An opinion concerning the discussion of "ra(n)gefest" - But in another direction

[Darkkarma]

The fact that an archer can pull out a big-f-sword and proceed to whoops ass is not a big problem (from my view as an infantry). I WANT them to be able to fight instead of facing only runners. Bows in general are not problematic anymore - it is all about thrown and xbows.


The other option is to add penalties to xbows that will really hurt an infantry - at least psychologically. It is possible (see Brytenwalda mod) to have skill penalties attached to equipment. An xbow is a cumbersome thing to carry on your back while swordplaying. I bet that if it carried even -1 penalty to PS, many will skip it. I would put this at -2 PS. Make sure to advertise this penalty well for the full psychological effect. The point being: a dedicated xbowman will be much less effected by this: he is dedicated to shooting the bow from distance, not carrying it for the highland charge (one shot, then charge). Xbow user than wishes to go into full melee can "g" drop the xbow and the penalty goes away (in Brytenwalda). I will not mind "two slot fillers" starting the frame with the xbow, then dropping it and going full melee - they will most likely not go back to pick it up and the shoot-melee-shoot-melee will go away.

Not to sound rude but losing power strike points is just crazy. It's hard enough killing/fending off certain builds as a dedicated crossbowman as it is without having to worry about melee defects. Shooting from a great distance is also incredibly tough with the current travel rate of bolts, mixed in with the shitty reload rates. It only really balances out at around 100 + wpf in crossbow. What you're proposing would essentially make hybrid builds completely impractical and not worth it. Which is just lame IMO.

[Nemeth]

(click to show/hide)

The fact that an archer can pull out a big-f-sword and proceed to whoops ass is not a big problem (from my view as an infantry). I WANT them to be able to fight instead of facing only runners. Bows in general are not problematic anymore - it is all about thrown and xbows.

The problem is the melee-focused guys who have no reason NOT to carry a thrown or an xbow. These should be some cost  to make this "what the heck, I'll carry an xbow" attitude unattractive. One is cost on the lightest xbows. I imagine that a dedicated xbowman will go for the heavier xbows and it seems that the "two free slots to fill" types carry the light ones. Raising the cost of the low tier ones may make this a little less appealing.

The other option is to add penalties to xbows that will really hurt an infantry - at least psychologically. It is possible (see Brytenwalda mod) to have skill penalties attached to equipment. An xbow is a cumbersome thing to carry on your back while swordplaying. I bet that if it carried even -1 penalty to PS, many will skip it. I would put this at -2 PS. Make sure to advertise this penalty well for the full psychological effect. The point being: a dedicated xbowman will be much less effected by this: he is dedicated to shooting the bow from distance, not carrying it for the highland charge (one shot, then charge). Xbow user than wishes to go into full melee can "g" drop the xbow and the penalty goes away (in Brytenwalda). I will not mind "two slot fillers" starting the frame with the xbow, then dropping it and going full melee - they will most likely not go back to pick it up and the shoot-melee-shoot-melee will go away.

In theory a similar thing can be done with throwing weapons for the "lets have something to throw from 3 meters" crowd, but I do not think it fits that case (unlike the xbow case, it will hurt the dedicated throwers). Dedicated throwers go insanely high PT anyway, therefore I think that the PT entry point to any decent throwing weapons should be 4 PT and the really good ones above 6. If you are a melee guy that just want to throw something for the lols, there are plenty of stones around with 0 PT requirement.

This suggestion would destroy dedicated xbowman more than you seem to think. There would be no reason whatsoever to go pure xbow over pure archery. Xbowers are forced to melee much more often than archers. If you take their ability to do so away when wearing their only weapon their profficient with, there would be no reason NOT to switch to archery. I can easily have 6 PS on pure archer and it's really not that hard to melee with 1 wpf.

[La Makina]

) Make polearms and 2 handed weapons use two slots. This way we won't see archers with weapons of death. Use a 1h weapon no shield for sidearm. Twohanders have to choose shield or shooty. etc.

I support this (I suggested this idea once, in another thread, no clue where). This would also prevent melee fighters from carrying a 2h sword (for duel) plus a pike (for horses) plus a 2h axe (for  shields) plus throwing weapons, like I actually do.

I would also suggest:

- Divide stacks of thrown weapons by two (i.e. 1 lance, 2 throwing axes, 4 darts...)

- Remove the ability to pick up arrows and bolts from the ground/trees/walls. Once shot, they should be lost (because they break or remain stuck in whatever they've hit...).

So ranged fighters would still have their part of fun but rangefests would not last too long.

[Literally_Circler]

the only problem i see with the current system in regards to everything, is throwers
i have no problem with 1h+shield, 2h, pole, xbow, archers, or any kind of cav. just throwers

they have the power of xbows, combined with the release rates of archers
oh and you can use a shield while you wield them

they are seriously easy mode

[EponiCo]

forcing an archer to put points into PS takes points away that they would otherwise convert into attributes, and still be able to take a mele weapon ANYWAY

with your way, I would just convert those six points into agi and put the wpf into 2H.  This allows for much more hybridized builds.

MY way would force them to actually choose which is more important.  because they would have LESS wpf to spend overall, and would still have to put points in PS to pick a better mele weapon.  Pure archers would have to use a lower tiered mele weapon to sacrifice for that archery wpf, and hybrids sacrifice archery wpf to put points into PS instead of the att conversion.

Its called "balance"

Just modifying the wpf requirements would be simple to bypass by just stacking agi with a 18/21 or 15/24 build and converting 8 pts.  this would allow you to use pretty much every weapon in the game with almost maximum efficiency.  This is the problem that was being addressed in the OP.

Can you detail that build you are talking about? Because I'm simply not seeing it.
I can tell you my build from last gen (the calc is a little wrong)

    * Strength: 18
    * Agility: 18
    * Hit points: 53

    * Converted: 2
    * Power Strike: 6
    * Athletics: 6
    * Riding: 5
    * Power Draw: 6
    * Weapon Master: 6

    * One Handed: 90
    * Archery: 140

and even if I take away the just for fun riding it's not worth it

    * Strength: 18
    * Agility: 21
    * Hit points: 53

    * Converted: 8
    * Power Strike: 4
    * Athletics: 6
    * Power Draw: 6
    * Weapon Master: 7

    * One Handed: 110
    * Archery: 140

That's 8-15% loss on damage for a wee bit more speed - in any case, with PS limit on weapons I'd easily use a flamberge on my build but with wpf limit (of say 150) I'd have no chance to get there without screwing the archering alltogether.

[Chasab]

Is it possible to make WPF directly linked to the range a bolt/arrow/thrown object travels?

The lower the WPF the closer you need to be for your shots to go far enough to hit the enemy.

[Tears of Destiny]

I support this (I suggested this idea once, in another thread, no clue where). This would also prevent melee fighters from carrying a 2h sword (for duel) plus a pike (for horses) plus a 2h axe (for  shields) plus throwing weapons, like I actually do.

I am OK with people having all those weapons though, because the upkeep of that means they have terrible armor.

[Keshian]

I fully support skill rather than attribute based requirements as many ranged weapons already have them.  Some other thread mentioned this for armor and also raising some of the requirements so people can't just do 18 strength and then pump everything into agility and still be able to use all the weapons and armor, but would actually have to do tradeoffs.  In general anything that forces people to make tradeoffs to specialize or hybridize that are balanced choices, increases diversity of player builds, which increases the fun of competition.  Hybridizing currently has too few tradeoffs so you can classify a huge portion of the player popualtion under 3 basic builds - xbow/melee 12-18 strength, the rest agility (only 15 needed for siege xbow), thrower/melee 21+ strength (7 powerthrow opens up throwing lances) and more powerthrow = more accuracy, archer/melee 15-24 to 24-15 weakest bows are a joke as no real speed advantage to make up for crappy damage and so khergit to longbow ar 99% of the bows used (yes, a few people go higher powerdraw but thats not the norm).  Though you still see occasional dedicated melee or dedicated ranged they are the exception not the rule now because you might do it becuse you don't like ranged or vice versa, but the tradeoffs in wpf and skill points is so small right now that it makes perfect sense to hybridize as you are losing almost nothing in your main class.

Having significant requirements would be useful like making longbow stronger but require 8 powerdraw or black armor requiring 27 strength or usign a giant flamberge like a twig requires 7 or 8 powerstrike.  Forcing real tradeoffs and choices would be a step in the right direction - you would probably not see as many fast shooting khergit bow users swinging elegant poleaxes up close or war spear\iron staff\knobbed mace\polearm stun spammers suddenly pulling out a siege xbow.

[jspook]

Can you detail that build you are talking about? Because I'm simply not seeing it.
I can tell you my build from last gen (the calc is a little wrong)

You are ignoring quite a few obvious possibilities with your builds.  for example:

Strength: 18
Agility: 21

Converted: 8
Power Strike: 6
Athletics: 4
Power Draw: 6
Weapon Master: 7

One Handed: 110
Archery: 140

And your current build is already the tradeoff I was talking about..  There are a lot of 8-10 PD users out ther that can ALSO use a flamberge or poleaxe simply because of all of the str required for the higher PD.  THOSE types of pure builds shouldnt be also using the high end mele weapons.  Thats the point of the OP.  YOUR build is actually pretty balanced, and you are not as effective an archer as someone with more wpf and pd in archery.  thats the point.

edit: The problem stems from these types of builds (who can walk around with both a highly specialized archery build AND be effective with high tier mele) :

Strength: 27
Agility: 15

Converted: 14
Athletics: 3
Power Draw: 9
Weapon Master: 5

Archery: 148

or

Strength: 18 
Agility: 24 
 
Converted: 14
Power Strike: 3   
Power Draw: 6   
Weapon master: 8 

Archery   172   

Having significant requirements would be useful like making longbow stronger but require 8 powerdraw or black armor requiring 27 strength or usign a giant flamberge like a twig requires 7 or 8 powerstrike.  Forcing real tradeoffs and choices would be a step in the right direction - you would probably not see as many fast shooting khergit bow users swinging elegant poleaxes up close or war spear\iron staff\knobbed mace\polearm stun spammers suddenly pulling out a siege xbow.

Agreed wholeheartedly.

[UrLukur]

I am OK with people having all those weapons though, because the upkeep of that means they have terrible armor.

?

9001
2458
5030
1589
=
18078

6458
8922
=
15380

by that definition, 1h + shield is forced to run in crap armor.

[Tears of Destiny]

?

9001
2458
5030
1589
=
18078

6458
8922
=
15380

by that definition, 1h + shield is forced to run in crap armor.

True, I was thinking of the more expensive weapons, but note that for 15K the 1Her with shield can get a very good 1Her weapon and a very good shield for that price, compared to the four weapons that were listed.

I think I should re-word my point (Thank you for pointing out that those were cheap weapons, +1 point): For the gold invested, versatility will diminish the amount of armor or effectiveness-at-one-moment that a dedicated will have.

[Ronan]

I just have something short-ish to add:
  Most of you that complain about throwers, complain because you die by them. Most of you that complain about xbow, die by them, most of you that complain about archers... well you get the point. It seems to be that if they kill you, theyre over powered. Really? Or is it you want to be the best without having to try too hard?
  I can agree with the tweaking. Sure make it a choice to either be ranged or melee, to be a hybrid should have its penalty. Either weight, PS/WP, or what ever creative way you melee orientated characters can hamper what you hate the most. RANGE.
 I really dont think 70% of you(if not more) enjoy any kind of range, thus, you want it gone. Some of you people think about it in a emotional way and try to justify it by "reason" IE: "thats not how it was in real life" "theyre OP" "They dont run out of ammo" and so on. I read it way too much. Those of you that look at logically, i appreciate your input.
 If you really want to win EVERY time, use tactics, dont just run straight at them with your 2Her, dont go after the ones you know you loose to unless you have no choice. I mean, there is no sure thing but there are ways to better your chances. Your rage gets mine ;P

I do like the idea of the original poster. Make it a choice to be melee or range. If you do both you will be best at neither. Thank you for reading, you are all great!

[Tears of Destiny]

^
<3 +1 cookie

[Chasab]

True, I was thinking of the more expensive weapons, but note that for 15K the 1Her with shield can get a very good 1Her weapon and a very good shield for that price, compared to the four weapons that were listed.

I think I should re-word my point (Thank you for pointing out that those were cheap weapons, +1 point): For the gold invested, versatility will diminish the amount of armor or effectiveness-at-one-moment that a dedicated will have.

I'm a sword and board player my normal gear runs right around 30k and i make massive amounts of money.

" It seems to be that if they kill you, theyre over powered. Really? Or is it you want to be the best without having to try too hard?" its not the fact that they can kill me, Its How many ways they can kill me in the same round, Hybirds in games are normally too strong, its no different here. right now too many tankmages.

[Tears of Destiny]

I'm a sword and board player my normal gear runs right around 30k and i make massive amounts of money.

Mind posting your gear? I am rather curious, though running light makes sense if you are an agil build.