Excuse me, what? 0 slots swords?

[NikMac]

[Wolfsblood]

Wow. you sound like a moron.

The zero slot swords were put in so that archers could actually have a fighting chance and if they have a chance they are less likely to run and kite you. Unless of course you like being kited to oblivion.

so yea, we should totally take away one of the incentives given to archers so that they fight instead of run....

[Brrrak]

I'm fine with rainbow-flavored projectiles and heavily support implementing bat'leths into this mod.

The Klingon Empire is the Best Empire.

[Rhekimos]

More options and variety is good. 0 slot swords allow for hybrid archer, which is better than pinpoint accurate arrow machine guns.
And like Wolf mentioned, a passable 0 slot sword makes the "not kiting" option less of a certain lose proposition for the archer.

[NikMac]

Wow. you sound like a moron.

The zero slot swords were put in so that archers could actually have a fighting chance and if they have a chance they are less likely to run and kite you. Unless of course you like being kited to oblivion.

so yea, we should totally take away one of the incentives given to archers so that they fight instead of run....

More options and variety is good. 0 slot swords allow for hybrid archer, which is better than pinpoint accurate arrow machine guns.
And like Wolf mentioned, a passable 0 slot sword makes the "not kiting" option less of a certain lose proposition for the archer.

Excuse me, friends, but You're lacking attention: now archers can have 2 bags of arrows, bow (2 slots), good melee before they had to choose: 2 bags & bad melee or less arrows. Can u make conclusion by yourself?

[rustyspoon]

At old days, when crpg was young and at least pretended to be balanced, archer should choose, what they want: more rainbow projectiles or some real bearded man stuff like mace etc.
At nowdays: lots of swords becomes 0 slots! even short broad, which allow them to have at 1 time max amount of rainbow projectiles & good melee. So why we must stop? Let's make for each bow 2nd mode: 2h with 250 lenght 50 blunt 150 speed. Or let's try to make game a bit more balanced again and return slots requirement for all short swords as it has to be.
P.S. To prevent posts like "another QQer - 2h hero" - I'm shielder, and spit on arrows.

The thing that amuses me most about this post is that you say in the "old days" archers had to choose whether to have a good melee weapon or a good bow. In the old days, an archer could choose a bow AND pull a flamberge out of their back pocket.

[Sagar]

Following this dev logic, they can also add some good resistance shield with difficulty: 0 - so 2H or polearms can use it for cover, without adding skill points to shield, and still have good protection.
It is the same logic for 0 slots swords .... I'm fine with balancing, but status of first 5 shields is ridicules - they brake with first arrows.

For example: Add difficulty: 0 for these shields.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Hirlok]

At old days, when crpg was young and at least pretended to be balanced...

...I had Warbow, 2 quivers of bodkins (and there were still some arrows in them at that time), and one of the first masterwork Claymores.

Today?

Our arrows are padded with lead, weight a ton,  and need 1/2 minute to reach an enemy (unless he moved and swapped places with a teammate...), etc.pp. But of course non-ranged is qq'ing like this was native...

Remove QQ from game. Oh, mod dead then. OK. Buff QQ.

[Kafein]

So according to you, current 0 slot 1h are good melee weapons ?

I'd call the short nordic war sword, broad short sword and short arming sword "usable", but no better than that. Enjoy the constant blockstun with any of them, killing any serious str stack in 10+ hits and glancing often on just about everything above 55 armor.

Among the weapons that were already 0 slot, the hammer is one of the best ones just because it has knockdown. The rondel dagger is good too, but cannot be used to block so it is not a good sidearm at all.

Also, what rusty said.

[Ulter]

Excuse me, friends, but You're lacking attention: now archers can have 2 bags of arrows, bow (2 slots), good melee before they had to choose: 2 bags & bad melee or less arrows. Can u make conclusion by yourself?

"Good meele"? Some of those 0 slot swords are not bad, indeed, however without a proper meele build and a shield you're unlikely to do well in a fight.

[Teeth]

I much rather fight an archer that has a good sword then run after an archer that has a tiny hammer.

[Joker86]

Excuse me, friends, but You're lacking attention: now archers can have 2 bags of arrows, bow (2 slots), good melee before they had to choose: 2 bags & bad melee or less arrows. Can u make conclusion by yourself?

Trust me, balancing is much more about looking at one aspect and basing all your argumentation on that one aspect. You are right, choices are nice and all, but so is having options. If you just go for "archers need to choose between ranged and melee capabilities" (which is basically right) you completely ignore the question whether the combined, absolute value of those two variables is on the right level. Could be that they should choose between those two, but could it be that they are underpowered enough concerning their ranged capabilities, that a slightly better melee weapon would be justified (because it was decided that the old ranged capabilities were causing problems)? I don't see you check on the archer's general effectivity in your suggestion/rant.

Btw. the choices are still there, they only got shifted a bit. It's like

- 0 slot hammers & the like
<
- 0 slot swords
<
- 1 slot 1hd weapons
<
-2 slot weapons
....

Now the threshold just got shifted from the first "<" to the second. Which means there is still a choice between ranged and melee effectivity. Especially since swords are a) light and b) only mediocre cutting damage, which means that together with the probably REALLY low 1hd-WPF and power strike of most archers those swords are only good for blocking until help arrives, nothing more. They will glance and do petty damage almost as bad as the old 0-slot weapons, making the archers no more effective than before.

And don't forget, that it's not only archers who can use swords. For example it's a nice backup weapon for dismounted lancers, who don't want to go hoplite. Or a nice backup weapon if combined with a 1-slot-shield for every player who has a 3 slot weapon, like pikemen or maulers. And it's a good choice for every hybrid. You didn't take this into consideration, either, did you? I mean, it's not like you can compare the swords from the middle of the shop side with the hammers, picks, axes and good swords from the end, but all of them cost only one slot. And don't tell me the upkeep restricts the choices, because for many, if not most players it does not.

I hope you are satisfied with my suggestion. 

[Jarlek]

How many were using the shortswords before they became 0 slot? That's how good they are.

Also:

I much rather fight an archer that has a good sword then run after an archer that has a tiny hammer.

[Brrrak]

Following this dev logic, they can also add some good resistance shield with difficulty: 0 - so 2H or polearms can use it for cover, without adding skill points to shield, and still have good protection.
It is the same logic for 0 slots swords .... I'm fine with balancing, but status of first 5 shields is ridicules - they brake with first arrows.

For example: Add difficulty: 0 for these shields.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Then we could lower the weight of bows and arrows, so archers could choose to kite or fight.

[CrazyCracka420]

I'd say instead of giving archers these "good" 0 slot weapons and giving more shields 0 difficulty, we revert back a lot of these nerfs, and tell people to change the way they are playing instead of nerfing the way other people play against them.  Don't want to get kited?  Don't chase the archer.  Don't want to get shot by archers?  Don't run aimlessly up a hill while being surrounded by 10 archers.  Problem solved.

I still don't agree with the justification of many nerfs over the last 1.5 years.  Only one I can come up with off the top of my head that I think is justified is the crossbow/light crossbow going to 2 slots (but even that fucked over a lot of people, even though I think it was a justified nerf)