Show Posts
31
Game Balance Discussion / Re: Thoughts on 4.0 Archery Nerf and Class Counters
« on: October 25, 2014, 05:37:25 pm »
I think archery should be deadly. It should be a threat. If you see archers, you should feel the urgency to be forced to deal with them ASAP as a cavalry player, xbow player, archer, or shielder.
You should know that if you leave them there, they will do major damage to your team and you may end up losing. The problem is too many players don't give two shits about teamwork and are only interested in their own personal K/D. If a cavalry player sees a bunch of archers, he would rather avoid them and lance people in the ass and get more kills than to do his role as a counter to archery.
Archery has never been over powered because of its stats, it has only ever become powerful because too many players are cowards and unwilling to risk their own deaths to fulfill their class role.
The shielders won't pursue archers because they don't want to be kited around.
The cav won't pursue archers because they don't want to become dismounted.
All other infantry won't pursue them immediately because of obvious reasons.
However, if cavalry did start pursuing them, shielders would not be kited, cavalry would not be focused, and the archer threat would be eliminated unless they were also supported by their team (unlikely).
Archery is the class in the game that is most obviously balanced entirely on masterwork bows and arrows. Anyone who does not use masterwork is at such a disadvantage as an archer, that I personally don't even consider them a threat. It is ridiculous to only be effective with masterwork items. No other class in the game is ineffective without masterwork items. Anyone who specs into archery probably waits until they get all the masterwork gear before even testing the build, and even then, you might have to headshot people multiple times, end up being slower than most 2hers & polearms, and if you ever do well even once, everyone will lobby another nerf.
If we look at game balance from a meta perspective, we will see that whatever class is the easiest to play and maintain a high k/d is going to be the most played class all around the board. Two-handers and polearms have been the most played classes in all of warband history, and will likely always be. Naturally whatever counters these classes will cause those who play the class to cry nerf because they want to maintain their superior position as a class. If archers were ever stronger in whole (not talking about that one archer pro who is just ridiculously good at the game) then more players would play the class, however, we do not see that, and we have never seen that in crpg. If it happened, archers would want their counters to be nerfed, due to this vox populi effect we have. Although it may not be vox populi at all, it may just be that the balancers all play two-handed and polearm classes and have always played these classes *cough*.
TL:DR
I don't imagine this game will ever be properly balanced because too many players favor 2-handed and polearm classes. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but it just shows how the majorities "fun" will always overshadow any sort of "balancing" and attempts to make the game fun for all.
I think every class should be deadly and powerful. Obviously a 2-hander and polearm has superiority in melee combat, and it should end right there.
Ranged players should have the advantage on infantry without shields, otherwise what the fuck do we need shields for?
To be fair, it is easier to hit someone in melee than to hit someone with ranged at a long distance (unless they are idiotically running in a strait line).
If all melee players who catch up to archers can basically 1-2 hit kill them, then why should archery not be as deadly?
Archery should be 2-4 hit kills, not 10, not 20, not 30 if you are a HA and have two quivers.
I don't even play the archer class, and I probably never will do a full gen as an archer. I'm a light cav player, a counter to archery. More archers would also be a counter to me, and even I can admit they should be buffed.
The way it is now:
Cav kills the 2-3 archer players that are still left in existence on NA. And now cav has to deal with the insanely heavily armed pike ridden one shot kills your horse infantry mobs, that archers would have otherwise at least watered down by now...but they haven't...because they are nerfed to shit.
Then the infantry mobs just blob across the map like an Ebola virus eating up everything in its path. There is no room for countering any classes. There is no room for tactics. You do not need to try to coordinate your team, you just need to make sure your mob blob stays bigger than the enemy mob blob, and you win.
If archers were stronger, cav would have to carefully consider pursuing them.
Shielders would be needed up front.
Blobs would be discouraged because archers could just shoot into them always getting a hit.
Every class would have to play their role, and tactics would be encouraged.
You should know that if you leave them there, they will do major damage to your team and you may end up losing. The problem is too many players don't give two shits about teamwork and are only interested in their own personal K/D. If a cavalry player sees a bunch of archers, he would rather avoid them and lance people in the ass and get more kills than to do his role as a counter to archery.
Archery has never been over powered because of its stats, it has only ever become powerful because too many players are cowards and unwilling to risk their own deaths to fulfill their class role.
The shielders won't pursue archers because they don't want to be kited around.
The cav won't pursue archers because they don't want to become dismounted.
All other infantry won't pursue them immediately because of obvious reasons.
However, if cavalry did start pursuing them, shielders would not be kited, cavalry would not be focused, and the archer threat would be eliminated unless they were also supported by their team (unlikely).
Archery is the class in the game that is most obviously balanced entirely on masterwork bows and arrows. Anyone who does not use masterwork is at such a disadvantage as an archer, that I personally don't even consider them a threat. It is ridiculous to only be effective with masterwork items. No other class in the game is ineffective without masterwork items. Anyone who specs into archery probably waits until they get all the masterwork gear before even testing the build, and even then, you might have to headshot people multiple times, end up being slower than most 2hers & polearms, and if you ever do well even once, everyone will lobby another nerf.
If we look at game balance from a meta perspective, we will see that whatever class is the easiest to play and maintain a high k/d is going to be the most played class all around the board. Two-handers and polearms have been the most played classes in all of warband history, and will likely always be. Naturally whatever counters these classes will cause those who play the class to cry nerf because they want to maintain their superior position as a class. If archers were ever stronger in whole (not talking about that one archer pro who is just ridiculously good at the game) then more players would play the class, however, we do not see that, and we have never seen that in crpg. If it happened, archers would want their counters to be nerfed, due to this vox populi effect we have. Although it may not be vox populi at all, it may just be that the balancers all play two-handed and polearm classes and have always played these classes *cough*.
TL:DR
I don't imagine this game will ever be properly balanced because too many players favor 2-handed and polearm classes. There is nothing inherently wrong with this, but it just shows how the majorities "fun" will always overshadow any sort of "balancing" and attempts to make the game fun for all.
I think every class should be deadly and powerful. Obviously a 2-hander and polearm has superiority in melee combat, and it should end right there.
Ranged players should have the advantage on infantry without shields, otherwise what the fuck do we need shields for?
To be fair, it is easier to hit someone in melee than to hit someone with ranged at a long distance (unless they are idiotically running in a strait line).
If all melee players who catch up to archers can basically 1-2 hit kill them, then why should archery not be as deadly?
Archery should be 2-4 hit kills, not 10, not 20, not 30 if you are a HA and have two quivers.
I don't even play the archer class, and I probably never will do a full gen as an archer. I'm a light cav player, a counter to archery. More archers would also be a counter to me, and even I can admit they should be buffed.
The way it is now:
Cav kills the 2-3 archer players that are still left in existence on NA. And now cav has to deal with the insanely heavily armed pike ridden one shot kills your horse infantry mobs, that archers would have otherwise at least watered down by now...but they haven't...because they are nerfed to shit.
Then the infantry mobs just blob across the map like an Ebola virus eating up everything in its path. There is no room for countering any classes. There is no room for tactics. You do not need to try to coordinate your team, you just need to make sure your mob blob stays bigger than the enemy mob blob, and you win.
If archers were stronger, cav would have to carefully consider pursuing them.
Shielders would be needed up front.
Blobs would be discouraged because archers could just shoot into them always getting a hit.
Every class would have to play their role, and tactics would be encouraged.
