Number of players declining

[Templar_Steevee]

Ranged kill them before we even meet them in battle.

and really often before you know about their existance. Bolt from nowhere is common thing killing or hard wounding ppl

[Prpavi]

imo this should be the order of adressing issues regarding ranged:

1. xbows
2. mounted ranged
3. stop buffing shielders they are not the answer to ranged

unfortunatley this is not enough to convince long term melee players like myslef to go back to pole/2h, reasons wky I don't enjoy melee anymore are bigger than ranged spam.

[Nightmare798]

3. stop buffing shielders they are not the answer to ranged

Sure, lets buff 2H instead.

Seriously man...

[Prpavi]

Sure, lets buff 2H instead.

Seriously man...

who said anything about 2h? you have no idea what you talking about as usual

[Nightmare798]

who said anything about 2h? you have no idea what you talking about as usual

I was talking about 2H because 2H users are usually the ones who cry about shielders and their "ZOMG OP" stab.

And seriously, Is there a reason why shouldnt shielders be faster and their shields last longer? Because those are about all buffs shields received lately...

[Leshma]

My idea of ranged is to make them like throwers used to be, minus ranged gear being expensive. Low damage, low accuracy, basically a tool to wound your enemy before you engage him in melee. But it will never be that way, sadly. Also throwers these days aren't accurate but everything they throw hurts like hell.

People cry so much about manual block fest, but majority either fire projectiles or hide behind shields.

[Paul]

Ok, no more dedicated ranged. Next step we make it so that horses can only be used by mounted infantry for transportation. No more fighting on horseback. Maybe shields shouldn't be usuable in a fight either - only for sliding down hills.

[Leshma]

Make fun of me as much you want but your idea of "specialized" classes is the most boring thing ever. That's why I play hybrids these days.

Your idea of archer is someone who can kill anyone on battlefield from the distance but when you reach him, he's pretty much dead (dies in just one hit to unprotected head). And that makes perfect sense and is very realistic. But it's against the whole nature of this game. First, their ability to kill anything from range makes best part of this game (melee combat) pointless. Second, they can't play melee properly so they don't even try.

Shooting whole day takes special kind of person to enjoy. I can enjoy archery but not all the time and in every situation.

[Grumbs]

If you don't make ranged specialised classes you end up with the situation we have now: Ranged absolutely everywhere because you can do well in any situation. Why play pure melee when you can play ranged with good melee?

Ranged should be good at ranged combat, melee good at melee and stop bluring the lines imo. Otherwise pure melee will end up becoming throwers and xbowers too

Ranged should be support classes who help his team by softening key targets, while the main gameplay takes place between cav and melee. Ranged as it is implemented just doesn't fit into the overall game

[Paul]

My idea of an archer is someone who has to option to focus on shooting his bow OR being also somewhat able in melee. I played both - hybrid and pure - , enjoyed both although being far more effective with the melee oriented archer. I think killing the option to be a pure archer is wrong. Taking away possibilities for the sake of an everwhining group is wrong in my opinion.

[Tor!]

There are not many people who will get just rolled over in melee anymore. Even if you catch up to an archer, he wont just fall over and die, he probably knows how to block and keep you occupied for a while. Archers can be quite effective at both ranged and melee if they want too (Good thing we have dagger quickswap for those annoying ones )

People are just to solid in the melee part of this game, so people naturally go to the weapon that allows them to kill what they cant otherwise. Then some figured out they could be on a horse as well! The melee part doesnt have enough going for it at this stage, it has not really evolved in many years. People kinda reached the peak, I would say. We can just hope M:BG pulls it off better.

Oh, and the best counter to ranged is still ranged   

[bagge]

Fuck support.

Anyway, people playing melee are often brainless retards that actually challenges an Archer while running up a hill and then go and complain about it on the forum.

Melees often have extreme tunnelvision that arent aware of ranged and those are the easy targets. Without realising they suck they go and complain about it on the forum.

Most melee players have no patience and refuse to wait for flags and instead they go out in the open, challenging several archers and get fucked and complain about in the forum.

Kiting archers? Pft they barely exist anymore. Players like Shokoshugi maybe do it, but you can easily avoid him since he's 10 miles away in the first place. If you're going towards him from 20-50 meters, or any decent Archer for that matter, expect to be fragged.

Obviously its frustrating when you get fucked cause of an arrow, al tho its a part of the game and you live with it. Dlnt enjoy EU1 or EU2, just go melee only bundle of stickss

[Leshma]

Well, you "killed" an option to be full STR build. There are players who still prefer 36/3 with no WM but they are far from their previous effectiveness and takes ton of skill to be on par with now, much better 27/12 or 30/9 builds.

I'm not saying to remove pure archers, but I don't believe that pure archer should ever get more than 1:1 k/d. Currently, those pesky high level russian archers have 30/3 scores on siege. And ton of points and valor sometimes. Which is stupid, because they are mostly useless despite high number of kills and damage dealt.

Melee archer used to be doable, before you raised quiver weight to deal with kiters. Now melee archer feels like a tincan, with small portion of tincan survivability. Now saying that melee archer should be capable at melee like pure melee builds, but currently it's not even comparable.

[bagge]

Oh, and the best counter to ranged is still ranged   

As it should be. The thing is that the awful team balance Ruins it. If it were proper team balance for the classes we wouldnt have this problem.

Nerfing everything to the ground isnt the solution

[Grumbs]

As it should be. The thing is that the awful team balance Ruins it. If it were proper team balance for the classes we wouldnt have this problem.

Nerfing everything to the ground isnt the solution

As long as the best counter to ranged is ranged we will continue to have these NERF RANGED threads. Its simple, if we can't have classes that adequately counter ranged, the population of ranged will stay at insane levels. Making ranged good in melee is making the issue worse. Buffing 1 handers, making more 0 slot etc just makes a ranged counter weaker

You should be able to look at the battlefield and say "Phew thats a lot of ranged, i'm gonna play X to counter". That class should then shit on ranged in a similar way to ranged 1 shots players without putting themselves at much risk. Otherwise ranged should not be as effective as they are risk/reward wise

Sadly doing that is probably outside the scope of the game, unless they make some kind of anti ranged cav build for eg that shits on ranged and doesn't do much to infantry