Horse Archers Balance Suggestion

[Wulzzz]

Actually normal cav keeps a hand at the horse "strings".

So what?

[Lucas]

So they can still maneuver the horse, if you could read my post you'd see that the point i'm trying to make is that it's harder to turn a horse without using any of your hands.

[Wulzzz]

Do you play cav?- horses probably wouldn't just stand still IRL if they ride with full speed against a wall or stuff
Inf?-IRL no man could run with 2 arrows in his body as if nothing happened

So my point was: shit on pseudo "realism reasos" etc.
If you want the game style changed, give game style reasons.

And just penalizing one of the horse class cause they got "no hands on their horse" doesn't make sense to me.

[AlbaTiger]

Which other horse class doesn't have a hand on the reigns?

Shielders hold them in the shield hand, all others hold them in the free hand....meanwhile horse archers steer with their knees.

[Wulzzz]

Cav thrower?Who gives a shit.

Or the other way round: why should HAs get fixed for that before inf actually getting slowed down by the arrows in their body(after some time leading to complete immobility)

[Lucas]

I'd find interesting to see people (and horses) get cripled by the damage they receive(from arrows bolts and melee too), but i think it's asking too much isn't it?(and also that it would be ****ing hard to code)

[EponiCo]

I've seen that in some sp mod. Diplomacy iirc.

[La Makina]

Yep, some mods already propose a speed and maneuver penalty to wounded horses. It works fine, in singeplayer at least.

I am not sure for the suggestion, I don't play HA and I don't feel them being such a problem. I find them cool actually. One thing maybe: they should be compelled to dismount to pick arrows from the ground. I saw once a HA who was riding around to refill his quivers with arrows from the ground, delaying the round for ever.

[Cheap_Shot]

I wouldn't say this is a bad idea, because it makes at least a little sense, but I don't know that HA's need to be nerfed really. I rarely get killed by them, they mostly just harass while infantry moves in. Good support class.

[Seprest]

It's balanced by the fact that you lose accuracy while you are moving on a horse.  Also, you cannot use the top tier bows while mounted on a horse.  It is fine, I think people just get frustrated if they are melee and there is a horse archer left on the field.  They are supposed to be engaged by ranged primarily; if they are in range to shoot you, you are more capable of shooting them because you do not moving on a horse and a horse is a much bigger target.  Horses being OP is overrated.


ALSO, it has always been this way, no point in changing it for any sense of realism, it has been fine , just because many people get frustrated because they can't engage a horse archer all the while being shot at, is  no reason to QQQQQQQQQQQ. Remember, they had to drop points into horse archery and riding.

[Diavolo]

Due to the accuracy decrease when moving and that its harder to hit while moving, not so many HA's do it. The HA tactic is mainly playing as an archer, standing still with the horse, but having the mobility to kite, kite and kite again if danger approaches. If enemy cavalry tryes to kill them, they just ride away firing arrows at the enemy horse (which is easy to hit since if the enemy wants to catch up with them they cant keep strafing much with the horse) That is what makes the HA a "problem". They can kill with nearly no way to kill them. If you want to nerf HA's in some way, rather buff throwing weapons. (or the bows that are not useable on a horse)

[Rumblood]

I don't see an issue with HA's as they are. Perhaps force them to dismount in order to pick up arrows off the ground so they can't circle strafe infantry with no ranged the entire round, but that's it. Plus that infantry could always loot the xbow's and bolts laying around.