Cmpx, you know why I am asking for it. Come here and see my suggestion.

[Dravic]

You can't really afford to pick your shots as defence on siege, you need to kill the enemy as quickly as possible, lest be overrun.  20 steel bolts, 25 28 normal bolts sound about right.

This.

[Jacko]

...Finally! Been waiting for this shait for a good while now, good to see some proper changes! I'm getting sick of everyone having 4 different weapons.

[Joker86]

Too bad I discovered this that lately... 


My two cents:

The upkeep system indeed was an improvement, and it did even better than I expected, but nonetheless it has many many flaws, and what you're now doing is a botch job (online translator). And once one issue is solved, there will be another one, which will require another individual solution, and so on and so on, until there will be no gameplay concept left any more. Before changing to the upkeep system it wouldn't have hurt to check if there would have been better solutions out there. And there definitely WERE better solution, I presented one months ago. And i don't see a single point where upkeep was superior to my suggestion. The problem with the crossbows could be solved with my system by only tweaking a small little stat (the item value), you didn't even have to remove a slot from the players who want to use a particular weapon. If someone wants to additionaly use a dagger or a club I don't see how this would make him OP in any way. So if he wants to, he can do so. With upkeep system he doesn't have that freedom.

This is already everything I have to say about the matter. I don't play cRPG any more, but I would like to see its "comeback" for me, as I had (too  ) many hours of fun with it. And honestly, 2 slot items? Your making it more shitty, not better. To me this sounds like a really clumsy attempt to balance out a system which is already failed. Just think of the cavalry, of throwing, of archery, of the complete unimportance of your personal performance, upkeep causes problems over problems.

[Gorath]

Your making it more shitty, not better. To me this sounds like a really clumsy attempt to balance out a system which is already failed.

No, this has nothing to do with balance, and everything to do with placing dedicated 2h/polearm users back on the top of the food chain forever.  Thankfully I have both a 2her and a PA user. 

[Joker86]

Eeerrrm... I would call that balance. You know, balance can also determine which class is the most powerful, if there is supposed to be one... 

[Nemeth]

I don't play cRPG any more

That is the single most important thing in your post. You have obviously no idea what the current problem of cRPG is, which is dominance of hybrids that have to sacrifice very little to be proficient with the best weapons of two "lines". This solution should not hurt dedicate classes (not only melee, but all of them, as there will probably be polearms and 2h taking only one slot, making it ideal for archers/xbowers), but reduce the "let's take an xbow cause I have two slots left, which I never ever use anyway".
Also, you can't judge anything until it's out and working. It's easy to say it's fail concept when you have no idea how it's gonna be when it comes live, and even when you have very limited information about how it actually gonna look. Your suggestion from months ago has its flaws either. I don't know what excatly, but I remember reading it a while back and thinking about responding and pointing out the things I thought were bad, but I didn't want to necro a thread that rightfully died.

[Joker86]

That is the single most important thing in your post. You have obviously no idea what the current problem of cRPG is, which is dominance of hybrids that have to sacrifice very little to be proficient with the best weapons of two "lines". This solution should not hurt dedicate classes (not only melee, but all of them, as there will probably be polearms and 2h taking only one slot, making it ideal for archers/xbowers), but reduce the "let's take an xbow cause I have two slots left, which I never ever use anyway".
Also, you can't judge anything until it's out and working. It's easy to say it's fail concept when you have no idea how it's gonna be when it comes live, and even when you have very limited information about how it actually gonna look. Your suggestion from months ago has its flaws either. I don't know what excatly, but I remember reading it a while back and thinking about responding and pointing out the things I thought were bad, but I didn't want to necro a thread that rightfully died.

Why do you accuse me of things which are not true?

Of course I know the hybrids are currently the biggest problem, it's one of the reasons I stopped to play.

And this solution is bad because of the simple fact that it reduces the amount of possibilities for the players. With one slot less (that's 25% less!) you don't have the freedom to create your character like you had before. Using four slots and a crossbows doesn't mean you are a hybrid (I guess dedicated builds also often used all four slots), and there is less room for new, creative character builds, which - in my eyes - goes against the idea of cRPG. Having a Siege Crossbow and three other slots occupied doesn't make you OP neccesarily.

And to predict flaws of a concept is nothing you need a doctor for. Making players pay for the price of the items they use will ALWAYS mean that archers for example have got an advantage over heavy infantry or cavalry. And the problem is, that the upkeep system has no different mechanic to balance this out by something else. Also some items were effectively taken out of the game, they are only on the page for "alibi"-purposes, so that you can say how many items cRPG offers.

Instead of balancing classes like heavy infantry or cavalry, the upkeep just removed them. That's poor balancing, I would say. And no, equipping yourself to a full knight sometimes, doesn't make you a knight. Renting a Porsche from time to time after saving some money doesn't make you a Porsche driver.


You know, I don't doubt that making the "heavy" ranged weapons taking two slots will reduce the ranged spam from hybrids. But it will rather go the way of removing it instead of balancing it. It's like amputating the limbs of the game because of some scratches and bruises, a little bit of dexterity could have fixed.

[Mullerian]

That is the single most important thing in your post. You have obviously no idea what the current problem of cRPG is, which is dominance of hybrids that have to sacrifice very little to be proficient with the best weapons of two "lines". This solution should not hurt dedicate classes (not only melee, but all of them, as there will probably be polearms and 2h taking only one slot, making it ideal for archers/xbowers), but reduce the "let's take an xbow cause I have two slots left, which I never ever use anyway".
Also, you can't judge anything until it's out and working. It's easy to say it's fail concept when you have no idea how it's gonna be when it comes live, and even when you have very limited information about how it actually gonna look. Your suggestion from months ago has its flaws either. I don't know what excatly, but I remember reading it a while back and thinking about responding and pointing out the things I thought were bad, but I didn't want to necro a thread that rightfully died.

While this is true, how many archers do you know that takes only 1 stack of arrows? With bows taking 2 slots and a need for 2 stacks of arrows to last through a battle you pretty much force archers to run since they cant really have a melee weapon that way. Making bow take 1 slot but the 2 handers/polearms taking 2 however forces archers to use a 1hander, which from what i understood was the point of this?

[Konrax]

They said they would be looking at stack sizes and may adjust them.

On the flip side pure throwers with 16 throwing spears (or more if heirloomed) is also a problem.

The dev team is well aware of ammo needed to fight.

[Nemeth]

I think the bow issue is not yet resolved. Afaik, the top tier bows will either be 2 slots and will probably get buffed to be worth it, or will stay 1 slot. That is all a speculation though, but this info appeared on irc. I wouldn't be surprised if even dev team atm doesn't know how it's gonna be in the end.

[Kophka]

While this is true, how many archers do you know that takes only 1 stack of arrows? With bows taking 2 slots and a need for 2 stacks of arrows to last through a battle you pretty much force archers to run since they cant really have a melee weapon that way. Making bow take 1 slot but the 2 handers/polearms taking 2 however forces archers to use a 1hander, which from what i understood was the point of this?

What's wrong with an archer having to use a 1 hander? They are ranged fighters, thanks to the draw/nock/draw animation, and they shouldn't be in melee range at all without a team to back them up and let them move to get some space. Having a 1 handed weapon gives them the ability to defend themselves if they get suprised, (or get caught out on a roof by themselves  ) but if their team failed to defend them, or they are the last ones left alive, well that's just too bad. They aren't 2 handers, they aren't polearm specialists, they are the most dedicated ranged fighter there is. If you can't handle it, don't play archer, there are plenty of people that will. Same goes for specialist xbowmen with sniper/heavies too, as well as throwing lance throwers. If you dedicated yourself to range, it NEEDS a drawback, just like dedicated melee people won't be able to hit YOU at range.

[Mullerian]

What's wrong with an archer having to use a 1 hander? They are ranged fighters, thanks to the draw/nock/draw animation, and they shouldn't be in melee range at all without a team to back them up and let them move to get some space. Having a 1 handed weapon gives them the ability to defend themselves if they get suprised, (or get caught out on a roof by themselves  ) but if their team failed to defend them, or they are the last ones left alive, well that's just too bad. They aren't 2 handers, they aren't polearm specialists, they are the most dedicated ranged fighter there is. If you can't handle it, don't play archer, there are plenty of people that will. Same goes for specialist xbowmen with sniper/heavies too, as well as throwing lance throwers. If you dedicated yourself to range, it NEEDS a drawback, just like dedicated melee people won't be able to hit YOU at range.

Which was exactly my point with the post. That archers should be "forced" into using 1 handers, not into using no melee weapons as that encourages running which is infinitely more frustrating.

[Memento_Mori]

Which was exactly my point with the post. That archers should be "forced" into using 1 handers, not into using no melee weapons as that encourages running which is infinitely more frustrating.

No offense or anything, but running is an archer tactic. They know they're faster than most of the heavier infantry & if they're NOT the last one alive then running kind of makes sense, it's always great when you think you're going to lose and then you watch your team's last archer running with 4 painfully slow infantry chasing him whilst your last infantry team mate gets to 1v1 the guy not chasing the archer. xD

Then the archer slyly leads the other 4 infantry around until his ally catches them from behind.

Hideously frustrating and annoying, sure.
But would having a 1h weapon make them stop doing it?
Heck no, you'd have to glue/staple/nail/bolt them to the ground to keep them from running away from the melee.


Think my point is, you can't stop archers from running away when you come at them with your sword raised in full plate moving slower than a snail.
Heck archers with flamberges still run from melee, because they're archers.

[Mullerian]

Yes that is true, some archers do that. But leaving them with no melee weapon encourages those who actually do stand and fight to run and im not sure thats a better alternative. But yes it is indeed a valid tactic to run and kite people when you're not the last guy alive, i just dont agree with encouraging it when theres plenty of archers who atm stand and fight.

[Tears of Destiny]

And then you have players like Miley with 6 athletics, bless her, who is fast enough to catch us and good enough to survive end round. Lately she has been playing without her plate and it really shows. Always a challenge