Haha faaaar superior where?
I'm comparing the
archer's melee weapon to the
archer's ranged weapon. Since you can such great damage (6PD) along with good athletics (7-8), why would you switch to your melee weapon which will be less damaging than the bow? I did not compare any 13 PS great maul user to an archer if that's what you're implying. However, since you laughed at me I can tell you that bagge's rus + bodkins usually knock more health off my bar than Tor's GLA. And guess whose attacks I can block?
I don't think regular archery (no heirlooms) is OP in any way, however I think fully-loomed archery is.
If anything increase weight of arrows and make them deployable.
Then again that would force archers to spawn camp since they won't arrive in combat before the enemy infantry does.
Or, even better, make carrying two stacks (or more) arrows give the same penalty as two (or more) shields.
Why? Because I can not wear decent armor and need all my wpf in archery to be effective.
Why? Because people cried for nerfs alllll the time 
You can wear decent armor and you can use decent melee weapons. Tenne said that the difference in using a leather jerkin and a mail shirt was almost unnoticeable when we were playing on ts. 18/18 build with 5 IF, 6 PD, 6 PS, 6 Ath, 6 WM is perfectly viable, but the min-maxing archers found out that they would rather sacrifice all but archery skills to get all the small benefits at range for doing so. And what did they do afterwards? Tell us that they can't get any melee profiency. It's a choice, you can viable doing both, but don't come crying for making a bad choice when you die with a 0 ps pickaxe in your hand.
Everyone here play an archer from 1 to 31 (screens or it never happened) I will do the same with an 18/21 2h build next gen.
Then we talk.
I've played through a gen on an archer alt and was archer on my main for months before. Is that enough for you?
