Arrows/Bolts and Polestagger

[Fips]

I like it when friendly archers shoot my enemy and i can just kill him without any problems =O
Just like i love a good bump.

[BlueKnight]

(click to show/hide)

Ok, I understand. I'm gonna throw in the old "support" argument in that you all know very well but I think its still somewhat valid.
I enjoy it very much to interfere in fights by shooting bolts in there. The best moments are when you see that an ally is getting engaged by 2 or more targets and you drop one of them so your mate has increased chances of survival. Or just hit one of the guys and if the timing is good it was just in that moment where your ally was starting a hit and with the stagger there is no chance for the other guy to block it.

These are the moments I play for mostly, to get teammates out of shit situations. Be it by dehorsing enemies, shooting enemy archers or enemy melee that would outnumber my own team.
For me this is one of the main reasons I play this game, I've always played more of a supportive role in most games and I enjoy it very much in this game. You want your hero aspect in the game but I also want to be able to support.
Dont tell me that you've never smiled when a horse is shot right in front of you and you can finish the guy off or when you see an archer aiming for you but before the arrow goes off he drops down dead. I know its annoying to die in battle because u just get to spawn once but adapting is part of survival.

In my case I adapt to be more of a coward (one might call it cautious, but lets call it coward) and run away from everything that is melee. I often get onehit from behind or bumped to death by horses. But thats ok, I dont want to be invincible, to have only one "life" and to take care of it makes this interesting.

I'm talking only for myself now. I've got 13 bolts with me, 14 with the preloaded xbow. So that means I can "stagger" 14 targets with that, if I had a 100% accuracy, which I do not have. Some rounds I hardly hit anything, other rounds I hit very good. I'd say I have 60-70% chance to hit in general. If it rains I dont use an xbow because of the damage reduction and practise some melee.

Ranged will always be there and the more hardcore melee heroes there are the more of the "average" players will play ranged to have a chance against you. I still remember when Tor used to finsih me off all the time with his bigass evil axe of annihilation, thats one of the reasons why I changed to xbow. Deal with the weapon range available in this game or change game.

Edit: ninja edit?  And we're all playing navy seals? I'm talking about serious blows of swords, axes, bar mace etc.

We are talking here about stun from ranged not ranged in general.

You said that you like to help and stun enemies that are fighting your teammate. Similar was the role of the long spear and pike. They were stunners in the crowd fights and allowed polearmers to play main role in such a fight. When they lost stun they were still used and still are and are great battle weapons because (like with ranged) longspearmen attack from distance. They are standing next to the fight but don't have to block that much. I know that the conditions of battle often make them fight alone or at leats block for some time trying to defend themselves until their teammates can help them but it's not the point of the discussion. Longspearmen co-exist with their teammates. There aren't any lone longspearmen around because their job is to support. Interrupting and dealing damage of the earlier mentioned unit is kind of support that still plays huge role on the field of battle.

What I wanted to say is that like with longspearmen, ranged don't have to stun to help. They can simply interrupt actions of enemies and keep dealing damage. I don't mind getting shot by good ranged, it's his role lol. I mind getting killed due to being frozen for some reason.

Crossbowmen still have better battle possibilities than archers. They require only 15 str for the most damaging crossbow and don't have to invest any skillpoints in it which leaves them with 24 agi at 30 lvl. This makes them have 8 ath and 8 wm and 8 wm allows them to hybridise and invest some WPF in melee weapon. They also have 5 ps which is way better than archer's 3 ps.

Reloading speed of arbalest which is the most often used crossbow, doesn't make you run out of bolts often (you have to admit). Therefore you have 1 slot empty for melee weapon which is still better than archer's (ofc until archer goes 5pd but then he doesn't even hurt anybody with his horn bow).

What I wanted to say is that I don't think removal of the stun from the crossbows will nerf their supporting role but for sure will decrease the ammount of average rage evoked when being shot in game. Also remove that thing from archers and remake the amount of arrows in 1 quiver to "basic+7" so they can take just 1 bag and some melee weapon. I guess I'm naive if I think my archer-solution would work because some would just take 2 bags of arrows and never run out of them but whateva.

[Grumpy_Nic]

(click to show/hide)

We are talking here about stun from ranged not ranged in general.

You said that you like to help and stun enemies that are fighting your teammate. Similar was the role of the long spear and pike. They were stunners in the crowd fights and allowed polearmers to play main role in such a fight. When they lost stun they were still used and still are and are great battle weapons because (like with ranged) longspearmen attack from distance. They are standing next to the fight but don't have to block that much. I know that the conditions of battle often make them fight alone or at leats block for some time trying to defend themselves until their teammates can help them but it's not the point of the discussion. Longspearmen co-exist with their teammates. There aren't any lone longspearmen around because their job is to support. Interrupting and dealing damage of the earlier mentioned unit is kind of support that still plays huge role on the field of battle.

What I wanted to say is that like with longspearmen, ranged don't have to stun to help. They can simply interrupt actions of enemies and keep dealing damage. I don't mind getting shot by good ranged, it's his role lol. I mind getting killed due to being frozen for some reason.

Crossbowmen still have better battle possibilities than archers. They require only 15 str for the most damaging crossbow and don't have to invest any skillpoints in it which leaves them with 24 agi at 30 lvl. This makes them have 8 ath and 8 wm and 8 wm allows them to hybridise and invest some WPF in melee weapon. They also have 5 ps which is way better than archer's 3 ps.

Reloading speed of arbalest which is the most often used crossbow, doesn't make you run out of bolts often (you have to admit). Therefore you have 1 slot empty for melee weapon which is still better than archer's (ofc until archer goes 5pd but then he doesn't even hurt anybody with his horn bow).

What I wanted to say is that I don't think removal of the stun from the crossbows will nerf their supporting role but for sure will decrease the ammount of average rage evoked when being shot in game. Also remove that thing from archers and remake the amount of arrows in 1 quiver to "basic+7" so they can take just 1 bag and some melee weapon. I guess I'm naive if I think my archer-solution would work because some would just take 2 bags of arrows and never run out of them but whateva.

I get your point. I wouldnt mind to change the staggering to a normal "stun" or whatever it is called which is created by a sword or something similar. But in total, where is it going to end? Horses cannot bump anymore? Kicks removed from play? Knockdown removed from all hammers and maces? Crushtrhough removed?
Changes in crpg are generally nerfs and less diversity, which is bad in my opinion. Changes should also include things that are improved.

[BlueKnight]

I get your point. I wouldnt mind to change the staggering to a normal "stun" or whatever it is called which is created by a sword or something similar. But in total, where is it going to end? Horses cannot bump anymore? Kicks removed from play? Knockdown removed from all hammers and maces? Crushtrhough removed?
Changes in crpg are generally nerfs and less diversity, which is bad in my opinion. Changes should also include things that are improved.

These bad changes made us play a lot better to be honest. If you heard about future crpg 1 year ago you would say "what!?". Can't stab through the ground? turnrate da fuq? no kiting? slower arrows? nerfed armours? stun removed?. Those were the things that allowed us to kill and now we keep doing that pretty well even without them.

But there is a difference between those changes that I mentioned in this post and the changes that haven't been done yet but you mentioned. It's like we have to know where is this invisible border between good changes which involve nerfing some kind of abused or annoying things and between overnerfing special features of some classes where the feature is an important part of it (like bumping for cav, crush through for maulers, kicks in general for melee (good change that is badly made. Horizontal blocking could be kept while vertical removed.)).

I am happy that you understand my point of view and I totally agree that changes done to mechanics and stats must be well thought, else we will end up with plastic knives

[Kafein]

The problem with stuns and staggers is that it makes fighting alone against any number of enemies much, much harder. Even without any armor it makes a big difference. If someone pokes me with a pointy stick, nevermind it does 10% damage, I'm stopped dead in my tracks and this makes me die. Fighting against all odds is part of what makes this game fun and original, weapons that are good at teamwork make it dull. This also applies to ranged. If you ever encountered mass ranged, you know that the moment you are hit by the first arrow/bolt/whatever, you are dead, with a shield or not, dodging or not. The stun is so long other ranged have all the time to aim and shoot at you, a now stationary target.

[Leshma]

Where's good old "get a shield" argument?

For your information, EU my old friendchers, people who used to carry a shield alongside their "big" melee weapon can't be seen on EU1 anymore. Why, have they stopped playing? On the contrary, those players are still there but on ranged/cav alts such as: Nord_Nori (Nord_Tor), Friedbolt (Friedturtle), LeLouche_the_Douche (Rufio) and the rest of melee with shield gang. If shield is so effective against ranged (and we know it's not, just ask Jackie), why are those people mainly playing their ranged/cav alts?

Even Grumbs is playing less and less which is a rare thing, I think I saw him with a shield but he probably realised it's useless so he just decided to battle omnipotent ranged threat by playing less cRPG (at least on EU1).

Many think I'm most prominent ranged hater in here, maybe I am but you should also know that I'm one of the few players using regular light armor and no shield. Only other somewhat active player I know who's capable of maintaining decent kdr is Nord_Logen. Everybody else either are ranged, hybrid ranged or have shitload of loomed armor and HP and move in pack so archers can't kill them all at the same time (Warpigs).

One bolt from someone like Veselov/Panzerstyle takes away 85% of my HP from a long distance. At short distance it is lethal in most cases. Tenne's arrows take 55% of my HP from a long distance. At short range it's somewhere between 60-80%. Throwing axes take between 40-80% of my HP etc.

On top of it all there's that pesky stun which can be so severe sometimes that my whole body shakes and stun last for 2 or more seconds. There are ways to prevent such a stun but even the lightest stun is enough for an archer to seriously fuck me up. But my favorite thing about ranged is when I'm the last one and a horde of enemy player is after me, catch me and create a circle around me (10 players or more). Second later I die, just to realise that I died to a bloody archer standing behind that huge crowd, few meters away. WTF!

Archers QQ how melee kill them when they catch them. Well bros, at least you have a chance in that duel. Against you I don't have a chance, it's not up to me. Only if you fuck up I get to kill you.

[Prpavi]

Heavy armor makes no sense at all any more.

I tried to counter ranged with plate, didn't work.

now i just stick to the walls and behind trees.

FUN!

[Grumpy_Nic]

Where's good old "get a shield" argument?

For your information, EU my old friendchers, people who used to carry a shield alongside their "big" melee weapon can't be seen on EU1 anymore. Why, have they stopped playing? On the contrary, those players are still there but on ranged/cav alts such as: Nord_Nori (Nord_Tor), Friedbolt (Friedturtle), LeLouche_the_Douche (Rufio) and the rest of melee with shield gang. If shield is so effective against ranged (and we know it's not, just ask Jackie), why are those people mainly playing their ranged/cav alts?

Even Grumbs is playing less and less which is a rare thing, I think I saw him with a shield but he probably realised it's useless so he just decided to battle omnipotent ranged threat by playing less cRPG (at least on EU1).

Many think I'm most prominent ranged hater in here, maybe I am but you should also know that I'm one of the few players using regular light armor and no shield. Only other somewhat active player I know who's capable of maintaining decent kdr is Nord_Logen. Everybody else either are ranged, hybrid ranged or have shitload of loomed armor and HP and move in pack so archers can't kill them all at the same time (Warpigs).

One bolt from someone like Veselov/Panzerstyle takes away 85% of my HP from a long distance. At short distance it is lethal in most cases. Tenne's arrows take 55% of my HP from a long distance. At short range it's somewhere between 60-80%. Throwing axes take between 40-80% of my HP etc.

On top of it all there's that pesky stun which can be so severe sometimes that my whole body shakes and stun last for 2 or more seconds. There are ways to prevent such a stun but even the lightest stun is enough for an archer to seriously fuck me up. But my favorite thing about ranged is when I'm the last one and a horde of enemy player is after me, catch me and create a circle around me (10 players or more). Second later I die, just to realise that I died to a bloody archer standing behind that huge crowd, few meters away. WTF!

Archers QQ how melee kill them when they catch them. Well bros, at least you have a chance in that duel. Against you I don't have a chance, it's not up to me. Only if you fuck up I get to kill you.

I'm also using regular light armor and I lose at least 70% health from one of your hits, sometimes its a onehit. I dont complain about getting onehit. And I would just like to ask something, not sure if I got your complaint/argument right.

You are using light armor. Regular Light armor. You are not hitpoint stacking. At the same time you complain about the amount of damage you receive from projectiles coming from well known players that probably have their stuff all loomed to +3 for increased damage?

A 2 second stun where you cannot do anything? Come on.

I think its great if pro-melee gamers change class, you should go ranged too. You could shoot people and when they come close you can use your good melee skills to finish them off.


Edit: Prpavi: Who said that heavy armor counters ranged? You'll take less damage per hit. But what exactly was your plan with heavy armor? To charge the famous "my old friendcher hill"?

[Prpavi]

Let me ask you one thing Grumpy.

Do u think that EU 1 atm is a ranged fest and that there are more and more ranged and less infantry every day?

[jtobiasm]

First people complain about archers kiting, then doing too much damage, then being too accurate now the stun is op.
The fuck is wrong with this community?

edit: I hope for people own sake that they don't play League of legends when a new champion is out or when an update comes out. Go play that when it happens, you'll see what OP means in a game. Or aku on cod4 pam4, if people played that I'm sure a few would have killed themselves by now, with how the aku was OP to shit if it was in comparison to archers on C-rpg.

[Grumpy_Nic]

Let me ask you one thing Grumpy.

Do u think that EU 1 atm is a ranged fest and that there are more and more ranged and less infantry every day?

Now it depends very much on which people are online I think. But no, I dont think so. There are, and this is clear, times when many ranged are online and many projectiles are flying around. But there are times when the server is clearly melee dominated. I dont see many dedicated xbowers and in the last 3-4 days I've actively been looking for xbow sidearms at the beginning of each round (you know when the whole team starts together). I have seen almost none. Feel free to post screenshots to prove me wrong, I'm willing to listen to everything.
I think there are more archers than xbowers, but for you this will probably be not much of a difference as it does damage to you either way. I try to keep track of enemy archers because after cav and melee guys coming directly to me, they are my main target group. So I see it in a different way than you.

So my answer to your question would be "no". I would like you to answer this question: Do you think that EU1 is sometimes dominated by ranged, sometimes by melee and sometimes by cav?

[jtobiasm]

So my answer to your question would be "no". I would like you to answer this question: Do you think that EU1 is sometimes dominated byranged, sometimes by melee and sometimes by cav?

indeed, if 2 handers had brains and used cover or not chase archers, they'll 90% of the time win the round if 1v1 with an archer. Only time I see them loosing if their not good at melee. But that isn't hard when you're a 2 hander against an archer.

#TeamGrumpy

[Prpavi]

Now it depends very much on which people are online I think. But no, I dont think so. There are, and this is clear, times when many ranged are online and many projectiles are flying around. But there are times when the server is clearly melee dominated. I dont see many dedicated xbowers and in the last 3-4 days I've actively been looking for xbow sidearms at the beginning of each round (you know when the whole team starts together). I have seen almost none. Feel free to post screenshots to prove me wrong, I'm willing to listen to everything.
I think there are more archers than xbowers, but for you this will probably be not much of a difference as it does damage to you either way. I try to keep track of enemy archers because after cav and melee guys coming directly to me, they are my main target group. So I see it in a different way than you.

So my answer to your question would be "no". I would like you to answer this question: Do you think that EU1 is sometimes dominated by ranged, sometimes by melee and sometimes by cav?

I didn't ask you about a spacific class i only said ranged that means archer/xbow/thrower.

I agree that sometimes all 3 classes dominate but it depends allot on the maps. ofc cav will rape plains etc...

What i wanted to establish is can you notice the slow but steady trend of people giving up on melee (shieldless) classes. It wont happen onernight but you must notice allot of people rage respec or play ther ranged alts witch is never a good thing to be happening imo, something ust be wrong for people to start doing that in numbers.

Let's get on thing clear, I think melee only server is boring after a half an hour and all classes should be represented equally but current state is no fun for melee guys, honest truth.

[Macropus]

For your information, EU my old friendchers, people who used to carry a shield alongside their "big" melee weapon can't be seen on EU1 anymore. Why, have they stopped playing? On the contrary, those players are still there but on ranged/cav alts such as: Nord_Nori (Nord_Tor), Friedbolt (Friedturtle), LeLouche_the_Douche (Rufio) and the rest of melee with shield gang. If shield is so effective against ranged (and we know it's not, just ask Jackie), why are those people mainly playing their ranged/cav alts?

Shield is effective, even if you use 2h or polearm. It makes you able to chase any archer 1 vs 1 (if he's not trying to just run away in which case he's harmless anyway). And shield is not the only option. Infantry has throwing and xbows (hell, even 7-8 athletics character can cut these archers to pieces) as well to counter archers.
Oh well, if you chose a ridiculous pure duel build with only PS/ATH/WM, why complain you can't defend against archers on the battlefield?

On top of it all there's that pesky stun which can be so severe sometimes that my whole body shakes and stun last for 2 or more seconds.

This is simply not true.

The problem with pure 2h is that they think they should have equial chances with ranged. They actually shouldn't, as well as pikemen don't have a equial chance against shielder.
Twohanders have great attack power along with reach and speed, and the vulnerability to ranged is a payback. Seems quite logical to me.

[Grumpy_Nic]

I didn't ask you about a spacific class i only said ranged that means archer/xbow/thrower.

I agree that sometimes all 3 classes dominate but it depends allot on the maps. ofc cav will rape plains etc...

What i wanted to establish is can you notice the slow but steady trend of people giving up on melee (shieldless) classes. It wont happen onernight but you must notice allot of people rage respec or play ther ranged alts witch is never a good thing to be happening imo, something ust be wrong for people to start doing that in numbers.

Let's get on thing clear, I think melee only server is boring after a half an hour and all classes should be represented equally but current state is no fun for melee guys, honest truth.

For you ranged is ranged. For me there are different ranged types. Like I talk about melee and you think of different classes like 1h, 2h, pole...
I never really kept track of a general development of classes, I just hop on a server, play and try to have fun.