Messages

1

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Throwing... could you possibly make it any more useless?

« on: July 10, 2011, 06:36:21 pm »

My IQ is half my age.

Again, my condolences.

To counter ranged a melee has to spend 3-4 points in shields and give up 1-2 slots. To counter melee a ranged has to spend 4-6 points in PS and 75-125 wpf and also give up 1-2 slots. For ranged to counter melee, there is a much higher price than for melee to counter ranged. Not to mention that using LoS to counter ranged is free.

I constantly beat you on my 2h/tincan alt. You really aren't good at all. I don't use a shield on my 2h/tincan because it's simply not needed. Cover + the fact that arrows do so little damage to me means all I have to worry about is xbows. Against xbows it's pretty easy to counter. If some HA wants to spend all day riding around trying to get LoS on me, so be it. He will get kicked for delaying because people always side with melee users in that regard.

Ranged will never get on top of the scoreboard unless there are a ton of peasants in game. Crossbows don't shoot fast enough to get kills comparable to cav or tincans and bows don't do enough damage to armor to get kills fast enough to compare. Again, you are a retard and have no clue what you're talking about when you say ranged is easier than melee. When ranged is consistently able to be on top of the scoreboard (like waaaaay back when warbows were popular) then you might have a justified argument for ranged being overpowered. It's a shame that the item balancing team is as dumb if not dumber than you and I am glad I have three accounts to play with because at least I can play my tincan (who is about to get buffed like crazy) and my lancer cav (who has always been good).

2

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Nerfing xbow/bow shoot speed by 31% next patch is too extreme

« on: July 10, 2011, 06:29:38 pm »

Confirmation that the item balancing team has down syndrome and/or are melee biased. Good thing I have my 2h/tincan and cav alts to play because all ranged is pretty useless.

3

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Throwing... could you possibly make it any more useless?

« on: July 08, 2011, 08:11:39 am »

What, you are talking about realism? And then you pull 17 out of hammerspace spam them out without ever hitting or actually stopping to pick one up while backpeddling and manage to kill him with the 18th one.
I'm talking about game balance, when I say ranged should be less powerful then melee.

No, it shouldn't. There are more than enough easy ways to force ranged into melee range, so melee shouldn't be more powerful just because it is melee.

I am a retard without a GED.

I'm sorry to hear that.

I wish people who think ranged is OP would simply play with the Ninja clan for a week or two. You learn very quickly that it is extremely easy to close the distance on ranged without armor or a shield (especially on NA maps). Bad players like Gorath will always complain about range because they die once or twice to an archer/crossbow/throwing weapon in a game. Players like this are the plague of the current video game industry and are why games these days are way too damn easy. Instead of figuring out WHY THEY FAILED, they blame the game and demand the game be changed instead of their skill. I bet people like you would've written letters to Tecmo bitching about how monsters have knockback in Ninja Gaiden. We then would have a shitty game that is way too easy that nobody would remember instead of the challenging game that we remember these days.

In short, you have down syndrome and I think it's rubbing off on the item balancing team.

4

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Throwing... could you possibly make it any more useless?

« on: July 08, 2011, 02:55:19 am »

Well, the current state is a much better simulation of medieval throwing than the previous system of pure throwers stuffing 20 axes down their pants. 
It has nothing to do with honorable duels, but imo melee has the right to be more powerful than ranged.
Simply because yes, you have to get close, get through his blocks and block yourself. Even if you can't run away as ranged, you can hide behind teammates or in hard to reach spots. And threaten fairly many targets without moving from your spot.
That said, I don't care if it does more damage than a sword if it is limited otherwise but if a pure archer (a more or less sensible class) has to take a support role than you can't come with "but melee does so much damage too" etc when you want to play a made up thing like pure thrower. Simply accept it if you play this class you are not as effective as standard builds.
Not that I'm against a buff, but let's keep it weaker than melee.

Until I can pull my throwing axes and spears out of your retarded melee spam face, I better damn well get 20+ of them to throw. Otherwise melee weapons should be given the same damage potential restrictions, after 10 swings, you have to find a new sword.

5

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Throwing... could you possibly make it any more useless?

« on: July 07, 2011, 06:46:28 am »

That rock can be blocked, dodged, and taken cover from, just like the club.  Remember WHY melee weaponry is bitched about when it does damage superior to ranged.  It can't be blocked (except by a melee weapon or shield), can't be chambered (because that's nearly impossible in CRPG) and can't be run out of ammo (because it's melee, derp herp I know). Melee is also the only weapon in the game with unlimited killing potential, unlike throwing's 3-4 TOPS, and crossbow's/bow's 10 or so.

Fixed.

6

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Katana's Thrust

« on: July 05, 2011, 03:05:05 am »

I'm all for weeaboo hate, but i can agree with proper pricing IF all those items will be mid-tier equipment (not on par with best choices but not useless either). Those ninjas want all they toys to be top tier choices while those items don't deserve to be top tier.

You are a dumbass. "They" (not just the ninja clan) want the katana to better represent the price it costs to use. There's a reason why the danish and german swords have great stats and also a high price. Currently, the katana isn't as good as a longsword or bastard sword that cost much less to use. The solution is to either reduce the cost of the katana or increase the damage.

7

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Katana's Thrust

« on: July 03, 2011, 05:08:45 pm »

I never ever will use an Katana but i have tears in my eyes when some people i really like have to fight with this horrible weapon because thats their style.
Miaodao Nodachi etc. are all very good weapons so that miaodao already gets used by european knights which looks a bit silly. So this exotic weapon argument doesnt fit cause Katana is one of the few that are really fucked up.
Either give Katana more cut ore raise stab to at least 20 Pierce.

Annoying isn't it?

What's worse, seeing tincans with miadao/nodachi or ninjas with longswords/bastard swords? Cause with the current melee balance, that's how it is. The high str tincans want someone fast, long, and has high cut damage. The ninjas want something that is fast, with reasonable length, that has good cut damage for soft targets, and a nice high dmg pierce for tin cans.

8

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Katana's Thrust

« on: July 03, 2011, 03:14:51 pm »

Long hafted blade has more pierce, hurr durr.

9

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Katana's Thrust

« on: July 03, 2011, 12:02:28 pm »

Needs a lower str requirement and price to better fit crappy stats or it needs to have better stats to fit the str requirement and price.

10

Game Balance Discussion / Re: The bec de corbin, balanced....fast?

« on: June 29, 2011, 04:18:41 am »

The problem with the weight in the original post (7lb 11 oz) was that it came from a weapon much longer than the in game weapon. I see that in the second version of the calculations you've revised it to 6.6 pounds, which I assume comes from the in game value of 2.8kg. Of course the in game value is unreliable as far as realistic weight goes, as it is adjusted both roughly on realistic values and game balance. This usually results in the weight on weapons in game being inflated slightly beyond their correct weights.

As far as correct weights go, the crow's beak and other similar pick type weapons were indeed quite heavy at the end. I think an accurate estimate of the weight would be perhaps 5 pounds, give or take a little bit. The myarmoury page you linked shows a fairly short version of a similar weapon as 105centimeters and 3 pounds 8 inches. It notes that it is possibly shortened, which if it is, it is the wood being removed from the base of the weapon, meaning that a full length version would still have a fairly close weight. The in game model of the bec is roughly 165 centimeters long, so I think 5 pounds should be a reasonable estimate.

Another note about balance: the bec is not a "balanced" weapon by any means in real life, but that does not necessarily translate to having poor handling characteristics. Poleaxes are actually quite wieldy weapons. In any case, considering that the length of the weapon is only in the 120s, it seems reasonable to have the weapon with the balanced tag to me.

As I said, I put a similar model into Ansys and went with and without the supports having mass, the overall center didn't change enough to be noteworthy. Also, poleaxes may be "quick" in the sense that you can move them around quickly, but to actually deliver a blow that will hurt someone in heavy armor, it takes more than a fast swipe to do so.

11

Game Balance Discussion / Re: The bec de corbin, balanced....fast?

« on: June 28, 2011, 08:21:55 pm »

I see... you take a 7 pound, 237cm long weapon, change the length to 150cm, and keep the weight exactly the same. Perfect logic here.
hint: your revelation that the balance is akin to that 'of a sledgehammer' is only because you assumed the weight to be concentrated at the very tip. Look at the picture - it's obvious that much of the weight comes from the metal strips that rivet the head to the pole. This means that the metal mass is most certainly NOT concentrated at a single point, and that your center of mass is grossly incorrect. Suggestion: Try harder, maybe you'll get more than a C in your high school physics class.

I ran it through ANSYS because I don't like your tone and it doesn't change the center of mass that much because most of the metal weight is in the axe/beak/hammer area. Sure, he messed up the conversion from in. to cm (2.54 cm/in.), but his post is at least well thought out and has some effort put into it. It befuddles me that you would waste time to berate someone that is clearly putting effort into their posts, yet you sit idle at your computer while people like Gorath take shits on their keyboards to make posts.

12

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Throwing... could you possibly make it any more useless?

« on: June 27, 2011, 09:47:00 am »

I obviously didn't read the post and didn't address any of the points made. I am a dumbass who doesn't know how to have a logical argument. My IQ is half my age, may God have mercy on my soul.

Fixed.

13

Game Balance Discussion / Re: Throwing... could you possibly make it any more useless?

« on: June 27, 2011, 08:37:20 am »

It's really simple.

Most kiteable ranged weapons:  Archery (throwing requires too much str to have high athletics)
Most versatile ranged weapons:  Crossbow  (shield piercing, high pierce damage, high ammo, no wpf requirement, extremely accurate with wpf, etc)
Most capable of surviving melee:  Crossbow  (actually has melee wpf and high PS)

Fixed.

I'm totally fine with "realistic" ammo counts if you give me infinite stones to throw, let me throw any weapon I can pick up on the ground, let me take my weapons out of dead bodies, and let me carry 50+ shurikens in a bag and still carry a melee weapon and a shield. Hey, it's realistic. I could easily carry 50+ shurikens in a bag, a sheathed sword, a shield, and still be able to use them all fairly easily. Oh and headshots should ignore armor because people usually didn't fight with visors down and if they did, they would suffer a huge SA reduction, which isn't modeled in game. I would also like for shields, other than the wooden/leather ones, to not be able to be held up for the entire round. There should be a stamina bar for how far you can run, how long you can hold your shield up, and how many times you can swing. Heavier armor, shields, and weapons, cause your stamina bar to be smaller or deplete faster.

14

Game Balance Discussion / Re: This game is perfect, stop messing with it.

« on: June 26, 2011, 11:03:00 pm »

Arbalest is already more accurate than bows at 160 wpf. I don't think accuracy needs to be changed. As I suggested in another thread, if wpf requirements for crossbows can't be done, then 0 wpf crossbows need to be insanely inaccurate and take forever to reload, but high wpf users shouldn't be changed.

15

Game Balance Discussion / Re: This game is perfect, stop messing with it.

« on: June 26, 2011, 12:36:21 pm »

nobody wants plate armor with minimal str requirements because of the upkeep