Lobbyism

[XyNox]

Melee players [...] don't care if being an archer is easier or harder than being 2h, polearmer or shielder. They just hate range spam. [...] no one cares how hard it is to get decent KDR as an archer. The only soultion to this problem I can imagine is limit of range players [...]   

Oh my dear Ciri I indeed got the point. My little post described how archery becomes more and more unfun because melees complain about their fun being treatened by ranged and are therefore suggesting nerfs, nerfs at the expence of ranged players that is. And now you gave a live demonstration of that by basicly telling us that you dont care how bad the game gets for ranged players as long as the melee players have fun. Dont you think this fits the title of the threat pretty well ?

[Falka]

Meh, archery can be nerfed to the ground and it doesn't help if half of the server will bring bow or xbow. Also, I rarely play on battle servers (and currently don't play at all) so personally don't really care about range spam, it's not that bad on siege. And this sentence: "you dont care how bad the game gets for ranged players as long as the melee players have fun" can be related to archers as well, don't you think? you dont care how bad the game gets for melee players as long as the ranged players have fun - I'd say it's equally true as your sentence 

[Tydeus]

I've played every class in crpg and with multiple builds and varying heirlooms. I have several alts and several looms. Recently I've been playing my 1h, no-shield, thrower alt and without a doubt, the class that fucks me up the most, would be archers. I had a round earlier today where I got 3~ kills with my throwing weapons then proceeded to 1v5 the last guys on the opposite team (all melee) with a MW Italian Falchion and ended the round with full hp.

This is why I do not like ranged, because ranged weapons are the counter to player skill in melee. Had there been a single ranged player among those last 5 guys, I surely would have lost. Any footwork I utilized for positioning on the melee enemies would have been completely nullified had I taken even a single hit and would have led to my death (41 body armor, 48 hp character). It's often nearly impossible to fight even one person when under fire from ranged, while you can utilize footwork easily enough in a 1v2 (if you have the right amount of athletics) to avoid allowing both enemies to simultaneously get the position for a solid attack.

[XyNox]

Meh, archery can be nerfed to the ground and it doesn't help if half of the server will bring bow or xbow. Also, I rarely play on battle servers (and currently don't play at all) so personally don't really care about range spam, it's not that bad on siege. And this sentence: "you dont care how bad the game gets for ranged players as long as the melee players have fun" can be related to archers as well, don't you think? you dont care how bad the game gets for melee players as long as the ranged players have fun - I'd say it's equally true as your sentence 

Ideally both have fun. Still, devs only decided in favour of melees so far. And still you almost never see nerf threads opened by ranged players but instead you see them spammed by melee players on a daily basis. And this is the whole lobbying issue we are discussing here I assume.

[Tydeus]

Ideally both have fun. Still, devs only decided in favour of melees so far. And still you almost never see nerf threads opened by ranged players but instead you see them spammed by melee players on a daily basis. And this is the whole lobbying issue we are discussing here I assume.

Remove that sentence and I will think about removing my -1 from your post.

[XyNox]

Remove that sentence and I will think about removing my -1 from your post.

I would have guessed the minus was for the first sentence of my Post

(click to show/hide)

as in "WRONG ! ONLY MELEES CAN HAZ ZE FUNZ" 

No, seriously 

Tell me one thing concerning archery that did NOT get nerfed.

[Tears of Destiny]

Tell me one thing concerning archery that did NOT get nerfed.

The idiotic decision to raise HS damage from 170% or so to a 210%, other then that though you kinda have a point, but I think c-RPG has long since hit exhaustion for any new opinions about why range/whatever suckzorz

[XyNox]

The idiotic decision to raise HS damage from 170% or so to a 210%, other then that though you kinda have a point, but I think c-RPG has long since hit exhaustion for any new opinions about why range/whatever suckzorz

Its one of those nerf 100% then buff 50% as compensation "ninjanerfs" I guess. I do a lot less 1hitheadshots then i used to with my longbow.

[Tydeus]

There have been several nerfs, but also multiple buffs in varying ways. Two years ago, archers weren't able to do pierce damage for example. A few months ago, 6PD builds were capable of the same damage as a 10PD build, thus pigeonholing archers into only a couple of different builds without taking a gigantic hit to effectiveness. Instead of simply lowering the damage that 6PD archers do, they gave all archers more wpf. They changed around light armor weight amounts so that you weren't stuck with either a 4 weight chest or a 10, with nothing in between. They lowered the maximum amount of armor that melee can obtain, particularly by nerfing armors that only melee characters use. All throwing weapons obtained the itp_extra_penetration property, including cut damage throwing weapons.

That's off the top of my head, without asking anyone else or without looking up past threads.

[Leshma]

Thank you XyNox for derailing my thread and turning it into archery buff propaganda.

[Tydeus]

Thank you XyNox for derailing my thread and turning it into archery buff propaganda.

Oh, you had 999 Renown, congrats on becoming a "king".

Edit:

(click to show/hide)

Remember, I was the one that granted you this great stature

Edit2:

(click to show/hide)

Definitely not off topic.

Edit3: Archers now have itp_extra_penetration as well.

[rustyspoon]

Currently I think the infantry "classes" are pretty well balanced.

They all have their pros and cons.

Archery is funny. Unloomed you do pathetic damage, fully loomed you can do ridiculous damage. Still, a single archer isn't that dangerous.  But as many people above have mentioned, the threat scales dramatically as the numbers of archers increase. The big problem with ranged is the only real counter to ranged is more ranged. Don't know the solution to that problem and don't care too much. I find ranged hellaciously boring to play.

I think the mod needs more tweaks than big fixes.

[Panos]

Currently I think the infantry "classes" are pretty well balanced.
They all have their pros and cons.

Please can you name me some pros that  polearm class has over 2h class??

[Joker86]

Remember that this discussion is not about which classes are OP/UP, more/less skill based, more/less important and so on. It is about how come that it's always certain classes which make the players experience the game a certain way, and what those factors are. And then it would be much more interesting to find out how those factors influence your perception precisely, and THEN we will perhaps be capable to decide if everything's okay with the classes. But most likely even then we won't have the one truth, if it exists at all. So stop lobyying for/against a certain class. Rather think about what the gameplay differences are for certain classes, and where problems could be hidden. This would actually contribute something constructive and would help everybody, instead of yet another tiresome discussion we already had countless times before.

[rustyspoon]

Please can you name me some pros that  polearm class has over 2h class??

To keep it short, I'll only name a few:

Glaive, Poleaxe, Great Long Axe/Long War Axe, Long Bardiche, Long Spear, Long Hafted Spiked Mace...oh, and right swing.