Author Topic: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged  (Read 7871 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Xant

  • Finnish Pony
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1552
  • Infamy: 803
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #45 on: October 05, 2011, 12:52:03 am »
+1
It's not "taRtar", stop calling it like that, tartar is sauce, Tatar is name of the people and of the bow. Go look at c-rpg.net, if you don't believe me.

Very good Corwin, you have just disproven Paul's entire point.
Meaning lies as much
in the mind of the reader
as in the Haiku.

Offline RandomDude

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 431
  • Infamy: 43
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight
  • I play now! but I suck =(
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: RandomDude
  • IRC nick: RandomDude
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #46 on: October 05, 2011, 12:57:10 am »
+1
So, balance is done based on kill statistics :shock: :lol:

And for a moment I thought we're dealing with smart people here (devs).

I would so like to be muted permanently on these forums if you don't mind so I don't have to waste my precious time on the likes of you, dear so called devs.

but who will whisper sweet nothings in my ear once you're gone? :s

(click to show/hide)

yeah if u only fight slashing weapons then armour is great

use the pierce attack of the weapon or a blunt one and people die fast
« Last Edit: October 05, 2011, 01:00:24 am by RandomDude »

Offline Herkkutatti

  • Permanently Banned
  • **
  • Renown: 292
  • Infamy: 149
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #47 on: October 05, 2011, 01:01:21 am »
0
i have 7 if and +3 black armour  and archers kill me with 4 hits ffs no idea in this game anymore.
/l
(゚、 。 7
l、 ~ヽ
じしf_, )ノ Nerf archery ,please!

Offline Dezilagel

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 722
  • Infamy: 209
  • cRPG Player
  • (X) probably goes well with Nutella
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Guards, Guards!
  • Game nicks: Dezi_the_Bagel
  • IRC nick: Dezilagel
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #48 on: October 05, 2011, 01:09:27 am »
+1
loomless "fucking archer" (15 str, 5 PD, 140 active wpf) with hornbow(24) against 82 body armor pointblank

bodkin(24+2 p):
average damage = 6
average amount of bodkins needed for 75? hp = about 12 to 13

tartar(24 + 5 c):
average damage = 2.5
average amount of tatar arrows needed for 75? hp = about 30

Nonloomed hornbow = fairly weak

82 Body Armor = hardcore fully loomed tincan.

5 PD = lol

Let's instead look at the numbers for 7-8 PD MW rus/longbow + MW arrows vs. ~55 armor (lordly medium-heavy armor or standard plate, + standard gloves) @ 10 m (better throw in some speed bonus there aswell since if you're trying to melee an archer you should tentatively run towards him) for a view on what's actually the problem.

No worries, I'll do the calculations for you this time:

(click to show/hide)

Seriously though, why post these statistics anyway? They're displaying a very rare event that is extreme; a light bow fired from a low-str char vs the heaviest of heavy armor. Unless you got comparable statistics for melee weapons that somehow throw off my point then I see no reason why anyone should care about these numbers.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Quote from: Rumblood
You fuck, or you get fucked.
Valour Multghulis - All Krems Must Die

Offline Xant

  • Finnish Pony
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1552
  • Infamy: 803
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #49 on: October 05, 2011, 01:31:11 am »
0
Yep. But at least it shows that you can't kill the hardcorest of loomed tincans with 5 PD unloomed bow...

But well, I have 63 armor atm and some dude with a Rus Bow just two shot me.
Meaning lies as much
in the mind of the reader
as in the Haiku.

Offline cmp

  • M:BG Developer
  • Supreme Overlord
  • *******
  • Renown: 2052
  • Infamy: 569
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: cmp
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #50 on: October 05, 2011, 01:40:02 am »
0
It's not "taRtar", stop calling it like that, tartar is sauce, Tatar is name of the people and of the bow. Go look at c-rpg.net, if you don't believe me.

Tar·tar  (tärtr)
n.
1. also Ta·tar (tätr) A member of any of the Turkic and Mongolian peoples of central Asia who invaded western Asia and eastern Europe in the Middle Ages.


Offline Paul

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Renown: 1879
  • Infamy: 442
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • ball bounce boss
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: Urist
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #51 on: October 05, 2011, 02:08:08 am »
0
Armor to effective in melee?? i run around in a +8 plate armor set with at least 11 or 12 if and i can say that u not right!
79 head 82 body and 66 leg

...

What i want is to GIVE BACK THE OLD SOAK VALUES!!!!! because i pay fucking 3k+ upkeep and i want to get something from that!! damn i put 8 loom points in my armor!! and fucking archers with no loom points beat the shit put of me!!! WTF

I posted the 82 armor example because of this. I also got a PD5 hornbow archer so i took him for the example. I got a PD6 Longbow archer too but I like the other one more.

Nice job with the tatar typo ridicule. Especially with having in mind that wrote the word a second time in the same post without the extra r. Both is correct though as cmp showed.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2011, 02:11:01 am by Paul »

Offline Xant

  • Finnish Pony
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1552
  • Infamy: 803
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #52 on: October 05, 2011, 02:12:04 am »
0
well yes but i don't think anyone took greatkali seriously

dude's complaining about not being able to escape three people when he doesn't put a single point in athletic and uses plate armor
Meaning lies as much
in the mind of the reader
as in the Haiku.

Offline justme

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 188
  • Infamy: 45
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Bandits
  • Game nicks: Bandit_Elsupreme
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #53 on: October 05, 2011, 08:18:46 am »
0


[17:35] <@cmp> EU
[17:35] <@cmp> OneHanded 36530 20.64%
[17:35] <@cmp> TwoHanded 47598 26.89%
[17:35] <@cmp> Polearm   50203 28.36%
[17:35] <@cmp> Archery   13331 07.53%
[17:35] <@cmp> Crossbow  6703  03.79%
[17:35] <@cmp> Throwing  2548  01.44%
[17:35] <@cmp> Headshot  12102 06.84%
[17:35] <@cmp> Naked     61    00.03%
[17:35] <@cmp> Horsebump 3549  02.00%
[17:35] <@cmp> Couch     4395  02.48%
[17:35] <@cmp> EU more skilled kthx



almost always i die from the ranged, how the hell is only 15 %?
and its easy to kill someone, because rangefest make everyone 1/3 of hp when they arrive to melee..

Offline Paul

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Renown: 1879
  • Infamy: 442
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • ball bounce boss
    • View Profile
  • IRC nick: Urist
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #54 on: October 05, 2011, 11:06:10 am »
+2
Selective perception. You probably don't use a shield and as a shieldless 2h/polearm guy you feel insulted when being shot/thrown at. But cRPG is not a ranged fest. On the contrary, ranged is pretty weak here - at least compared to Native.

People forgot how strong ranged has been is past patches but because the majority of players is 2h or polearm, they want it weakened no matter what. Their hysteria is cumulative. They make up hidden ranged buffs and perceived ranged growing rates of several hundert percent. All this while the ranged kill sum hasn't been growing for month. Yes, it is an indicator for ranged performance and we are working on better ones.

Giving ranged the new armor parameters fucks it up too much. This is different to melee which has a high cadence and a couple of hits more against a heavily armored target isn't that bad in my opinion. It's better than random glances. But a longbow archers needing his whole quiver to take down a loomed kujak doesn't feel right to me while glancing with weak bows seems ok.

Offline Corwin

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 499
  • Infamy: 162
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Corwin_the_Lazy
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #55 on: October 05, 2011, 11:29:17 am »
0


Selective perception. You probably don't use a shield and as a shieldless 2h/polearm guy you feel insulted when being shot/thrown at. But cRPG is not a ranged fest. On the contrary, ranged is pretty weak here - at least compared to Native.

People forgot how strong ranged has been is past patches but because the majority of players is 2h or polearm, they want it weakened no matter what. Their hysteria is cumulative. They make up hidden ranged buffs and perceived ranged growing rates of several hundert percent. All this while the ranged kill sum hasn't been growing for month. Yes, it is an indicator for ranged performance and we are working on better ones.

Giving ranged the new armor parameters fucks it up too much. This is different to melee which has a high cadence and a couple of hits more against a heavily armored target isn't that bad in my opinion. It's better than random glances. But a longbow archers needing his whole quiver to take down a loomed kujak doesn't feel right to me while glancing with weak bows seems ok.

I understand the argument about selective perception, but there are still few things missing when talking about statistics. First of all, relation between a number of players playing certain class pure or hybrid (and I know this would be a bitch to calculate) and percentage of kills. For example, crossbows kill 3.79% and maybe half of headshots being the most accurate ranged weapon, which brings us to maybe 7%. However, if number of players playing crossbowmen is around 2%, that leads to conclusion that crossbows are overpowered. Or, if there are 20% of players playing crossbow, that would mean that this weapon is seriously underpowered. Also, if I were you, I would do my best to compare this statistic with the one showing damage, as someone already suggested.
Second, I don't think that there was ever a situation when longbowmen needed more than 3 arrows to kill person in loomed kuyak. And that is with negative bonus.
Thirdly, you should definitely take in consideration and carefully read what Jambi, Gisbert and Tenne, being among the most experienced bowmen at least on EU say about this whole issue.

I apologize for quoting from another thread, but this is practically the same discussion, taking place at two separate topics.

The Hornbow definatly needs a nerf, and so does the Tatar bow now. If these bows fire Bodkin arrows, the speed/damage ratio is just insane.

Level 30
    15/24 / 18/21  Hornbow Bow
or 21/18 Tatar bow build are just way too OP.

At the end I would say that, at least to me, comparisons with Native don't mean anything. I thought you were trying (and succeeding so far) to make something much better than Native.
I mean, what have you got to lose? You know, you come from nothing, you're going back to nothing, what have you lost? Nothing!

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Hrafn

  • Noble
  • **
  • Renown: 11
  • Infamy: 10
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #56 on: October 05, 2011, 12:01:10 pm »
0
Some people just dont understand that 2h/pole gives big melee advantage compare to 1h. Not giving to them posibility easily reach melee and kill  hordes of people is one of the ranged goals. Thats how balance work, live with it. Many peope got used to play with giant 3H sword and get easy killes, they will always whine.

Offline Camaris

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 223
  • Infamy: 56
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: HRE
  • Game nicks: Neresto_HRE
  • IRC nick: Neresto_HRE
Re: Ranged and armor
« Reply #57 on: October 05, 2011, 12:08:47 pm »
-1
lol you know arbalest price? and you say about making bolts more expesive then bodkins, no way ty, with bow you can shoot 10 times more then with arbalest, thats why it has big dmg.

and also, if i shoot tincans from big distance some of they need 3 shoots from mw arbalest, and sometimes it is rain -.-

If i hit tincans with my danish they sometimes need 3-6 hits and sometimes they even do block. Dont cry with your stupid x-bow its op enough since ages.

Offline RandomDude

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 431
  • Infamy: 43
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Knight
  • I play now! but I suck =(
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: RandomDude
  • IRC nick: RandomDude
Re: Ranged and armor
« Reply #58 on: October 05, 2011, 12:43:05 pm »
0
If i hit tincans with my danish they sometimes need 3-6 hits and sometimes they even do block. Dont cry with your stupid x-bow its op enough since ages.

Please use thrust attack and then see how many hits it takes.

I have been one hit from thrust attacks many times with full hp, obv there was speed bonus too.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2011, 12:45:30 pm by RandomDude »

Offline v/onMega

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 234
  • Infamy: 67
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Bearzantium
  • Game nicks: Byzantium_vMega
Re: Armor: Effectiveness vs Melee and Ranged
« Reply #59 on: October 05, 2011, 12:57:37 pm »
0
Funny,

I frequently end up eating 3 - 4 projectiles a round, 2- 4 hits in melee and still survive.

I can also perfectly recall a time, dying to 2 maybe 3 arrows shot ACROSS the map @ a 27/27 full IF build...

Wait till Paul fixes the random soak of armors....(thats whats sometimes causing shocking dmg effects)....and it will be perfect :-).


I am totally for balancing ranged out for 1 year....was always whining loud....

Weird I say this, but ranged seems balanced :-)