Suggestions to re-balance throwing.

[Cheap_Shot]

...but more people will take throwing weapons to hurl at the enemy before charging into the fray.

That is actually what no one wants. I think most people would rather have throwers be few and far between and effective, then have throwers be everywhere and TKing inaccurate drags on a team.

[AlbaTiger]

Yeah dedicated throwers as full blown light skirmishers, as they were used in reality, who would throw then run are how they should work in the game.

It makes sense and is good as an additional style of play and tactical option in the game.

Along with the mounted thrower.

That's always been the main case us dedicated throwers have been making though I guess.

[Gorath]

I can center you all I want, but most of the time my weapons fly wild not even going inside the reticule, but far to the side. I have 130 wpf in throwing too. 

You just suck ass then.  Period.

*A point of note:  I do have a semi-long logic based argument about this issue, alas I just don't have the time to spend more than a minute at my puter lately.  I will commence cessation of trollish remarks when I get the chance and discuss the issue reasonably when I have the time.  Until then, stop being a ranged fairy guzzling man juice from the jock strap of ru paul and be a damned man by learning to melee for christ's sake.  Go shoot at people in a proper FPS and stop tainting the ONLY game with good melee combat with your pre-disposition for playing like a taint licker.

[Spawny]

You just suck ass then.  Period.

*A point of note:  I do have a semi-long logic based argument about this issue, alas I just don't have the time to spend more than a minute at my puter lately.  I will commence cessation of trollish remarks when I get the chance and discuss the issue reasonably when I have the time.  Until then, stop being a ranged fairy guzzling man juice from the jock strap of ru paul and be a damned man by learning to melee for christ's sake.  Go shoot at people in a proper FPS and stop tainting the ONLY game with good melee combat with your pre-disposition for playing like a taint licker.

Who says throwers can't block?

[MouthnHoof]

... for example a roman soldier on top of his armour, large shield and sword would carry two heavy javelins designed for breaking shields, often piercing the man behing. So I think its more than possible to take even 6 javelins on your back, with a small sidearm, though speed would be reduced but as throwers often have low agility we see that anyways.

You boldfaced the wrong word. Should have been:
"a roman soldier on top of his armour, large shield and sword would carry two heavy javelins".
I think they more commonly had just one, but that besides the point. Mounted javeliners are a completely different issue - they did not have any real limits on ammo since they could pack a large number of them on the horse (or ride back to get more in a static battle) without impeding mobility. I am talking about foot troops.

Why should there be a "dedicated thrower"? You could build one in terms of the character stats, but I still think that the ammo carrying capacity should be EXTREMELY limited: Either by stacks of 1 or by stacks of 3-4 with #slot requirement of two. So yeah, you have a free slot, you can bring A franciska with you - why should it take less slots than a normal axe? When you get to the javelin/jarid level, these are the tools of what could be considered a "skirmisher" (with a high PT requirement, so it is not for all players). Making them in 1-slot stacks of two, or 2-slots stacks of 3 will allow a skirmisher to have 6 of them (and a 1-slot or 0-slot weapon). After that, yes, you go melee or scavenge for more on the ground.

[zagibu]

I always like such statements as "a javelin could pierce heavy armor". Maybe it could. But did it? No, in most cases, it hit at an angle that made it bounce off. Same for arrows, bolts, and other piercing weapons. Yes, they COULD pierce plate armor, IF they hit at the exactly right spot in the exactly right angle, but most of the time, they simply got deflected.

I also like how rotating thrown stuff always seems to arrive with the hurting end at my location.

[Lorenzo_of_Iberia]

I got the right word there, but if you want another example, peltasts of greek armies had 2 javelins in their shield which was a shield that covered their whole body. Now I'm gonna assume that a shield is pretty heavy, maybe even heavier than 4 more javelins of a reasonable size.

And yes javelins would be able to pierce plate pretty commonly, definately medium armours, yet even the medium armours still take about 3 javs at a pt of 5 to get a kill... It's not realistic how little damage javelins do, but I'm not arguing that I argue that if these javelins with the fair (but not realistic)  damage they do, had a boost in stack size then they should be considered fair.

The only people who have ever complained about throwers are those who just are falling into the same situation again and again (i.e. not taking a shield) and then whine that someone has taken advantage of their own weakness Yes i'm looking at you 2h players ;)

[Lichen]

Why do some think that throwers don't know how to melee or block? I have a 1h+shield character as well and I regularly wreck many top players. I HAD a polearm character which I absolutely DESTROYED people with (10ps + greatlongaxe) but guess what? It got BORING. Once you kill VARIETY the game will become repetitive and boring. Also how many of you have ever seen a thrower top the scoreboards consistently like a 2h/pole user?

Are we going to play and adapt or just complain forever? Trust me it is much more effective to adapt than to be at the mercy waiting for the devs to nerf something you don't like.

[22nd_King_Plazek]

Yea I know right, the main reason I carry throwing as a 2h user is as a counter to all the archers and X-bows.

So I can at least put a little pressure on them during my approach, which is important considering my C-RPG character has never touched a shield.

[Cheap_Shot]

This thread isn't here to argue about realism. We are afterall playing a video game. Also Gorath, I doubt if you've tried throwing recently. I know you like to go into every thread and troll and go "Why are you having problems? I'M pretending that I'M good at it! hurr hurr" so I'd rather you stay out of this one. Some legit balance needs to happen and there is no room for idiots to derail. As much as I appreciate your super advanced and clever trolling methods. 

[ArchonAlarion]

If it isn't based on realism then what is our reference point for determining the nature of any item?

If throwing was (correctly) designed as a secondary weapon, it would naturally find a niche within certain builds (light infantry, cavalry). Shields are a secondary item too; some builds need them more (light to medium armored infantry, heavy cavalry, besiegers). If throwing difficulty was strength based, I think some builds would take throwing and others would not. It wouldn't be a chuck-fest, though.

Builds should arise naturally instead of force fitting some dungeons and dragons class system on the game. Throwing is cool and sometimes useful, but not as a primary class. Once the stats reflect reality, gold cost should be adjusted and throwing can be a cheap option for certain builds to increase their versatility.

[Cheap_Shot]

The thing is, throwing wasn't a class, it was always people willing to accept a lot of drawbacks so they could use their own unique and fun playstyle. They were considered back up weapons, but you could put up with the disadvantages to use them dedicated. Melee users complained as they always do, anytime anything ranged interrupts their manly honor duels. Even though thrown weapons always had limited ammo, and required you to trade speed, armor, accuracy, etc just to get the damage where it was. Powerstrike however can easily get to level 10 and one hit kill everything. There are no severe drawbacks to it like there are for powerthrow. Not even minor ones. I for instance just played siege. A guy with a bec jumped out of nowhere and destroyed three people with one hit each. It's ironic that people like that are here saying "SORRY YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR 1 HIT KILL EASYMODE ANYMORE STOP WHINING". 10 powerstrike with 10 ironflesh melee is as easymode as it gets. Throw on some plate and watch as you cleave through a dozen people before anyone can take you down.

My point is, I'm not asking that the game be changed to fit around my play style. I'm just asking for the game to be balanced and fair. Throwing should get more accurate and powerful in accordance to the amount you invest in it, since that's how everything else works. It stands to reason no one can argue against "more points = more effective". If throwing actually worked like the rest of the game does, I wouldn't be here. This game isn't concerned with realism. You can't say how realistic it is to put on samurai armor and attack a European castle with English weapons. Realism arguments in video games are a joke. The reference point I'm using is the rest of the game mechanics already in place. Throwing has been altered to not follow them even further to put throwing at too much of a disadvantage to be viable.


Reduce throwing base damage but have powerthrow increase damage by a larger amount per point. Reduce the wpf need per point from 14 to 12. Make wpf increase accuracy by a much larger amount. Increase stacks, or reduce slots back to 1. Done.

Nothing game breaking there. That's how it should work anyway when compared to the melee equivalent. Stats are heavily slanted in favor of melee builds and the recent landslide slew of throwing nerfs was unreasonable and unnecessary.

[MouthnHoof]

It's ironic that people like that are here saying "SORRY YOU CAN'T HAVE YOUR 1 HIT KILL EASYMODE ANYMORE STOP WHINING". 10 powerstrike with 10 ironflesh melee is as easymode as it gets. Throw on some plate and watch as you cleave through a dozen people before anyone can take you down.

10 PS is slow, as I am sure you know if you played 10 PT character. The point is, if you got your str that high, you will have 10 PS AND 10 PT instead of IF. Now you have a thrower and a sumo wrestler in one character. Also, regarding one shotting, there is a huge difference between one-shotting from range and one-shotting from melee - the latter first has to catch someone and then also takes a higher risk getting hit himself.

My fear is that if throwing is even half decent, or good enough for: "1 free slot? <shrug> OK, I'll grab that javeling bag too", everyone will carry some. Many more "unsheathable" flags and a large #-slot requirement may prevent that. How about a very large bag of javelins that require 3 slots? Either a thrower with a small melee weapon or a thrower with a shield using the alt-mode of the items foe melee? This will prevent just anyone from taking it unless he wants to concentrate on being a thrower. I still think one-shotting with a ranged weapon is a bad idea gameplay-wise.

Edit:
Just to be clear on the idea, Throwing weapons come in two kind of stacks (two items in the store):
* stack of 1, requiring 1 slot (as a secondary weapon)
* stack of N (to be decided), requiring 3 slots (for the full skirmisher)

[zagibu]

I think most everyone agrees that throwing was overnerfed and will most likely be buffed a little next patch. However, it was OP before, as you hopefully agree as well.

[AlbaTiger]

It was OP in certain combinations with other equipment but your average dedicated thrower playing for the character rather than some kind of advantage was almost always at a disadvantage.

Specifically before the slot system came in and you had people kicking about with 8 throwing lances or the best shield, best 1hander, fully skilled for shielder but then with some points dumped into PT.

Throwing lances were overpowered, and min/maxing hybrids were overpowered.

Throwing was not.