cRPG
cRPG => General Discussion => Topic started by: Templar_Steevee on May 23, 2012, 02:19:13 pm
-
I'm almost shure that many ppl tell me that I'm whining, but I don't care about it.
I noticed small changes on maps witch helps to paly with cav and melee and force range units to change their play style.
I mean minor changes like removing some ladders or stairs, even some big rocks. Those things helps a lot range units to take cover from some melee and especially from cav. Removing them force range to change their tactics and even changing bulids to hi athlethic (most of melee rage about running archers).
I only hope that devs won't remove trees, because they are helpfull to avoid cav...
-
More (completely) unreachable houses, less rocks, less trees, less fences please.
Ha yes less skirmish maps, more battlefields. This is not modern warfare.
-
IMO most players think that on battelfield shouldn't be ANY range unit. Range units make this mod more interesting and force melee and cav to think, not only to wild charge straight on enemy.
Kafein it looks like the best map for you is big flat desert with no hills.
Many players like sometimes hide somewhere and backstab someone.
Differentiated maps makes this game more fun and helps players to not get bored too fast and let them to create some nice tactics.
-
I also think that spawns should have some ways not be rushed by cav to kill people being left behind or afks. Some little walls around it, some obstacle in front so cav never gets free kills. They don't even need them btw. (I don't have anything against cav though, but late-spawners (whatever reason), or guys with slow pcs/connection often just die in the first second)
Big flat maps without any hills aren't good anyway. Not like we would fight in Swadian area only. Nord/Rhodok area both have hills, nearly same with Vaegir, Sarranid have medium dunes and the Khergit Steppe isn't flat either. Hills add more possibilites to the fights and leaving out the archers, the game would end up in boring 2h fights.
-
Everybody says spawnkilling should not be possible and I can't agree more.
But I personally think hills and dunes are much worse than houses. In this game as soon as you have rough terrain your map looks like it's from Mars.
Hills add more possibilites to the fights
No. Hills actually force each side to find the steepest mountain and camp it until one team dies of boredom. That is what happens whenever random "plains" are on the rotation and the randomness decides plains are supposed to have 80% slopes.
Actually on a 100% flat map without houses the units that have the highest advantage are the archers, this advantage growing bigger with hills. Why ? Well if horses can't hide behind houses, they die. Most horses die when you look at them the wrong way so if everybody can look at them all the time they die very fast. Usually as soon as they enter a 100m circle around the enemy team. The second classes are cav and 1h. 1h because they are more or less protected against archers, and cav because they can manage to kill inf that went too far from their archers or other cav (usually when there are two archer nests cav just fight each other because it's more fun anyway). But 2h/polearms are invariably crushed by range, except those that have enough brainpower to stay behind shielders (most of these are pikemen).
Cav are faster ninjas with the duelling skills of single handed mentally challenged footmen. If you add objects that hide what's on the other side, cav becomes better. On the other hand, objects that don't hide but still prevent moving through them such as rocks, trees or fences are the worst enemy of cav.
So yeah, this :
More (completely) unreachable houses, less rocks, less trees, less fences please.
Was totally biased.
But this :
Ha yes less skirmish maps, more battlefields. This is not modern warfare.
Was not.
-
Cav are faster ninjas with the duelling skills of single handed mentally challenged footmen. If you add objects that hide what's on the other side, cav becomes better. On the other hand, objects that don't hide but still prevent moving through them such as rocks, trees or fences are the worst enemy of cav.
Every class can find "+" and "-" in terrain. You only have to think and you won't die like a bitch. :wink:
-
Of course those maps with hills shouldnt be randomed (I do not mean high mountains). As you said those random maps are mostly awful and make teams camp. By hills I mean a way for archers to be a bit better protected against horses. Cav either couche lances, hides behind their shields or directly attacks and do bumpkills quite often. With 5 IF, 18 STR and around 35 Body Armor and 30 Leg Armor I as Archer lose around 20% by a bump (courser, destrier) of a cav. Their slashes are usually 1hit. It is quite difficult to survive any cav attack without inf support or a lucky headshot of myself. There either a tree or a little hill does help me a lot.
But as I actually went more a Hybrid Archer who is able to fight in melee (not neccessarily against cav though), I do not complain about that. I just want some obstacles on a map (not just a plain grass map which is completely flat without many trees).
-
More (completely) unreachable houses, less rocks, less trees, less fences please.
Ha yes less skirmish maps, more battlefields. This is not modern warfare.
Agreed. I don't like all the "skirmish/siege" type maps on the battle servers. Open field battles are where the battles took place (unless it was a siege). "open field" = geographic terrain. There wasn't typically buildings and large rocks and fences to hide behind. You relied on terrain and your other units working in conjunction to hold the advantage.
I also don't like all the modern warfare type maps. Too many people running around thinking they are a one man army, when their actual strength lies in numbers (or at least running with a few people who can compliment your weaknesses and vice versa).
I disagree with your post about hills though. I think hills are very important...that the units should be using the terrain to their advantage on the maps. I don't think we need giant mountains (considering how slow you move on upward slopes), but some elevation changes are important if you remove the fences, houses, and other man made structures. As cavalry, I think it's completely fair that archers and infantry should be able to fight on the top of a hill that I can't do much to help out with. That's just plain smart.
-
Ha yes less skirmish maps, more battlefields. This is not modern warfare.
Battlefields as in open ground?
-
Many players like sometimes hide somewhere and backstab someone
You're bad at this game.
-
You're bad at this game.
Maybe you are wright, I suck in melee, I only know how to pew pew.
But I'm not playing for beeing one of the best, I'm playing for fun, and love when ppls rage about me when I kill them.
Anyway I'm playing "the most retarded class - fucking archer" and I like it 8-)
-
I'm almost shure that many ppl tell me that I'm whining, but I don't care about it.
I noticed small changes on maps witch helps to paly with cav and melee and force range units to change their play style.
I mean minor changes like removing some ladders or stairs, even some big rocks. Those things helps a lot range units to take cover from some melee and especially from cav. Removing them force range to change their tactics and even changing bulids to hi athlethic (most of melee rage about running archers).
I only hope that devs won't remove trees, because they are helpfull to avoid cav...
down with the trees
-
I hate starting post out like this but fuck it...
My dream map rotation:
Large open flat field map
Large open hilly map
Mixed forest, creek and open field map
field with village in centre map
large village map
Dueling village map (2 small villages face off, short open run between villages and a longer windy cav unfriendly run)
city with huge wide cavalcade friendly roads down the middle map
destroyed castle map
And don't tell me to go make more maps, I am, I'm just lazy and slow like every other fucker.
-
The old maps are made less xbow/archer-friendly, I have noticed it aswell, all the good spots gone.
The problem is: in general melee are somewhat braindamaged, and will seldom support the fragile but usefull.
ranged needs time to do their job, and are most effective when not needing to constantly look around 360 for danger.
Saving a running archer is a big bonus for you team, so dont run away from a running archer.
And the shittiest move of them all: "you do not need to be faster than the bear, just faster than the other guy".
I see a friendly melee player beeing chased by a tincan, the friendly runs towards me,ofc in a straight line towards me so I can not shoot at his pursuer.So I hold my arrow, waiting to release til friendly has passed me, and we can fight him together.
Friendly kicks me, losing my draw, and stunned, and find myself being cut down before I can even bring up my little hammer.
Thanks alot friend, you really helped ur team by saving urself.
-
Every class can find "+" and "-" in terrain. You only have to think and you won't die like a bitch. :wink:
Following that I can say :
You need to find the true power of friendship to win !
And it will be just as useful to the conversation as your post. But now I have to make a real point or else I'll be more moronic than usual which is not my intention.
I'm in favor of this :
Of course those maps with hills shouldnt be randomed (I do not mean high mountains). As you said those random maps are mostly awful and make teams camp. By hills I mean a way for archers to be a bit better protected against horses. Cav either couche lances, hides behind their shields or directly attacks and do bumpkills quite often. With 5 IF, 18 STR and around 35 Body Armor and 30 Leg Armor I as Archer lose around 20% by a bump (courser, destrier) of a cav. Their slashes are usually 1hit. It is quite difficult to survive any cav attack without inf support or a lucky headshot of myself. There either a tree or a little hill does help me a lot.
But as I actually went more a Hybrid Archer who is able to fight in melee (not neccessarily against cav though), I do not complain about that. I just want some obstacles on a map (not just a plain grass map which is completely flat without many trees).
And this :
Agreed. I don't like all the "skirmish/siege" type maps on the battle servers. Open field battles are where the battles took place (unless it was a siege). "open field" = geographic terrain. There wasn't typically buildings and large rocks and fences to hide behind. You relied on terrain and your other units working in conjunction to hold the advantage.
I also don't like all the modern warfare type maps. Too many people running around thinking they are a one man army, when their actual strength lies in numbers (or at least running with a few people who can compliment your weaknesses and vice versa).
I disagree with your post about hills though. I think hills are very important...that the units should be using the terrain to their advantage on the maps. I don't think we need giant mountains (considering how slow you move on upward slopes), but some elevation changes are important if you remove the fences, houses, and other man made structures. As cavalry, I think it's completely fair that archers and infantry should be able to fight on the top of a hill that I can't do much to help out with. That's just plain smart.
But it really depends on the exact size and shape of the hills. Due to the way the engine handles terrain and movement, the same elevation can cause a dead stop and be lethal to cav, or just a small deceleration. The former tends to happen when the mapmaker forgot to use the terrain smoothing tool.
A map with smooth hills is usually the most balanced because both footmen teams will naturally stick together and head towards the hill, and that will naturally cause a concentration of ranged power in one spot, which is extremely lethal to cav.
In this situation only a well balanced team can win since :
- Archers need at least some inf to protect them in the odd chance of a massive cav charge, and also to force the enemy to open up, make the enemy cav move and expose itself, etc. cav also acts as a good anti-cav, or at least can engage enemy cav long enough without dying.
- Cav needs inf to distract the enemy and archers to shoot down the horse archers
- Inf needs archers to weaken the enemy shieldless inf and kill the enemy cav hunting the engaged melee.
Also generally speaking, archers gain the tactical advantages and force the other team to take action (like any form of artillery), melee take the blows and horsemen make the killing.
-
cav should be spawning 30 sec later just to avoid stupid spawn rape...
guys with shitty connection connect later especially if they are downloading that map...
btw. spawn rape should be banable imo...
-
Nerf these shithole cunt fucks
-
Die in a fire, archer.
Range units make this mod more interesting and force melee and cav to think, not only to wild charge straight on enemy.
What I read here is more like: players who are actually terrible at this game and can play but ranged easymode try to justify their "playstyle" and give reason for ruining other people's play. It's interesting only for you, who are camping on a roof and shooting others with impunity.
There, said it.
-
Nerf these shithole cunt fucks
This made me laugh because I can't tell who you are referring to :lol:
-
What I read here is more like: players who are actually terrible at this game and can play but ranged easymode try to justify their "playstyle" and give reason for ruining other people's play. It's interesting only for you, who are camping on a roof and shooting others with impunity.
Ye, if you aren't good enough to keep battle awareness and dodge enemy arrows, there's of course only one way: crying. Actually you are the one trying to play "easymode" by removing anything ranged (ye I know you didnt say that directly, that is however what I get by your post) because you can't stand getting shot or killed in a situation where you can't 1hit the enemy.
I am myself not 100% an archer, wasn't even half my generations a ranged class and never had a problem with them. Ladders were already removed, no one can camp any roof anymore, except for some maps with 1-3 meters higher ground.
btw Get a Shield! :D
-
Ye, if you aren't good enough to keep battle awareness and dodge enemy arrows, there's of course only one way: crying. Actually you are the one trying to play "easymode" by removing anything ranged (ye I know you didnt say that directly, that is however what I get by your post) because you can't stand getting shot or killed in a situation where you can't 1hit the enemy.
I am myself not 100% an archer, wasn't even half my generations a ranged class and never had a problem with them. Ladders were already removed, no one can camp any roof anymore, except for some maps with 1-3 meters higher ground.
btw Get a Shield! :D
Even though ladders are gone, semi-unreachable ranged camping spots are still a reality on a few maps. By semi-unreachable I mean you can't reach them alive when there's someone with a ranged weapon aiming at you. And no getting a shield doesn't help as jumping is required.
-
True, always depends on map though. Those jump glitches should be removed anyway. That's indeed too much of an advantage then.
-
Die in a fire, archer.
What I read here is more like: players who are actually terrible at this game and can play but ranged easymode try to justify their "playstyle" and give reason for ruining other people's play. It's interesting only for you, who are camping on a roof and shooting others with impunity.
There, said it.
Say whatever you want but steevee is really good archer, and stop saying shit about his low melee skill he is better than some infantry, or cav playes(and he use only hand axe), and tell me where his post is incorect?
Witchout archers cav will rape your ass in no time
And steevee always was against roof campers, In hes opinion acrher on roof is like open target but that isnt topick about that.
back to the topic then
-
This made me laugh because I can't tell who you are referring to :lol:
everything about my old friendchers
-
This made me laugh because I can't tell who you are referring to :lol:
I know why he is so mad and I support him.
Today he was 1 vs 2 archers. Herk was in full milanese plate with plate covered shield and then flags spawned. He tried his best to avoid their fire but couldn't. Two archers destroyed knigth in full plate using metal shield...
I do understand that archers are counter to 2H and other non shield classes. But they should tremble if shielder approaches them, and sadly that's not the case in cRPG.
Yes, I actually think that shielder should be able to kill two or more archers when they are last alive.
Mauls, pikes and ranged aren't counters. They are good against everything. That should change, don't know how but it should be fixed.
-
Everything +3 and the other my old friend shot me once and that took over 50% hp
-
Although I do favor more open maps, medieval battles of this scale would only rarely be fought on open plains. Mostly they'd be village/encampment raids or forest/rough terrain ambushes.
-
Yes, I actually think that shielder should be able to kill two or more archers when they are last alive.
Any class should be able to kill any other class in a 1vs1 situation. As it was 2vs1 there is no reason why the shielder should actually win, unless the 2 guys fail in teamwork and can't fight.
-
Archer can beat any class on 1vs1 cos it's fucking op
-
Any class should be able to kill any other class in a 1vs1 situation. As it was 2vs1 there is no reason why the shielder should actually win, unless the 2 guys fail in teamwork and can't fight.
Two shielders will hardly kill a lancer who knows what he's doing, on open plains map, of course.
I'm not saying that two archers shouldn't have a chance against a shielder but those chances should be lower than they are now (pretty damn high).
I really don't like current class balance and roles those classes fill. I've made so many threads and posts and never got any support from this community. Might try it again.
Basically I want kiting archers gone for good and replaced with high damage (but without armor ignore so that armoured guys don't take same amount of damage as low armoured players), decently armoured archer who's decent melee hybrid too. I want to see other popular classes changed (including mine).
With this balance we have for over a year now with minor changes, people get bored fast. Change some things, please developers!
-
I know why he is so mad and I support him.
Today he was 1 vs 2 archers. Herk was in full milanese plate with plate covered shield and then flags spawned. He tried his best to avoid their fire but couldn't. Two archers destroyed knigth in full plate using metal shield...
I do understand that archers are counter to 2H and other non shield classes. But they should tremble if shielder approaches them, and sadly that's not the case in cRPG.
Yes, I actually think that shielder should be able to kill two or more archers when they are last alive.
Mauls, pikes and ranged aren't counters. They are good against everything. That should change, don't know how but it should be fixed.
full milanes makes him slow, shield is heavy and makes him swallower, 2 archers caneasily rape 1 shielde because THEY was SHOOTing FROM 2 DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, DAMN ITS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, shield isn't 360 uber forcefield
and dam full plate isn't good solution for battle server
cry more rage more
you want solution for archers? make them unable to move during drawing the bow.
-
Wait ... there are still people out there who havent learned how to outplay archers yet ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_Fav3iPTE0
-
unable to move during drawing the bow.
THIS
-
Why shouldn't 2 archers beat a charging shielder? A shielder can only turn his shield to 1 side at a time, if you cant get around that situation, you should be dead.
-
Archer can beat any class on 1vs1 cos it's fucking op
Yes! Why aint this shit nerfed yet?
you want solution for archers? make them unable to move during drawing the bow.
Yes, great solution. Cripple archers completely. Clever.
-
full milanes makes him slow, shield is heavy and makes him swallower, 2 archers caneasily rape 1 shielde because THEY was SHOOTing FROM 2 DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS, DAMN ITS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND, shield isn't 360 uber forcefield
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
-
Why shouldn't 2 archers beat a charging shielder? A shielder can only turn his shield to 1 side at a time, if you cant get around that situation, you should be dead.
An archer can completely fuck over 2 2handers or 2 polearmers...
-
An archer can completely fuck over 2 2handers or 2 polearmers...
Yeah, in my dreams.
What happens mostly in the game(if you play it) is that those guys may take 2 or 3 arrows to the chest, if they dont evade, and then 1 hit kill the archer. The OPness of those two classes makes ballancing all others difficult, but the devs must please the masses.
-
Or you know, the smart archer run aways, and goes run n' gun as long as he has ammo... which both 2 handers have no counter, no way to hurt the archer or to protect themselves, unless they change their builds.
-
Or you know, the smart archer run aways, and goes run n' gun as long as he has ammo...
And when he is out of ammo, he runs another 2 mins to find moar.
-
But that's boring and lame.
-
But that's boring and lame.
it is the reality of archers.
-
Reason they don't get shields is cuz 2handers are too busy roleplaying Aragorn and can't drop their LARP session.
-
But that's boring and lame.
I know, I don't do it on my archer alt, but what Herk said is true.
-
Wait ... there are still people out there who havent learned how to outplay archers yet ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_Fav3iPTE0
Aaaaaaand your constructive input to this discussion is ?
Two shielders will hardly kill a lancer who knows what he's doing, on open plains map, of course.
I'm not saying that two archers shouldn't have a chance against a shielder but those chances should be lower than they are now (pretty damn high).
I really don't like current class balance and roles those classes fill. I've made so many threads and posts and never got any support from this community. Might try it again.
Basically I want kiting archers gone for good and replaced with high damage (but without armor ignore so that armoured guys don't take same amount of damage as low armoured players), decently armoured archer who's decent melee hybrid too. I want to see other popular classes changed (including mine).
With this balance we have for over a year now with minor changes, people get bored fast. Change some things, please developers!
This. And I repeat my wish to marry your new personality Leshma.
The only way 2 archers can not kill a shielder is if they both run in the same direction. And that happens... that never happens. It is quite incredible that some people still refuse to admit things that are facts of this game such as this.
As a shielder if you ask me to fight two opponents I will pick two shielders, maybe one shielder and one 2h if it's not a maul or an axe. That makes very little sense considering I should logically chose my natural prey. But what am I saying... shielders don't have any natural prey. That's a fact. They are only strong because they have melee capabilities just as good as the other melee classes, and enjoy what is essentially an autoblock that makes you slower, and may protect you from projectiles that come from anyone standing exactly in front of you. Fighting two archers would be among my last choices together with HA HX and throwers actually.
It's just a general rule that out of the three classes, ranged get the greatest advantages out of outnumbering the enemy, with cav and inf being rather bad at it. It's very logical. With a ranged weapon you don't need to be close to the enemy and you don't risk being shot or hit by your teammates. If you don't use a horse you can't be stopped by teammates and be a sitting duck during two seconds.
-
Again that "get shield" bullshit......
-
Getting a shield is of limited use tbh. The best way to kill archers is to stay alive while killing the rest of their team then hope they don't kill your whole team when you zerg them at the end of the round.
-
And that's how you guys manage to claim 90% of the kills while whining about archery.
-
Aaaaaaand your constructive input to this discussion is ?
It is that there have been millions of posts so far what archers weaknesses are and how to take advantage of them. But still nobody cares and does not seem to even try getting a better player, instead complaining about the things people dont understand still is the prefered option to cope with such things.
People who still think archery is OP, while they actually got nerfed doezents of times and get penalties for everything they do, those people simply need a lot of practice. I dont care what gen or reputition or what degree of fame archer-QQers achieved so far, people who are not competent enough to overcome this "obstacle" should definitly consider themselves to be the main problem in the first place. (which probably wont happen anytime soon)
Melee gameplay and especially shielders already is "ez-mode" compared to archery. I can get more kills and topscore easier with unloomed hbs and pilgrimdisguise than with a set of loomed bow and arrows with even less effort and lower situational awareness.
Lets face it, 80% of the playerbase are noobs. Archers that are skilled enough to kill with a bow consistently under hard conditions would need even less effort to own those people with a proper melee build and armor.
Dont get me wrong, its not a shame if someone cant handle archers but if its someones own fault he or she should not accuse other people for those inabilities. I know very few archers who are able to kill me before I get into melee range but I see many melee players getting kills without any clue what they are doing. As said sometime ago, my offer stands, if you are having trouble dealing with archers Im willing to spend a few minutes on the duel server to give some advice.
So basicly my constructive criticism is to pull one self together and learn something in order to improve, not complaining about the things one doesnt understand or doesnt want to understand. Im sure you are a mature person when it comes to arguments Kafein and I hope you will look at this post with the priority to share information instead of producing negative emotions, like its supposed to function. You can be sure however there will be people disagreeing with this without being able to state any reasonable or technically correct argument but rather making up fictional situation about archers that kill whole clans on their own and whining about imaginary archers that run like the wind and hit as hard as couched lance alike. And I can well imagine that those are the same people who run solo in a group and cry when they have to wait so long to respawn.
-
Archery is fine.
-
Buff longbow!
-
XyNox that's how it's always been. People want to complain about their "bane" instead of realizing in 99% of the time THEY THEMSELVES are the problem. If you can't counter a class or tactic, it's because you're doing it wrong, not because "ZOMG they're overpowered". Everything in the game has weaknesses (as well as strengths). It's up to YOU to figure it out and use your strengths, avoid your weaknesses, and take advantage of other people's weaknesses...
AKA use some common sense.
-
but i have to agree longbow should have +1 accuracy :P
-
XyNox that's how it's always been. People want to complain about their "bane" instead of realizing in 99% of the time THEY THEMSELVES are the problem. If you can't counter a class or tactic, it's because you're doing it wrong, not because "ZOMG they're overpowered". Everything in the game has weaknesses (as well as strengths). It's up to YOU to figure it out and use your strengths, avoid your weaknesses, and take advantage of other people's weaknesses...
AKA use some common sense.
You're basically saying that archers should kite. If the classes really where ballanced maybe such cheasyness wouldn't happen as often.
-
I will get a shield to stop your primary attack (arrows) when archers need to spend skill points to stop my primary attack (sword). No powerstrike and a 0 slot weapon requires nothing. A shield requires skill points.
Otherwise, it's a bullshit argument.
-
You're basically saying that archers should kite. If the classes really where ballanced maybe such cheasyness wouldn't happen as often.
Yes, if that's what they need to do to survive the situation. Archers are weak against infantry (when infantry is within melee range). That's obvious.
Infantry don't have to chase the archers when they run away. In fact, allowing yourself to be kited really hurts your team. Personally, with 6 athletics and medium/heavy armor, being "kited" isn't an issue. if someone runs away when there's still a lot of enemy infantry left, I go back to killing/fighting with my infantry group. If there's only 5 people left and one is an archer who's running, I chase them until they die.
The classes ARE balanced very well. Everything has strengths and weaknesses. Every "strength" has a counter to it. Explain to me where there is an imbalance and how you would like to fix it (in general, doesn't need to be specific).
-
Class efficiency, the fact that melee classes are a lot better at killing than archers are isn't ballanced at all. A noob anything can easely kill an average archer, but a noob archer cant kill anything.
-
It is that there have been millions of posts so far what archers weaknesses are and how to take advantage of them. But still nobody cares and does not seem to even try getting a better player, instead complaining about the things people dont understand still is the prefered option to cope with such things.
People who still think archery is OP, while they actually got nerfed doezents of times and get penalties for everything they do, those people simply need a lot of practice. I dont care what gen or reputition or what degree of fame archer-QQers achieved so far, people who are not competent enough to overcome this "obstacle" should definitly consider themselves to be the main problem in the first place. (which probably wont happen anytime soon)
Melee gameplay and especially shielders already is "ez-mode" compared to archery. I can get more kills and topscore easier with unloomed hbs and pilgrimdisguise than with a set of loomed bow and arrows with even less effort and lower situational awareness.
Lets face it, 80% of the playerbase are noobs. Archers that are skilled enough to kill with a bow consistently under hard conditions would need even less effort to own those people with a proper melee build and armor.
Dont get me wrong, its not a shame if someone cant handle archers but if its someones own fault he or she should not accuse other people for those inabilities. I know very few archers who are able to kill me before I get into melee range but I see many melee players getting kills without any clue what they are doing. As said sometime ago, my offer stands, if you are having trouble dealing with archers Im willing to spend a few minutes on the duel server to give some advice.
So basicly my constructive criticism is to pull one self together and learn something in order to improve, not complaining about the things one doesnt understand or doesnt want to understand. Im sure you are a mature person when it comes to arguments Kafein and I hope you will look at this post with the priority to share information instead of producing negative emotions, like its supposed to function. You can be sure however there will be people disagreeing with this without being able to state any reasonable or technically correct argument but rather making up fictional situation about archers that kill whole clans on their own and whining about imaginary archers that run like the wind and hit as hard as couched lance alike. And I can well imagine that those are the same people who run solo in a group and cry when they have to wait so long to respawn.
I'm very interested in potential techniques against archers, please PM me so we can settle a time on EU_3 :)
I'm just very curious as archers and ranged chars in general are what kills the best melee players. Even after mastering melee I don't see a single one of them doing anything really different than what most people come up with against range, which is not much.
And IMO it is not surprising at all given how the game works.
-
Most splendid, I will PM you tomorrow so we can discuss this matter in the fields. After my special training you wil be cruisin through the battleground in no time, leaving a trail of but dead archers behind you. I dont know when I will be online though.