--> Poll <-- about the stuff with arrows

[Gisbert_of_Thuringia]

As we all know it's been heavily discussed for a while now but I don't remember anyone starting a poll so we can see some numbers.

At the moment arrows define the damage type, which means every archer can shoot with pierce damage, even those with little crappy hornbows, that should be made for shooting light armoured targets.

I know it was all done for some realism stuff, but actually it made archery very unbalanced.

I say remove it to the old way of archery that only longbow does pierce damage.
That way it will be more balanced again and the longbow wouldn't be that underpowered compared to other bows.


And please don't forget that I'm an archer myself for almost the whole time I've played the game now so don't call me a poor melee guy whining around ;)

[Corwin]

Here: http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,16652.60.html

140 people voted and we have 50:50 split atm.

[Penitent]

Here: http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,16652.60.html

140 people voted and we have 50:50 split atm.

Actually...
    YES (48.3%)
    NO  (51.7%)

Slight majority to ppl who like the current way (arrows determine damage type)

[Corwin]

At the moment of posting it was 70:70. 7 archers and 2 non-archers saw the poll after the post.

[Paul]

"everyone shooting with pierce damage". I like that almost subtle manipulation effort. Btw, we are not changing it back.

[Tears of Destiny]

Not everyone uses the Bodkins, just like not every two hander uses the German or Danish Greatsword...

Fail poll is fail.

Hell, I don't use bodkins usually.

[cmp]

Not everyone uses the Bodkins, just like not every two hander uses the German or Danish Greatsword...

what

[Tydeus]

what

Sword of War ftw.

[Rumblood]

As we all know it's been heavily discussed for a while now but I don't remember anyone starting a poll so we can see some numbers.

At the moment arrows define the damage type, which means every archer can shoot with pierce damage, even those with little crappy hornbows, that should be made for shooting light armoured targets.

I know it was all done for some realism stuff, but actually it made archery very unbalanced.

I say remove it to the old way of archery that only longbow does pierce damage.
That way it will be more balanced again and the longbow wouldn't be that underpowered compared to other bows.


And please don't forget that I'm an archer myself for almost the whole time I've played the game now so don't call me a poor melee guy whining around ;)

I've had the same horn bow setup for a long time now. Bodkins for first quiver, Barbed for 2nd quiver. Upkeep cost is the reason I don't always use the most damaging arrow. My assessment? This damage fix has made no change overall in how many kills I get. In general, it still takes about as many arrows to take an armored guy, unless it is a headshot. The reduction in the amount of damage in the bodkin actually allows the lighter armored guys to take more hits from me. I'm not certain I wouldn't be just as happy with my old cut damage from bodkins back again.
The problem here is perception. People were saying beforehand that a LongBow was the only viable build, but they are discovering what I and a few others already knew. That a PD 5 Horn Bow build is viable and fun and pierce damage or not, the overall effect is about the same.
The only reason people are complaining is perception. Horn Bow didn't suddenly become the best build. You just see more of them now that people don't feel trapped into a Long Bow or nothing mentality.

[Remy]

As a HA I have essentially given up on using Bodkin arrows, they are so expensive and as Rumblood said against the targets one should ideally engage(cavalry, light infantry and archers) I am not sure it is an advantage to gain some piercing as opposed to overall damage.

Tin cans are still best to headshot or not to shoot at all(unless of course you have plenty of arrows left or to help some teammates out).

~Remy_The_Poor_HA

[Malaclypse]

I don't agree with either of the poll options. I'd like for more than just the Long Bow have pierce. Give it to Short Bow and  Bow to add a tiny bit of incentive towards using them as well. As it stands now you never see them except on someone leveling up to use a Tatar and up.

[Corwin]

You never see anyone using sickle, so what?

[Slamz]

I actually think the new method has brought balance to the game.

The problem is there are soooo many people who are used to the old system, where archers could be safely ignored because they were nearly worthless scrubs.  You'd just see teams consisting of sometimes 80% two-handers in heavy armor with no shields, no throwing, no athletics, no method what-so-ever of dealing with archers.  They dealt with archers by mainly just ignoring them, and there weren't that many archers anyway because archers sucked so bad.

So now.... archers don't suck.  Uh oh.  A large portion of the playerbase consists of builds that are basically invalid now.  Pure str, no athletics, no throwing, no shield and nobody to hide behind because all your buddies have the exact same build you do.


So far, most people have been "adapting" by playing the "I'll show you!  I'll make an archer!" game.  I think they are finding that archers have plenty of vulnerabilities.  You just have to spec for it a bit.  And not EVERYONE needs to respec.  It's just that teams of 80% two-handers are arrow fodder for archer heavy teams.  (Whereas a team of 80% shielders would laugh heartily while mugging the archer heavy team in a complete one-sided fight.)

There's a much better element of rock-paper-scissors now, instead of the old "rock beats scissors, rock beats paper, rock beats other rocks" we had before.

[Remy]

I think that is another problem at least in battle, a large portion of the infantry utilizes polearms or two handed weapons as opposed to shields.

Thus as you say they are quite vulnerable to ranged fire.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, I ran around as with a 1H axe and no shield or 2H(as a Ninja) for most of my time playing cRPG and so forth. However, I accepted that ranged troops would be rather bad for my health.

Ideally one would hope that with balanced weapons and classes we would see rather varied builds and types of players(1H w/shield, 2H, Polearm, Cavalry, etc.).

[justme]

Not everyone uses the Bodkins, just like not every two hander uses the German or Danish Greatsword...

Fail poll is fail.

Hell, I don't use bodkins usually.

you lie like a rest of  archers.... all i see on  ground are bodkins and bodkins..