Hopefully paired with gold sinks we can reduce the number of range via upkeep
Yes, +4k gold price is such a gold sink. Not sure how I'm going to afford being crossbowman (sarcasm
)
You'll find that the more you whine and be a cunt about things the more you will be dismissed.
You'll find that the more you do bullshit decisions and show your negative attitude to justified criticism the more players will leave. I agree though that people who only say "balancers suck cocks" should be ignored, there will always be people who are not amused, it's just fine.
I read your thread dave I also chatted with you privately where you attempted to teach me how to play the class I've been playing for years (Just as long as you have). While I appreciate the attempts at teaching me a variety of things and then simply calling me bad when I tell you I choose 185 wpf because I want a more optimized strat build is incredibly narrow sighted and quite frankly you are very childish.
I didn't even try to teach you how to play. I've only stated that max wpf builds are useless for _battle servers_ and 185 wpf in general is more wpf than required to successfully land shots at any range (170-175 wpf for MW arbalest allows you to get a crosshair size that allows you not to miss almost on any possible distance if you aim properly and for many players even that is not required). And I reminded you several times that the game should be balanced for battle mode first of all. Strat should be taken into account ofc but it's different.
Instead of discussing stuff you proceeded with bragging how well you perform, that your usual distance is 75-100m, that people bring you bolts etc. I have a lot of reasons to brag around too, yet I won't since it won't help anyhow.
The only thing I disagree with is the strength requirement increase *effectively* removing arb availability outside of lvl 34-35 builds. Not ideal. Some random person shouldn't have to grind to level 35 to sport a build designed for long-range shots. (Its true that this change wouldn't affect me at all bc I'm level 34 and level 35 back before the level changes some years ago. So the lot of you that are claiming I'm protecting my own playstyle are sorely mistaken I'm protecting the availability of options and I'm sorry you all seem to disagree with diversity being a strong suit in cRPG.
Another text that has literally no calculation behind it. How is that going to remove arb availability outside lvl34-35?!
Okay, long-range shots. lvl30 (yes, just 30)
18-21 build:
6 PS, 3 IF, 7 ATH, 7 WM, 170 wpf.
170 wpf allows to get long range shots already. But okay, you want a strat build. I will even ignore the fact that lvl31 can be reached during a couple of days of strat battles, if you want lvl30 builds lets do it.
18-24 build:
8 WM, 6 IF, 3 athletics, 184 wpf or 8 WM, 8 athletics, 1 IF and 184 wpf or any other combination.
even 18-27 build:
9 WM, 2 IF, 197 wpf (who would need this build any way? But it's diversity just as you wanted)
Alone these classes are so heavily neutered compared to native: that any fresh native person would tell you that these classes are beyond helping in terms of balancing Yet people still whine.
Okay. Again back to numbers and some real things that you're bad with.
It's always a stupid idea to compare to native, but here you go. In native multiplayer, crossbowmen have 4 athletics, 2 PS, 2 IF and 15 AGI + 14-16 STR. AT the same time all melee classes in warband multiplayer have 6 athletics.
You ask us to fix your auto balancer so EU range is split evenly amongst teams.
There is no need. At some point it will work and split ranged evenly because all the players will be ranged.
I've basically come to the conclusion that discussing things with the players before/after balancing decisions are made to be completely pointless and that I ought to not even bother to look at the forums as its all just whining that you have an active development team.
Very good conclusion and attitude, just as good as others. It's definitely going to help.
