c(ounterstrike)RPG

[BerG]

Ah and btw. talking about realism:

Ok, not realism, let's say authentic.

M&B is all about authentic medieval fight, isn't it? I want to play with believable impression that this is medieval combat. Not fantasy bullshit with giant fucking final fantasy swords and dragons, right?

[F i n]

Ok, not realism, let's say authentic.

M&B is all about authentic medieval fight, isn't it? I want to play with believable impression that this is medieval combat. Not fantasy bullshit with giant fucking final fantasy swords and dragons, right?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login



Edit: Well ok yes. But Archers dominating the battlefield by running around solo, shooting everything and everyone (+ hitting everything and everyone) isn't that realistic. In RL Battles archery only was effective when there were loads of Archers shooting at the same time.

That whole Robin-Hood thing is - just as the Highlander thing with 2h - neither realistic nor authentic.

But it's a game, that's why i can accept it. What i just don't like is that (looking at the numbers of players playing as Ranged) is that most of the other builds seem to be much less appealing.

C-rpg should not be a shooter. I'd like to have more diversity. But atm. EU1 is basically just running around, catching random arrows, being spawnraped by HA and other Cav or overrun by 10000 shielders.

The worst thing is: There is no alternative to EU 1 at all... Eu4 is gone, Siege sucks, Defend the vagina is basically a singleplayer-hack-and-slay-minigame and Rageball is gone...


And i kind of feel ashamed but:


c-rpg has become a bit boring.

[musketer]

This is really true, the amount of ranged has increased by a lot, if there are 40 players 15-20 are Ha's or archers or Xbowers...

I have to say that the aim of the bows is really too high, I've been with my horsie today and the archers could hit me and my horse from distances of 100+ metres without any difficulty and running in a high speed. It's really stupid how the ranged is so overpowered right now, it basically ruins the gaming experience, just decrease the damage and the aim and problem solved, is that so hard devs?

[Kafein]

It seems Tydeus wants to go down the "armor counters range" route. Well okay, then change the ranged penetration bonus to a malus, increase armor values and melee weapon damage, remove the long ranged stagger and nerf xbows somehow. Maybe making xbows less accurate would be ideal as it would be the most realistic nerf to it and also be boring for the user. I think this is good becaues everybody knows if you choose xbow you must be a boring person and enjoy boring stuff.

Note that increasing base armor ratings and base damage values for melee weapons would also make heirlooms less important which I believe would be a good idea right now.

[bavvoz]

Not realistic at all but would it be possible to make projectiles blockable? Ofc not just downblock but something that would require skill/luck like the rolling.

[F i n]

This is really true, the ammount of ranged has increased by a lot, if there are 40 players 15-20 are Ha's or archers or Xbowers...

I have to say that the aim of the bows is really too high, I've been with my horsie today and the archers could hit me and my horse from distances of 100+ metres without any difficulty and running in a high speed. It's really stupid how the ranged is so overpowered right now, it basically ruins the gaming experience, just decrease the damage and the aim and problem solved, is that so hard devs?

Thats one of the posts that will make the devs just skip this topic.

Archery should be way more powerful - but way more difficult.

Decreasing the "accurate" time after you drew the bow to a really short time-window - while increasing the damage drastically would be way more realistic.

In that case, archers would kick ass if they'd form a line and just let it rain - while a lonely archer would be almost useless - except he's really skilled.

[oreshy]

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[pingpong]

Mod balance was fine before bows & arrow damage was buffed, now its just: get 20k gold-> buy bow& arrows -> dominate
You dont need to loom anything as an archer to be really effective, and thats wrong because melee people have to loom weapons and armor to be on the same level with others, if you go 1vs1 with lets say normal shortsword against a +3 chances are you lose if the opponent knows how to block.

[Miwiw]

What does it tell us if one class is being played more than another class?

a) Does Class A which is being played more than class B, makes you enjoy the game more?
b) Does Class B suck more than Class A so it isn't played as much?
c) Is Class A being played more because it's easier, if at least not more enjoyable?
d) Does Class B suck itself already so it's not worth at all being played?
e) Is there no Class C that is nearly as good as Class A and B?
f) Do people force themselves to play Class A even though they would love playing Class B?
g) If Class B doesn't such more than Class A, though more people play Class A; does it mean that Class A is simply stronger? Balance needed?
h) Why am I writing down points like this, even though the topic and solution is clear, and xbow needs a honest nerf?

Anyway, why archery has gone through a lot more nerfs than xbow during the last years, it still seems to be far more enjoyable. However as archer you're usually forced to put all your points into ranged skills as putting some wpf and skill points into 1h/2h wpf and PS isn't really worth it while weakening yourself at ranged.
Xbow players put 2/3 of their wpf in xbow, rest into melee wpf and they are able to put their skill points in PS/IF if they want to, so in the end most have a typical melee build (tho most go for more agility to get more wpf). They grab a mace which they can easily swing with 5 PS and 100 wpf and deal good dmg while being deadly on range as well while Archers usually struggle at level 30 to get such a good build with both melee and ranged abilities to deal dmg with both.
An Archer could do 18/18 as well, with 6 PS, 6 WM but he will lack important wpf. A 18/21 build is far better in that case on level 30, while an xbow can easily go 15/24 on level 30 which gives him 5 PS and 8 WM.

The amount of any class is not the real problem as it would be real bullshit to restrict the amount of a certain class. The more important step we should take, is buffing melee classes (ie. shielders who seem to have a hard time engaging ranged).

[Radament]

how about adding Pierce Penetration Absorb on medium/heavy armors.
i know it will be a mess to balance all armors and assign a value to them but it's worth a try.
don't know if this can be done without including pierce damage done by stabs or melee pierce tho.
here's an example :

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

at least armors can be useful in this case.
to be applied on head (like full helms) , leg (heavier) and glove (heavier) also if possible

shitstorm inc lul.

[Radament]

The amount of any class is not the real problem as it would be real bullshit to restrict the amount of a certain class. The more important step we should take, is buffing melee classes (ie. shielders who seem to have a hard time engaging ranged).

not very true , as a shielder , engaging an archer is quite simple , just face them.
the real problem is the amount of them shooting you 360 degrees.
and the balance sometimes sucks , it's like 10 cav + 20 ranged +10 inf VS 30 inf + 5 ranged + 5 cav

anyway i agree that restrictions sucks but jesus , playing against 20+ ranged is hard even with a shield.


and i agree xbows needs some type of nerf , dunno , raise requirements , on horse aiming should be a bit more difficult etc...

[Miwiw]

(ie. shielders who seem to have a hard time engaging ranged).

By that I meant "ranged" as a group of ranged players, ie. 3+. However the amount of shielders doesn't have to be one. Even if 3 shielders charge 3 archers, those could move into different directions and shoot those shielders who do not face them. In the end none of those shielders are protected at all as they are getting shot in the back/sides.

What buff could actually help them I am not sure about. In a real situation and not theory, it also does not always work out for the archers to split up of course.

If class balance sucks, it is not the fault of the classes itself tho. In that case class balance should probably come before banner balance. Infantry with the same banner should probably still be balanced in one team but ranged and cav is simply another case.

[Radament]

By that I meant "ranged" as a group of ranged players, ie. 3+. However the amount of shielders doesn't have to be one. Even if 3 shielders charge 3 archers, those could move into different directions and shoot those shielders who do not face them. In the end none of those shielders are protected at all as they are getting shot in the back/sides.

What buff could actually help them I am not sure about. In a real situation and not theory, it also does not always work out for the archers to split up of course.

in a 3vs3 situation i really don't feel so much worried , you just need timing (run without shield when they are not aiming) and if your mates are not too stupid , engage them only if they are at medium range , if not just wait flags behind shields or walls.
Buuut if you are a 2h or polearm you are pretty fucked if you are in open places and you don't have any kind of cover and the Benny Hill's scene is quite depressing lol

Anyway the solution for me is just change server if the amount of ranged is too high , or change game or go eat a sandwich lol.

[no_rules_just_play]

Radament, missile speed is so high and accuracy drop after holds is so slow that even archers can shotgun you before you have raised your weapon.

And if they have friendly infantry helping them you are even more fucked, they shoot so fast and accurate that they can hit a single enemy in a revolving mob of friendlies.

[Torost]

Been saying it for years .. it is impossible to balance crossbows in any meaningfull way.
They are cheap,easy and effective. Rewards passive play, hiding and reloading.

I am pretty sure that an army made entirely of medium armor crossbowmen with shield and 1hand/pole would beat any combination army out there of equally skilled players given the same gold constraints over and over if they play towards their strength. (passive)

For some odd reason , patch after patch, crossbows avoid any detrimental changes.

Archers have to expose themselves, so they get picked off by enemies team of archers.

Crossbows on the other hand just hide reload and shoot. And are viable infrantry when it comes down to it.