Compared to other ranged classes, throwing still seems like good damage, skill point investment, cost, and weight. 41p throwing weapons slightly outdamage 35p bows and 70p crossbows at 7PT/PD. For 3 skill points, you have access to 34-35p/b throwing weapons. The high end is poor, though, requiring 6-7 for spears and lances. Costs for throwing outside of stacked jarids/throwing lances are low, and even then those two are not that bad compared to other ranged. Throwers have the lowest weight out of any ranged class, but the lower tier should have less weight. I think accuracy and ammo count are still the main issues where they are far too lacking, while the rest of the problems lie with heavy cav. Heavy cav is the easiest class right now.
Yeah but that's just what i meant by "we have to support the classes themselves".
Comparing only the damage of Throwing to other the damage of ranged classes for example is just not a good way to balance things. Throwing is not a "ranged class" - at least not a pure one.
In my opinion crpg ranged classes are those who are far from the enemy having good accuracy and much time to deal damage - with the tradeoff that the damage is relatively "average". But the big advantage of being out of the direct dangerzone.
As a thrower you are more vulnerable, you are less accurate, you don't have the same possibilities over high distances, you have almost no ammunition at all, but your damage is almost the same?
How's that a good balance?
Archery should have loads of ammo, good speed and a good effective distance but only medium damage. (check)
Crossbows should have low ammo, lowest speed, high effective distance and high damage. (check)
Throwing should have low ammo, low speed, low effective distance but the highest damage of all ranged classes - not just "a good one". But throwing is the only class where there is no tradeoff for the low ammo, low speed and low range.
Compare the damage of a longbow to heavy throwing axes for example. Just do it with your admintool thing. I bet it's almost the same. But that's just what's the problem here. It just shouldn't be the same!
It's like if you're saying that a couched lance's damage is fine, because a rondel dagger stab does the same. (I know that's not the case)
Same goes for :
Compared to melee weapons, a single throwing weapon deals more damage. The hurtbox/accuracy part was how skilled throwers get rewarded. Melee has more damage multipliers to work with, however. Throwing should receive hold bonus damages, though, if it's even possible. Getting 3 swings on an opponent is also easier than 3 throws, but throwers can retrieve missed ammo.
How can you even try to compare those classes?
And how could "Getting 3 swings on an opponent is also easier than 3 throws, but throwers can retrieve missed ammo." ever be a valid argument for the melee-side?
We should stop trying to find explanations why the throwing damage is fine and start thinking about if it really IS.
It's not that cav is OP - cav just doesn't have a real enemy as it used to be.
Because:
( - and even if this is maybe the 1000th time me and other players are saying this - )
THROWING DAMAGE IS THE PROBLEM
... accuracy is fine, ammo too.
Maybe it helps if i write it in big, red letters?
So how to balance cav and throwing?
Buff throwing = Nerf cav = Solution to our problem. (is it even called a buff if you undo a unjust nerf..?)
Don't change throwing + Nerf Cav = 2 classes destroyed instead of 1
But if you want to keep the damage, increase accuracy and ammo - at least be honest and stop calling throwing weapons throwing weapons. Cus then they're just a cheap copy of archery and far from the throwing we all know and love and fight for.
