Pew! Pew! Pew!

[Zisa]

Learn to dodge.

[Rhade]

Learn to dodge.

Dodging becomes irrelevant when the air is full of projectiles.

[Thucydides]

I like to point out that playing in native a team full of range is nigh unbeatable unless you shield up. Its quite similar to crpg except that in crpg, the range is actually severely nerfed compared to native.

[Darkkarma]

That's kind of my point though:

People can choose to not melee me and completely negate and avoid my skillset.

I can never, ever choose not to be shot at. I must always expose myself to ranged fire if I want to do anything whatsoever, and I always have to give ranged a chance to shoot me, yet ranged never has to give me a chance to hit them. When you add in a critical mass of archers/xbows/throwers, it's just pretty evident to me that ranged rules the field. I'm not sure how to fix the issue, but it's clear to me that there is one.

Let's say, for a moment, that there was an archer as deadly as Harmless or Gore or I are in melee:

Not only would this archer be able to dominate all other ranged units with effectiveness, he'd also be able to dominate melee players before they even reached him. He would be able to beat other ranged (because he is ranged and can effectively attack them at the very moment he himself is exposed, making it fair for both ranged participants) and he would also be able to beat melee players, as he is able to either shoot them, shoot their feet, shoot over their shield, run from them and let his team shoot them/generate distance so he can keep shooting, or simply pull out a melee weapon and have a chance to attack his enemy, at the very least, before his enemy can kill him. Oftentimes this is the main frustration I feel, I never have the chance to even attack a ranged enemy or effectively defend myself, even with a shield and a shield level of 2, yet a good ranged player always has the ability to attack/defend no matter who he is fighting.

A melee "champion" is hamstrung extremely hard compared to a ranged "champion" when you think about it.

Well, IMO the biggest issue we see with range right now are all of the FOTM crossbow hybrids in addition to all of the throwers. Also, some of the natural in game balances don't really apply in CRPG. For example, in Native, when one class is overloaded  the option to choose another class balances out/works well against the other lop sided team. In CRPG, there are of course no classes to choose from and each character must be made individually, even then they can't be switched easily like in Native, so we see less play style balance, also some items are a bit ridiculous when used as hybrid weapons (60 wpf side arm sniper xbowmen make me sick) and obviously, some items need to be tweaked(throwing lances, etc). All that said, the fix i've heard about is making certain items take up two slots, which is fucking retarded, when adding a stat akin to powerdraw/making crossbows even rely on power draw would essentially weed out many of the FOTM pseudo archers without fucking over the other dedicated players, but we'll see.

These points might have already been covered, but fuck it, this took me forever to actually type out.

[Zisa]

Dodging becomes irrelevant when the air is full of projectiles.

It is not like I disagree with you about too much range...

But the challenge as a pure 2h / polearm without carrying some crappy shield or hybriding, is to sneak, charge and dodge when appropriate.

It is extremely satisfying to catch a ranged player, especially if you had to dodge/survive a lot of crap to get to him.

[Rhade]

I like to point out that playing in native a team full of range is nigh unbeatable unless you shield up. Its quite similar to crpg except that in crpg, the range is actually severely nerfed compared to native.

I'd like to point out that in native you can adjust your character to address range spam, you also are able to have 1h/shield/2h and aren't "limited."

If they archer spam, you can switch to heavy horse.

That's not possible in cRPG.

[Thucydides]

I'd like to point out that in native you can adjust your character to address range spam, you also are able to have 1h/shield/2h and aren't "limited."

If they archer spam, you can switch to heavy horse.

That's not possible in cRPG.

You address it by picking up a shield and working with your teammates, staying in a group reduces the chance of a fatal range shot and increases the shield protection radius. Solo operation isn't viable here.

[Elmetiacos]

I like to point out that playing in native a team full of range is nigh unbeatable unless you shield up. Its quite similar to crpg except that in crpg, the range is actually severely nerfed compared to native.

Native has unpatched "forcefield" shields. Native has smaller battles and so the 'critical mass' Rhade talks about isn't reached. I have been in a Native battle as a Sarranid archer where almost the entire enemy team went cav, charged us on Field by the River and not one of them got to us because we had so many good archers, but it only happened once - in Native the troops and the sides change anyway; if the next map is Nords v Swadians you won't get the sun blotted out with arrows. You also don't get hybrids in Native; if you want to use a crossbow you have to actually be a crossbowman and accept the corresponding gear and skill set.

[Rhade]

You address it by picking up a shield and working with your teammates, staying in a group reduces the chance of a fatal range shot and increases the shield protection radius. Solo operation isn't viable here.

So, your answer is that 2h isn't very viable and I need to alter my build, forced to dump points in shield skill and then zerg.

Excellent plan.

[Zisa]

So, your answer is that 2h isn't very viable and I need to alter my build, forced to dump points in shield skill and then zerg.

Excellent plan.

Ignore that..
I've dodged more arrows in c-rpg then most.
Skip the shield.
and in your case.. get a green toque to cover that target you call a head.

[Garem]

So, your answer is that 2h isn't very viable and I need to alter my build, forced to dump points in shield skill and then zerg.

Excellent plan.

That isn't even close to what he said. Nobody is arguing that 2H'ers aren't viable, because that would be a very stupid argument based on any experience playing the game. You ignored the last half of his statement (use teamwork/don't play solo), while having already stated that you've done the first half (picked up a shield) presumed it was the only solution given. It wasn't.

If you want to play the highest damage class with the second best reach (2H'ers), then you have to accept that you need team members to help you utilize the fullest potential of that class. If you want to play alone, you have to be very, very sneaky. That's your only option. That's the drawback to playing a 2H'er.

If you want to play alone without sneaking, you're going to have to suck it up and use a class that can do that- any shielder, faster cavalry, plated cavalry, or always use plate armors (granted, this last one only works against archers since they giggle at slashing damage).

You (and you're certainly not alone) seem to have this peculiar idea that you don't deserve to play a character class with a major weakness by sheer talent alone.

[Rhade]

You (and you're certainly not alone) seem to have this peculiar idea that you don't deserve to play a character class with a major weakness by sheer talent alone.

Actually, I just don't understand the major weakness of 1h+shield or ranged while 2h has a glaring weakness.

Please explain.

1h+shield has decent range and decent speed, only SLIGHTLY shorter reach than a 2h and about the same speed with AUTOBLOCK and defense from projectiles while being able to attack (2h'ers cant attack with a shield out), so I'd say that's pretty fair, even slightly leaning towards an advantage for 1h+shield in the melee department.

Cav can outreach 90% of 2h weapons with lances.

Archers can shoot 2h.

Xbows can shoot 2h.

Throwers can shoot 2h.

2h is not strong or weak vs 2h.

So where, exactly, does 2h shine? 1h weapons take half my hp while I'm 7IF/21STR/Full plate, so don't tell me we outshine 1h+shield in melee.

Meanwhile:

1h+shield relatively easily balances out againt 2h.
1h+shield has an advantage against archers, xbows, and throwers.
1h+shield is outreached by lances, just like 2h.

Range kills 2h.
Range kills cav.
Range kills range.
Range can shoot over/under/around shields, kite, and worst case scenario pull out a 1h+shield themselves or pull out a 2h and (assuming they're good) kill the 1h+shield.

See the issue here? I really hope so because I'm getting tired of making the obvious point over and over.

[EponiCo]

I don't know how much of this is trolling, but anyway.

1.) Shooting under shields
Point your shield the way the archer points his bow and buy some shield skill. Or buy lots of shieldskill.

2.) Kiting
Well, Kiting is mostly a good archer tactic because you don't have much staying power. Kiting means leave your teammates alone to die. But if you try to protect them you have high chances to die, if not by enemy than by teamkill. A lone kiting archer has a high risk to be shot or be killed by cav (seriously, I only ever learned how to block sword & board cav from being an archer, not that it helps me much as when they see you are in trouble they come at you like vultures) and there's still enough melee players I can't outrun me even with my dedicated flanking archer build.

3.) Ranged has the lowest damage output rate and ammo limit.
Test it against a dummy if you don't believe me.

4.) Ranged is easily backstabbed.
As melee player you don't have to watch how your tiny arrow flies, how he moves, if there is a good target somewhere on the field or worry about what happens when you look away and he suddenly is next to you and your weapon can't block. When they are not directly next to the enemy melees have no reason not to spin their view like a madman, but rangers do and often forget about the function even. At the same time you only survive a backstab if he doesn't oneshot you, you manage to pull out your sword while jumping over his follow up attack and block the next while spinning madly. Then, if you haven't totally tangled up your mouse with that you can start to fight. This has killed quite a few throwers against my 2h char, I just get into range where I have good chances of dodging yet can quickly make it to them and when they are totally focussing on me a teammate can backstab them.


edit:
2h advantages over 1h

1.)Damage and reach
Means you can kill 3 people before he can get the first hit in, so you can destroy gangs before they even form on you.
In one vs one - every time he isn't in reach you get a free attack. If he misjudges and doesn't block oneshot him. If he does not take all your time spamming feints, keeping the attack held, or whatever.

2.) Shield breaks
The heater shields very quickly actually, and then he is left with only a weaker weapon than you.

3.) Stun
Another way to get free attacks.



Obviously all that is highly dependent on how the character is made. But for example the faster you can kite the lower your damage is.

[Garem]

Actually, I just don't understand the major weakness of 1h+shield or ranged while 2h has a glaring weakness.

Please explain.

1h+shield has decent range and decent speed, only SLIGHTLY shorter reach than a 2h and about the same speed with AUTOBLOCK and defense from projectiles while being able to attack (2h'ers cant attack with a shield out), so I'd say that's pretty fair, even slightly leaning towards an advantage for 1h+shield in the melee department.

Cav can outreach 90% of 2h weapons with lances.

Archers can shoot 2h.

Xbows can shoot 2h.

Throwers can shoot 2h.

2h is not strong or weak vs 2h.

So where, exactly, does 2h shine? 1h weapons take half my hp while I'm 7IF/21STR/Full plate, so don't tell me we outshine 1h+shield in melee.

Meanwhile:

1h+shield relatively easily balances out againt 2h.
1h+shield has an advantage against archers, xbows, and throwers.
1h+shield is outreached by lances, just like 2h.

Range kills 2h.
Range kills cav.
Range kills range.
Range can shoot over/under/around shields, kite, and worst case scenario pull out a 1h+shield themselves or pull out a 2h and (assuming they're good) kill the 1h+shield.

See the issue here? I really hope so because I'm getting tired of making the obvious point over and over.

Sure, I can explain.

First, to clarify that I understand you, you're arguing that every other class is better than 2H'ers. That's absolutely true under certain battlefield conditions , and absolutely false under certain conditions. We could probably argue as to what these are, fairly, but we'll stick with the obvious extremes- 2H'ers are weak in open fields and amazing with abundant sources of cover or in some tight spaces. The only ones they're very strong against in open fields are shielders, which are slower (foot and swing speed), and you say that have decent reach when in reality, their reach is worst of all archtypes. When they get into swinging distance, 2H'ers have the best damage, the best weapon abilities (crushtrough, for instance), and the second best reach (dividing cavalry into 2H, 1H, and Polearm, the latter being the vast majority). When it comes to pure melee power, 2H'ers stand supreme. The scoreboards reflect this.

An easy way to verify this is to look at siege maps. Who always tops the defender's scoreboard? 2H'ers. Not even ranged folks, being in virtually ideal conditions for their class, beat them with any frequency (I've seen some get close from time to time, but never beat them outright). Yet on offense, 2H'ers (and ranged) don't do nearly as well, usually because they lack any cover until they break through and take the wall. Only shield infantry outshine them, for obvious reasons.

I'd like to break down the other classes as well, where 2H'ers beat them and where they beat 2H'ers, but this really is a long, long discussion and it's after 4am. Maybe tomorrow. If anyone else wants to jump on it, feel free to. Your argument simply doesn't stand and the scoreboards reflect that consistently. 2H'ers are a very viable class with major benefits and equally major flaws. They dominate certain classes in certain cases, and they get dominated by certain classes in those very same situations.

This is all quite far from the original post, however. The only point that has to be reiterated is that, yes, 2H'ers should fear ranged, shields should fear axes, horsemen should fear pikes, ranged should fear shielders* (goddamn huscarls), and peasants should fear everything.

*Looking back, you seem to emphasize the point that ranged can easily shoot above, beside, or under shields. That really just isn't the case. I've poured hundreds of arrows into shields, trying to pierce (oh, wait, slashnerf, ugh, what?) that little toe and rarely with any effect, even when it's clearly unprotected. Really, maybe a dozen times out of HUNDREDS of attempts. The forcefield effect with even just 3 or so points in shield is truly amazing. I've never gotten a headshot on anyone while the shield was raised.

[Beauchamp]

Rhade, you're a fucking idiot.

+1