cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Palurgee on July 21, 2013, 12:01:11 am

Title: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Palurgee on July 21, 2013, 12:01:11 am
I'm certain all of us have noticed a rise in archery on cRPG, in both EU and NA servers. A lot of people have been complaining about how much ranged there is, which leads to the question: how much range do you think there should be?
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Canuck on July 21, 2013, 12:02:06 am
As many as there are people that want to play ranged
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Prpavi on July 21, 2013, 12:03:41 am
not as much as now that's for sure.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on July 21, 2013, 12:27:28 am
A large amount of ranged, while frustrating at times, isn't the main problem. You can always get shield skill, hide behind those with shields, hide behind terrain and structures, and wait until MoTF comes up.

The big problem is the lack of a class balance component in the autobalancer. Frequently one team will end up as mostly ranged and dominate the other team in a fashion non-conducive to fun. Of course, there is little chance of a class balance component being added, so we're pretty much doomed.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Vodner on July 21, 2013, 12:31:09 am
If there's a ton of ranged, I'll usually spec ranged myself. It beats pushing forward and getting shot to death. I realize that this doesn't help matters.

That being said, there have only been a few occasions in the last few weeks where I felt that things were out of hand.

Quote
You can always get shield skill, hide behind those with shields, hide behind terrain and structures, and wait until MoTF comes up.
While very effective (and always my preferred method of doing things in such situations), this isn't very fun. It's effectively 4:00 of not playing the game, followed by a brief flag skirmish.

If I have to choose between winning and having fun, I'll always choose winning. That shouldn't be a choice people have to make, though.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Apollo on July 21, 2013, 12:51:54 am
These don't look like sarcastic avatars.....
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Miwiw on July 21, 2013, 01:30:06 am
There are not as many ranged as infantry. Maybe there is less cav than ranged and inf, but the most played class is infantry (obviously cause inf has pole, 1h and 2h, ranged has xbow and archery and cav is cav :P).

Canuck got it, good answer.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Rumblood on July 21, 2013, 01:46:38 am
I initially started playing ranged because I was tired of hit and run cavalry. Then as more people acquired some form of a ranged attack (xbows, throwing), you have even more cause to have some manner of striking back. Then after they broke archers legs, I found myself forced to become ranged and cavalry. I see no end to the spiral as more and more players give up and join the dark side as well.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Vodner on July 21, 2013, 02:52:35 am
Quote
Then after they broke archers legs, I found myself forced to become ranged and cavalry.
At level 30, you can roll an 18/18 hybrid that is both quite good at archery (150 WPF with 6 PD), and is perfectly capable of defending itself in melee (50 1h WPF with 6 PS). You even get 5 IF in the deal, and can throw in some low-end medium armor without taking a WPF hit. You can either take a 1-slot bow, two stacks of arrows, and a 1-slot 1h, or you can take a 2-slot bow, two stacks of arrows, and a 0-slot 1h (of which there are several decent choices now).

With a crossbow, things get even better. You can go 18/21, get 120 1h WPF and 130 xbow WPF, wear very good armor, and wield a 1-slot 1h.

Ranged doesn't need to kite, nor should it be able to. I do wish that there was a better way to eliminate kiting, without having to resort to gimping archer melee footwork. It's a little goofy having to melee like you're wearing gothic plate.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Rumblood on July 21, 2013, 08:19:27 am
I never kited Saul, but thanks for the assumption. I fired until melee was in my face, using the stun from the last hit to allow me time to switch to my melee weapon. I see no reason to both be forced into light armor and be forced to wear concrete boots. I used the high athletics to dance around the heavy armored melee, avoid cavalry charges, and weave in and out of multiple opponents. Take that away and you take away the motivation to stand toe to toe. I'll just stay on the pony and retain the ability to dictate the engagement.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Vodner on July 21, 2013, 08:53:43 am
I never kited Saul, but thanks for the assumption. I fired until melee was in my face, using the stun from the last hit to allow me time to switch to my melee weapon. I see no reason to both be forced into light armor and be forced to wear concrete boots. I used the high athletics to dance around the heavy armored melee, avoid cavalry charges, and weave in and out of multiple opponents. Take that away and you take away the motivation to stand toe to toe. I'll just stay on the pony and retain the ability to dictate the engagement.
I agree that completely gimping archer footwork is unfortunate. Also, having jumps just flat-out not work while drawing a bow (rather than cancelling the draw) makes it nearly impossible to avoid a cav charge, which is again unfortunate.

That said, without cmp putting in a lot of work to disable sprint for archers (quite a lot of work, since he would have to modify the WSE2 client, the vanilla client, the WSE2 server, and the vanilla server), it was the only solution available.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Grumbs on July 21, 2013, 09:09:26 am
As many as there are people that want to play ranged

Although this sounds like a nice and fair answer, I don't really agree with it. I would say the majority come to M&B because it has solid melee game mechanics and if you put people in a situation where they can't really do melee or they have to wait half the time before they can start playing the server numbers will suffer.

The main problem is that the best counter to ranged is more ranged. This creates a feedback loop in the meta game. Either it needs to be less like rock/paper/scissors (buff the skill needed to shoot stuff) when it comes to ranged vs melee or it needs to be that melee and cav can use particular builds that suit killing ranged. What we could do with is a new skill people can take that makes shields lighter or perhaps buffs assassins. A horse that has great manoeuvre and armour but crap top speed thats not so good against melee but kills ranged easier. Something that allows people to make anti ranged builds that aren't either too slow or were the shield won't break too soon or be shot straight through by xbows. The shields are already really strong in melee vs melee though

TL;DR: Buff or create more ranged counters, or increase skill floor for shooting stuff
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Canuck on July 21, 2013, 09:54:09 am
Short: Ranged have rights too. I don't really think ranged is the only counter to ranged. 1h shield cav worked really well for me just last week. Something gets buffed so people play it for a while, others get tired of it so they spec to something that beats it, people get tired of being beaten by their counter and things swing in a different direction for a bit. It all just takes time.

Long:
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: XyNox on July 21, 2013, 11:35:11 am
I initially started playing ranged because I was tired of hit and run cavalry. Then as more people acquired some form of a ranged attack (xbows, throwing), you have even more cause to have some manner of striking back. Then after they broke archers legs, I found myself forced to become ranged and cavalry. I see no end to the spiral as more and more players give up and join the dark side as well.

Although I despise any form of horseback warfare, I have to say I caught myself thinking the exact same thing more often than I like to.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Adamar on July 21, 2013, 03:50:19 pm
At level 30, you can roll an 18/18 hybrid that is both quite good at archery (150 WPF with 6 PD), and is perfectly capable of defending itself in melee (50 1h WPF with 6 PS). You even get 5 IF in the deal, and can throw in some low-end medium armor without taking a WPF hit. You can either take a 1-slot bow, two stacks of arrows, and a 1-slot 1h, or you can take a 2-slot bow, two stacks of arrows, and a 0-slot 1h (of which there are several decent choices now).

That's not really efficient, you need a lot of athlectics to fight, especially with 2 stacks of arrows, and 150 wpf is only good with 1 slot bows. This shouldn't be a 1 build class, nor should we be loosing skill points to athlectics, when the class is already short on those.

The main problem is that the best counter to ranged is more ranged. This creates a feedback loop in the meta game. Either it needs to be less like rock/paper/scissors (buff the skill needed to shoot stuff) when it comes to ranged vs melee or it needs to be that melee and cav can use particular builds that suit killing ranged. What we could do with is a new skill people can take that makes shields lighter or perhaps buffs assassins. A horse that has great manoeuvre and armour but crap top speed thats not so good against melee but kills ranged easier. Something that allows people to make anti ranged builds that aren't either too slow or were the shield won't break too soon or be shot straight through by xbows. The shields are already really strong in melee vs melee though

Any class can counter ranged. You're clinging to the principle that ranged shoot and others can't shoot back, while ignoring the difficulty it bears, and the many solutions presented to you by the devs. The bow shooting mechanic in the mod has been gimped, in part to make it easier for other classes to counter it. And by counter it I mean run up to the archer(not a group of them by yourself) while dodging or by raising your shield the exact moment the archer points an arrow at you, while running normaly the rest of the way, which actually works, only not always.
Even if an archer is skilled, the bow is still slow, and the reticule still unsteady. You dont have to be ranged yourself to counter ranged, but the problem with ranged often comes from the player's unwillingness to adapt to the game.
Non of this is new, but some people seem to resist the notion that the best way to fight something is to learn its ways first.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Umbra on July 21, 2013, 03:52:58 pm
(click to show/hide)

Lolz yeah guise just get shield or hide nabz amarite?

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Canary on July 21, 2013, 10:10:41 pm
Melee says to ranged: "shooting is no fair, it's hard to retaliate against!"

Ranged responds to melee: "get a shield if you don't want to get shot!"

Melee thinks it over; why, I'd have to stop using my chosen weapon and change my spec to something else entirely if I wanted to use a shield.



Ranged says to melee: "patch was no fair, I was nerfed too hard and can't kill or survive as efficiently anymore!"

Melee responds to ranged: "looks like it's time to spec out of ranged, then!"

Ranged does not take this retort in stride, however still changes spec and takes points in riding and horse archery to spite the nay-saying melee.


(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: HappyPhantom on July 22, 2013, 12:11:13 am
To avoid being shot:

1. engage in melee - as a ranged, I'm less likely to shoot you if my chances of TW are higher (zomg! I know right!! I must be the only one)

2. never run in a straight line

3. never stand in the same place for prolonged periods of time

Frankly I don't see why everyone has such a hard time avoiding ranged.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Vodner on July 22, 2013, 12:31:13 am
1. engage in melee - as a ranged, I'm less likely to shoot you if my chances of TW are higher (zomg! I know right!! I must be the only one)
About 90% of the time I get shot by ranged, it's while I'm engaged in melee. You have severely limited movement options once engaged, as you need to stick to enemies to stop them from hitting friendlies, and you need to footwork appropriately as necessitated by melee.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Palurgee on July 22, 2013, 12:44:52 am
2. never run in a straight line

Any archer or crossbowman worth his salt knows how to hit a target that isn't moving in a straight line, if with slightly more effort.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Rumblood on July 22, 2013, 02:12:03 am
Any archer or crossbowman worth his salt knows how to hit a target that isn't moving in a straight line, if with slightly more effort.

True, but given a choice between targets, it is the immobile, and then the straight line runner and not the juker involved in a swirling melee who gets chosen as a target. S key heroes get targeted because a: they aren't truly involved in melee and b: they usually back in a straight line and c: the stun gives your teammates a chance to catch the bastard.  :P
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Smoothrich on July 22, 2013, 07:35:42 am
Does anyone else sometimes feel like the meta-game operates based on what will piss people off more?

LLJK and all of its members figured this out 2 years ago.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Macropus on July 23, 2013, 06:50:08 pm
As a lightly armored ninja with 8 athletics and 13.1 total eqipment weight I say - ranged isn't too bad.
Yes sometimes it's getting hard to survive though. I'm not really sure if that means ranged is OP or not.

PS: Just for the record - I once charged a group of 3 archers in open field (completely stupid move, especially for ninja. Or maybe not that stupid, for a ninja?) and killed them all, only getting shot 1 or 2 times.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Angantyr on July 23, 2013, 07:00:18 pm
CRPG are closing in on being more like Native than it has since the earliest versions; more ranged and more shielders than ever.

Less range spam and more manual block is why I chose cRPG over any other module, in the first place.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Kafein on July 23, 2013, 08:01:55 pm
As many as there are people that want to play ranged

This


Yet in order for that to work, there should be a way to balance the archery population ingame.

Even making the ridiculous assumption that there's an effective way of countering archers (be it shields that kill archers from afar, or cav with 18PS that teleport behind archers, or hive-minds of 2h and polearms that can continuously evade shots from two directions at once on sloped terrain...), it simply does not work as a mitigating factor against the rise of the ranged population. Still assuming something counters archers (apart from more archers), winning that way isn't necessarily fun. In the case of the shielders or camping/waiting for the flags to spawn, it is rather necessarily the most boring thing ever. Choosing between winning and having fun, I'll chose having fun, which also means I'm going to quit the server at some point if it goes on. A high density of archers shouldn't have as consequence that everybody would want to play ranged too. It should push players to chose some other class which is effective and fun to play against archers. Even though the first part is "debatable", the second isn't, there's no such thing.


To avoid being shot:

1. engage in melee - as a ranged, I'm less likely to shoot you if my chances of TW are higher (zomg! I know right!! I must be the only one)

2. never run in a straight line

3. never stand in the same place for prolonged periods of time

Frankly I don't see why everyone has such a hard time avoiding ranged.

What's important is the relative difficulty of surviving ranged and melee. The average player survives when engaged in melee much longer than what the game was designed for, and this just keeps on increasing. Quite bluntly people block much better than they used to, but there's only so much you can do against projectiles. The instant someone shoots at you, it is in most cases already too late, even with a shield. There's very little room for increasing your ability to survive projectiles without hindering your playstyle (hiding somewhere and being  useless just for the sake of surviving ranged just means the enemy ranged won without even killing you), because it is very dependent on both luck and your stats, and very little on your input. Surviving melee on the other hand is the opposite. Even with a wooden stick and a level 1 character a good player can survive melee for entire minutes. Applying everything you said and much much more to avoid being killed by ranged still doesn't reach the same level or certainty you won't die.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on July 23, 2013, 08:19:11 pm
I play C-rpg and Warband because it's the closest thing I'm going to get from a video game to fighting as a solo combatant (as part of a larger unit) in the middle ages.  Not just for melee, not just for riding around on a horse, not just for shooting a bow and arrow, for all of it.

I don't think there should be limits on the amount of people playing a certain class, it should be up to whatever the person chooses.  That being said, the team balance could do a way better job of balancing the teams so that it's not 40 archers on one team, and 10 on the other. 

If I was putting together an army (in crpg) I'd want about 30% ranged, 30% cavalry, and 40% infantry.  Where the ranged and cavalry are mainly supporting the infantry.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Elindor on July 24, 2013, 06:18:32 pm
Too many ranged?  I notice all of you are talking about battle.  I have noticed the increase as well, and although I like battle and plan to play both modes....

Come to the darkside and play Siege once in a while!
"NOOBS EVRYWARE ALL SEEG PLYARS ARE BADDDIES AND NO ARH3rS!!!!" (right?)

No but seriously there are less archers on siege....oddly enough.  And there are plenty of good players.

And guess what.
(click to show/hide)

Support NA2 2013 :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on July 24, 2013, 06:59:30 pm
Having only one life per round is much better than respawning.  Getting kills is much more meaningful, as is staying alive. 

Also, I can't also play CK2 when I'm playing siege, I can in battle mode (if I die).   :mrgreen:
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Tydeus on July 25, 2013, 11:10:54 pm
(click to show/hide)
Instead, you get to die once (even if it's on the front lines), and have your flag capped before you have a chance to reach the flags with your second life, or worse yet, even respawn. Shit happens to me all the time, regardless of the amount of players in the server. It's actually the most infuriating aspect of siege for me. It doesn't matter how well you played up to that point, how great your defense/teamwork/cooperation was, you die once, and it can be over before you have a chance to do anything again.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Grumpy_Nic on July 29, 2013, 11:06:57 am
Instead, you get to die once (even if it's on the front lines), and have your flag capped before you have a chance to reach the flags with your second life, or worse yet, even respawn. Shit happens to me all the time, regardless of the amount of players in the server. It's actually the most infuriating aspect of siege for me. It doesn't matter how well you played up to that point, how great your defense/teamwork/cooperation was, you die once, and it can be over before you have a chance to do anything again.

This. I hardly play siege but from time to time, when battle pisses me off, I play siege. Usually when defending the flag I spawn on the other side of the map which is bullcrap or as Tydeus mentioned, I dont spawn at all because its over.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Ronin on August 07, 2013, 09:36:41 am
About 90% of the time I get shot by ranged, it's while I'm engaged in melee. You have severely limited movement options once engaged, as you need to stick to enemies to stop them from hitting friendlies, and you need to footwork appropriately as necessitated by melee.
Once you are engaged in melee, you should know that your opponent can be your shield.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Vodner on August 07, 2013, 06:28:42 pm
Once you are engaged in melee, you should know that your opponent can be your shield.
If it's a 1v1 engagement out in the middle of nowhere, then sure. Realistically, it's a 40v40 clusterfuck with the entirety of your concentration split between finding vulnerable opponents, watching for teammates getting ganked, and watching for incoming attacks.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Ronin on August 07, 2013, 06:50:52 pm
Yeah random shit happens there.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Bulzur on August 07, 2013, 11:19:11 pm
I like range.

They're the players i found the most pleasure in exterminating.
Take away the range, take away my pleasure. :(
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Berserkadin on August 08, 2013, 01:50:27 am
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Tears of Destiny on August 10, 2013, 10:24:51 pm
I'm certain all of us have noticed a rise in archery on cRPG, in both EU and NA servers.
In the years I've been here, range is pretty mild right now.
Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: Rumblood on August 10, 2013, 11:30:07 pm
I'm certain all of us have noticed a rise in archery on cRPG, in both EU and NA servers. A lot of people have been complaining about how much ranged there is, which leads to the question: how much range do you think there should be?

Quote
Palurgee:
Date Registered:
    July 12, 2013, 03:35:45 am

 :lol:

Title: Re: Ranged to Melee Ratio
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on August 12, 2013, 03:37:55 pm
:lol:

To be fair, thinking that a majority (or even an average) of users who play the game, actually visit or post on the forums, is quite a stretch.

I'm guessing most of us nerds who post on the forums, are doing so from work