After reading this I'm thinking about working towards an additional foot archery buff within the balance team. In respect of their current inefficiency the amount of retarded lobbying against archers - even from otherwise intelligent specimen like Kafein - is unbearable. Maybe it is time to show again what it is like when they really have an impact on the outcome of a round which is now mainly hogged by cav, inf and (to a lessen extend) crossbowmen.
I disagree with this thinking, although I think archers are in a good spot atm. I often see high level, good archers make very high K:D ratios, while the majority really sucks. (Could be a problem with the scaling of the archer with levels and looms..)
The thing is,
gameplay for the majority should trump balance decisions like this, not power or round impact, although they are intimately connected.
In my opinion,
control in the sense that your choices and skill as a player determine whether you live or die or kill, is extremely important to gameplay. The main elements taking away control, perhaps you can call them "skill nullifiers" are ranged and especially unavoidable ranged like HX and sniper xbows (Which doesn't give you a second chance very often).
While fighting, cav can be another unavoidable skill nullifier, both with bumps, slashes and couches. (But cav is situational and not without weakness)
Now, most serious games contain skill nullifiers, but they are often made not too powerful, or numbers are kept down somehow, or they kill the fun of others.
So what I think:
* Classes that take away choice and skill from other classes should be kept down
or be less effective.
* In cRPG this means ranged and cav, even though they prey on each other.
The result is a game where players to a larger extent can control their fate, less bumps, less random ranged, more teamplay in the form of hoplites/infantry spearmen, and
LESS SEEMINGLY RANDOM CRAP.(from infantry perspective, cav and ranged are in a much better position to control their fates.. )
