So uh... archery's fine?
The only thing the archery patch did was destroy most PD builds and ruin some post level 30 mains and devalue the PD6 bows. In the coming months, archery spam will increase with the machine gun bows, and the new over the top headshot bonus means that more people then usual will be one shotted (Am I the only guy who thinks that helmets should protect against range, and that one shotting anything above a naked peasent is a bad thing?).
so let me get a 23 cut weapon like hmm Cleaver with 24 cut will do. and 4ps and let me count how many hits it takes to down a 2h with heavy armour?
if your going to do tests at least do it with real bloody arrows and a PD lvl that most archers have ie 5.
well, with my 29 str and 9 if head armor 60, im lucky if i survive HS...
Archers could do the sensible thing and stack str, meaning their body shots will actually do significant damage...
I have 8PD and am using MW Rus and +2 bods, do not recommend.
Archers could do the sensible thing and stack str, meaning their body shots will actually do significant damage...
(sorry for the Teamspeak chatter - should have left the channel)
Come onto NA duel sometime, let's see how many head shots you survive against my STF archer... maybe fraps yourself in battle and point out the times where you've taken a 100% damage headshot from an archer.
I'm sure it happens, but the archers that are able to score those 1-shot headshot kills aren't the ones that can effectively and consistently hit the head. I have no doubt that a longbow or rus bow user with 7-8 PD will be able to 1-shot most people with a headshot, but even if they are aiming right at the head there is probably a 30-40% chance they can hit the head with the shot at the range in my video... not even considering the fact that targets are moving ALL the time.
Basically what I'm saying is, a build designed to hit the head effectively still doesn't do a whole bunch of damage, while builds that CAN kill with 1 shot lack the wpf to do it consistently. Archers are between a rock and a hard place.
Things seem ok for archers then. If you could be able to both headshot consistently and oneshot on headshot, there would be a problem.
Archers could do the sensible thing and stack str, meaning their body shots will actually do significant damage...
Things seem ok for archers then. If you could be able to both headshot consistently and oneshot on headshot, there would be a problem.
This is balanced because you still cause staggers (most of the time). This allows the real heroes of the battlefield to win. Didn't anyone tell you? Archers are support characters. They're more like cheerleaders, while the melee classes are the real athletes. What, you actually want to do damage? You're using the wrong weapon then.
Damage to horses will probably be reverted at least. Cavalry are supposed to be support too, so it's OK to hurt them.
I think you are exaggerating here.
In my opinion archers really shouldn't do too much damage, simply because you don't need to make a mistake to be shot by an archer, unlike melee where you can block and even fight back.
I agree that you do too little damage atm, but this is about to be tweaked a bit, so you should do fine as soon as the next patch comes out.
I retired some time ago, and from ATH 8 I am now on ATH 5 (approaching my build's maximum of 7), and I find it particularly difficult to dodge arrows. It was much easier for me some time ago, but now mtemko can shoot my from horseback over 50 meter (and over the heads of 10 other players) twice in a row, killing me, while I am running around and dodging like mad. (I knew he was shooting me).
It was a ridiculous post, yes, but some people think ranged really should be little more than support, which is also ridiculous.
mtemko is a very good HA. I remember when he used to play on the NA servers. The whole server would rage at him. You are basing your opinion on the best players of a class instead of the average player. Too many people make that mistake.
Lol joker. Mte? He's a mate and I know his build...
He's good, but at 50 Meters not even foot archer have a 100% chance of hitting you, assuming they aimed perfectly :P
And Mte, if he didnt change his mind, went for the less accurate more damage (which is still crap damage) HA build.
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.
I agree that archers are a bit UP at the moment, but I share the common opinion that archers should make less kills than melee in any case, due to their kind of "one way" fighting (target often can't fight back, doesn't even need to make a real mistake to be killed). If the devs would lower the penalty from the last patch by 25-33% I think it should be fine.
What I want to say is: there is no need to complain further about the nerf. The devs already decided to do something about it.
The op wanted to show the worst case scenario.. unloomed items, basic arrows, 4PD bow, cut damage on higher armour. Get a practice longsword and beat on someone with 4 powerstrike and see what happens. Try piercing, more PD, find out people's HP, try loomed weapons/ammunition etc. Ranged is fine as it is, it should be support damage or reward genuinely good play
Yes, it was this on the ruins map where you asked what's wrong. This was wrong. We won the round, but there had to be a horse archer against 9 infantrymen, who didn't stop picking arrows from the ground. Which makes him de facto immortal, because he can pick up arrows again and again, unless he shoots them into something where he can't recover them. Which are shields (which break after a certain time) or players. Nice autowin, all it needs is time...
The op wanted to show the worst case scenario.. unloomed items, basic arrows, 4PD bow, cut damage on higher armour.
And joker...please, before you claim HA takes no skill and you get the kills because you picked the right class, try it on a full EU1 server and see what kind of K/D's you get. HA takes a lot of skill. I find it harder than melee for the most part. It certainly provides more of a rush and more reward in my eyes.
This time I am talking about the skill ceiling of the class, not the average performance. Remove picking up projectiles from horseback and I'll be fine.
You have to near slow down to a stop to pick up projectiles from horseback. It's incredibly risky and if the inf isn't stupid they can take advantage of this. If Mtemtko managed to pull that off successfully enough to keep shoot you guys for a long time, then I can only commend him on it for taking advantage of all your stupidity.
Which advantage can an infantryman take of an archer stopping his horse 50m away and picking up 5 arrows?
There's 9 of you. Let me guess, the majority of you were all clumped up in a group providing perfect shot opportunities and trying to chase him around the map? Spread out, cover more ground, give him less space to manoeuvre and you would have had him easily.
There was still a melee cav left, so spreading up would not have been the best thing to do.
Still there was no chance for the infantry to win this unless the HA makes a mistake.
The op wanted to show the worst case scenario.. unloomed items, basic arrows, 4PD bow, cut damage on higher armour. Get a practice longsword and beat on someone with 4 powerstrike and see what happens. Try piercing, more PD, find out people's HP, try loomed weapons/ammunition etc. Ranged is fine as it is, it should be support damage or reward genuinely good play
If people want more accuracy then fine, but the damage is fine as is for this melee centric game. If M&B didn't have great melee/cav mechanics no one would play. The ranged mechanics are like a totally separate game. Yet some seem to think its fine for them to 1-2 hit kill with easy body shots from range. I swear if the devs added a hitscan 1 hit kill weapon some people would use it exclusively
Shinyspoons already covered it, but yeah, this is a legitimate build right now. If you go higher with PD your headshot aim goes way down. Bodkins are mega expensive with low stack size, not ideal at all. My main has +3 bow and +3 arrows, but I'm not going to respec archer just to show those off. I'm also gen 21 and have played the game for almost a year... you shouldn't need loomed gear to compete, nowhere else in the game is that needed, it shouldn't start with archery.
Side note: the practice longsword is fucking awesome with 4 PS. Blunt damage, speed and reach... I know what you were trying to do but you picked the wrong weapon to prove your point :P
E: working on uploading some videos of in-game rounds.
I can't 1 shot lvl 30 archer, with 7ps and mw war cleaver 48cut.
They would still have circled around us, just in a wider circle (the map was ruins, but the fight was on open terrain, and what would be if the map was open plains?), but it would be less dangerous to attack single players because their mates would be far away.
And you are still relying your argumentation on the fact that the cav makes a mistake.
I just hate to play a game where I have to pray not to meet a certain class on the field. Sorry for being frustrted of notbeing able to prevent you of killing me without any chance to protect myself.
Body shot might be a joke now, but headshot is a joke of the year.
Archer accuracy + headshot damage increase was a massive fail, i don't understand how it is possible that archer can 1 shot lvl 30 infantry?
I can't 1 shot lvl 30 archer, with 7ps and mw war cleaver 48cut.
I really doubt people play like that now on the servers. There are plenty of good archers who do fine now
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
(http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/819/mb15x.jpg/)
no comment
If it takes me 15 body hits or 3 headshots to hit one guy with mid 40 armor
Now this is complete bull.
I have (EDIT: Had, recently deleted b/c of boring) an archer stf (7 PD) and it takes me like 3-6 hits (it seems extremely random) to the body to down most mid infantry.
And I've yet to make one headshot that didn't kill. On my main I've survived one since the patch, and that was a long-range shot (like 40 m) from a HA, which still took 85%.
Take a look at the good archers, and try to learn something 8-)
Now this is complete bull.
I have (EDIT: Had, recently deleted b/c of boring) an archer stf (7 PD) and it takes me like 3-6 hits (it seems extremely random) to the body to down most mid infantry.
And I've yet to make one headshot that didn't kill. On my main I've survived one since the patch, and that was a long-range shot (like 40 m) from a HA, which still took 85%.
From behind = massive negative speedbonus (he's on a horse).yes you are right , but.. his horse was quite slow, close range.
Nothing strange about that really.
Nord_Bagge / Tennenoth?
For example yes. In two sieges Bagge went 68-2 in total. If that's not efficient, well then I dont know what is :rolleyes:
You only take 1 shot now.
Did tests, my figures were accurate.Fancy that, cause so are mine :P
They should somehow tweak the damage so that it does almost same dmg to tincans and light armor.
You only take 1 shot now.what will happen when they become all professionals.
They should somehow tweak the damage so that it does almost same dmg to tincans and light armor.
Take a look at the good archers, and try to learn something 8-)
I'd much rather see some tests where the archer has a decent PD, targets are moving, and where there's certainty about IF. I can see that it's a relatively high strength build, and being NA, the target dummy might have a lot of health. Perhaps the 0.260 patch changes were felt slightly harder in the NA?
Otherwise, my experience is as Dezi's, I have 47 body armor, 50 head and 5IF and it usually takes 3-6 arrows to take me down from what I reckon is a decent archer, sometimes I lose as much as 60% health (might be a bolt though) and I've yet to be shot in the head without dying.
Though, keep bodyshots the way they are. Perfect way to seperate lowskillers from professionals imo.
Perfect way to seperate lowskillers from professionals imo.
70 body armor.
56/57 head.
I literally laugh about body hits.
18 str, 4 if.
Though, keep bodyshots the way they are. Perfect way to seperate lowskillers from professionals imo.
Can't completely agree here to be honest, it's not difficult to aim slightly above where you normally do. :rolleyes: If you can't do that then you have a complete lack of hand-eye co-ordination.I'm at work right now, but I'd love to see your skills in action. Maybe we can get on the duel server, I can run around at medium distance and see how long it takes you to headshot me? We could do 5 tests and I'd happily post them in this thread. What bow do you use?
Archery is completly destroyed now.Archers and throwers should be able to use PD and PT above 10 just like melee can use PS above 10. That would help archers and throwers regain some of their power (trade off is inaccuracy of course).
Especially high PD archers(including me) are nerfed like hell.
I went to a 10PD longbow build to deal great damage to the body and not to be a superaccurate headshot sniper.
But now my build is nearly useless, because I only can aim for the head at close ranges and the damage
to the body is a bad joke.
I stopped playing as an archer since the new crappy damage system was released.
Now... it seems like I deal nearly the same damage with 30str, 1PS and my 3+Mace as with 10PD and 3+Longbow and 3+bodkins.
I'm at work right now, but I'd love to see your skills in action. Maybe we can get on the duel server, I can run around at medium distance and see how long it takes you to headshot me? We could do 5 tests and I'd happily post them in this thread. What bow do you use?
I need two shots now :cry:
Longbow.
It's not skill that this change needs to negate it, the smaller the target, the more that the randomness of the reticle takes effect, aiming slightly higher will mean that you aim for "the sweet spot" and unless you have 100% pin point accuracy, skill has nothing to do with it.
You can't say that because someone is aiming for the head, that they will hit 100% of the time because the reticle will make it more difficult. As an experienced archer, I am quite aware that there is only a certain amount that having skill and experience can change.
Please don't take this the wrong way Shine but it would be a silly test because even if I was able to follow you perfectly using programs, the hit rate would be lower than if that program was following your body perfectly due to the fact that it's a larger target, therefore filling more of the reticle.
70 body armor.
56/57 head.
I literally laugh about body hits.
I got widely opened eyes whenever i get a head hit (massive hp loss, always)
Got one shotted once so far.
18 str, 4 if.
I like the general idea of headshotaim.
The sorroundings and necessities should be altered though (softened up).
Though, keep bodyshots the way they are. Perfect way to seperate lowskillers from professionals imo.
,it's buffed my new worst enemy
@sebastian..you can go 30+ agi build like other..you can kill the ppl extra 1-2 shoot.. after the patch; damage is no problem..
Problem is that..The other things.agi characters is more funny..
Now that archers, my old hate class, are nerfed to an acceptable level, I think cavalry will become my new hate class, because I think that being cavalry needs even less skill than being an archer. Horse archers will always be my hate class Nr. 1, and after one 1hd-cav and 1 HA won a round against 9 infantrymen (me included, I died first to mtemko's sniper-shots), simply because they chose the right class, not because of skill (because no skill can help 2 players being gangbanged in the open by 9 infantrymen with different weapons), I wouldn't whine a single tear if the horse archery skill would be removed from the game and all ranged weapons made unusable from horseback. Yes, it would be a pity to have a class less, but I think it's still better than keeping the only class in the game that is entirely immune to certain other classes, and in addition can kill some without them having a single chance to survive or defend themselves.
Yes, it was this on the ruins map where you asked what's wrong. This was wrong. We won the round, but there had to be a horse archer against 9 infantrymen, who didn't stop picking arrows from the ground. Which makes him de facto immortal, because he can pick up arrows again and again, unless he shoots them into something where he can't recover them. Which are shields (which break after a certain time) or players. Nice autowin, all it needs is time...
Its not like somebody is forcing you to use an item to counter something your class isnt meant to deal with(or is weak to), use it or dont and suffer for your choice, its as simple as that.
1 or 2 hits from anything and you should die.
I quite like this patch, it's finally nerfed crossbows which means that they're no longer my worst enemy, but at the same time, it's buffed my new worst enemy, cavalry, to such a factor that they're even worse than xbows were previously! :lol:
Ranged is by far the class with the BIGGEST number of opportunities to hit someone; if you give them a 1/2 shot bows the game will become too hard for melee.
Whot bout Throwing mate!?
I'd much rather see some tests where the archer has a decent PD, targets are moving, and where there's certainty about IF. I can see that it's a relatively high strength build, and being NA, the target dummy might have a lot of health. Perhaps the 0.260 patch changes were felt slightly harder in the NA?
Otherwise, my experience is as Dezi's, I have 47 body armor, 50 head and 5IF and it usually takes 3-6 arrows to take me down from what I reckon is a decent archer, sometimes I lose as much as 60% health (might be a bolt though) and I've yet to be shot in the head without dying.
I've never really played a thrower so I can't say... but I can only imagine how much it sucks right now.
Anyways, one more vid up that I added to OP (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98qKu-_9YM0&feature=plcp&context=C31e32f0UDOEgsToPDskKt0Fu0g_obCDFz5qMd8_5m)
I still have a bunch and will add them slowly if people are interested... I think it helps to see an archer "in action". But I'm not loading another one cause I want to play! (on my main that is..)
Archers make the game alot less fun for everyone else.Yes, like cavalry and also infantry :rolleyes:
Yes, like cavalry and also infantry :rolleyes:
Everyone who hit or kill someone destroyes the fun... doesn't matter which class.
The fun-destroying aspect often is the first thing invoked when people lobby for ranged nerfs. But of course they are all wrong ? I'm sorry I've never seen anyone complain about infantry destroying their fun. I do have about cavalry, but certainly not as much as ranged (at least before this patch)
I'm not saying that archery isn't over nerfed but as a direct result of the archery nerf the number of CRPG players has increased by a decent margin. Archers make the game alot less fun for everyone else.
The fun-destroying aspect often is the first thing invoked when people lobby for ranged nerfs. But of course they are all wrong ? I'm sorry I've never seen anyone complain about infantry destroying their fun. I do have about cavalry, but certainly not as much as ranged (at least before this patch)
(Drawn in response to people saying ranged should be taken out of the game, and the tunatown server.)(click to show/hide)
alot of peeps pick their wep based on the "op'ness" - they use the weapon/class they use simply because its the most overpowered and not because they like the style or weapon. it happend with the polearm-change. right after patch, i saw tons of players i use to know as 2h and shielders, respec. i dont mind it (not much anyway, i just think its a tiny bit lame but whatever makes ur day - as long as its not destroying MY game :p), i just try to prove the point that archery before was op and therefore alot of players were archers. i like this change. now the archer amount have decreased a little (theres still way too many imo) and makes room for more polearms :p
i use to have an archer, fluke_dk. i recently respec'ed him - not becasue of the archer change but due to the fact that i grew a love for melee :) anyway, he was still archer post-patch and i do not think the patch was a nerf. its a change not a nerf. archers is fine! i still see alot of top score archers (eventho score doesnt matter) pls stop moan and instead adapt like a gamer. and that goes for all of you archer whiners :) try something else for a change? why not go xbow? or try some cav? if you dont like your class, maybe its because you dont play it very well and you may want to try another approach to the game... i dont target anyone in particular, but im just abit fed up with all the moan and whine i read all over forums and in game.1 Arrow to my horse's head = Dead
argh sorry for repost, was suppose to edit me old one, i phucked up! lol
yesterday i was playing on siege with my main 18 strength, if archer main. i was wearing a milanese sallet ,heavy gauntlets, heraldic transitional armor and cased greaves. Templar Steeve hit me with his MASTERWORK LONGBOW and MASTERWORK TATAR ARROWS. 1 hit stole 3% of of my health.
Agincourt, anyone?
I'm with the infantry players on this one,
Archery is fine is it? tell that to my longbow.
My non-loomed longbow with non-loomed tatar arrows doesn't mind it.
as a direct result of the archery nerf the number of CRPG players has increased by a decent margin.
Archers make the game alot less fun for everyone else.
+1
When people complain about 2h spam: learn to block
When people complain about cav: bring a pike or longspear
when people complain about archers:Use cover, bring a shield, or stay behind someone that has.Nerf them!
Archers are not supposed to get kills they get staggers.
They are nothing more than Bards playing a one string harp.
While they are on the battlefield, your teammates have a +5 to hit.
Joker, that was actually a good post. It would be tough to implement a reward system for obeying commands, but it would be super cool! Other than than, your thought process behind your post is good.
It's the "lemming behavior" or lack of tactics, or lack of smart playstyle that makes cav or archers OP....not their actual stats or damage. All the classes in this game can easily be counteracted with equipment and playstyle.
It's as if people WANT this to be a infantry-only battle game SO BADLY that they will stubbornly play as if it is one no matter how many archers are shooting at them, or how many cav are at their back. They will not take shields, pikes, or use formations and cover no matter what...then complain when something goes wrong over and over until this game takes one more step in the direction of becoming an infantry battle simulator instead of a medieval battle simulator.
All they really have to do is play smarter given the rules of the game...not try to change the rules to make it easier to play.
Before the latest patch, it was all pretty balanced. Each "class" was able to succeed and play a major role in a battle if they were able to adapt and play smart.
When people complain about 2h spam: learn to block
When people complain about cav: bring a pike or longspear
when people complain about archers:Use cover, bring a shield, or stay behind someone that has.Nerf them!
Thanks!
I just want to add that I don't think that suggesting to equip certain items (e.g. pikes or shields) can be used as a balancing argument, because this effectively changes your class, and be it only to hybrid.
current state of cRPG when the map/amount of my old friends permits.
current state of cRPG when the map/amount of my old friends permits.(click to show/hide)
I think you're misunderstanding him.
It's not "omg, this is so unfair and op I can't beat it Q_Q" he's saying, he's saying "wtf guys, look at yourselves; is this really how you want to play the game?"
And I agree with him on one point - it's fucking lame. But then nothing can really be done about it, so I guess we'll just have to wait for flags... FUN!
No but really, I personally don't get the camper mentality, but each to their own I guess.
This is also not to say that the current horse situation isn't lame. But that can be fixed.
Hmm, I disagree with this statement. You have to take in to account what the battlefield holds before you decide your class. For example, if I want to make a 33/3 archery build and complain that melee are walking all over me.. I would have to change my build to compensate. Not all builds are equal in viability. If I'm a melee and complain that archers are kill me before I can engage the enemy, I would likewise be expected to bring a practice shield or follow someone that has. If I'm a cav with 3 riding skill and complain that I can't kill other cav...well you get the picture. We absolutely must adapt our builds, play-styles, and equipment to conditions on the ground--at least in part. Otherwise we fall back in to the stubborn and selfish "I'll play how I want to play and complain when it doesn't work out the way I want." We gotta adapt, man.
On the other hand, if someone absolutely wants to make a build that uses a spear and a longsword (and has no slots for shields) then they should do so knowing full well that risks that entails. They'd have to adapt their playstyle to stick with teamies that have shields or run from cover to cover (the the best of his ability) before engaging the enemy to avoid arrow fire. Getting riddled with arrows would not be grounds for complaint in this case, because it was a choice the player made. They wouldn't be forced to change their build, but they'd have to deal with the consquences (however light or heavy) based on the build they chose.
E: Regarding that map with the camping ranged (looks like 3 archers 3 xbowmen) that is an awful map and I agree it's lame when an army of archers are on the roof... even worse if a few shielders are blocking the stairway up.
But you can't really blame ranged for using an advantageous position, there is no real good reason NOT to be up there as ranged.
I think you're misunderstanding him.[sarcasm]Who ever heard of archers taking the height advantage instead of staying on the ground were they are easy prey for melee? Yeah 'wtf' archers indeed. They should all just come down so they can easily be dealt with with minimal effort from melee players. [/sarcasm]
It's not "omg, this is so unfair and op I can't beat it Q_Q" he's saying, he's saying "wtf guys, look at yourselves; is this really how you want to play the game?"
And I agree with him on one point - it's fucking lame. But then nothing can really be done about it, so I guess we'll just have to wait for flags... FUN!
No but really, I personally don't get the camper mentality, but each to their own I guess.
But it's so funny. I swear next patch they're going to buff those items and then I'll be swimming in $$.