archery..

[Leshma]

I think he posted that smiley because everything you wrote are well known facts, which actually do not need to be written down ever again because everyone already knows it. Its like writing that you can block with rmb. But you did a nice job on summarizing again none the less.

Good players are good at everything. Chase is great archer, probably way better than you, for example.

So no, archery doesn't take more skill than melee. It's just that some archers are terrible at melee so they think that. Bagge for example is good at everything.

[Bobthehero]

I play archer don't find it all that difficult.

  was not an argument, if you can figure out what it is, then your intelligence level is low and you must be a terrible archer.

[XyNox]

Actually I dont care anymore what "arguments" people come up with here. I just wanted to get some fresh air in this thread. It is embedded in my daily portion of amusement.

I do however agree with Siberian_Wolf for the most part.

[Bobthehero]

And I think melee has other sets of skills you need to have, especially regarding who to hit with which attack, trying to stay within your range of your weapon while either outranging the enemy or avoiding to be outranged, placemenet is pretty important.

[Siberian_Wolf]

Good players are good at everything. Chase is great archer, probably way better than you, for example.

So no, archery doesn't take more skill than melee. It's just that some archers are terrible at melee so they think that. Bagge for example is good at everything.

I beg to see where I wrote one takes more skill then the other.

I said there are:

Different circumstances
Different intelligent requirements

I'll say it again, pressing block + attack doesn't require much intelligence, just muscle memory + intuition.
Putting into account of placement, release time, arrow drop, enemy direction* (not speed) and all that, requires intelligence.

Funny how you just prove my point by ignorantly putting text together in an answer to a post that is far from what you thought it was. Go back and read it again.

[Bobthehero]

Using the right attack for the right situation, seeing if you're properly placed to do an effective attack, using speed bonus to your advantage, knowing how long is your window to do damage.

But yeah hur dur I am melee player huuuur can't play archer uheuheuhe.

[Tzar]

Huehuehue

[Adamar]

Same old skill discussion eh? It's not so much about skill as it is about build, you people should know by now(but genneraly dont care) that archers are inherently bad in melee. A guy has to be 2 or 3 times a better fighter to kill an average meleer, thats why we often end up dieing like retards.

[Bobthehero]

Same old skill discussion eh? It's not so much about skill as it is about build, you people should know by now(but genneraly dont care) that archers are inherently bad in melee. A guy has to be 2 or 3 times a better fighter to kill an average meleer, thats why we often end up dieing like retards. running and gunning, leaving no chance to the melee player most of the time.

FTFY

[Adamar]

Well, I do it the other way, running is boring.

[Bobthehero]

Well props to you then.

And I am serious.

[Leshma]

Same old skill discussion eh? It's not so much about skill as it is about build, you people should know by now(but genneraly dont care) that archers are inherently bad in melee. A guy has to be 2 or 3 times a better fighter to kill an average meleer, thats why we often end up dieing like retards.

I have few ideas how to fix that issue but Paul isn't listening to me.

[Pappus]

I have two options in mind to rebalance archers:

1)

Reduce the movement speed of archers by 50%.
The reasoning is to put an stop to prolonged, turn around, shoot, run, shoot. Or swiftly dodging cavalry couches. By allowing them that kind of movement speed you leave them without a counter.

A shielder is not a counter, because due to the shield he is likely to not catch up for a very long time. Hell I even have problems catching up with medium armor, no shield and 8 athletics.


2)

Decrease their dmg below a certain amount of meters by huge degree. At least 80%. I prefer this method, because it actually increase the usefulness of cavalry. It is simply idiotic to charge on the back of an archer just for him to realize it like 5m away turn around headshot your horse and demount you in a single blow, which is true for coursers and rounces and if he can aim for the legs a couple of the warhorses will be in severe danger aswell. I realize people hate the idea of buffing cavalry, but they actually dont have a role other then striking unaware people, bumping into dueling ones or attacking other lancers/1h cav - certainly not HA's. This is why I like idea 2  more, because it also stops an end to HA nonsense e.g. bumping a shielder and then shoot or running away from other cav for as long as it takes to get two shots out to drop the enemy horse.

However it also helps 2h guys to get the kill done, archers can still run and run and run, but at least they have to get to the threshold to do any reasonable amount of dmg.

[Paul]

Interesting ideas Pappus. We could also hand out wheelchairs to archers but with an automatic brake so they can kite downhill which would be unfair.

Also, only melee damage profits from the armor ignore on hitting horse legs.

[Ronin]

I have two options in mind to rebalance archers:

1)

Reduce the movement speed of archers by 50%.
The reasoning is to put an stop to prolonged, turn around, shoot, run, shoot. Or swiftly dodging cavalry couches. By allowing them that kind of movement speed you leave them without a counter.

A shielder is not a counter, because due to the shield he is likely to not catch up for a very long time. Hell I even have problems catching up with medium armor, no shield and 8 athletics.


2)

Decrease their dmg below a certain amount of meters by huge degree. At least 80%. I prefer this method, because it actually increase the usefulness of cavalry. It is simply idiotic to charge on the back of an archer just for him to realize it like 5m away turn around headshot your horse and demount you in a single blow, which is true for coursers and rounces and if he can aim for the legs a couple of the warhorses will be in severe danger aswell. I realize people hate the idea of buffing cavalry, but they actually dont have a role other then striking unaware people, bumping into dueling ones or attacking other lancers/1h cav - certainly not HA's. This is why I like idea 2  more, because it also stops an end to HA nonsense e.g. bumping a shielder and then shoot or running away from other cav for as long as it takes to get two shots out to drop the enemy horse.

However it also helps 2h guys to get the kill done, archers can still run and run and run, but at least they have to get to the threshold to do any reasonable amount of dmg.

Why don't we just remove every item from the game but only leave twohanded greatswords and light/heavy kuyak?