Should we remove pin point accuracy from bows?

[Kafein]

The "light bows counter heavy bows" argument is bollocks. Everybody knows the only rule that archers follow when shooting is the one that maximizes the number of kills they get. Why would they shoot other ranged when obviously melee and cav enemies are going to be easier to hit (either closer or larger), distracted and unable to retaliate ? Sure, light bows are better than heavy bows in an archer duel, but battle and siege are anything but ranged duels.

[YnScN]

The "light bows counter heavy bows" argument is bollocks. Everybody knows the only rule that archers follow when shooting is the one that maximizes the number of kills they get. Why would they shoot other ranged when obviously melee and cav enemies are going to be easier to hit (either closer or larger), distracted and unable to retaliate ? Sure, light bows are better than heavy bows in an archer duel, but battle and siege are anything but ranged duels.

Rangers are always easier to hit because they stand still, and light bows have to counter ranged to be useful, I dont want to pray for my luck to headshot an unaware ranged from long range. I want precision.

[Kafein]

Rangers are always easier to hit because they stand still, and light bows have to counter ranged to be useful, I dont want to pray for my luck to headshot an unaware ranged from long range. I want precision.

When I melee I don't want my opponents to block my swings either.

[Gmnotutoo]

When I melee I don't want my opponents to block my swings either.

Honestly I'd love to see melee combat speed increased.

[YnScN]

When I melee I don't want my opponents to block my swings either.

There is a difference between what i'm saying and what you're saying. I'm saying that i don't want to be based on luck to do what i do best. You're saying that you want your opponent shouldn't do what he needs to counter you.

There were only 2 bows before they made low tier bows useful. By the changes they made room for specialization in archery. You can either take high tier bows and hunt infantry, or low tier bows and hunt archers. And if they remove pin point accuracy from low tier bows, why should i use them to counter ranged? You can say because they are fast, but draw speed is not an issue because if an enemy archer is aware of you having a low tier bow and aiming at him,  he will just dodge until he finds a cover.

Most of my kills come from archers that are not aware of me. I saw them first, aim carefully and i don't give them another chance to reply. I trained on duel servers, with different ranges to precise my aim. That's why i don't want to be based on luck. And with having these i 'm not very useful over enemy infantry as it should be. Sometimes it takes more than 5 body arrows for a guy with kuyak and heavy gauntlets.

To conclude, i think ranged diversity is good and pin point accuracy should stay as it is.

[Teeth]

Honestly I'd love to see melee combat speed increased.

Combat has been sped up significantly over the past year.

[Rebelyell]

Few people manage to present such a flawed argument in such a cocksure manner ^

he was muted for" being total twat"
no jokes here that was a reson

[Hoppster]

he was muted for" being total twat"
no jokes here that was a reson

looks like the truths out at last

[Oberyn]

For example, I used to play lance cavalry in a very anti infantry focused way. High PS and low movement speed, hanging around the fight, distracting people and dishing out a lot of hits. Very often however, there would be couch cavalry players that completely focus on killing other cavalry and it is incredibly annoying. I am trying to make my team win by using my horse to influence the outcome of group fights the best I can, and these fast cav fucks only focus on getting easy cav kills which makes them the perfect counter to my playstyle.

Heavy cav, heavy armored lancer hunting down inf was just your "playstyle" and "trying to make my team win", but light cav fighting other cav is "easy kills"? Backstabbing and bumping unaware, already engaged infantry is doable by all cav, and frankly it's by far the easiest aspect, whether as heavy or light. You really think light cav trying to take you down were going for "easy kills"? Literaly everything else other than maybe horse ranged is an easier target. Maybe taking your fat, OP elephant riding, inf harassing ass down was about making their team win too, just maybe.
Don't pretend heavy cav was defenseless, or light cav it's"perfect counter", even couches werent enough to kill your horse in 1 hit, whereas most light horses died if you coughed at them. For being a "perfect counter" it's funny how all it takes is one little mistake and bam, no more horse. As opposed to the relentless tide of fails you could afford to bumble into as heavy, and still good to go to trample more peasants. Seriously, this is so fucking backwards.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Kafein]

Heavy cav, heavy armored lancer hunting down inf was just your "playstyle" and "trying to make my team win", but light cav fighting other cav is "easy kills"? Backstabbing and bumping unaware, already engaged infantry is doable by all cav, and frankly it's by far the easiest aspect, whether as heavy or light. You really think light cav trying to take you down were going for "easy kills"? Literaly everything else other than maybe horse ranged is an easier target. Maybe taking your fat, OP elephant riding, inf harassing ass down was about making their team win too, just maybe.
Don't pretend heavy cav was defenseless, or light cav it's"perfect counter", even couches werent enough to kill your horse in 1 hit, whereas most light horses died if you coughed at them. For being a "perfect counter" it's funny how all it takes is one little mistake and bam, no more horse. As opposed to the relentless tide of fails you could afford to bumble into as heavy, and still good to go to trample more peasants. Seriously, this is so fucking backwards.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

I believed light cav wasn't even part of the argument anymore. How many arrows do these things even survive these days ? Minus 2 ?

[Algarn]

4 shots for the arabian with 6 PD, 5/6 shots for the destrier using bodkins (with almost no bonus speed).

[Mr.K.]

4 shots for the arabian with 6 PD, 5/6 shots for the destrier using bodkins (with almost no bonus speed).

Two if you hit the head, prolly for both of those. +0 Rouncey can be onehit by ranged and it's not much lighter than +3 arabian. Remember bodkins are far worse against cavalry than tatars.

[Templar_Steevee]

Two if you hit the head, prolly for both of those. +0 Rouncey can be onehit by ranged and it's not much lighter than +3 arabian. Remember bodkins are far worse against cavalry than tatars.

Untill it's heavy cav 

[polkafranzi]

STF Minjy using Fins +3 Barbed arrows and a +0 Tatar bow, 6PD, 170wpf (pinpoint accuracy lol)...

Arabian warhorses are consistently going down in 2-4 arrows.

There, nobody needs to fucking speculate anymore.

Just look on eu1 at how many archers there are, there, that's your problem.  Fix it!

[Templar_Steevee]

There's only one problem, lots of archers playing at EU1 are quite hi lvl archers, not a STF.

I don't think that there are so many of them, because last month I'm playing mosty on my 2h alt with 15 agi and to play without shield you have to think more, that's it.

Charging archers on open fields is not a good idea, ofc there are maps wher they will dominate, but on lots of maps if you will think you can sneak up behind them and make a happy spam on their faces. I Suggest learn to aim head, to oneshot them, because plendy know how to block and have some ps to hit back with quite good short swords.