When you're submitting changes to someone who is openly criticising melee players at seemingly every opportunity and talks about how he wants to buff ranged then theres a conflict of interest straight away, especially if you're having to come up with the changes yourself.
Who exactly is it that I'm submitting ranged buffs to that is "openly criticising melee players at seemingly every opporunity?" Certainly not shik, he was removed before this was proposed. It's not as if I stick to one thing in crpg, I constantly play different builds where several of those consist of different types of ranged weapons, both hybrid and dedicated(except for dedicated throwers, they're shit and don't deserve buffs).
I just think there needs to be a group with as little biases as possible who aren't influenced by anyone on a war path against melee players.
War path against ranged players is surely fine though, I agree.
This was a huge buff for ranged btw, don't kid. Way cheaper, more ammo, easier shots, lower PD required for the damage (more agi kiting), cut buff and the biggest one, no need to specialise into the class so any random joe can do the sort of damage reserved for certain individuals that spent millions of gold on looms. So the average damage from the average archer will be a lot higher with not needing looms
Cheaper in that you can actually expect to not be utterly useless without looms now. Cheaper in that the lowest tier bows might not be complete dog trash. Arrows and highest tier bows are the same price, Steel Bolts actually doubled in price, so it's definitely not cheaper for crossbowmen. Lower PD req for the
lowest tier composite bows. It may very well be that the average archer's damage has been increased, but it's not going to be by much, as most players already had looms. It's not a huge buff for ranged, it's a huge buff for shitty bows that weren't used at all.
