A balance for crossbow and archery.

[Darkkarma]

What do you mean the situation they are in? Sure some archers like Ashelia(sp?) are incredibly good, but that's only a very few archers, not including me. Bows don't do that much damage anyway. Even with Light Leather on I only took at the most 1/4 of my health away when shot by a bow, while if I was shot by a bolt it would be 1/2 at the least. The crossbow, which is what I'm using now still does more damage than the longbow, isn't really that much faster, and is still more accurate. If I feel like going with a 2-slotted crossbow I can and wield a Langes like you said or use the 50 points I can put into 1-hander as well and use an elite spammitar. And for upkeep, it's been consistently less than what is was with my previous build, which I find strange.

I would love to know what padded leather you're wearing as gafferjack and almost every other archer in c-rpg with a longbow can two-shot me with or without heirloomed items at 5 ironflesh. Also, the fact that you think the regular crossbow does more damage than the longbow says it all.The fact that the longbow's rate of fire is so much better totally balances it out.. If you had a longbow with the damage of a sniper xbow or even a regular crossbow you'd have one of the most overpowered weapons in the game.

[Fips]

Just make the arrows faster. That is all. 
Now that i started playing archer that is the only problem i would love to see go away, because now i have to go very close to the battle to actually hit something and do damage. It's just not cool to see your arrow hitting the ground 20 meters in front of your enemy, even if u aim like 30° (or more) higher.

Any kind of xbow-nerf would be great, too, but i can live with it the way it is now. I just don't shoot at xbows who are aiming at me. If they can't hide i pwn them ofc, but that is like never the case. If they can hide, they usually pwn me...they can just stand still and wait for me to do so as well and then BOOM...dead. Or i'm just a noob =(

And one thing more: Headshots should ALWAYS kill the opponent. At least at a minimum of like 25 cut-dmg and 5pd or so. I've seen many tincans survive headshots and that just sucks. It's hard enough to headshot somebody and when u do, they just survive. for teh lulz.

[Blondin]

Why a headshot should always be a kill?

If you talk of realism, then it's false, ppl can be shoot in the head and don't die (even with a gun) headskull is hard, an arrow could slip on it.

[Aleskander]

I would love to know what padded leather you're wearing as gafferjack and almost every other archer in c-rpg with a longbow can two-shot me with or without heirloomed items at 5 ironflesh. Also, the fact that you think the regular crossbow does more damage than the longbow says it all.The fact that the longbow's rate of fire is so much better totally balances it out.. If you had a longbow with the damage of a sniper xbow or even a regular crossbow you'd have one of the most overpowered weapons in the game.

I never said that the longbow did more damage than the regular crossbow...
I said that crossbows do more damage generally, not against a longbower with 7-9 PD. As I said, rate of fire doesn't matter that much when a crossbower can just hide behind something. You clearly have never played as an archer, you would know. The only hope an archer has against a crossbower in cover is that the archer will get lucky and time the draw perfectly. I don't even care that the crossbow does more damage that the bow, what I hate is how easily they an be more accurate.

[Aleskander]

Why a headshot should always be a kill?

If you talk of realism, then it's false, ppl can be shoot in the head and don't die (even with a gun) headskull is hard, an arrow could slip on it.

It would depend on how much kinetic energy the projectile had. Even if the projectile didn't kill you, you have a huge wound on your head and possibly a concussion.

[Fips]

Why a headshot should always be a kill?

If you talk of realism, then it's false, ppl can be shoot in the head and don't die (even with a gun) headskull is hard, an arrow could slip on it.

I was not talking about realism...just game balance. Though ur argument made me lol.

[Darkkarma]

I never said that the longbow did more damage than the regular crossbow...
I said that crossbows do more damage generally, not against a longbower with 7-9 PD. As I said, rate of fire doesn't matter that much when a crossbower can just hide behind something. You clearly have never played as an archer, you would know. The only hope an archer has against a crossbower in cover is that the archer will get lucky and time the draw perfectly. I don't even care that the crossbow does more damage that the bow, what I hate is how easily they an be more accurate.

The funny thing is that I have played as an archer, if you'd actually read the posts I made you'd know that. In smaller area or town maps that have elevation crossbows thrive. Even then, if you know how to reload while moving you can easily push a crossbowmen off balance with your far superior mobility. If you can't figure that out then you should probably just stick to melee as dodging one or two bolts to get within range is stupidly easy.(You should be able to do it especially, you're such a zig zag master on your 2 handed crossbow guy after all aren't you?) In open plains maps or maps with more open, hilly areas archers do exceptionally well. Sorry archers don't have a more than fair shake against other ranged in every situation possible but thats the dynamic we have right now. I'll say it again in case you didn't bother to read the first part and just skimmed through, On non rainy days with city like maps with alot of cover crossbows do very well. On open terrain maps with less cover and more hills archery does very well, It's that simple.  If you want crossbows to no longer be able to hold their shots, one of the only major advantages they have over archery at the moment, then you would drastically need change how crossbows function as a whole. Even then your reasoning is pretty shaky and seemingly based entirely off of opinion.

[Aleskander]

The funny thing is that I have played as an archer, if you'd actually read the posts I made you'd know that. In smaller area or town maps that have elevation crossbows thrive. Even then, if you know how to reload while moving you can easily push a crossbowmen off balance with your far superior mobility. If you can't figure that out then you should probably just stick to melee as dodging one or two bolts to get within range is stupidly easy.(You should be able to do it especially, you're such a zig zag master on your 2 handed crossbow guy after all aren't you?) In open plains maps or maps with more open, hilly areas archers do exceptionally well. Sorry archers don't have a more than fair shake against other ranged in every situation possible but thats the dynamic we have right now. I'll say it again in case you didn't bother to read the first part and just skimmed through, On non rainy days with city like maps with alot of cover crossbows do very well. On open terrain maps with less cover and more hills archery does very well, It's that simple.  If you want crossbows to no longer be able to hold their shots, one of the only major advantages they have over archery at the moment, then you would drastically need change how crossbows function as a whole. Even then your reasoning is pretty shaky and seemingly based entirely off of opinion.

Only the completely dedicated corssbowers would actually use their crossbows, the rest would just go melee in a map like that. All maps have some cover, only the stupid crossbowers would not fight near cover. Archers don't do well on the flat maps like you are talking about, cav kills everyone on that kind of map, and the restriction to only light armor makes that even easier for the cav. I'm guessing you only play siege. You misunderstood what I said in the first post anyway. I'm fine with the damage and armor issue, it's only the accuracy that I want changed. I'm saying that the accuracy should slowly(increasing with WPF) narrow down to waht it is now, not just instantly snap into the position. You could use your logic to nerf throwers again.

[Darkkarma]

Only the completely dedicated corssbowers would actually use their crossbows, the rest would just go melee in a map like that. All maps have some cover, only the stupid crossbowers would not fight near cover. Archers don't do well on the flat maps like you are talking about, cav kills everyone on that kind of map, and the restriction to only light armor makes that even easier for the cav. I'm guessing you only play siege. You misunderstood what I said in the first post anyway. I'm fine with the damage and armor issue, it's only the accuracy that I want changed. I'm saying that the accuracy should slowly(increasing with WPF) narrow down to waht it is now, not just instantly snap into the position. You could use your logic to nerf throwers again.

Ok, you should stop making assumptions about where and how I play as they(your assumptions) are totally irrelevant in this instance and not even a little bit accurate. In open plains maps Cav and archery are the dominating classes. Also, those crossbowmen that do go melee on those maps will get shot to bits in no time if that archer is worth his or her salt. And actually, most of the maps on the official server have only little thin trees for cover and can easily have shots angled to hit the person hiding behind the tree before they can ever get a bolt in your quiver. Any semi-competent archer knows this, maybe you yourself need to re-evaluate your playstyle a bit if you're going to stick with ranged combat? Go look at the fallen and see how they do on maps like those then tell me that open plains and hilly maps don't favor archers that know how to play to their class's strength. Given that a longbow with the stronger arrows can usually two or 3 shot most horses with the variable speed bonus makes them a terror for any cav player. Also, how exactly could my logic be used to nerf throwers? You are making less sense with every post my friend.

[Arrowblood]

REBALANCE THE SHOTSPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEd

if you want

[Mckillroy]

Both bows and crossbows are the way they should be.Crossbows are slow but powerful and bows are fast with varying power. The only thing that should change are the effectiveness of the weapon (being bow or crossbow) and were u hit your target  should determine the damage inflicted (Tired of being shot in the foot and dieing) and crossbows and bows should break less than armor and swords, u don't block with them you  just drop them, should not be damage so much and lastly the aiming on the crossbow is that way not because u suck at shooting but u did not load right.
Darkkarma's right too

[OttomanSniper]

Everyone can use xbow its not need weapon point but archery need minimum 130wp. +1

[Aleskander]

Ok, you should stop making assumptions about where and how I play as they(your assumptions) are totally irrelevant in this instance and not even a little bit accurate. In open plains maps Cav and archery are the dominating classes. Also, those crossbowmen that do go melee on those maps will get shot to bits in no time if that archer is worth his or her salt. And actually, most of the maps on the official server have only little thin trees for cover and can easily have shots angled to hit the person hiding behind the tree before they can ever get a bolt in your quiver. Any semi-competent archer knows this, maybe you yourself need to re-evaluate your playstyle a bit if you're going to stick with ranged combat? Go look at the fallen and see how they do on maps like those then tell me that open plains and hilly maps don't favor archers that know how to play to their class's strength. Given that a longbow with the stronger arrows can usually two or 3 shot most horses with the variable speed bonus makes them a terror for any cav player. Also, how exactly could my logic be used to nerf throwers? You are making less sense with every post my friend.

Once again your ignoring my original post. Crossbowers can eaisily hide behind trees, I've done it many times. Even with 0 WPF in crossbows, I can still shotgun easily. If I'm rich I might as well carry one around all the time. Yes, good archers can shoot down incoming melee and behind trees, but most archers aren't good archers are they?  Yes, longbows can 3 shot horses, but crossbows can 1 or 2 shot them, especially the weaker ones. And have you ever seen a armored horse taken down by arrows? No, because it doesn't ever happen. Throwing is less accurate, less range, and can reload while moving. Even the damage is the same as the longbow. By your logic, it's completely balanced, it fits your definition of "balanced" perfectly. And I don't stick to ranged combat, that's why I switched to crossbow, so I could do both. So I'll say this again, because you appear to not be reading the OP. What do you have against making the accuracy of a crossbow narrow down slowly and stick, as opposed to just narrow down and stick?

[BADPLAYERold]

Once again your ignoring my original post. Crossbowers can eaisily hide behind trees, I've done it many times. Even with 0 WPF in crossbows, I can still shotgun easily. If I'm rich I might as well carry one around all the time. Yes, good archers can shoot down incoming melee and behind trees, but most archers aren't good archers are they?  Yes, longbows can 3 shot horses, but crossbows can 1 or 2 shot them, especially the weaker ones. And have you ever seen a armored horse taken down by arrows? No, because it doesn't ever happen. Throwing is less accurate, less range, and can reload while moving. Even the damage is the same as the longbow. By your logic, it's completely balanced, it fits your definition of "balanced" perfectly. And I don't stick to ranged combat, that's why I switched to crossbow, so I could do both. So I'll say this again, because you appear to not be reading the OP. What do you have against making the accuracy of a crossbow narrow down slowly and stick, as opposed to just narrow down and stick?

As heavy cavalry I find that crossbowmen are an easy kill, I let them shoot my horse once and then they are either dead or they won't be able to reload for the rest of the round because of me harassing them.
Longbowmen however are a completely different story, yeah it is easy to couch a tunnel visioned archer but as soon as a half decent archer gets his sights on me I run away because longbow arrows kill my horse and me faster than anything else.
Since I started going heavy cav I don't think I have been killed by a crossbow more than 10-15 times, whereas the vast majority of my deaths are from longbows.

[Darkkarma]

Once again your ignoring my original post. Crossbowers can eaisily hide behind trees, I've done it many times. Even with 0 WPF in crossbows, I can still shotgun easily. If I'm rich I might as well carry one around all the time. Yes, good archers can shoot down incoming melee and behind trees, but most archers aren't good archers are they?  Yes, longbows can 3 shot horses, but crossbows can 1 or 2 shot them, especially the weaker ones. And have you ever seen a armored horse taken down by arrows? No, because it doesn't ever happen. Throwing is less accurate, less range, and can reload while moving. Even the damage is the same as the longbow. By your logic, it's completely balanced, it fits your definition of "balanced" perfectly. And I don't stick to ranged combat, that's why I switched to crossbow, so I could do both. So I'll say this again, because you appear to not be reading the OP. What do you have against making the accuracy of a crossbow narrow down slowly and stick, as opposed to just narrow down and stick?

As bad player just pointed out, ranged in general doesn't take down armored horses, on their own, they are meant to be tanks, so that's sort of irrelevant. I already responded to your "crossbows can hide behind trees" remark. An archer's superior reload mobility totally negates what little cover a crossbower has on open field maps. Also, one thin little tree to hide behind puts an xbower at a serious disadvantage when it comes to trying to fight off an archer with a longbow. And my Issue with it "narrowing down slowly" is that it would essentially be giving all crossbowmen the issue with fire delay that the arbalest gives. What is the point? Especially when we have in most cases at least a 1-2 second reload time on our xbows after we shoot? Unless you wanted to talk about increasing xbow damage or range going along with this longer reticule narrowdown it  would be a huge kick it in the pants to xbowers. Also, I hope you enjoy losing all of your money gradually if you want to 0 wpf most xbows as you wont be getting any kind of consistent reward for having that mini horse on your back other than the occasional range kill.