What do you think abut the archery nerf?

[SixThumbs]

So high scorers can have a larger kill count and assist count and make others look even worse?

[Zerran]

(click to show/hide)

Long bows with bodkins had problems penetrating plate unless within 20 yards, and even then had lackluster performance.

In what time period? 1150? Sure. 1450? Not the coldest chance in hell. From 1300-1400 and forward warfare changed drastically in what was used. Pikes were dominant, heavy armour was normal, and shields fell to the wayside for two handed weaponry. Crossbows, though outlawed by the Catholic Church for use against Christans, were rather popular especially in the Italian regions as time progressed. As Feudal armies owned by lords were quickly replaced by Armies of the State, shields were pretty much uncommon or simply rare.

In the renaissance, the "medieval" period was renamed the dark ages to try and promote some sort of propaganda in how "great" society had become, and polluted further tales, making Knights all use swords and shields and shiny plate even before they had it, use exaggerated codes of chivalry, and even corrupted tales with nonsense (such as the fabrication of Sir Lancelot, who was not part of the original tales of King Arthur).

You will find that proper medieval warfare evolved quickly, and is not at all what the renaissance nor what Hollywood has portrayed it to be.

+10000

[The_Bloody_Nine]

In the renaissance, the "medieval" period was renamed the dark ages to try and promote some sort of propaganda in how "great" society had become, and polluted further tales, making Knights all use swords and shields and shiny plate even before they had it, use exaggerated codes of chivalry, and even corrupted tales with nonsense (such as the fabrication of Sir Lancelot, who was not part of the original tales of King Arthur).

You will find that proper medieval warfare evolved quickly, and is not at all what the renaissance nor what Hollywood has portrayed it to be.

This is actually not only true in the case of warfare, but in overall medieval science and progress. Though life was incredibly and unimaginably different from today, it was in many ways very progressive.

But on topic:

What has changed for me: I almost allways have been dead if I got headshotted in Barbutte (50 Headarmour) before the patch. I often used some lighter helmet because it made little difference. Now, after the patch, I'm still dead when headshotted. Only difference, all other hits barely itch me (ok, a little more) and headshots happen a bit more often but still seldom.

So from this (limited) perspective it was a huge ranged nerf hidden behind an attempt to "add more skill".

[Taser]

I voted that the nerf was not needed as a ranged player. This was before even playing the game. I still see no reason to have archery nerfed so much with the body shots especially if it is the case that headshots were 210% damage before the patch and are 150% now. Course I got that from a random poster whose entire post I do not remember so that may be in error.

After playing I can live with the patch if the body shots are increased in damage a bit. This is only for archery (horn bow, 5 PD) since I have no alts or stf characters that deal with xbows. I haven't used my throwing alt yet. Throwing really shouldn't have been involved in this nerf anyway. This also doesn't apply to those using 8 PD or 10 PD using longbows/rus bows. I still don't see why ranged had to be nerfed but if it's going to stick, then I just want body shots increased more.

[Adamar]

you got the headshot damage mixed, it was lower before and its higher now.

[Taser]

Ok then. I figured. I thought I read from someone else's post that it was the opposite and thought that it didn't make any sense. Appreciate it.

[Tears of Destiny]

Ok then. I figured. I thought I read from someone else's post that it was the opposite and thought that it didn't make any sense. Appreciate it.

They are now some stupid high number like 270% now, because lord knows headshots were not damaging enough 

[Taser]

They are now some stupid high number like 270% now, because lord knows headshots were not damaging enough 

Are you no longer an archer? Haven't seen you around lately. Although I just got back on crpg within the last week.

[Tears of Destiny]

Xylophone.

[Taser]

Trombones my friend.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Tears of Destiny]

In all seriousness, still an archer, though Meow convinced me last night not to respec... We shall see how long that lasts.

[Taser]

Aight good to hear. have fun with your MW rus bow then.

[Tears of Destiny]

Doing better with a non-loomed hornbow to be honest, but thanks.

[isatis]

Doing better with a non-loomed hornbow to be honest, but thanks.

^
this

that archery ''nerf'' has a failure inside

look at the score I can achieve with only normal bow and normal arrows

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

it's not an awesome score (7-5 on siege) but tell me : how would you ever got only a positive K:D ratio before this patch with same gear?
only way was melee. now a headshot kill everybody, head armor became pointless, in the worst case (like x3 top helmet) I can body shoot glance them and kill them after.
I'm not a skilled archer, so I fear agi pure archer guy who played 5+ gen as acher, should he take tatar bow+arrow and it's 48 missile incoming!

I don't say this patch was bad, no it was a good idea to add some difficulty. but this nerfed way too badly high tier bow.
therefore, I would remove some of the accuracy penalty to high pd. it's a pity to see Hirlok with his Mw long Bow and Mw bodkin taking 3 body shot to kill me while i can kill any tin can with bow and arrow and a good shot!

good idea but buff top tier bow a bit!

[SixThumbs]

This was also an indirect nerf to 0 slot weapons.