploited to be worse or at least equal to the infamous lolstab that 2handers used to have before it thankfully was nerfed. Running (even jumping) backwards and about while doing these comical, 360 degrees lolstabs again and again is utilized by many 'top-tier' polearm users, though there's nothing new about it; this is how it has always been since the first MP version of WB, but before the polestagger it all seemed to add up.
But I hope we can agree on so much that you can still lol/swingstab with poles and not as well with 2handers (plus of course the 2hander will be auto-stunned after a stab where the polearm actually stuns the opponent).
I noticed some different behavior the last 2 day. The accuracy and damage of bows seems to be even more nerfed now. At first I just thought its my imagination but the hornbow surely was not this inaccurate. Sometimes I missed stationary targets at mid range what was not the case 3 days ago.
Then I noticed that all of a sudden 80% of my headshots are not lethal anymore. "OK" I thought, maybe I just shot very highly armored targets. THEN however I took out my longbow + loomed bodkins + 8PD and shot peoples heads happily and they refused to die. Just some minutes ago I shot someone 5 times in the body with this build/equip without lethal result. When I shot someones head and it took 3 additional bodyshots to kill him I seriously was not sure if this is some kind of a new cheat or something.
Did archery get nerfed again ? Is this a joke of some kind ? Is it april fools ? Halloween ? ...
Edit: Oh and I just want to point out that "ghost arrows" seem to occur at a 40% chance now instead of the usual 30%. Wtf is happening to this mod ?
Only reply from trolling cannonfodder so far ?
bump
DUDE: Unless you got MW arrow + bow on lvl 31+ toon and can make headshots so continually that the fact the there is NO hitbox there half the time doesnt affect you, you wont kill anything with a bow, stop raging: Archery was effectily moved to the same corner as pikemen: Every can have a blast at it but your not gonna get kills and enjoy yourself unless you have nerded at that class for the last 2 years.
-snip-Just gonna quote this as proof that you should never, ever listen to BlackMilk when it comes to balancing or anything related to how this game works:
the by far highest damage overall (31 pierce stab on poleaxe eg)
-snip-