Archery buff

[Michael]

Archers didnt have 2h/ poleaxes for a simple reason: its impossible to use a bow with a heavy weapon on your back in rl.

They used (small) 1h hammers, pickaxes and stuff for melee.

At the famous battle of Agincourt, the English longbowmen were hiding behind the smart placed stakes/ palings, injured the French cavalry that couldnt charge, only retreat, and then, obviously faster cos of their light armor, especially on that deep ground, they gangbanged the totally exhausted French heavy infantry. 


In game, an archer can kill unarmored horses in 2 or even 1 shot, he can fight on foot spamming a huge 2h / poleaxe, so archer/2h/polearm hybrid is the most effective build overall.

Lets be honest. 80 % of crpg maps are archers paradise. Footmen can run up every mountain in full armor at full speed, horses have to climb slowly the smallest hill, ridiculous.

Even a pure archer with 3 or 4 power draw who cant fight in melee can get tons of kills.

As long the crosshair doesnt get removed for ranged, they dont need another buff.

[bruce]

Archers didnt have 2h/ poleaxes for a simple reason: its impossible to use a bow with a heavy weapon on your back in rl.

Herp derp... you can rest it on the floor, you're not playing ninja runner, and the weight of some things such as twohanders is greatly overstated. Their price, however, is a different thing. But if you think using a twohanded sword and a longbow is physically a problem, well... idk, the last person to use a longbow in war also carried a claymore. 

The real reason why a archer would historically not be equipped with the finest and best melee weapons known to man would be price. But still... I don't think it's the efficiency in melee of archers and crossbowmen which is a problem, but rather their efficiency at range. Make them unable to melee with any effect and they'll just run until kickpolled or you turn your back to them (where they will resume shooting you), since they run faster.

Lets be honest. 80 % of crpg maps are archers paradise.

This is one of the biggest issues. Half of the maps we play are hilly to mountainous village squabbles with archers on roofs. Open-type maps where archers need to stick in some sort of formation with infantry promote tactics, not the roof shooting galleries and house to house fighting.

Until maps change into something more resembling a place where you'd actually fight a battle rather then maps out of counterstrike, we'll see the same counterstrike gameplay.

As long the crosshair doesnt get removed for ranged, they dont need another buff.

Agreed.

[Furax]

FYI the only map that would not be archers paradise is an enclosed 5m² room where everyone spawns into eachother in huge cluster=)

[Gnjus]

Lets be honest. 80 % of crpg maps are archers paradise.

Make that 100% and you'll be telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

[Franklin]

Yes, in movies. With the advancement of armour, the type of shield which was most commonly used by footmen.... was the buckler. On the battlefield. Imagine. Larger shields were generally used by the less armoured people. (the buckler not being a battlefield shield is just a myth, really)


Anyway, if you want to see reasonable tactics... then you need to see reasonable maps. House to house fighting maps don't lend to tactics well. Open-type large maps do.

Meh I was only suggesting two possible outcomes depending on what choices were made.  If I wanted true historical accuracy I would ask for animal shit to be placed on the field so I could dip my arrows.

As for watching to many movies http://cwmwdial.org.uk/  er yeh    Been hit twice by archers, once by crossbow (can't describe the bruises and thats from low powered health and safety crap) stabbed in the throat by a spear which bounced high off someones shield, been stabbed, chopped, kicked, punched and generally butchered far to often to be amused.  Oh and was at Hastings 2006 on the shield wall being charged by Footman, Cavalry and having arrows and bolts dropped on us.

[Joxer]

Archers didnt have 2h/ poleaxes for a simple reason: its impossible to use a bow with a heavy weapon on your back in rl.

That is just fucking bullshit. There is absolutely nothing that would stop you from using a bow even if you carry crap on your back or hip. Learn2rl before you make crap like that up.

Lets be honest. 80 % of crpg maps are archers paradise. Footmen can run up every mountain in full armor at full speed, horses have to climb slowly the smallest hill, ridiculous.

100% of maps is archer paradise for any archer with half a brain to seek a favourable position. The same applies to cavalry and infantry too.
 

[Freland]

Lets be honest. 80 % of crpg maps are archers paradise.

The problem is it's very hard to make a balanced map  in batlle  with equal opportunities for archers, infantry and cavalry  because there is no other objective than killing the other team. So people tend to fight in their favorite terrain (and rightfully so) . Archers climb the roofs or hills, infantry likes to fight in close quarters and cav needs flat plains.
Archers have the advantage to be able to attack targets far away so usually infantry and cav come to the archers favorite terrain. Like I said it's a battle problem.

Btw in siege archers suck as attackers (of course they shine as defenders.)

To summarize the problem:  maps being archers paradise cannot be solved in battle.

Open-type maps where archers need to stick in some sort of formation with infantry promote tactics, not the roof shooting galleries and house to house fighting.

There is one map on EU4 which features just open plains in a river delta. That map is terrible (gameplay wise) because infantry does not matter at all, archers have a hard time and usually the team with more cav wins 5-0.

[bruce]

There is one map on EU4 which features just open plains in a river delta. That map is terrible (gameplay wise) because infantry does not matter at all, archers have a hard time and usually the team with more cav wins 5-0.

I've seen it. The problem with it is that people somehow by instinct go to the closest bottleneck (the bridge) which is the stupid thing to do, if the other team has a lot of cavalry.

You simply need to camp near spawn in formation, and shoot the cavalry when it comes near. After that, mop up the infantry. If you go to the bridge you have to play shootout games with their archers and your flanks and back are wide open.

For some time, EU4 maps were 60% random plains, and nearly every map of that sort consisted of people fighting in formation with the obligatory shieldwall, cavalry hanging behind, and archers behind infantry together with some pikes. People did this because a team which would random mob charge would get slaughtered every time even with 10 Phyrexes and Bjords on it.

On the other hand, town maps where you can hide/etc behind walls and such promote CS-like roofcamps and random mob charging. Why? Because it works.

[Gnjus]

100% of maps is archer paradise for any archer with half a brain to seek a favourable position. The same applies to cavalry and infantry too.
 

You couldn't be more wrong, mugface. Any idiotic archer out there is spending his holidays on top of some roof or hill or something, and getting easy kills while infantry, and especially cavalry can suck their cocks trying to reach them, and if your best answer to this is "buy a crossbow" well....i don't think there is much more to add to the case, you've said it all. As it is now: every single map suits the archer scum, 50% of 'em are suited for melee infantry of all kinds while 20% (at most) are any good for cavalry.

[Freland]

For some time, EU4 maps were 60% random plains, and nearly every map of that sort consisted of people fighting in formation with the obligatory shieldwall,

I agree with you that those maps force teamwork which is a good thing. If I remember correctly this was before the big patch and in my opinion there is less global team tactics nowadays because of banner balance (or just because Phaz isn't playing that much at the moment). The competent leaders (and their clans) are forming squads of 5-6 men now communicating over teamspeak without using team chat. Perhaps we need those open maps to force global tactics again...

I realize that we are getting quite offtopic 

[Joxer]

You couldn't be more wrong, mugface. Any idiotic archer out there is spending his holidays on top of some roof or hill or something, and getting easy kills while infantry, and especially cavalry can suck their cocks trying to reach them, and if your best answer to this is "buy a crossbow" well....i don't think there is much more to add to the case, you've said it all. As it is now: every single map suits the archer scum, 50% of 'em are suited for melee infantry of all kinds while 20% (at most) are any good for cavalry.

So you're disagreeing with me by agreeing? WTF? For archer a favourable position wheter its a hill or house or whatever is just that. For infantry favourable position is near cover such as walls, rocks and stuff and for cavalry it's of course open areas. Of course if infantry tries to get to archers favourable position it will be difficult. Same goes for archer who goes to infantry's or cavalry's favourable position. They get a huge disadvantage by doing so.

[Tears of Destiny]

And at the end of the day, there are significantly more Infantry and Cavalry at the top of the scoreboards then there are Archers or Crossbowmen.

If infantry have half a brain and stop running in a straight line and stop refusing to use shields or take cover behind someone who has one, arrows stop being such a threat. Yes, if you lack a shield you take more hits, but that is the Sacrifice you are making for that extra melee capability, and is the price you pay for increasing anti-infantry/cav capabilities.

Archers seem fine as is, they are a support class and more often then not score wounds more then fatalities.

As for the map issue, not every map is an Archer paradise, as some are absolute buggers to be in if the infantry have half a brain or if there are fast cav. (Helms Deep comes to mind where it is much harder to avoid being snuck up on, as archers get butchered in melee and rightfully so).

Every build has a weakness and a strength, get used to it.

What I love are people who say it takes no skill to play an archer, as it does take skill to learn how to properly lead a target with these snail rounds, or being able to properly choose a target on a snapshot.

But really, at the end of the day, if you notice a weakness that you have, you first want to cry "NERF IT! OP against me!" Most people will always ridicule other builds not of their own, and want buffs to the build they use if unskilled/powerhungry.

[Franklin]

Archers seem fine as is, they are a support class and more often then not score wounds more then fatalities.

Can't fault you there  apart from the fact that I should not be able to take the piss by playing dodge the pointy stick because I can see the damn thing coming. 

[Tears of Destiny]

Can't fault you there  apart from the fact that I should not be able to take the piss by playing dodge the pointy stick because I can see the damn thing coming. 

Give this man a prize, he watches incoming arrows! You deserve a cookie for paying attention instead of being unaware and whining when my arrow greets your face.

[Franklin]

Give this man a prize, he watches incoming arrows! You deserve a cookie for paying attention instead of being unaware and whining when my arrow greets your face.

Lol.  I'm sure it annoys the shit out of archers when people do that 

Its a pity there is no M. Jackson Moonwalk button.  I'd wee meself if I saw someone doing that and dodging arrows at the same time.