seeing how weak ranged is now compared to Native.lol Native gets 28 bodkin arrows a bag as opposed to the 18 bodkins you get a bag at +3 here. 2 slots 56 arrows there 2 slots 36 here, they get 3 bags of ammo to the 2 bags archers get here.
Tincans in a strat battle need 5-6 (shots).I switched my strat hero back to my melee char because even arbalest is useless against masses of plate armor dudes, you do 4 shots to shoot one down and 5 others show up with great mauls :lol:
Instead of QQing about how op ranged is (which especially archery is not), QQ about how many there are. With a pop of 30 or lower, the team with the better/more ranged players wins. Pretty simple. I hate it. That's why I basicly stopped playing EU1, as my favourite classes simply get rekt. Go play strat. There are also a shitton of ranged, but enough melee fight to get over it.
And btw to all these really intelligent people saying "get a shield": As a normal thinking player I either hide or fight. If I hide, I don't fucking need a shield and if I fight I can't fucking use a shield.
And to all those saying "omg not this kind of shit again". They did. But not once a day from different people.
They should not be able to then duel or groupfight on equal footing, end of.
The fact is we have all been playing this game for at least 5 years now, most more than that. We have all reached peak performance and so should expect the skill level to be higher, but I do believe there is a solution. Either caps on how much prof you can put into weapon points or increase the cost as you put more points into a particular one. This would reduce complaints about movement speed for melee heroes, AND reduce accuracy of ranged.
I'm expecting the usual ignorant replies of "shield blah blah blah" , "I'm already inaccurate as fuck", "protect your own archers". So any comments in the like will be ignored.
I just want to have a conversation about potential fixes because this is what will kill the mod.
Archer damage is a joke.
No... It really isn't.
Lots of ranged on today, on a map that was very easily defended out in the open (with cav support). EZ losses when people rush out but eventually some started staying in cover of the village and we managed to squeeze out a win. Maybe not the most interesting active gameplay, but it is satisfying to overcome the obstacle even on a whack map that simply didnt allow any good paths but straight down the middle if we were to force anything.
strat battle right now. 18/49 players are ranged. Dedicated, not just guys who picked up crossbows. Yay.
strat battle right now. 18/49 players are ranged. Dedicated, not just guys who picked up crossbows. Yay.
Everybody can afford a full plate army with shields, what exactly is your excuse
I genuinely wonder what makes people switch to ranged when they can most likely do better with melee weapons.
Well that's the thing. They can't do better with melee weapons. Bad players tend to appeal to ranged weapons. When I first started, I was an archer because I was so bad at melee.there's a difference between arrow spammer and dedicated archer, u can't be good archer without +avg melee skills it's so simple.
The fact is we have all been playing this game for at least 5 years now
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Both your renown and infamy are in the single digits, and your first post is from 2016.
People to actually think about how they play, and then win their games.
Ranged stagger could go
Ranged stagger is practically gone already. I don't see why someone who takes an arbalest shot in the torso shouldn't be stunned if he isn't wearing heavy armor.
If I headshot someone at 10 meters with the most powerful bow in the game, the most PD available, and bodkin arrows (all loomed), I expect him to die, or at least, not to brush it off like if it's nothing. Removing the stun for very high damage entirely makes no sense, it's just another nerf. I understand that arrows that don't even deal 10% of my life shouldn't be able to stop me as long as I'm wearing a medium set of armor, but if it's a shot dealing 90% of my hp, it'd be bullshit if I can simply keep walking like if nothing happened.
If I headshot someone at 10 meters with the most powerful bow in the game, the most PD available, and bodkin arrows (all loomed), I expect him to die, or at least, not to brush it off like if it's nothing. Removing the stun for very high damage entirely makes no sense, it's just another nerf. I understand that arrows that don't even deal 10% of my life shouldn't be able to stop me as long as I'm wearing a medium set of armor, but if it's a shot dealing 90% of my hp, it'd be bullshit if I can simply keep walking like if nothing happened.
If I headshot someone at 10 meters with the most powerful bow in the game, the most PD available, and bodkin arrows (all loomed), I expect him to die, or at least, not to brush it off like if it's nothing. Removing the stun for very high damage entirely makes no sense, it's just another nerf. I understand that arrows that don't even deal 10% of my life shouldn't be able to stop me as long as I'm wearing a medium set of armor, but if it's a shot dealing 90% of my hp, it'd be bullshit if I can simply keep walking like if nothing happened.