This is getting stupid. I propose that in order for us to have proper discussions about the current state of classes, we need some new rules because some people sound like a broken fucking record.
Rules for Melee:
1. Stop calling ranged my old friends. It makes you look stupid.
2. Stop complaining that you get kited. It's annoying as fuck, but it makes perfect sense as they are playing to their strengths, while limiting yours.
3. Stop complaining about cav backstabbing you. It's annoying as fuck, but it makes perfect sense as they are playing to their strengths, while limiting yours.
Rules for Ranged:
1. Stop telling melee to get a shield. Especially when archers themselves admit that shields don't make much of a difference to an unsuspecting foe. Ranged don't need to spend points to block melee, so it's pretty much rubbing it in.
2. Stop telling melee to get more awareness. It's very hard to be on the lookout for archers, and cav, and other melee who might be half a second away from striking range. It's far easier to be aware when you play ranged since you are not in the thick of melee
Rules for Cav:
1. Stop telling melee to get more awareness. It's very hard to be on the lookout for archers, and cav, and other melee who might be half a second away from striking range. It's far easier to be aware when you play cav and can simply ride away from a tough situation.
If you think of any, please feel free to add.
1. Stop callingrangedeveryone my old friends. It makes you look stupid.
Rules for Ranged:
1. Stop telling melee to get a shield. Especially when archers themselves admit that shields don't make much of a difference to an unsuspecting foe. Ranged don't need to spend points to block melee, so it's pretty much rubbing it in.
Rules for Cav:I disagree with this one. I just can't believe that almost every round I see some guy being completely oblivious to the cav coming from a mile away and getting his ass couched. Outfit view button, motherfucker, do you use it? It's really not that hard.
1. Stop telling melee to get more awareness.
I disagree with this one. I just can't believe that almost every round I see some guy being completely oblivious to the cav coming from a mile away and getting his ass couched. Outfit view button, motherfucker, do you use it? It's really not that hard.Eh, holding it all round is boring as shit, I'd rather be couched, if I spot the lancer, he dies, if I don't, I die, I'm fine with it either way.
New rules for rangedmy old friends:(click to show/hide)
It's very hard to be on the lookout for archers, and cav, and other melee who might be half a second away from striking range.
Yeah, I'm not hitting that tilde key when already locked in combat or about to engage.
1. Stop telling melee to get a shield. Especially when archers themselves admit that shields don't make much of a difference to an unsuspecting foe. Ranged don't need to spend points to block melee, so it's pretty much rubbing it in.
NO AGREE...
but, 2h heros should have a shield, and people should be aware to cav.
stupid thread.
Funny thing is that ranged *do* have to spend points to "block" melee. It's called Athletics.
The comparison doesn't work. Because infantry has to spend spoints in ATH as well, to be able to even attack. And ADDITIONALY to this they need shield skill.
It's far easier to be aware when you play ranged since you are not in the thick of melee
No. Ranged loses a lot of awareness when focusing on targets and timming shots, making them perfect targets for assassins and sneaky cav.
Rules for Ranged:
1. Stop telling melee to get a shield. Especially when archers themselves admit that shields don't make much of a difference to an unsuspecting foe. Ranged don't need to spend points to block melee, so it's pretty much rubbing it in.
Rules for Cav:
1. Stop telling melee to get more awareness. It's very hard to be on the lookout for archers, and cav, and other melee who might be half a second away from striking range. It's far easier to be aware when you play cav and can simply ride away from a tough situation.
You say that like STR builds aren't the most effective melee class in the mod.
Athletics are far from necessary for melee oriented builds. I did just fine with a 42/3 build with every skill point in power strike and a German Greatsword a few months back. More than "just fine" actually.
This is getting stupid. I propose that in order for us to have proper discussions about the current state of classes, we need some new rules because some people sound like a broken fucking record.
Rules for Melee:
1. Stop calling ranged my old friends. It makes you look stupid.
2. Stop complaining that you get kited. It's annoying as fuck, but it makes perfect sense as they are playing to their strengths, while limiting yours.
3. Stop complaining about cav backstabbing you. It's annoying as fuck, but it makes perfect sense as they are playing to their strengths, while limiting yours.
Rules for Ranged:
1. Stop telling melee to get a shield. Especially when archers themselves admit that shields don't make much of a difference to an unsuspecting foe. Ranged don't need to spend points to block melee, so it's pretty much rubbing it in.
2. Stop telling melee to get more awareness. It's very hard to be on the lookout for archers, and cav, and other melee who might be half a second away from striking range. It's far easier to be aware when you play ranged since you are not in the thick of melee
Rules for Cav:
1. Stop telling melee to get more awareness. It's very hard to be on the lookout for archers, and cav, and other melee who might be half a second away from striking range. It's far easier to be aware when you play cav and can simply ride away from a tough situation.
If you think of any, please feel free to add.
Run&gun archery is the main reason why most people call archery my old friendgy. I havent heard many people calling archers my old friends in Native, simply cause they acctually are archers and need lots of love and support from teammates.I disagree, in Native they are actually extremely competent by themselves, as my arrows go exactly where I want them to, headshots require all skill and zero luck, arrows hit noticeably hard especially as the average opponent has crappy armor, and if they get close I don't have to run away I can actually melee due to real PS and WPF.
I disagree, in Native they are actually extremely competent by themselves, as my arrows go exactly where I want them to, headshots require all skill and zero luck, arrows hit noticeably hard especially as the average opponent has crappy armor, and if they get close I don't have to run away I can actually melee due to real PS and WPF.Most of Native archer classes have no PS (vaegir, sarranid and khergit archers have 0 PS, and only nords have 2 PS) and no access to nigh-tier weapons, so they often glance even on leather. More importantly, they all have lower athletics than dedicated infantry classes. They also deal less damage than those in cRPG, versus a comparable armor. For example, Native Archers cannot oneshot infantry classes wearing a simple shirt using any combination of bow and arrows.
Most of Native archer classes have no PS (vaegir, sarranid and khergit archers have 0 PS, and only nords have 2 PS) and no access to nigh-tier weapons, so they often glance even on leather. More importantly, they all have lower athletics than dedicated infantry classes. They also deal less damage than those in cRPG, versus a comparable armor. For example, Native Archers cannot oneshot infantry classes wearing a simple shirt using any combination of bow and arrows.Thats why native archers are relatively higher in skill than our own cRPG archers. They have to aim for the head as that is a pretty much a guaranteed kill, and i see more HS kills on native no matter what server than i do on cRPG
Thats why native archers are relatively higher in skill than our own cRPG archers. They have to aim for the head as that is a pretty much a guaranteed kill, and i see more HS kills on native no matter what server than i do on cRPG
You can't compare native archery to cRPG archery, anyway. Native archery crosshair is MUCH smaller than cRPG, which allows for a more precise shot.plus a vastly higher projectile speed...
2. Stop complaining that you get kited. It's annoying as fuck, but it makes perfect sense as they are playing to their strengths, while limiting yours.
It will also prevent two good archers from killing 10 shielders at the end of a round using kiting and crossfiring, because if you think two archers winning against 10 shielders is fine, you can go to hell. And I'm not even mentioning the much more frequent 2 archers vs 3 shielders situation and it's game-balance-defying most frequent outcome.
:lol:
I doupt they even have the arrows for that.
It will also prevent two good archers from killing 10 shielders at the end of a round using kiting and crossfiring, because if you think two archers winning against 10 shielders is fine, you can go to hell. And I'm not even mentioning the much more frequent 2 archers vs 3 shielders situation and it's game-balance-defying most frequent outcome.lol that must be 3 or even 10 real bad players... or 2 fucking awesome rangers ...
lol that must be 3 or even 10 real bad players... or 2 fucking awesome rangers ...
sorry , but i call that BS :rolleyes:
There are always objects on a map that can give you couver, use your shield to couver a portion of your body and said object to couver your back. If you dont have a shield, and if you have low athlectics, then you chose a build that's meant to be weak against range and you'll have to relly on evasion and/or flags, if you're up against more than 1 kiter.
I sure do love how this thread has proved my point.
Very few people in this community are capable of discussing balance without saying the things in the OP, when all of those comments have literally nothing to do with balance and are playstyle changes. That's not balancing in any sense of the word. That is altering playstyle to compensate for a perceived lack of balance.
Want an example of balancing? Spinstabbing. All you had to do was block down (a playstyle change since apparently some people didn't get this) but what happened was the nerf to stab and overhead speed (balancing move) which rendered it a lot less useful.
So in other words the solution would be hugging a wall while facing archers who are standing (!) a few meters away and shoot you constantly,
And saying you are meant to be weak against a class is pretty easy, when you are not weak against any class yourself? Or tell me a class which can kill an archer pretty easily without the archer ebing able to do much about it. Shielders can't be killed that easily, yes, but they are no real threat, either. So what's left? Cavalry? Shoot the horses. Everything else? Just shoot it. Throwers with shield, perhaps. Not a very popular class, I dare to say. At least not popular enough to counter the amount of archers on the servers.
Okay, then tell me how you want to kill an archer who has higher ATH than you but less item weight, when you can only engage in melee, and no one else is left on the map? And THEN tell me, how you want to cover yourself against two archers. :wink:
As an archer you will instinctively displace when you have no line of sight to your target or your target is covered by its shield. If the target is moving towards you, you will just try to keep distance and kite it. During that time you will know your archer buddy will follow the same instincts and move in the same way to get into the back of the shieldman. What I want to say with this paragraph is: already mediocre or even bad archers will still use the technique of crossfire, because it is a much more instinctive tactic than many others, which require some knowledge or thinking or go even against natural instincts (waiting BEHIND a hilltop, BEHIND a bottleneck etc., for example).
Okay, 2 vs. 10 is a little bit too much, but 2 vs. 5 is well doable.
Everything you are saying is common sense, and how it should be in the rock/paper/scissors scenario.
Everything you are saying is common sense, and how it should be in the rock/paper/scissors scenario.There should never be an RPS scenario, ever. At no point should you lose because your class is just flat-out countered by some other class.
I sure do love how this thread has proved my point.
Very few people in this community are capable of discussing balance without saying the things in the OP, when all of those comments have literally nothing to do with balance and are playstyle changes. That's not balancing in any sense of the word. That is altering playstyle to compensate for a perceived lack of balance.
Want an example of balancing? Spinstabbing. All you had to do was block down (a playstyle change since apparently some people didn't get this) but what happened was the nerf to stab and overhead speed (balancing move) which rendered it a lot less useful.
By all means, turn this thread into the other 740 that are discussing the same damn shit.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
The fact stands than archers do get killed prety easely in the servers(with all the nerfing they took), either because of bad armor, bad evasion from low athlectics and shit melee capability. The theory that archers are unbeatable doesn't stick when in practice capable meleers do kill them constantly. As for cavalry, yes, archers can shoot the horses, but only if the target is available. Any cav with a brain wont attack archers with good couver, but will rather stay away and draw the archers to the open. It's a shame that some horsemen put their horses in situations where they'll obviously lose, only to complain about it after. Inteligence should be a factor in any war game.
The fact stands than archers do get killed prety easely in the servers
bad evasion from low athlectics
The theory that archers are unbeatable doesn't stick when in practice capable meleers do kill them constantly
As for cavalry, yes, archers can shoot the horses, but only if the target is available. Any cav with a brain wont attack archers with good couver, but will rather stay away and draw the archers to the open.
no access to nigh-tier weapons, so they often glance even on leather.
I never said to get a shield and spear. Maybe you should try getting a 1h weapon as an alternate.
And no I'm not one of the fools who only has a spear but even with a sword
At the end of most rounds on a battle server, all the archers in the winning team except the very unlucky are alive. Actually if you open your eyes you will see that the majority of players in a winning team have some sort of ranged weapon, and that is normal since they can play their role away from the dangerous areas.
? Archers have the best athletics of all classes, with the only exception of light crossbowmen. Furthermore, the near absence of armor lets them enjoy full mobility.
That is under the assumption these "capable meleers" actually survive until they reach an archer at melee range. Also, being good at melee won't help them to do that. Actually, nothing will, except more agi, more ath and less armor. A shield slows them down considerably.
L2P issue here. What actually happens is that cav that know their weaknesses will attack archers only if there is enough cover to hide behind until it's too late for the horseman's target. An archer in the middle of a plain is pretty much unbeatable for one cav, because there is no angle of attack where the horse remains unseen. Also, I don't see how someone can possibly "draw" an archer somewhere. When I play as archer I don't ever need to follow an enemy, there are plenty of targets everywhere. It's actually the archers that force enemies to move.
And the rest of us (who posses common sense and reasoning abilities) were telling you that you were going to have to adjust the way you play your class if you don't have a shield, a spear or ranged weaopn.
In general you shouldn't be cavalry or archer hunting if you're an infantry melee class. Why are you trying to chase down archers before the end of the round? And if it's the end of the round and your team loses because people were trying to chase archers, then you clearly did something wrong.
The largest problem with archers is that people were not used to having them on the battlefield, in numbers that they used to have, up until a couple weeks ago. So now people are having to get re-accustomed to tactics with archers on the battlefield.
You can't force all public players to work as a team, but there's enough regulars on that most times infantry are fighting in groups, even if it's just relatively loose fighting formations.
I still claim the root cause of most of these "issues" infantry encounter is because of terrible tactics, teamwork and formations. Which is largely to do with the lack of communication or leadership in game. But not entirely. To me, the team that generally wins, is the team that has the better coordinated infantry.
At the end of most rounds you have the winning melee gang steamroling the leftovers of the enemy team. Or maybe you're playing a different game?
It seems you did.
If most of the archers on the winning team are alive, that's because there wasn't enought people trying to kill them(cav, assassins, other ranged). Anyone would survive if the enemy wouldn't get to them, that's not an issue of class ballance.
Yes it is. Archers are the hardest class to kill for any other class due to their mobility advantage, absence of need to be close to the action, and excellent dodging. Smart people just avoid to attack archers until the team has a big numerical advantage, because that's the only thing that works against archers.
As for athletics, no archers aren't full of athlectics, and neither are horsemen for that matter. Athletics are an infs skill, along with power strike and iron flesh. Dedicated archers are nearly forced to focus into agility and wm to be able to aim, you should be aware of the basics if you've played an archer.
I don't understand why you mention horsemen. Lance and 1h cav need to be in melee range of the enemy to harm them, so anything they do is a dice roll, except the perfect backstabs. As far as I know, athletics is an agi skill. Most archers put enough points in athletics to be able to kite most of the infantry crowd. The high agility they have in order to get a lot of wm is enough to dodge cav they are aware of.
If a meleer choses to be a str crutcher and not invest properly in athletics, then he shouldn't complain about archers being faster. A ballanced meleer doesn't have much problems outrunning archers, but having to make ballanced builds for greater efficiency isn't fair right?
That's only true if for you a balanced meleer is a 12/27 ninja in rags.
And yes, an archer on a plain is unbeatable for any horseman, but only if the horseman isn't trying to kill him, and if the horseman doesn't use evasion. It's really easy to miss an arrow if the horse maneuvers properly. But the horseman shouldn't be required to evade right? It would be way cooler if the archer dealt shit damage instead. Oh wait...
Did you played cav for more than one week ? What usually happens is that the horseman survives as long as he keeps a respectable distance between him and the archer. Cav dies exactly when they try to attack the archer, because shooting a horse going towards you, even if he makes the most elaborate dodging sequence, is one of the easiest things to do in this game. Also, if wait long enough before releasing the shot, there is no way you can miss the head. At such close range, a war bow will oneshot up to the early armored horses. And even if the archer has no time to draw his bow, the low armor and high agi he has lets him dodge any horse at any speed and any angle extremely easily.
And any player of any class can draw the enemy out if they're in a good position. As I said, there is always cover, and a horseman can even ride large distances to make arrows useless and wait for the right moment to strike.
This is poetry. What is "the right moment to strike" exactly ? There is no such thing. An horseman starting to back off from ranged fire in a plain has no other choice than waiting these ranged enemies are killed by somebody else
but I am not sure that tactics beat skill of good rambo players. (E.g. when you have one of those typical clanstacks which don't use tactics or interact with their team at all, but still slice through the enemy team) :?They do, me and Oohillac and Palatro proved that last night for example by mowing down at least 8 people all by ourselves at round end with pure melee (some of them clannies and some very good players) simply because we were working together without even voice-comms (Nice thing about fighting with an ATS member is they already understand teamwork, no comms required).
They do, me and Oohillac and Palatro proved that last night for example by mowing down at least 8 people all by ourselves at round end with pure melee (some of them clannies and some very good players) simply because we were working together without even voice-comms (Nice thing about fighting with an ATS member is they already understand teamwork, no comms required).This type of thing is my favourite cRPG gameplay. Teaming up with someone you know is a capable player and without any communication pulling of excellent teamwork and turning the tide in a supposedly lost round.
Point: If a meleer choses to be a str crutcher and not invest properly in athletics, then he shouldn't complain about archers being faster. A ballanced meleer doesn't have much problems outrunning archers, but having to make ballanced builds for greater efficiency isn't fair right?
Counterpoint: That's only true if for you a balanced meleer is a 12/27 ninja in rags.
Sorry Kaf your counterpoint is not valid. I have 18 agility, and 6 athletics. I can chase down (or at least keep up) with any archer on the battlefield to effectively neutralize them. If I drop my heavy lance I still am carrying 18.5 weight in armor, and 7.2 weight in my shield/sword.
I agree with your assessment of the battlefield as well (before you get to your BUT). Archers and ranged can hit people from a distance. Melee cannot unless they close the gap. This is how the game is designed, and how it should be.
Sorry Kaf your counterpoint is not valid. I have 18 agility, and 6 athletics. I can chase down (or at least keep up) with any archer on the battlefield to effectively neutralize them. If I drop my heavy lance I still am carrying 18.5 weight in armor, and 7.2 weight in my shield/sword.There are archers I cannot catch with 7 ath and cloth armor (on my previous build). Not all archers of course, but certainly enough to be aggravating.
There are archers I cannot catch with 7 ath and cloth armor (on my previous build). Not all archers of course, but certainly enough to be aggravating.
There are archers I cannot catch with 7 ath and cloth armor (on my previous build). Not all archers of course, but certainly enough to be aggravating.
One doesn't have to wear the shield everytime but it would be very helpful in situations where you know the other team has 10+ archers and you have none. I realize it does limit mobility and doesn't mean archers scream in vain when they see a shield but it can help you retreat to a better position or hold the flags at end, etc. It just gives you the option to better survive ranged without necessarily guaranteeing it.
The main issue is not that melee should or must have shields. Its the fact that archers kite. The main issue for that is that most archers have 2 slots bows and its usually the rus. Then they carry 2 quivers of arrows because 2 quivers is a good amount and gives you 34 arrows with loomed bodkins and over 50 with loomed normal arrows. They don't want to carry one quiver thus they have no slots for a good melee weapon which makes them want to run away from melee.
That's what it comes down to. Archers want 2 quivers of arrows and I can't blame them for that. But when they usually have the rus bow, it leaves no room for a good melee weapon which makes them not want to fight in melee. So they kite. Solve that somehow by increasing quiver size, reducing bow slots to 1, giving a better 0 slot weapon, etc and you'll see less archers kiting.