cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: [ptx] on October 15, 2013, 12:17:40 pm

Title: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 15, 2013, 12:17:40 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

(click to show/hide)

What.

Ok, most of these things have been this way before... AND IT WAS FINE.

Except for the one stat, which got its direction REVERSED during the last change to archery - missile speed.

Missile speed - this determines how quickly an arrow begins to drop, and thus determines the range of a bow - both the maximum range (how far can you shoot) and EFFECTIVE range (at what range can you actually hope to hit a moving/dodging target).

This being reversed has made it so that longbow effectively has the shortest range of all bows (with the exception of Yumi) and is generally shit in every other way as well, whilst Horn and Tatar bows completely dominate at all distances, due to their combination of draw speed, missile speed and accuracy, due to their lower base damage.

The only argument i've received, when i've sought for any sort of explanation: this simulates longbows firing heavier arrows. What the fuck, realism? Last i checked, longbows were known for their great range?

What the fuck, balance? :|
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Xant on October 15, 2013, 12:18:50 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Bjord on October 15, 2013, 12:20:55 pm
I hate ranged but this is bullshit, makes no sense. Who did this!?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Paul on October 15, 2013, 01:07:54 pm
Afaik horn and tatar are both composite bows while the longbow is a one material bow made out of a material (wood) that has a rather low maximum spring speed. That means even with decreasing the arrow weight the longbow would hit an upper limit for projectile speed, which is around 60 m/s iirc. A composite bow circumvents that problem with using a high spring speed material in combination with the slower wood. Steel, as used in high powered crossbow, has a high maximum speed as well.

So yes, one has to imagine in cRPG that the longbow uses different, heavier arrows than other bows. But that is what happens in reality anyway. Also Tydeus did it.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 15, 2013, 01:09:41 pm
Yes, but... the part about range? And, y'kno, actual ingame balance.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Paul on October 15, 2013, 01:44:40 pm
The English exaggerated the shit out of their national weapon. On the other hand there were Turkish claims that the range of their bows (composite) was 1km which tops the allerged 300-400m of the longbows significantly.

What I can imagine though is that because of the heavy war arrows the high draw weight longbows launched, they were still effective at maximum range. This is not a matter of course especially with armor around. Lighter arrows might have been very weak at distance while heavy arrows were affected less by drag loss and wind. So my guess is that longbows got their legacy from their good effective range while lighter draw weight bows were ineffective at distance.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 15, 2013, 01:49:12 pm
Well, this doesn't really translate to cRPG either, as the lighter bows have vastly superior effective range now.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Nordwolf on October 15, 2013, 03:45:11 pm
Afaik horn and tatar are both composite bows while the longbow is a one material bow made out of a material (wood) that has a rather low maximum spring speed. That means even with decreasing the arrow weight the longbow would hit an upper limit for projectile speed, which is around 60 m/s iirc. A composite bow circumvents that problem with using a high spring speed material in combination with the slower wood. Steel, as used in high powered crossbow, has a high maximum speed as well.

So yes, one has to imagine in cRPG that the longbow uses different, heavier arrows than other bows. But that is what happens in reality anyway. Also Tydeus did it.
I'm sorry but from realism point of view it doesn't make sense.

If same arrow is shot, what defines it's damage? Speed.
If you want different arrow weights, implement them, so for e.g. arrows with higher weight (and damage) are much more accurate with Rus/Long Bow, arrows with lower weight have chance to break or less accuracy with higher difficulty.  This won't happen anyway though.
So having less damage and higher missile speed is not realistic.
In reality Long Bows were long range weapon with low close combat capacity, as it was always in cRPG.

Now from balance point of view.
Firstly, "insert random rage quote about changing missile speeds for archery", and I agree with those... mostly. It worsens players accuracy much more than "accuracy stat"
Secondly, Long bow was always a sniper bow, with it's speed and damage. Now it's not effective at all.
I've always used it not because of damage. but because of missile speed.

Actually after that update I didn't even look at it's stats, I just stopped using it because it didn't feel right and any good to use.

(click to show/hide)


EDIT:
I've looked at bow missile speed stats...
It has no sense to give higher tier bows lower missile speed - it is the best stat for bows.

At the moment you are able to have pin-point accuracy with tatart bows and even deal a lot of damage. Yes, more damage than Long Bow in capacity of hitting more targets close, much more targets at longer distances. And damage stat suddenly becomes useless.

How it should be by missile speed stat:
Short bow - 40
Nomad bow - 42
Tatar bow - 44
Bow - 42
Horn Bow - 44
Yumi - 38 (ultimate HA weapon with it's accuracy and damage)
Rus Bow - 42
Long Bow - 43
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: AntiBlitz on October 15, 2013, 04:51:54 pm
just to throw this out there, you can see the slow moving longbow shot and actually just move out of the way at range, but the Horn bows arrow is like a speeding train, its so fast you dont have much chance to dodge it, and they always seem to fire in a very flatline trajectory while the longbow has the weird lobbing shots, making you always have to aim rather high above the target.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on October 15, 2013, 05:01:55 pm
I'm not an archer, but I was always confuzzled by the bow stats.

I would have imagined the Long Bow would have the highest speed rating since it has the highest draw power.  I would think that the bows that take the longest to pull back, would travel the fastest through the air. And the bows that pull back and release the fastest, would have the slowest missile speed.  Shouldn't the damage of a bow be directly correlated with the missile speed?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Paul on October 15, 2013, 06:33:08 pm
I give up. Instead of writing "maximum spring speed" again and again I'll just say it's slower because we felt like making it so.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Nordwolf on October 15, 2013, 06:38:36 pm
I give up. Instead of writing "maximum spring speed" again and again I'll just say it's slower because we felt like making it so.
So if you give up..... maybe you can hear all of us and consider to do something? >.>
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 15, 2013, 06:39:35 pm
*I* get it, but, when has cRPG been balanced around "realism"?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Bjord on October 15, 2013, 06:40:19 pm
*I* get it, but, when has cRPG been balanced around realism?

December 2011
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hirlok on October 15, 2013, 06:43:34 pm
They fear me, so they destroyed longbow. Simple as that. Get pussy bow, keep shoot'n
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Paul on October 15, 2013, 08:56:50 pm
was there a special class of how to write nothing with using a lot words?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: oohillac on October 15, 2013, 09:06:42 pm
And yes i miss uni and writing essays.

You flunked out I bet
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: //saxon on October 15, 2013, 10:26:51 pm
The English exaggerated the shit out of their national weapon.
it might of been an English weapon but i know the best archers came from Wales, so maybe the Welsh had a more accurate statement.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Kafein on October 15, 2013, 11:23:57 pm
was there a special class of how to write nothing with using a lot words?

I guess t was called the English class

I learned how to say nothing with many French words myself.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Paul on October 16, 2013, 03:09:12 pm
No, because you didn't get my point. My claim was that the longbow was a good weapon because it could launch heavy war arrows which are needed to defeat armour. However the longbow was not able to produce high shot speeds with lighter arrows because of the spring speed limitation of a wooden one material bow, which pushes the whole velocity-projectile mass relation into non-linear behaviour. No matter how high the draw weight or low the arrow weight was, the bow just couldn't launch the projectile any faster.

Composite bows were better at this; they kept linearity for a greater spectrum of arrow weights. For the question what bow achieves the highest shot speed and thus range my bet would not be on the longbow but on a composite bow with flight arrows.

That was the question of this thread. Why has the longbow lower projectile speed than horn and tatar bow? Because they shot heavier arrows and have a lower maximum spring speed. I'm not dissing the longbow which was a great, robust weapon especially in the wet British climate which destroyed crossbows and composite bows alike. But in terms of shot speed there are better bows.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 16, 2013, 03:12:02 pm
Question of the day, are there going to be any changes to bows, or do we admit the superiority of the composite bow and everyone, who hasn't already done so, should switch to those?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hirlok on October 16, 2013, 03:20:34 pm
No, because you didn't get my point. My claim was that the longbow was a good weapon because it could launch heavy war arrows which are needed to defeat armour. However the longbow was not able to produce high shot speeds with lighter arrows because of the spring speed limitation of a wooden one material bow...etc.snip.

Good and valid point. Problem: in c-rpg all arrows are created equal incl the +3 ones and just differ slightly in damage and quiver size.

So if the longbow gets fucked overall + upkeep and break rate at a point where a lightly armored archer with lb / 2xbodkins / cheap 0 slot / ragged outfit keeps losing money FAST - how about at least giving it a special purpose?

A longbow with shitty projectile speed but UNIQUE arrows ("Heavy War Bodkins" or whatever, ONLY usable with longbow, damage slightly above the old mw bodkins before the 523 nerfs) might make sense.

Right now it has become useless and too expensive, even I have switched to a pussy horn bow or nomad for the time being
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Paul on October 16, 2013, 03:23:24 pm
I'd actually like to make the longbow a rather low price(around 6k) weapon and have a similar sized composite bow take the top price spot. I just dunno if those existed.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 16, 2013, 03:29:30 pm
Basically a crappy hard-to-use lower-tier bow, that has higher damage per shot? Well, i guess that is one way to go about it, though i still feel boned :/

Can it at least get better accuracy or maybe there can be some hack, that lets it be held for a slightly longer time (to be on par with other bows)?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: pingpong on October 16, 2013, 03:34:09 pm
Ah so this is why HA's so numerous & annoying these days  :rolleyes:, forget longbow what amazes me most is making regular bow 2 slot, being 1 slot prepatch was about the only good thing going for it, now IMO its just useless, you people need to realize that making everything historically accurate just leaves fewer weapon choices, people are greedy by nature and want to have the best of everything thats why we minmax, why use the "shitty" or semi-decent weapons if everyone and their mother is using the 1 or 2 best ones?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hirlok on October 16, 2013, 03:44:03 pm
yes, lots of HA and besides being a pain in the ass they usually get their kills by horse-bumping...

Fact is: while the amount of strength crutchers in heavy armor has not really been affected by upkeep or whatever measures to limit it, archery has been made a lot less effective over time.

The last big hit was the nerfing of loomed arrows - since then there are basically no arrows that deal damage an armored guy would notice.
Mission accomplished.

In addition: upkeep seems to be "tweaked for archers" - I have alts in all classes, some with much more costly gear, no one looses money as my archer main does, the break rate for mw bodkins and mw longbow (esp. on siege) is a joke.

On a constructive note: new high tier bow (or re-vitalized longbow) would be a great idea. Make it high requirement (7pd at least), give it unique arrows, medium missile speed, medium accuracy, and noticable damage. Will say: an effective weapon agains horses and armored people, useless for archer duels and not usable by kiting agi archers.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Nordwolf on October 16, 2013, 03:53:01 pm
I'd actually like to make the longbow a rather low price(around 6k) weapon and have a similar sized composite bow take the top price spot. I just dunno if those existed.
I still won't agree with you about arrows.... different arrows with same starting speed may come from different length of time arrow is accelerating on the bow, and it's certainly less with smaller bows. Faster acceleration = higher chance to break = harder arrows need to be used.

But lets go to actual game, realism aside, why would you remove a whole bow class? Yes it consisted only from Long Bow, but it wasn't op and had a meaning on the battlefileld... now small bows have ridiculous missile speed values >> they are much easier to hit with, and they have higher accuracy rating....

Yeah, Nomad bow missile speed is not overpowered ^^
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on October 16, 2013, 03:54:35 pm
I just don't get why the Longbow is the most expensive weapon, it's a piece of shit compared to the other bows.  And I don't even use an archer, it's just obvious.

IMO the longbow should have the highest missile speed, and damage.  But the slowest draw speed.   I don't get why some of the fastest draw bows would also have the highest missile speed.  It seems counter-intuitive from a gameplay or realism perspective.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: oohillac on October 17, 2013, 01:23:23 am
I just don't get why the Longbow is the most expensive weapon, it's a piece of shit compared to the other bows.  And I don't even use an archer, it's just obvious.

IMO the longbow should have the highest missile speed, and damage.  But the slowest draw speed.   I don't get why some of the fastest draw bows would also have the highest missile speed.  It seems counter-intuitive from a gameplay or realism perspective.

Don't forget that you can hold the draw for a long time on the Long Bow.  Having a slow draw also means more time to line up the crosshairs, so overall its lack of speed can be a boon to some archers who want more time for precise shots.

And missile speed is a personal thing as well, a lot of ranged (myself included when I was HA) tend to stick with one ranged weapon and simply internalize the missile speed.  It becomes a gut thing, and doesn't factor into a weapon's effectiveness once you're used to and competent with it.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Rumblood on October 17, 2013, 04:16:42 am
Question of the day, are there going to be any changes to bows, or do we admit the superiority of the composite bow and everyone, who hasn't already done so, should switch to those?

Never left them. Quit chasing the weapon of the day you fair weather archer!
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hoppster on October 17, 2013, 05:10:39 am
long bow is a joke now, 1500 more than horn bow for upkeep, double the slots, and its slow as fuck. not worth it, i'd rather use tht slot for a better melle weapon or more arrows
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 17, 2013, 10:18:40 am
Don't forget that you can hold the draw for a long time on the Long Bow.  Having a slow draw also means more time to line up the crosshairs, so overall its lack of speed can be a boon to some archers who want more time for precise shots.

And missile speed is a personal thing as well, a lot of ranged (myself included when I was HA) tend to stick with one ranged weapon and simply internalize the missile speed.  It becomes a gut thing, and doesn't factor into a weapon's effectiveness once you're used to and competent with it.
Are we playing the same game?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Nordwolf on October 18, 2013, 12:41:09 am
Don't forget that you can hold the draw for a long time on the Long Bow.  Having a slow draw also means more time to line up the crosshairs, so overall its lack of speed can be a boon to some archers who want more time for precise shots.

And missile speed is a personal thing as well, a lot of ranged (myself included when I was HA) tend to stick with one ranged weapon and simply internalize the missile speed.  It becomes a gut thing, and doesn't factor into a weapon's effectiveness once you're used to and competent with it.
If you call Long Bow's draw holding time with normal crosshair long, then all the short bows' time is forever.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Utrakil on October 18, 2013, 12:48:34 am
My archer alt likes the fact that cheap bows are superior now. it needs a hell lot less upkeep to be an archer now.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Tydeus on October 28, 2013, 06:06:21 pm
*I* get it, but, when has cRPG been balanced around "realism"?

I hated the status quo which dictated that less than half of the bows(my mission has been to make nearly every item worth using) would ever really even be used and wanted to change it. It was also clear that increasing damage was not a possibility. Thus I utilized realism for the idea and came up with numbers I thought were appropriate for balance, numbers that weren't dictated by physics necessarily. If that's balancing around realism then I'm all for it. It may be a video game, but it's clear that realism gives us a good starting point for just about everything(gravity, for one). Just so I don't confuse anyone, I'll put this bluntly; I put functionality before anything else.

Edit: Tweaks are never off the table.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 28, 2013, 06:07:44 pm
Yeah, but, as stated, this achieved the exact opposite, as horn/tatar bows are now almost the only bows in use.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Tydeus on October 28, 2013, 06:19:24 pm
Yeah, but, as stated, this achieved the exact opposite, as horn/tatar bows are now almost the only bows in use.

But I don't see any reason to believe that the method used was wrong, just that the numbers chosen were; the general feeling in this thread is that the opposite is true.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on October 28, 2013, 06:23:50 pm
I personally would give up some damage to have a superior bow (which is what the horn bow is right now, but hell I'd probably even use a nomad bow due to the high draw and missile speed...using +3 and +3 of bodkins/tatar would be rape face IMO).  I think all that was done was made the rus/long bow much less appealing to use, and made the lighter bows way more appealing. 

I think the lighter bows should be be cheaper, quickest to draw back, do medium to light damage (compared to heavy bows) and also have slower missile speeds.  The higher end bows should take more difficulty to shoot, take quite a while to draw back, do good damage, and have the highest missile speeds.

More like native...what we have now is just 'what is this, i don't even'.  Saying this as an outside observer who doesn't use a bow or have any current archer alts.  It seems like as you go up in bows the draw speed should get slower, missile speed should get higher, and damage should get higher.  A natural progression.

*EDIT* as gurni says below...don't get me wrong, as a cavalry player I like that people are using weaker bows  :twisted:  It just seems like the balance is off in the bows to me.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Gurnisson on October 28, 2013, 06:26:00 pm
Yeah, but, as stated, this achieved the exact opposite, as horn/tatar bows are now almost the only bows in use.

Best patch ever. Shokoshugi changed to horn bow and now he doesn't hit like a motherfucking train anymore (1-2 shots). Now I can actually dare to go close as 1h cav on a heavy horse. :)
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: [ptx] on October 28, 2013, 06:31:29 pm
Oh, damn, even dedicated uberhardhitters now use the lower bows.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Tydeus on October 28, 2013, 06:44:14 pm
I think all that was done was made the rus/long bow much less appealing to use, and made the lighter bows way more appealing. 
This was one of the main objectives; these two bows were being used far too often. As Gurnisson said, it's better to have archers preferring to use weapons that don't one shot melee. Even if the changes went a bit further than intended, not only can tweaks still be done, but overall gameplay would seem to be enhanced. Fewer 1shots without implementing any actual nerfs or major game mechanics changes that would decrease the maximum damage potential or overall effectiveness of any bows.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hirlok on October 28, 2013, 06:47:05 pm
archers preferring to use weapons that don't one shot melee.

LULZ. Made my day.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Matey on October 28, 2013, 06:49:38 pm
This was one of the main objectives; these two bows were being used far too often. As Gurnisson said, it's better to have archers preferring to use weapons that don't one shot melee. Even if the changes went a bit further than intended, not only can tweaks still be done, but overall gameplay would seem to be enhanced. Fewer 1shots without implementing any actual nerfs or major game mechanics changes that would decrease the maximum damage potential or overall effectiveness of any bows.

Eh I dunno bout other groups in strat... but us FCC folks are Long bows and Horn bows only and I think the long bows are the more popular. Strat is a different beast than battle though since everyone in strat is in plate.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Templar_Steevee on October 29, 2013, 12:07:40 am
Yeah, but, as stated, this achieved the exact opposite, as horn/tatar bows are now almost the only bows in use.

Maybe that's true, but at least for me it looks like that foot archers that are killing lots of ppl are using at least Horn Bow.

For me Long Bow is best bow, and I'm using it since i make an archer. Fu** all nerfs, it's all the time a deadly weapon.
It's also harder to use because of draw speed and draw time without loosing accuracy, but I like it. Other bows are way easier to use.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hirlok on October 29, 2013, 12:26:49 am
well - what gear do you use stevee?

with a normal outfit (ragged, woolen cap, leather gloves, rus shoes), longbow, 2x bodkins and medium 0 slot weapon I looooooose money fast. I have alts in all classes - none looses money that fast, apart from heaviest plate.

Not viable and makes no sense, taken into account that lb has become a joke and mw bodkins are junk meanwhile.


Together with the recent nerfs it has tempted me to go horn bow this gen - and I could puke.

Or in different words: I am about to take another extended break.
High tier archery is not wanted in c-rpg, so  be it.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Tydeus on October 29, 2013, 12:54:42 am
Together with the recent nerfs it has tempted me to go horn bow this gen - and I could puke.
Which ones are those, I must have missed them?
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Hirlok on October 29, 2013, 01:11:03 am
Which ones are those, I must have missed them?

arrow speed? loomed arrows useless, insane upkeep/break rate, etc.pp.
But I think there is no need to discuss/balance/blahblah this any further.
I'll take a break and/or wait if bannerlord or m:bg makes any more sense.
"Real" archery has been on the decline on c-rpg since 2010, and I've just had it.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Tydeus on October 29, 2013, 01:28:49 am
recent nerfs

arrow speed? loomed arrows useless, insane upkeep/break rate, etc.pp.
Projectile speed wasn't nerfed, it was actually buffed for most bows, meaning effectiveness was not lost. The upkeep and break chance thing isn't recent, it has been around for quite a while. It's perfectly acceptable to disagree with changes, but at least get your facts straight.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Grumbs on October 29, 2013, 05:23:17 am
Wrong thread, would delete if I could
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Mr.K. on October 29, 2013, 10:34:16 am
So basically you balanced the stats, but not the price. I like the 1356 gold Nomad Bow now more than 11 100 Long bow even though upkeep is a non-issue for me. Those lower tier bows shoot almost as straight as a crossbow making them much easier to hit with than Long Bow. I think the balance needs to be rethought and looms buffed a bit (same damage loomed, one less otherwise) to reduce the amount of ranged.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Templar_Steevee on October 29, 2013, 10:49:59 am
well - what gear do you use stevee?
29,833 gold Cost
2,087 gold Upkeep (max)
Long Bow, 2 x bodkins, Short Arming Sword, Heavy Aketon, Green Arena Helmet, Mail Mittens, Green Hose With Kneecops.

I sometimes earn gold, more often loos it, but most of time it's around 0. I'm running around with this equip all the time.
Solution for Upkeep of archer is simple - make an money earning alt and send gold from it to your archer.

And stop whining about Long Bow, It's a realy good and deadly bow, I'm making lots of kills with it and I'm often in top 5 in a roster by points or kills.
Archers with tiny bows are annoying, but not deadly as same amount of archers with Long Bows.

Even I am able to survive Head Shots from tiny bow archers that are not using bodkins.

Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Tydeus on October 29, 2013, 01:00:23 pm
So basically you balanced the stats, but not the price. I like the 1356 gold Nomad Bow now more than 11 100 Long bow even though upkeep is a non-issue for me. Those lower tier bows shoot almost as straight as a crossbow making them much easier to hit with than Long Bow. I think the balance needs to be rethought and looms buffed a bit (same damage loomed, one less otherwise) to reduce the amount of ranged.
Suggesting that an archer's best counter to the most expensive items in the game should be cheap? No, the price needed to stay high. It's true that it might be a bit too expensive, but I certainly don't believe anything dramatic should be done. We don't want to return to the days where everyone had archer alts for gold farming.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Mr.K. on October 29, 2013, 01:54:10 pm
Suggesting that an archer's best counter to the most expensive items in the game should be cheap? No, the price needed to stay high. It's true that it might be a bit too expensive, but I certainly don't believe anything dramatic should be done. We don't want to return to the days where everyone had archer alts for gold farming.

Well I for one find Longbow too hard to use. I counter mostly cavalry and other ranged when I'm playing an archer and for that purpose with my lack of skills I do far better with lower tier bows than with a long bow. Also tatars are more effective against both. So basically at least for me it already is the way the best counter against most expensive items (horses) is not the most expensive bow, but rather a cheap one like Horn, Tatar or Nomad. Take two sets of tatars and yes, you're farming gold as an archer. Just what you said you didn't want to happen. What's more is anyone can play archer now and be as effective as a guy that has used six loompoints on his bow and arrows. That is partially why there are so many archers atm.

Tatar bow + tatar arrows won't glance on 71 body armor with 4PD anymore. True it doesn't do much damage, but it'll stun the opponent allowing a free hit from infantry. I like the idea of variety in bows, but maybe we could come up with something that would allow the faster bows to counter lighter gear and cav much better and glance of heavier armor totally.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: HappyPhantom on October 30, 2013, 03:18:23 am
Suggesting that an archer's best counter to the most expensive items in the game should be cheap? No, the price needed to stay high. It's true that it might be a bit too expensive, but I certainly don't believe anything dramatic should be done. We don't want to return to the days where everyone had archer alts for gold farming.

I think the main problem for archer is upkeep on bodkins, and maybe the fact you are usually carrying two stacks. Not sure if that affects the frequency of repairs e.g. x2 chance.
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: Templar_Steevee on October 30, 2013, 05:46:20 pm
Each bag of arrows have it`s  own chance of repair. After one round you can pay for both of them, but for me it happens almost onky when i pay full upkeep. Playing longbowman with equipment like i have is not cheap, but guys on heavy horses are payingmore for horse, than an archer for full equipment, so pls stop qq about archer upkeep  :mrgreen:
Title: Re: I don't get this.
Post by: HappyPhantom on October 31, 2013, 12:43:17 am
[N]o