The State of Archery in cRPG - all fear the machine gun bows

[Joker86]

It was a ridiculous post, yes, but some people think ranged really should be little more than support, which is also ridiculous.

mtemko is a very good HA. I remember when he used to play on the NA servers. The whole server would rage at him. You are basing your opinion on the best players of a class instead of the average player. Too many people make that mistake.

Well, I sometimes use pikes and suffer from this, too.

The general problem is, that classes like pikemen or archers (who are both considered supporters... coincidence?) have a really high skill ceiling, but if you are new to the classes they are more difficult than others. The solution of the developers was always to nerf the class that hard that the skill ceiling lowered due to lower efficiency (which is good), but they also raised the needed skill level, which is a bad thing for average players, that's why those classes are so hard for beginners.

I agree that archers are a bit UP at the moment, but I share the common opinion that archers should make less kills than melee in any case, due to their kind of "one way" fighting (target often can't fight back, doesn't even need to make a real mistake to be killed). If the devs would lower the penalty from the last patch by 25-33% I think it should be fine.

What I want to say is: there is no need to complain further about the nerf. The devs already decided to do something about it. Rather complain about the time the devs need to release the new patch. I guess it would take less than a few hours for a single developer to find the changes they made in the last patch and tweak the values to the rough end result they are aiming at, if the balancing team didn't calculate the exact values yet. Still better than letting the game broken as it is for all ranged fighters and everyone who gets cav raped.

Now that archers, my old hate class, are nerfed to an acceptable level, I think cavalry will become my new hate class, because I think that being cavalry needs even less skill than being an archer. Horse archers will always be my hate class Nr. 1, and after one 1hd-cav and 1 HA won a round against 9 infantrymen (me included, I died first to mtemko's sniper-shots), simply because they chose the right class, not because of skill (because no skill can help 2 players being gangbanged in the open by 9 infantrymen with different weapons), I wouldn't whine a single tear if the horse archery skill would be removed from the game and all ranged weapons made unusable from horseback. Yes, it would be a pity to have a class less, but I think it's still better than keeping the only class in the game that is entirely immune to certain other classes, and in addition can kill some without them having a single chance to survive or defend themselves.

Lol joker. Mte? He's a mate and I know his build...

He's good, but at 50 Meters not even foot archer have a 100% chance of hitting you, assuming they aimed perfectly

And Mte, if he didnt change his mind, went for the less accurate more damage (which is still crap damage) HA build.

Yes, it was this on the ruins map where you asked what's wrong. This was wrong. We won the round, but there had to be a horse archer against 9 infantrymen, who didn't stop picking arrows from the ground. Which makes him de facto immortal, because he can pick up arrows again and again, unless he shoots them into something where he can't recover them. Which are shields (which break after a certain time) or players. Nice autowin, all it needs is time...

[Tears of Destiny]

I never really played a full blown archer for more than an hour.
Actually 80% of my time in cRPG was with Pole and 2h Axes of any kind, 10% a Heavy Throwing Axe build and the other 10% would be random respeccing which included basically every possible class - never finished a gen as one of those.

I always go back to melee in some form except for shields, the reason for that is that it's the only kind of combat in this game that gives me an adrenalin rush.
Everything else bores me out after minutes of playing.

What i do not see is how melee players are more skilled players per se.
I run a high str build and lately top the scoreboard from time to time which is kinda sad considering that all i do is placing overheads where fit.
Guess i could agree that melee is more twitch based which makes it more appealing for people who like that.

This does not make melee players superior in any way.
If i had to break it down into different game genres it would be:

Cav - Racing - make split decisions that are hard to change after the window of opportunity has passed.
Melee - Shooter - reaction and twitch based for individual skills, teamplay helps a lot, too.
Ranged - RTS - plan in advance to not get cornered, choose your position, choose the right targets and maintain combat awareness over a larger portion of the battlefield than the other classes - judging your projectile trajectory and speed right as well as leading the target would be experience i guess but that kinda goes for every class.

Sure they are all a mix of at least two of those but non of them is an inferior skill set.
Yeah, the examples lack a bit but there is no class you jump into and instantly dominate due to it's mechanics being super easy.

Now i am not someone who rages at the game but i see how it can be frustrating to get hit by ranged stuff while you try to reach them.
This is mostly a problem for pure 2h/polearm builds who do not see that bringing even the cheapest shield will help a lot.
Reducing body damage by 33% does not change it, it just makes ignoring the factor that you are doing it wrong a bit more forgiving.
I am one on of those shieldless people but hardly ever die to ranged for some reason, might be my epic 'stache.

Ranged does not get that, they are mostly low HP and low armor, if you reach them and they lack melee skill - they die.

I do not have the numbers at hand but i will go with the biggest part of the community plays some kind of melee class, now that ranged got nerfed cav is booming and will soon be the major part of all the whining.

People who still charge straight at ranged people will never be happy until ranged is removed while ranged players will adjust to the current standards and shut up because they get flamed by the melee crowd if they dare to complain.

Also i am under the impression that we have reached a point where further nerfs of any class will result in worse gameplay overall.
So i kinda hope from here on out classes and their gear will rather be buffed to a point where they are equally useful than nerfed to a point where they are all useless due to boring gameplay.

That whole post pretty much echoes my opinion on things rather well.

[MrShine]

I agree that archers are a bit UP at the moment, but I share the common opinion that archers should make less kills than melee in any case, due to their kind of "one way" fighting (target often can't fight back, doesn't even need to make a real mistake to be killed). If the devs would lower the penalty from the last patch by 25-33% I think it should be fine.

I disagree with the 'doesn't need to make a mistake to be killed' mindset.  Yes at its root you CAN be killed by ranged while "doing everything right", but the vast majority of my archery kills come against people who are standing still/running in straight lines/putting themselves in poor tactical positions/overwhelmed by other enemies.  If you "do everything right" as a melee player you will drastically reduce the % chance you'll be killed by ranged.  You won't reduce it completely, but you'll make hell for other ranged. 

I have been doing some more recording of my in game play to maybe give people who aren't used to playing archer an idea of what archers actually have to deal with.  It probably won't change the minds of people who are so completely wound up in their archery hatred, but maybe it will cause a few people to look at it differently.

Or maybe not, who knows.  I'll post stuff when I have time.

[Gristle]

Don't have time to respond to the rest, but:

What I want to say is: there is no need to complain further about the nerf. The devs already decided to do something about it.

"No news is good news." You have to keep lobbying until the change goes through, or they'll think we've slowly accepted the nerf and are fine with it.

[Grumbs]

The op wanted to show the worst case scenario.. unloomed items, basic arrows, 4PD bow, cut damage on higher armour. Get a practice longsword and beat on someone with 4 powerstrike and see what happens. Try piercing, more PD, find out people's HP, try loomed weapons/ammunition etc. Ranged is fine as it is, it should be support damage or reward genuinely good play

If people want more accuracy then fine, but the damage is fine as is for this melee centric game. If M&B didn't have great melee/cav mechanics no one would play. The ranged mechanics are like a totally separate game. Yet some seem to think its fine for them to 1-2 hit kill with easy body shots from range. I swear if the devs added a hitscan 1 hit kill weapon some people would use it exclusively

[Adamar]

The op wanted to show the worst case scenario.. unloomed items, basic arrows, 4PD bow, cut damage on higher armour. Get a practice longsword and beat on someone with 4 powerstrike and see what happens. Try piercing, more PD, find out people's HP, try loomed weapons/ammunition etc. Ranged is fine as it is, it should be support damage or reward genuinely good play

I have a mw longbow, yet I can do more kills with my normal horned bow(still crap though). How is ranged fine?

[Overdriven]

Yes, it was this on the ruins map where you asked what's wrong. This was wrong. We won the round, but there had to be a horse archer against 9 infantrymen, who didn't stop picking arrows from the ground. Which makes him de facto immortal, because he can pick up arrows again and again, unless he shoots them into something where he can't recover them. Which are shields (which break after a certain time) or players. Nice autowin, all it needs is time...

Well pre-patch I've done this before and ended a map with a +25 kills score. But it's rare and I have to be on my best form, and now post nerf even rarer. I can get 2 shots on a person from 50 meters to...but what good is that when it takes 9 barbed arrows to kill a guy in mail? Barbs don't even register damage against some of the upper medium-heavy armour. Picking up arrows from horseback is pretty damn difficult...and getting off horseback to do so allows inf to catch up. Mte is a damn good HA (or at least used to be at one point) so don't try and use him as an example.

And joker...please, before you claim HA takes no skill and you get the kills because you picked the right class, try it on a full EU1 server and see what kind of K/D's you get. HA takes a lot of skill. I find it harder than melee for the most part. It certainly provides more of a rush and more reward in my eyes. Furthermore, I've seen certain inf take on 1vs9 and win. 2vs9 is doable with skill. It's rare because most people aren't that skillfull but it can be done. Now for HA to do it also requires skill.

[ShinySpoons]

The op wanted to show the worst case scenario.. unloomed items, basic arrows, 4PD bow, cut damage on higher armour.

Actually, its one of the "best" builds for archers post patch. With the dmg nerf its headshots or nothing. To get a good reticule you need low PD, high wpf. High PD archers are completely fucked in that they now don't do much damage and can't aim very well.

And even worse off are throwers/xbowman who don't have the option of missle spam for the lucky headshot.

[Joker86]

And joker...please, before you claim HA takes no skill and you get the kills because you picked the right class, try it on a full EU1 server and see what kind of K/D's you get. HA takes a lot of skill. I find it harder than melee for the most part. It certainly provides more of a rush and more reward in my eyes.

This time I am talking about the skill ceiling of the class, not the average performance. Remove picking up projectiles from horseback and I'll be fine.

[Overdriven]

This time I am talking about the skill ceiling of the class, not the average performance. Remove picking up projectiles from horseback and I'll be fine.

You have to near slow down to a stop to pick up projectiles from horseback. It's incredibly risky and if the inf isn't stupid they can take advantage of this. If Mtemko managed to pull that off successfully enough to keep shooting you guys for a long time, then I can only commend him on it for taking advantage of all your stupidity.

[Joker86]

You have to near slow down to a stop to pick up projectiles from horseback. It's incredibly risky and if the inf isn't stupid they can take advantage of this. If Mtemtko managed to pull that off successfully enough to keep shoot you guys for a long time, then I can only commend him on it for taking advantage of all your stupidity.

Which advantage can an infantryman take of an archer stopping his horse 50m away and picking up 5 arrows?

[Overdriven]

Which advantage can an infantryman take of an archer stopping his horse 50m away and picking up 5 arrows?

There's 9 of you. Let me guess, the majority of you were all clumped up in a group providing perfect shot opportunities and trying to chase him around the map? Spread out, cover more ground, give him less space to manoeuvre and you would have had him easily. Once you are aware of an HA, dodging the shots is easy as anything, even against the most skilled HA. If you can't manage it, then you are doing something very wrong.

[Joker86]

There's 9 of you. Let me guess, the majority of you were all clumped up in a group providing perfect shot opportunities and trying to chase him around the map? Spread out, cover more ground, give him less space to manoeuvre and you would have had him easily.

There was still a melee cav left, so spreading up would not have been the best thing to do.

Still there was no chance for the infantry to win this unless the HA makes a mistake.

[Overdriven]

There was still a melee cav left, so spreading up would not have been the best thing to do.

Still there was no chance for the infantry to win this unless the HA makes a mistake.

Melee cav is the same principle. Sometimes clumping up isn't the best thing, particularly when an HA is involved. As long as you are aware of the 2 threats, combating them is easy. Cav needs space to manoeuvre around, re angle shots/attacks and leave escape routes if it looks dangerous. If you cover more ground (albeit not to much) and you are aware of them both, then it's easy to cut them down, particularly if you have some barriers on your side (you were on ruins ffs). Just letting them circle you and have their way is risky because the inf is more likely to make a mistake than the cav.

[Joker86]

They would still have circled around us, just in a wider circle (the map was ruins, but the fight was on open terrain, and what would be if the map was open plains?), but it would be less dangerous to attack single players because their mates would be far away.

And you are still relying your argumentation on the fact that the cav makes a mistake.