Remove Throwing Lances

[Patricia]

But unlike a 4/2.6 million chance like the royal flush I can consistently hit people wih my throwing lances (out of 8 lances I can easily get 7 to hit) so it's not really a good comparison.

[Seawied]

I'd like to see a video of you getting 7 to hit. The numbers of rounds I've seen someone do that, or have done it myself, are few and far between. I don't believe there is currently a way to track shot accuracy, but if there were, it would point towards my argument

[Nemeth]

You know, before I just thought you were an idiot -- now you just confirmed it.

The reticule shows the path of the projectile, not the speed. Can you guesstimate how its going to be thrown if you are moving or standing still? Sure. Are you more likely to hit by using that tool. Absolutely.

Yes, that was my mistake, I took it as a term from physics. Still I would like to know how the lance changes its physics depending on reticule.
Also, as I stated, I made a thrower, and lances are EASY to hit with with 8 PT. I can imagine it gets only better with 10 and more. The reticule is small enough to hit people reliably on close to melee range, which is all you need. You're saying stuff like "throwing has the worst accuracy of all ranged" well, that's obvious, they're close range weapons. You don't really need pinpoint accuracy with your bow/xbow to shoot someone 5m away from you. For the range throwing weapons are effective at, they have very good accuracy. Even high tier throwing weapons. If you can't see that, than there is no reason to argue with you.

PS: Arguing about accuracy mainly because you seem to be strongly obsessed with the reticule.

[Seawied]

I see how you can have the terms mistaken.

Anyway, this argument is getting unnecessarily heated and I contributed to that in more than a small part. For that, I apologize.


Here is why I say the accuracy is very important: it significantly reduces the effective range as you have stated. However, a more accurate weapon like a bow still have a very strong advantage over an inaccurate weapon like the throwing lance at close range. Here is why:

While the bow is slower, normally less damaging and less hybrid friendly, a good bowman can consistently get a headshot at close range if the opponent does not have a shield. The bow's accuracy and projectile speed are what keeps the damage low.

Throwers who use throwing lances do not have this luxury. While you may occasionally get a headshot, even a skilled player cannot consistently score a headshot on an aware opponent for a number of reasons.

• The accuracy of the throwing lance does not allow it. Random chance takes precedent over a well placed reticule.
• Throwing lances have one of the slowest projectile speeds in the game. In the event that your lance is guided towards the intended area, the opponent can easily sidestep the projectile.

While you can hit an opponent within 5m, this leaves the thrower significantly more exposed than other ranged classes. A fast melee character can quickly approach the thrower and force them into melee combat. All other ranged classes have the luxury of being a safe distance away from the main battle.

[Nemeth]

I can see how my first post was calling for response it got. Let's calm the waters a bit then.
Archers aim for head in close range because it's their only way to kill someone in one shot. And if the target actually has decent helmet, not even headshot is gonna kill him. That's however not the case with lances, as they will kill in one shot wherever they hit. There is no reason to go for a headshot with them.
Also, its always much harder to close the gap to thrower than to archer, simply because of the rate of fire, even with lances. Archer might be shooting you from more afar, but with the current speed of arrows and RoF of bow, it's no problem to get close to them without being hit once. Also, the fact that archer can't hold his shot for long plays in the cards of the guy trying to get close to him. And even if he actually hits you, you won't die most of the times.
While lance thrower have in best scenario 8 chances to hit you, and he needs to do so only once. Then he can just pick up the lances he missed and move on.

[Seawied]

Well, this is another preconception a lot of people have that isn't quite true.

We don't see a lot of archers go strength build, but a PD archer is quite powerful and can 1 shot an opponent... even with the current nerf.

A strength based archer with 8 PD, a longbow, and bodkin arrows can in fact 1 hit an opponent. Here is the math

(Bow damage + Arrow Damage) * (Power Draw Bonus) * ( Weapon prof damage bonus) * ( Speed Bonus) = Raw damage output
(((30+7) * (1 + 0.96) * (1 + ((150 / 200) * .015)) * (1 + 0.10)) + (24 - 14)) = 90.669435

Using the example we placed in the other thread of an opponent decently armored in Heraldic Mail with surcoat (chest armor 40) we get our final damage calculated as such

maximum remaining damage = potential damage - 0.5 * armor value * soak factor (formula courtesy of Urist)
Cutting Damage carries a soak factor of 0.8, unless this has been changed by the development team for c-rpg.

91-.05*40*.8=75

Given most characters have less than 70 life, this shot would be fatal.


The rate of fire is significantly slower, but the potential range and projectile speed is much greater. The only reason we don't see this more is because people just haven't figured it out yet.

[Tears of Destiny]

I figured that out,  to be fair, but the reason msot people do not do this is because your RoF combined with long distance shooting and the 130 wpf you are forced with due to the 10PD means you will not be OSing as often as you think. Then you have all those pesky people dodging snail rounds at range.

Coming from a guy  who just retired from a 10PD build, the longbow is crap. Get a warbow, though you will still OS many lower armored people and of course any horseman crazy enough to be running towards you.

[Seawied]

Fair point: did not include the PD penalty.


I imagine if you heirloom it, the chances of oneshotting will be right up there with the throwing lances though. Arrows get +4 at MW

[Heroin]

Well, this is another preconception a lot of people have that isn't quite true.

We don't see a lot of archers go strength build, but a PD archer is quite powerful and can 1 shot an opponent... even with the current nerf.

A strength based archer with 8 PD, a longbow, and bodkin arrows can in fact 1 hit an opponent. Here is the math

(Bow damage + Arrow Damage) * (Power Draw Bonus) * ( Weapon prof damage bonus) * ( Speed Bonus) = Raw damage output
(((30+7) * (1 + 0.96) * (1 + ((150 / 200) * .015)) * (1 + 0.10)) + (24 - 14)) = 90.669435

Using the example we placed in the other thread of an opponent decently armored in Heraldic Mail with surcoat (chest armor 40) we get our final damage calculated as such

maximum remaining damage = potential damage - 0.5 * armor value * soak factor (formula courtesy of Urist)
Cutting Damage carries a soak factor of 0.8, unless this has been changed by the development team for c-rpg.

91-.05*40*.8=75

Given most characters have less than 70 life, this shot would be fatal.


The rate of fire is significantly slower, but the potential range and projectile speed is much greater. The only reason we don't see this more is because people just haven't figured it out yet.

Let me preface my response by saying: I do not think throwing lances are OP. They are good, yes. But they should be. They are the highest tier, highest cost, lowest ammo throwing weapon. I think they are fine as is.

In response to your arguement that bows can one-shot, however, I have to disagree. I just retired a 10 pd archer with 134 wpf in bows, and I couldn't one-shot ANYONE except peasants with no armor. Even black lamellar vests took 2 shots, regardless of target's build, at point blank range with a non-heirloomed longbow/bodkins. I tested this extensively on the duel server with multiple willing people, using both high and low strength builds, at point blank range.

I tried this build because I came up with the same math that you did, thinking that a 10 pd archer would be able to one-shot a lot of people. However, it simply doesn't happen that way. For some reason, the damage calculation is WAY off. I was typically doing slightly more than half of my target's HP in damage.

Comparing the damage to that of a 6pd archer with high prof, the 6pd archer does almost the same damage as the 10pd build for some reason, and can usually kill the same person in 2 shots. So the extra damage from the 10pd build is actually wasted most of the time, since it ultimately works out to be 2 shots for either build, the difference being that the 6pd build has a much faster rate of fire, lower draw time, and higher accuracy.

The only advantage to the 10pd build, imo, is that the 10pd build will pretty much ALWAYS kill with a headshot, whereas the 6pd build may not if the target has high strength and 50+ head armor.

[Tears of Destiny]

One additional advantage is that it breaks shields too, very quickly. I have broken many a shield at a distance by slamming a half dozen or so arrows into it, making many shielders digruntled that a mere bowman broke it so fast with so few arrows.

And no, this is not counting those absurd huscarl shields, or the top two Board Shields (Though I have once managed to break the second-highest board shield from range witht he ehlp of another STR archer, that was hilarious).

Anywho, yes, for some odd reason it is difficult to one shot anyone higher then a ninja even with the PD10, and it is mainly only useful for blowing cavalry to pieces, going peasant hunting (I have better things to do with my time, say harass key players not score cheapo kills), or two shotting armored nuts that normally tak three arrows.

Sad but true, a round that takes 85% of the target health may as well only take 50% for an archer, as you need the second shot to kill him anyways, though one can argue that it is useful for softening up the target for friendly melee troops to kill. Though then again, if I see someone like Balbaroth or Singingintherain or goretooth wandering around, I would much rather kill them completely at range then wait for them to melee ANY friendly troop at "softened" state.

[Tydeus]

You'll pretty much never get a headshot against a thrower in close range, especially if you're using the Longbow. You'll try but they'll get off their throws so fast that by the time you can fire your arrow, due to strafing, your reticule is larger than theirs. If you try to stand still, you're just a sitting duck. Because you can move and strafe while throwing and you absolutely must be standing still with a bow to have any chance of hitting your target, throwers have a huge advantage against archers in close range. I'd actually argue that higher PD builds have a much smaller chance of success than lower due to RoF. Trying to argue otherwise is rather pathetic and makes me think you're scrambling to find supporting arguments Seawied.

You'd have to be using a Strong Bow with 5 PD to be able to "safely" shoot any arrows in close range against a thrower.

I was also going to debunk your "Longbow One Shot" post, but someone else already did it. Though I would like to ask the questions due to your formula: Do bows even gain damage from your raw strength? Is it possible to have 150 WPF while having 10 PD?

[Seawied]

Let me preface my response by saying: I do not think throwing lances are OP. They are good, yes. But they should be. They are the highest tier, highest cost, lowest ammo throwing weapon. I think they are fine as is.

In response to your arguement that bows can one-shot, however, I have to disagree. I just retired a 10 pd archer with 134 wpf in bows, and I couldn't one-shot ANYONE except peasants with no armor. Even black lamellar vests took 2 shots, regardless of target's build, at point blank range with a non-heirloomed longbow/bodkins. I tested this extensively on the duel server with multiple people.

I tried this build because I came up with the same math that you did, thinking that a 10 pd archer would be able to one-shot a lot of people. However, it simply doesn't happen that way. For some reason, the damage calculation is WAY off. I was typically doing slightly more than half of my target's HP in damage.

Comparing the damage to that of a 6pd archer with high prof, the 6pd archer does almost the same damage as the 10pd build for some reason, and can usually kill the same person in 2 shots. So the extra damage from the 10pd build is actually wasted most of the time, since it ultimately works out to be 2 shots for either build, the difference being that the 6pd build has a much faster rate of fire, lower draw time, and higher accuracy.

The only advantage to the 10pd build, imo, is that the 10pd build will pretty much ALWAYS kill with a headshot, whereas the 6pd build may not if the target has high strength and 50+ head armor.

This is for a point-blank shot heroin. Damage drop for all range weapons is reduced over distance. This is especially true for throwing lances, which have a lower projectile speed. Projectile speed impacts overall damage.

[Heroin]

This is for a point-blank shot heroin. Damage drop for all range weapons is reduced over distance. This is especially true for throwing lances, which have a lower projectile speed. Projectile speed impacts overall damage.

All my testing was done at point blank range. Edited and bolded previous post to ensure no one missed it.

[Seawied]

Late and have been drinking. 


But, that is the actual damage formula which goes into the game. Its hard coded too, so the c-rpg crew cannot change it. Armor has a random chance of effectiveness and can be anywhere from 50% effective to 100% effective. At 100% effectiveness (very rare!) with the numbers we are running, the damage output is 60... which means you need a minimum of 18 strength and 6 IF OR 19 strength and 5 IF if you want to survive. This is with the single most unlucky roll for the attacker.

[Rhade]

Pila were used to disable shields by making them too cumbersome to wield. They were not designed to kill people but to break phalanxes.


Throwing lances are stupid, they need considerable balancing or to be removed (or remade into the role of a Pilum using on-hit weight adding triggers at the cost of making them 30 damage and a bit more accurate. Seriously it would be cool to have something tactical like that rather than an "lol insta-kill no skill".)

It isn't that they are accurate but how inaccurate they are which makes them only usable in close to melee range. And oh yes do they one hit kill. Sure, there are times when people survive but that is generally rare or a high HP build being hit by a low PT thrower with no speed bonus.
I'm a thrower and with 10 PT I can one-shot Wallace and he is a super heavy tin can. I should not one-hit a guy with 70+ body armor and 10+ IronFlesh unless it is a headshot.
They don't currently serve any game use for balance or an interesting gimmick like "ohoho it adds tons of weight to a shield like a pilum so it makes it too heavy to use".

The usual arguments in favor of the throwing lance come along these few points so I'll just counter them now:
1. You only get 2 per stack. : You can pick them up. That is 2 dead things or destroyed shields. per stack. You can have 4 stacks.
2. They are really expensive. : Uh yeah, So is wearing plate. The top tier of everything is really expensive. Except you can onehit guys wearing plate which costs way more.
3. They have terrible accuracy : Not a reason to give them sympathy but rather a reason why they are so bad for the game. And due to it being an inaccurate just-be-close weapon that means it requires little skill to use effectively, and, more player skill produces no rewards.

Oh, how can I forget this too: They are a weapon that 1 hits enemies with little to no danger to himself. It is a high reward - no risk weapon. Every other weapon that can come even anywhere close to the one hit capabilities of a throwing lances are High risk to the user.

This this this this this.

Marathon, thank you for saving me from typing.