cRPG
cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Polobow on March 11, 2011, 10:32:24 pm
-
So, quick poll. What do you think is needed?
(Sorry for the limited options, post them if you got any other.)
-
Most throwers are 1h with huscarl just saying.
Since I guess your referring to thrower hybrids else yes some weapons if possible could use 2 slots to limit jack of all trades.
-
Just lessen the wpf nerf somehow, which will allow a return to specialization for the average player.
-
adjust the wpf system and make throwers require more wpf instead of just PT
-
I don't know why the cost of wpf was increased so much. Losing the past generation's wpf bonus was enough. Throwing on the increased cost on top of that is what's holding back specialization.
-
Yes, the problem is that wpf is not as useful as it should be. I don't believe any character should be able to use a weapon to any degree of effectiveness with no proficiency in that weapon. And I am a 2H/thrower hybrid.
-
I think the WPF scaling is fine. Throwing should just require WPF to be effective and the problem is mostly solved. Maybe also decrease stack size.
-
Eh. I think it's fine. I prefer my hybrid chars because I don't use heavy armour so I don't need as high wpf as others and it saves me having 2 chars for when I get bored of one play style :)
It's just throwing that needs nerf. Hybrids are fine. And if you reduce it to 3 weapon slots, archers, crossbows and quite a few cavalry are gonna be REALLY pissed off :)
-
Right now you can use the melee weapons without proficiency with some success (if you have no PS you'll do less damage, but that's it). Ranged weapons, on the other hand, are not useful if you don't put at least 100 proficiency in them , being archery the one which needs most, then throwing? (not sure) and at last crossbow (which doesn't need a special skill).
As this is the case right now, you can put your wpf in a ranged weapon and still be quite useful in melee combat. Should it be that way? I'm a noob here so I'm not sure, but I think melee weapons should start doing less damage (in addition to the speed) and less speed at lvl 1, and at lvl 150 be a bit (only a bit) faster than now at that wpf.
-
Only problem I have is the massive numbers of sidesword etc.+huscarl+throwing hybrids. Those are breaking the game.
Yeah, they are the Jack of all trades. Only problem that they excel pure players in melee because of the EZ-moding combo, so the "Master of none" part of the sentence isn't true here.
Pure builds need some more love, this over-hybridization is no good for the gameplay.
-
I have played three throwers with varying degrees of WPF. The most useful is the one with ZERO wpf because I can then concentrate on my melee proficiency. As long as I keep my PT high, I am golden. Before I used throwing with my melee, I used crossbows. Again, half my kills were from using a crossbow with ZERO proficiency.
Proficiency scaling is not fine when a character can have zero and still be maybe 5% less effective than someone with 100.
-
Just lessen the wpf nerf somehow, which will allow a return to specialization for the average player.
This is all thats needed to fix a lot of balance issues atm.
-
Pure builds need some more love, this over-hybridization is no good for the gameplay.
Couldn't put it better. Don't nerf a hybrid counter it but buffing a pure build.
-
I love hybriding, if you take that away I'll pretty much quit. Why? becuase I don't like using only 1 THING thats just boring. Nuff said. If its "overpowered" which I don't think it is then they better "balance" it and not nerf it to non existance.
Just my 2 cents.
-
In real life there is no such thing as a "1 weapon only" warrior or soldier. All soldiers, especially in the Muslim world were trained to fight not just as one role. There are old Muslim military manuals and books that talk about multi-role functioning units. A horse archer was at the same time taught to fight with full armor on horse or foot with multiple weapons.
I would stop playing the game if I had only one weapon like a cheap nintendo game. I am happy that the Turks who made this game had sense to make sure that the old manuscripts were not forgotten from Ottoman times alhamdolillah. :mrgreen:
-
I would greatly prefer to buff specialists then nerf hybrids.
-
i also think this would result in less camping, as people wouldnt want to camp without a ranged weapon. Now everyone has xbow or throwing, so camping is fine for everyone
-
i also think this would result in less camping, as people wouldnt want to camp without a ranged weapon. Now everyone has xbow or throwing, so camping is fine for everyone
*Thinks of the Acre xbow camp team on EU*
-
I think my main is possibly more hybridized than anyone else in the game, and I still think that PS should be the difficulty for melee weapons.
-
wpf was nerfed for a reason - getting it up to 200 is a bad idea.
The only issue is with the effectiveness that every Joe can get with a secondary xbow/throwing. There is absolutely no reason NOT to carry an exbow unless you want to collect more gold. There has to be a negative side to them so a pure melee character will not want to carry an xbow and hybridization will be difficult (mind you hybridization in melee skills, 1H/2H/pole is not a problem).
* Put -2 PS, -1 riding and -1 athletics on a crossbow (can be done) and nobody will carry it unless it is his main weapon. Dedicated xbowmen can still drop it to the ground and loose the penalties if they want to switch to full melee (I doubt many will bother to drop and collect it many times in a frame)
* Make ALL throwing weapons above rocks require lots of PT. A realy thrower has no problem to go over 4-5 PT. For the others investing 5 PT just to throw a dart is a bit too much.
-
I would greatly prefer to buff specialists then nerf hybrids.
+1 :D
-
wpf was nerfed for a reason - getting it up to 200 is a bad idea.
The only issue is with the effectiveness that every Joe can get with a secondary xbow/throwing. There is absolutely no reason NOT to carry an exbow unless you want to collect more gold. There has to be a negative side to them so a pure melee character will not want to carry an xbow and hybridization will be difficult (mind you hybridization in melee skills, 1H/2H/pole is not a problem).
* Put -2 PS, -1 riding and -1 athletics on a crossbow (can be done) and nobody will carry it unless it is his main weapon. Dedicated xbowmen can still drop it to the ground and loose the penalties if they want to switch to full melee (I doubt many will bother to drop and collect it many times in a frame)
* Make ALL throwing weapons above rocks require lots of PT. A realy thrower has no problem to go over 4-5 PT. For the others investing 5 PT just to throw a dart is a bit too much.
to fix throwing +2pt to all low teir throwing, +1pt to axes-lances
-
There is absolutely no reason NOT to carry an xbow unless you want to collect more gold.
Yea 14 000+ gold of upkeep (heavy xbow+ steel bolt) is absolutely no reason, :rolleyes: especially when you total budget must not exceed 35 000 gold to break even.
That's why absolutely nobody complain about upkeep.
Not to mention the 25 wpf lost in melee to get 100wpf in xbow.
No reason at all...
-
Yea 14 000+ gold of upkeep (heavy xbow+ steel bolt) is absolutely no reason, :rolleyes: especially when you total budget must not exceed 35 000 gold to break even.
That's why absolutely nobody complain about upkeep.
Not to mention the 25 wpf lost in melee to get 100wpf in xbow.
No reason at all...
Only most people who carry xbow as a secondary will take one of the lighter xbows for a couple of thousand $ and they will not invest anywhere near 100 wpf in it.
They Xbow and thrower hybrids that I am talking about are very light hybrids because both xbow and throw do not require much wpf to be useful. Xbow damage is just how much money you are willing to invest and throwing damage will come with a moderate investment in PT (no need for 10 there to do serious damage). Accuracy is not required if you are shooting from close range or blindly into a crowd.
-
Even if you use a light crossbow + steel bolt it's more than 7000 gold for an inaccurate weapon with low damage, low projectile speed and long reloading time, where you will have to stand still at close range leaving you exposed to all the ranged of enemies all that for a bolt that will only sting a little. With 7000 gold you can use elite armor instead of mail.
Somebody with 5 PT throwing axes will need at least 3 axes in the body to kill you if you ve decent armour and he will have terrible accuracy, he still have invest 5 skill point that could be spend elsewhere. 5PT could be 5IF that's a 20% increase of hp for a 15 strength build.
Seriously this thread should be renamed "let's make it impossible for people to use ineffective builds"
-
Even if you use a light crossbow + steel bolt it's more than 7000 gold for an inaccurate weapon with low damage, low projectile speed and long reloading time, where you will have to stand still at close range leaving you exposed to all the ranged of enemies all that for a bolt that will only sting a little. With 7000 gold you can use elite armor instead of mail.
Somebody with 5 PT throwing axes will need at least 3 axes in the body to kill you if you ve decent armour and he will have terrible accuracy, he still have invest 5 skill point that could be spend elsewhere. 5PT could be 5IF that's a 20% increase of hp for a 15 strength build.
Seriously this thread should be renamed "let's make it impossible for people to use ineffective builds"
I think the OP meant it the other way around.
You can be a very effective xbower with 100 wpf in crossbows and put all the rest into a melee weapon of your choice without sacrificing a lot of functionality in melee combat.
Having only 80 or so wpf in a melee proficiency doesn't really hamper your fighting capabilities. All you need are some manual blocking skills and footwork. Maybe add in some PS to hurt people and you're a perfect example of a hybrid.
-
My hybrid has at least 100 wpf in 3 weapons, yet I'm playing him as a pure 2hander atm and doing quite well scorewise. If I wanted to, I could play pure 1h/shield or xbowman and probably do equally well. Other than having a lower ps then I'd like, I really haven't sacrificed anything in terms of my killing potential by being having a hybrid. Rather, if I played as an actual xbowman/2hander I'd be even more effective.
So, there is very slight negatives to being a hybrid atm (minor sacrifice of stats/skills), and very high positives (effective in most situations).
-
I think that the problem is not crossbowers or archers. The problem is the ranged-spam-fest that all servers have. You can't walk ten seconds without being spammed by arrows, flying axes and bolts.
-
I think that the problem is not crossbowers or archers. The problem is the ranged-spam-fest that all servers have. You can't walk ten seconds without being spammed by arrows, flying axes and bolts.
Yep. Every server I play on is a range fest, literally 80-90% of my team almost every time I play has some sort of range weapon and everyone has a melee weapon just in case people get close to their camp spot. It's pretty silly that the hybrid is pretty much the only viable build, everything else feels like trying to *force* something to work simply because you want to, not because it's effective.
Playstyles have seemingly been forced to become range first, melee second and only if you absolutely HAVE to. Pretty boring, I'd rather play BC2 if I wanted to shoot people all day. It's really an exponential problem: inf you can counter with inf or range, the only way to counter range effectively is by range. Don't say "omg go shield", 2 archers can easily pick 1 shield apart, yet 2 shielders cant take 1 archer down as he'll simply run and let the rest of his team shoot you (and cav strafe you). Pretty ridiculously one sided. This problem only gets worse faster as more and more range is introduced and the problem is more and more exacerbated and pronounced, leaving only one way to respond to it: get range yourself. All emphasis now seems to be ranged, with melee only being an afterthought. It's pretty frustrating the way the trends are going when most of the skill and uniqueness of the game lies in the melee system, not in the less-than-average ranged system.
-
I am all for hybrids, though I play allways "pure".
Hate range as well, but it shouldnt be nerfed too hard. Would be perfect if there were simply less ranged players, but how to force this? Limit range weapons per match? i dont know...
-
I would greatly prefer to buff specialists then nerf hybrids.
Yeah!I want MOAR POWAAAH!
-
Yep. Every server I play on is a range fest, literally 80-90% of my team almost every time I play has some sort of range weapon and everyone has a melee weapon just in case people get close to their camp spot. It's pretty silly that the hybrid is pretty much the only viable build, everything else feels like trying to *force* something to work simply because you want to, not because it's effective.
Playstyles have seemingly been forced to become range first, melee second and only if you absolutely HAVE to. Pretty boring, I'd rather play BC2 if I wanted to shoot people all day. It's really an exponential problem: inf you can counter with inf or range, the only way to counter range effectively is by range. Don't say "omg go shield", 2 archers can easily pick 1 shield apart, yet 2 shielders cant take 1 archer down as he'll simply run and let the rest of his team shoot you (and cav strafe you). Pretty ridiculously one sided. This problem only gets worse faster as more and more range is introduced and the problem is more and more exacerbated and pronounced, leaving only one way to respond to it: get range yourself. All emphasis now seems to be ranged, with melee only being an afterthought. It's pretty frustrating the way the trends are going when most of the skill and uniqueness of the game lies in the melee system, not in the less-than-average ranged system.
I'm pure 2h, it's pretty effective. Shielder too. For my playstyle I'd feel like trying to force it if I picked a cheap ranged sidearm. I can't block a road or rush and shoot at the same time. The few times where I'd really like to shoot, well I just deal with it (*) that I've left that open with my class, like a cavalry has to deal with it that he can't use his horse in a castle map.
Countering archers as shielder is also not a problem with the right character, f.e. Kinngrimm always got me on my archer.
Try to look at that bolded part again. I don't really know how to put it so I'll just try to put that against it:
2 shielders can easily kill 1 archer, yet 2 archers can't take 1 shielder down as he'll simply block and let the rest of his team shoot you (and cav strafe you)
If you were really serious about that change your tactics, as a group of shielders kill the rest of the team before you run after a running archer.
-
Yep. Every server I play on is a range fest, literally 80-90% of my team almost every time I play has some sort of range weapon and everyone has a melee weapon just in case people get close to their camp spot. It's pretty silly that the hybrid is pretty much the only viable build, everything else feels like trying to *force* something to work simply because you want to, not because it's effective.
Playstyles have seemingly been forced to become range first, melee second and only if you absolutely HAVE to. Pretty boring, I'd rather play BC2 if I wanted to shoot people all day. It's really an exponential problem: inf you can counter with inf or range, the only way to counter range effectively is by range. Don't say "omg go shield", 2 archers can easily pick 1 shield apart, yet 2 shielders cant take 1 archer down as he'll simply run and let the rest of his team shoot you (and cav strafe you). Pretty ridiculously one sided. This problem only gets worse faster as more and more range is introduced and the problem is more and more exacerbated and pronounced, leaving only one way to respond to it: get range yourself. All emphasis now seems to be ranged, with melee only being an afterthought. It's pretty frustrating the way the trends are going when most of the skill and uniqueness of the game lies in the melee system, not in the less-than-average ranged system.
Somehow you compare 2vs1 (archers vs shielder) to 2vsThe whole team? Nice indeed. Also, if you compare players of equal skill, shielder should always win, even 1 on 1 (I can't believe I'm forced to say "even", but since you think 2 shielders can die to one archer, it seems needed).
Also, to your previous suggestion to make xbows get penalty for PS, that's bad. Don't nerf dedicated class. Pure xbowers are not a problem, they trade their melee wpf for xbow wpf, much like archers. Meleeing is part of xbower playstyle, cause there is no point for us to run away since we cant just turn around and shoot you. Forcing us to drop xbow whenever we melee is just stupid. You wouldn't get rid of hybrids, you would get rid of the whole class. If that's what you're after though, good job.
-
yet 2 archers can't take 1 shielder down as he'll simply block and let the rest of his team shoot you (and cav strafe you)
They can, if they coordinate, you see it sometimes on public servers even, even more common on matches or strategus.
-
Making swords require Power Strike would just further screw over Agility builds.
-
from what i understand of the situation, and all of the "pros" on the forums, Hybrids are fine. If you have trouble fighting a hybrid then you should just get better at the game.
-
make a hybrid and prove they need a nerf. Rather then ass backwards polling. Fuck's sake.
-
*cough* wpf requirements for weapons *cough* :wink:
-
make a hybrid and prove they need a nerf. Rather then ass backwards polling. Fuck's sake.
Sadly my motherboard blew a circuit a few days ago 200k from retiring. in two weeks ill have a new computer ill hit 31 retire and then make a hyrbid.
-
*cough* wpf requirements for weapons *cough* :wink:
people who do not spend wpf on throwing are turrets.