Internal bow balance

[Tydeus]

The biggest problem is, devs knows nothing about archery itself. The proof of my thoughts, was the patch which increased missile speed by +6 to +10 in some bows, which is just way too huge difference. As archer, I feel the difference between every single missile speed - buffing bows by 6 or 10 missile speed at one time was just crazy.
I suspect devs also don't know higher missile speed means higher damage.

We explained the decision to make the 1 slot bows have higher missile speed several times in the past. I wanted to make the lower tier bows actually see usage, rather than only ever seeing three bows on the servers. And to do that, we created buffs that simulated real world arrow weight differences. Unfortunately, dictating which bows can use what arrows, isn't an option, so this is what you got. I think it works quite nicely, and as urist and shik have both previously stated, is a better representation of how the actual bows would act in the real world. Also, weapon missile speed != the speed the missile moves, it is only a partial influencer.

Your last statement, in the case of throwing or any mounted ranged, isn't even true. In these cases, slower base speed allows for great speed bonuses(percentile damage increases). If we took a weapon in game right now, then buffed the projectile speed on it by 1000 times, it would still have the same damage. Sure, at a distance it would be higher, but it takes an extremely long distance to make an impact on your damage. How do I know this? Well, I've tested it multiple times in varying ways within the last two months using the in game damage reporter that urist scripted(not to mention the fact that I already had knowledge of the mechanics causing this prior to my testing).

For my recent throwing test, I used point blank range and would-never-seriously-throw-from-this-distance-in-a-battle-server range. The difference was 5 points of raw damage and 1 point of final damage 75 raw to 70 raw. This was also with MW HTA (15 missile speed) and a mere 5 PT.

[Leshma]

Whole that Blizzard type of balancing is nothing but annoying. Yo players, this month we buff this because everyone use that. Buff/nerf cycles aren't balancing, it's creating an illusion of balancing and you know that very well, because you used to upvote my posts where I meantioned that, before you became a balancer.

Also those bows are meant to be peasant bows, for low level characters. Balancers failed somewhere else, because very few players are leveling their chars these days and therefore peasant gear is underused. You should work on that, instead of making peasant bows better than high tier bows.

There are many ways to force players to retire once again, instead of sitting on their level 35 characters. Offering better heirloom bonuses, faster leveling, maybe even unlocking gen bonus for veterans. Also you can implement maluses for those who don't retire etc. That combined with higher STR requirements for high tier items is enough to make low tier items popular. Not buffing them to the level of high tier, that way losing gradation between low and high tier...

[Grumbs]

I think you've failed to address the issue if you simply make some bows easier to use. That to me is backwards balancing when it comes to ranged. Make longbow/rus bow harder to use rather than making horn bow easier by directly simplifying the shooting the mechanics. You also buff shit like HA like that and you increased their ammo so more spamming

[Tydeus]

"... those [items] are meant to be peasant [items]" That's the status quo that I was trying to change. I did this with low tier/underused melee weapons as well. It was a shift in the balance objective that initially came from chadz saying "I think we could buff the lower tier items". Sure, it's fine to have some things specifically for the very new, very low level character, but why should so many of them have almost zero effectiveness? Why not have them fulfill multiple roles? What do you add to the game by having weapons that are complete shit in all respects, why even have more than one of these? It's wasted potential.


I honestly think that the Long Bows and Rus Bows are harder to use but have a greater maximum potential than any of the other bows. This means that the easy to use bows are great for learning on, great for new players, but if you're a very skilled archer, you're much better off using a rus/long bow. This is perfect balance imo. It's exactly the type of thing you'd want to see in game balance. It adheres to the "Easy to use, hard to master" theme. It might be harder to fight an archer when you're using one of these higher tier bows, but these bows aren't really for shooting archers, they're for cav and infantry. Why should an archer be able to pick up a bow that allows them to excel in all areas? No other class has something like this, there are always trade-offs, there has to be trade-offs.

Some bows might be too effective at the moment(particularly against armor) but that's separate from the inner-class item balance argument.

[Grumbs]

I think putting good easy to use ranged weapons in the hands of poor players is the wrong way to do "easy to learn hard to master" in cRPG. Killing a melee player with ranged damage is 10x easier than killing a ranged as a melee. You have to get in range, then you have manual block which can make fights last forever or allow them to get towards team mates, 1 handers (0 slot even) were buffed too much etc. Damage from range is such a good ability that it should be something you have to work hard at to use.

[Tydeus]

I think putting good easy to use ranged weapons in the hands of poor players is the wrong way to do "easy to learn hard to master" in cRPG. Killing a melee player with ranged damage is 10x easier than killing a ranged as a melee. You have to get in range, then you have manual block which can make fights last forever or allow them to get towards team mates, 1 handers (0 slot even) were buffed too much etc. Damage from range is such a good ability that it should be something you have to work hard at to use.

I don't agree with the first part, but I can certainly see that it's possible they were "buffed too much". I don't believe I ever said anything contrary to this.

[Leshma]

Yes, there were buffed too much. While they deal less damage than the big bows, it's incredibly easy to score a headshot with those bows (if a player is pure archer and has more than 170 wpf in archery). Also because of higher missile speed than bigger bows, they are actually better at long range shooting. Accuracy and long range combined, is what makes them OP. Low damage on paper, becomes negligible in practice.

[Tydeus]

Yes, there were buffed too much. While they deal less damage than the big bows, it's incredibly easy to score a headshot with those bows (if a player is pure archer and has more than 170 wpf in archery). Also because of higher missile speed than bigger bows, they are actually better at long range shooting. Accuracy and long range combined, is what makes them OP. Low damage on paper, becomes negligible in practice.

What's wrong with a player actually getting rewarded for hitting a small hitbox though? I mean, isn't that what player skill should be? If we're not rewarding players for hitting a head hitbox, then what are we rewarding them for? At this point, all I see is QQ. I mean, we're not playing counter-strike here, projectiles aren't instant, regardless of how fast you think the arrows are. Heads provide more damage sure, but limbs give huge damage penalties. You say it's easy, but I'm pretty damn sure less than 10% of people's shots result in a headshot. I don't think there's a single player in this community who can consistently land headshots 30/40 % of the time.

[Grumbs]

In practice most headshots are utterly random. Its different to aiming a swing at a head, there is a lot of randomness involved which increases the frustration involved. Not only can you be in a situation were you have no course of action to take but you also get punished for no apparent reason. I can't imagine random headshots are fun for anyone

Making headshots 1 shot kills like they are now would only really work if the body shots didn't also kill in such few hits, since people would genuinely aim for the head. Or if you didn't stagger with every hit regardless of damage

[Tydeus]

In practice most headshots are utterly random. Its different to aiming a swing at a head, there is a lot of randomness involved which increases the frustration involved. Not only can you be in a situation were you have no course of action to take but you also get punished for no apparent reason. I can't imagine random headshots are fun for anyone

Making headshots 1 shot kills like they are now would only really work if the body shots didn't also kill in such few hits.

Personally, I feel like the only headshots that are random, are ones from throwers(because throwing is never very accurate) and very long distance shots.

[Leshma]

At this point, all I see is QQ.

So you wanna go that path, Paul knows everything, rest are scum path? Well in that case, good luck in your future endeavors, Tydeus. Won't be bothering you anymore. You might want to check my thread tho, there is fairly high level of votes in here (345 players voted). 26.4 percent blame balancers (you and Paul) for bad state of the mod. That is 91 players, more than usually play on NA1, NA2 and NA7 combined, on prime time.

[Tydeus]

So you wanna go that path, Paul knows everything, rest are scum path? Well in that case, good luck in your future endeavors, Tydeus. Won't be bothering you anymore. You might want to check my thread tho, there is fairly high level of votes in here (345 players voted). 26.4 percent blame balancers (you and Paul) for bad state of the mod. That is 91 players, more than usually play on NA1, NA2 and NA7 combined, on prime time.

Actually, Urist and I can't really seem to come to an agreement on whether or not horse ranged is problematic and needs addressing. Regardless, we both know there has been a lot of QQ for ages about it, so we know you have to take things with a grain of salt. If your argument doesn't make sense or your complaint has to do with player skill being rewarded(getting rewarded for hitting a player in the head) then you've kinda just complained about the absolute last thing that we'd ever want to nerf and therefore can't really be taken seriously in a debate(not worth the time to debate with, we can't just debate with everybody who has complaints, there has to be some sort of filter. Figure out how to add 24 more hours in a day, without lessening lifespan in years, then I'm sure things will change).

[Grumbs]

If you genuinely wanted to improve the reward for player skill you can do such things as:

Reduce ammo (less spamming until something hits or you get a lucky headshot)
Reduce missile speed (harder to judge where to shoot to be accurate, encouraged to get closer to the fight to hit)
Reduce stun/damage unless you aim and hit the head (smaller target to hit, more pressure when you miss the head)
Make position more important, so if you get into melee range you're pretty much dead

For HA:

Need to get closer to the fight so you're put under more pressure. If you need to get closer you need to think about how to use the horse while not hurting your team and you run the risk of getting hit by melee
Have to slow down to take a shot or reload with xbow (similar negative elements)

I don't think its about all this though, its about appeasing players that want to have their cake and eat it, and balancing within Urist's narrow vision for the game

[Dezilagel]

Wait what?

Balancing based on realism?

Horrible, horrible if that continues.

[Rumblood]

Personally, I feel like the only headshots that are random, are ones from very long distance shots.

I don't agree and is the main reason I get irritated over the missile speed reductions. For long range, your missile will be coming in at an arc from above. It actually gives you a better chance at getting a head shot. Plus, I love to pick out a xbow or archer who is standing on a hill on the other side of the map blithely spamming arrows into the melee scrum, when suddenly they find themselves a target and can't figure out from where. Archers who can take out the enemy cavalry from long range and the enemy ranged from long range end up with more consistent multipliers than those who don't. In fact, I would love to see the % of rounds played with a multiplier (and which multiplier) than any K/D ratio on the webpage. That might actually get some people to use real team tactics.