Poll

Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?

YES
89 (48.9%)
NO
93 (51.1%)

Total Members Voted: 181

Author Topic: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?  (Read 6058 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Leshma

  • Kickstarter Addict
  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1875
  • Infamy: 1107
  • cRPG Player Sir White Rook A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • VOTE 2024
    • View Profile
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #60 on: October 04, 2011, 01:02:10 pm »
0
I've been one headshotted by hornbow using bodkins despite my Lordly Vaegir War Mask 59 armor and 60 HP. But I don't mind, headshot should kill anyone. But I'm pissed when the same guy takes away 60% of my HP despite my 71 body armor...

Offline Gisbert_of_Thuringia

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 169
  • Infamy: 136
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Caravan Guild
  • Game nicks: Guard_Gisbert_of_Thuringia, Guard_Bernulf_of_Thuringia, Guard_Ranulf_of_Thuringia etc...
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #61 on: October 04, 2011, 01:40:42 pm »
0
It's been bow and arrow fest out there these days, two handers and poles  are being killed again by 3 arrows fired by machine gun archers. I think making cut damage to all bows except longbow was the best idea ever in this mod.

 It is just not normal that a tin can is getting killed by some "Tatar bow" in three seconds. Do you agree?


+1

Longbow should be the only bow with pierce damage.
And as already mentioned for a hundred times, the overpowered rus bow becomes even more overpowered due to that -.-

Offline Tennenoth

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 818
  • Infamy: 85
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • "Bloody peasant archers!"
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Caravan Guild (Head)
  • Game nicks: Guard_Tenne; Guard_The_Biscuits; Guard_Bugden; Guard_Tennenuff
  • IRC nick: Tennenoth
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #62 on: October 04, 2011, 06:39:29 pm »
+4
Alright, so after being asked to post here with my opinion, why anyone would want that completely bypasses me but none the less, here's my opinion.

I'm at a crossroads to be honest... On one side, you've got the arrows determine the damage type, perfectly acceptable in the realworld. On the other hand you've got the gameplay and balance argument, whereby different sub-classes of each class should be specialised in different areas, having the ability to pick more damage for a sub-class that previously didn't specialise doesn't make sense from that point of view.

The game has got many different types of weapons and armour interlapping over many different time frames.
If you think about it, and please don't go too deep into things here, but Bodkins were used against mail & plate by the British since they were more adept arrows at piercing armour while more "khergit style" people you were more well known for their horse archery skills would have been fighting people with lighter armour, more easily cut so cutting arrows would have been much more useful.

Now, we all know that this doesn't happen within cRPG because of the crossed timezones and armour types, pierce has always seemed to be better across the board with more of an advantage at the heavier range of equipment, makes perfect sense but when you start allowing bows that would never have fired a piercing arrow because of what they were designed to fight, it starts to become a grey area and you have to stop thinking about realism or even logic because it's perfectly acceptable to say "all bows can fire all arrows" because unlike for example, crossbows or guns, the bolts/bullets need to suit to the barrel size etc, I mean, if you had a twig, you could effectively fire it from a bow, but try shoving one into your gun and you know it's not going to end well.

From that point, it brings me to why I believe that from a gameplay point of view, having bows with different abilities, in this case, the longbow being the only bow to use pierce damage, makes sense, it's a lot slower than the cutting bows, it's got only slightly better range than other bows these days and therefore needs something to identify itself as being a worthwhile weapon other than it's stunning good looks.

I find it rather disconcerting that people are able to run around on horseback using bodkin arrows, Horse Archers, and please don't get me wrong, have always been a sub-class, one that is there to get its kicks from being a massive pain in the arse, they should be able to get kills but they shouldn't be firing at heavy armoured targets because lets face it, they wouldn't be in their set time zone.
With regards to that, taking the horse archery bows onto foot again, the same thing really, these bows are supposed to be fired quicker and the way the game balance works for these is that they're supposed to be the fast weak bows that are still viable to kill, while the Rus Bow is the mid-way bow, reasonable damage and reasonable speed at the cost of 2 slot while the longbow is the "damage god" but uselessly slow.

I honestly still don't have many problems with the horn bow/tatar bow wielding horse archers/footarchers but that's just by the way I play, i'm not exposed or helpless against them and therefore can dispatch them pretty effectively while melee will see them more and more often because basically to be frank, you're bloody easy targets with your lack of shield, slow movement speed & lack of spacial awareness.

In short, arrows dictating the damage type needs to be tweaked at the very least, not a fan of handing out buffs to sub-classes of archery that really didn't need them because they chose those sub-classes in order to play the way they wanted, doing more damage just increases the incentive to go for one build over another. As I said, the longbow being the only piercing bow allowed for people to go specifically for a longbow build to do high damage because they wanted to play like that, if they wanted to be faster, then they went for the hornbow/rusbow.

I hope that makes sense, but in short, I really don't care about what happens as long as the longbow stays piercing although I do like the idea of the "arrow logic" but the gamebalance appears to be, from a melee perspective, to be buggered.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2011, 06:41:43 pm by Tennenoth »
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

BullDog Clan member since 31/08/2010 / Caravan Guild member since 03/08/2010

How to understand what I say.
Always finish your tea and biscuits regardless of how terrible they are

Offline Lichen

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 184
  • Infamy: 79
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #63 on: October 04, 2011, 07:35:19 pm »
+1
One idea is to drop the base bow damage of all bows except the longbow. Then bodkins would be much less to not at all effective when used with the other bows. All cut arrows would then need to have buffed damage so when used with the other bows total damage is again the same when using cut. Main possible problem is you could use the higher damage cut arrows with a long bow, which may or may not be too powerful.
« Last Edit: October 04, 2011, 07:36:53 pm by Lichen »

Offline Corwin

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 499
  • Infamy: 162
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Corwin_the_Lazy
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #64 on: October 05, 2011, 11:28:04 am »
0
I apologize for quoting from another thread, but this is practically the same discussion, taking place at two separate topics.

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.

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 Ujin

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1057
  • Infamy: 166
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #65 on: October 20, 2011, 02:22:58 am »
0
All i can say is that i really like the idea of arrows determining the type of damage , which is somewhat realistic, but i really hate the troubles  this change is bringing atm : increased ranged spam, increased range dmg, longbow being a useless (okay, non-popular) weapon again etc.

Offline Adalwulf

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 169
  • Infamy: 53
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: HRE
  • Game nicks: Adalwulf
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #66 on: October 20, 2011, 04:00:27 am »
0

+1

Longbow should be the only bow with pierce damage.
And as already mentioned for a hundred times, the overpowered rus bow becomes even more overpowered due to that -.-

Wrong, Longbow should have greatest range. Arrow heads are what gave cut and pierce damage. Not the type of bow, that makes no sense...

Offline Arrowblood

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 508
  • Infamy: 112
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: The Mercenaries
  • Game nicks: Merc_Arrowblood
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #67 on: October 20, 2011, 11:30:48 pm »
0
Wrong, Longbow should have greatest range. Arrow heads are what gave cut and pierce damage. Not the type of bow, that makes no sense...
I agreee the longbow needs a shot speed buff

Offline Adalwulf

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 169
  • Infamy: 53
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: HRE
  • Game nicks: Adalwulf
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #68 on: October 20, 2011, 11:40:39 pm »
0
I agreee the longbow needs a shot speed buff

As it stands longbow is utterly useless and costs a fortune.

Offline Arrowblood

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 508
  • Infamy: 112
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: The Mercenaries
  • Game nicks: Merc_Arrowblood
Re: (Stats) Bows again determine type of damage, not arrows?
« Reply #69 on: October 21, 2011, 12:42:00 am »
0
As it stands longbow is utterly useless and costs a fortune.
Ofc its only useable by a couple of good Longbowmen this time like Tenne,Gisbert,Coldblood and a few others