eu1 tonight

[Corsair831]

i don't think there's any point discussing this any more

[Paul]

Ok, I get it. Ranged should not be able to damage melee. Only other ranged. I can't agree though. I'm not a big fan of the Apartheid.

[Zlisch_The_Butcher]

I would want to say "omg this ranged QQ again" but the word "again" doesnt seem to fit here since it implies that there was a period in between sometime when people did in fact not complain about ranged in the first place. This complaining seems to be more of a constant in the cRPG universe.

I cant even feel offended anymore by the stupidity of suggestions such as "too much ranged !!! nerf ranged damage, nerf their speed, nerf this nerf that nerf their ammo count etc." because everyone knows already that the stats are not the problem. Still claiming they are just reveals ones lack of understanding for the game mechanics, hence, why devs maybe wont take your complains seriously. I dont know how often I wrote this down but I will again; the problem is the lack of ability to play as a team ( omg not again ).
Ranged is the only thing in the game that does not have to choose between playing as a team and getting a million bolts and arrows shot at them.
For some reason in cRPG the willingness to give a fuck about anyone but yourself and your heroism is astonishingly, mindfuckingly low. In almost every other game I played, there is some form of very basic code consisting of things you intuitively do to assist your allies. I am not a big fan of MOBA games but take things like LoL or Dota for example:

If you feed the enemy, people from your team will probably scream at their computer screens while writing very unkind things in chat to let you know that you are HURTING YOUR TEAM. Or for instance, if you are a healer and a nearby teammate is low on health, wouldnt it be ABSOLUTELY NATURAL that you heal said teammate ? You get the deal.

To transfer this matter to cRPG, since it is known that archers are good at ranged at not so good at melee ( since this is how the whole class shit works right ? pros and cons ) shouldnt it be ABSOLUTELY NATURAL to let your archers shoot the other archers instead of charging in there alone without a shield ?
You yourself ALWAYS fucking say that you target 2h heroes over anything else because they're scum, every single archer who says we need to protect our ranged so they'll shoot their ranged if asked separately will always admit he targets infantry over anything else.
[Sarcasm]

Nope ... not in cRPG ... what the hell are you thinking ??? In cRPG I still see 2h's chasing HA's through the whole map, which they will obviously never catch, while teammate archers are getting slaughtered by enemy shielders. Why should anyone give a fuck about those my old friendgy archers right ? If enemy archers gank your shieldless pure melee build because your team has no archers left at the end of the round, then there is nothing wrong with you, there is obviously something wrong with the game right ? But hey, afterall melee is the right way to play and ranged is simply wrong and defending your archers would be a disgrace to melee masterrace. If you cant kill them all yourself, you can always go to the forum and say that ranged is bullshit because OP and that there is NO WAY to counter them ( that doesnt include holding W until you are in melee range ).
The one thing capable of countering ranged is more ranged (this goes more for horseranged than footranged after the weight nerfs though), tell me how that is not retarded...
[/Sarcasm]

I cant understand how anyone even expects to be taken seriously when he proposes that gameplay mechanics should be ballanced in a way that he alone with his specific build is able to counter EVERYTHING in the game. In fact, IMO the lack of certain capabilities for some classes such as ranged weapons, shields, horses etc. is THE key aspect that sets this game on top of so many other games where everyone can do roughly the same, which is shooting a gun in most cases. This system should beg for more teamplay than in most other games and it baffles me how the average member of the cRPG community coult possibly get so egocentric as it is the case now.
Counter EVERYTHING in the game, you mean like archers? (and before you say shielder, 2 archers can counter ten shielders.
Damn ... I did again. I wanted not to do it again but I couldnt help myself. I wrote all this down and I already know that people will go "omfg lawl fuckin bullshit", then hop into the game, hold W into a swarm of archers a place that isn't behind cover as soon as the round starts, get shot to pieces and then come here and say "wololo ranged OP nurf lol good joooooke devs I quit cuz you kill teh gaem".

Sad, very sad.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[XyNox]

I wont fall for your tricks Zlisch ! Thread is dead and not even your goat wizzardry can prevent that from happening, HAHA !

[Fartface]

Ranged is fine.

[Grumbs]

Ok, I get it. Ranged should not be able to damage melee. Only other ranged. I can't agree though. I'm not a big fan of the Apartheid.

Main thing I argue for is increasing the difficulty of dealing damage from range. The damage should be a function of the difficulty and the risk the player needs to put themselves in to deal the damage

[Arrowblood]

 Formations, the only one we have is the shieldwall. Same tactics for 4 years. Same in Strat. If the clans have enough members they can train formations.

[Paul]

Archers have the highest risk of dying a sudden death. At least from my experience.

[Grumbs]

The risk of dying needs to tie into the ease at which you deal damage. That means its no good putting in something with say 1/5 of the HP of everyone else if that class can simply point & click on enemies for damage, even if that damage is 1HP per shot. It all depends on the overall package. Does the ease at which archers shoot enemies that can't shoot back get balanced by the risk they put themselves in? I would say no because they don't need to get in the thick of the combat, they can find high or safe places, they get loads of ammo so can shoot and miss over and over, they can block melee attacks as a last resort, and if they have some PS they can use 1 handers which are actually quite strong in melee vs melee.

I would make projectiles take longer to hit a target and make it take longer to line up a shot. For Melee:Battlegrounds I hope they simply improve the complexity of the shooting mechanics so crosshairs are done away with entirely.

Xbows are the worst though, these things are like they are almost tacked onto M&B as an afterthought

[Mr.K.]

Longbows and Rus Bows and Yumis are not point and click weapons though. All bows below them are now thanks to recent buff* that nobody wanted nor expected. And you can't really put enough wpf into 1H and still be effective as an archer. In some situations you can fight back, but most of the time you're gonna run, even with 6PS.

Archery was fine before the buff. It was clearly UP, but the best players still could deal a lot of damage. Right now horse archery is pretty damn easy and effective even for players like myself that aren't really good at any kind of ranged. You don't do huge amount of damage per arrow, but you got up to 72 arrows with you. Get on a heavy horse not a single archer will even bother shooting at you and if they do you can avoid them. It's not OP, but it's quite a strong class now and doesn't really require any skill unlike foot archery.

Xbows are another thing though. In right hands they seem to be extremely easy and effective with no drawbacks. Haven't played much with them myself though to really claim they are OP.

*=Projectile speed got increased for the lower tier bows which makes them more effective at long ranges and a lot easier to shoot as the arrows drops was reduced

[Idzo]

Remove crosshairs.

Why I never came to that idea?

Grumbs I fucking love you.


When i come home home in few days "Remove Crosshairs" campain is starting!



Long live Grumbs!

[Tears of Destiny]

I feel like I'm playing a different game then everyone else, as more then ever the majority of my deaths are from melee.

[Grumbs]

I feel like I'm playing a different game then everyone else, as more then ever the majority of my deaths are from melee.

It might be true, but I argue that you could add sniper rifles into the game and give them 1 HP damage and the result would be the same. Melee might still kill you more, but the sniper does 1 HP more damage than he should.

Xbows pointing and clicking on guys miles away is just ridiculous, and then you see them doing 1 hit kills, wearing good armour and having good melee abilities.

About taking out xhairs idzo, doubt that would make any different since people will put something in the middle of their monitors instead. What would work is adding some extra depth to how you shoot, rather than point & click with some projectile travel time. Thats not really within the scope of cRPG though

[Idzo]

About taking out xhairs idzo, doubt that would make any different since people will put something in the middle of their monitors instead.

C'mon archers are not that smart.

Just look at Sillicium...

[Grumpy_Nic]

It might be true, but I argue that you could add sniper rifles into the game and give them 1 HP damage and the result would be the same. Melee might still kill you more, but the sniper does 1 HP more damage than he should.

Xbows pointing and clicking on guys miles away is just ridiculous, and then you see them doing 1 hit kills, wearing good armour and having good melee abilities.

About taking out xhairs idzo, doubt that would make any different since people will put something in the middle of their monitors instead. What would work is adding some extra depth to how you shoot, rather than point & click with some projectile travel time. Thats not really within the scope of cRPG though

You sir, are a terrible QQer.
I dont see melee having to reload every strike for 5 seconds, being immobilized during this time and being limited to 12 or 13 strikes per round QQ.