ADD A FUCKING RANGED CAP ALREADY

[Thryn]

rant time

reduce arrows for ranged; i mean if i get black barred or seriously wounded as melee, im forced to play conservatively if i want to survive, yet archers can shoot all goddamn day (therfore archers have more "long term usefullness")

i played through an xbow 1h and 12 bolts was fucking fine for me, and melee was still proficient

and ffs, shields aren't the global solution to this problem; there's a reason that archers and shields both stayed on the battlefield for centuries

shit like why do arrows fly so fast, dodging them is a pain in the ass; fucking ranged snipers are stupid as fuck, invest time into ranged devs and fix this shit

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Shemaforash]

I don't mind ranged, but I mind ranged nudging me back 20 meters because I came close.

[KingBread]

I think the problem starts when they decide to change heavy cav difficulty...

Back in the days when Fallen have more than 3 members we were making FALLEN_ARCHER_DEATH_SQUAD nights and invade servers. But there were one server we never invade. It was Eu1 with Great Khans members on it. Cos when we do join it with our FALLEN_ARCHER_DEATH_SQUAD we were fucking trembled to pieces by GK members switching from donkeys to hipopotams. And becouse there is no good cav on NA server we preffered that one.

[PsychoTwins]

I can't foresee a ranged cap ever happening, that's too artificial, too arbitrary of a solution. Unfortunately, legitimate nerfs aren't exactly desirable either. What's more unfortunate, is that nearly every proposal to disincentivize ranged without touching effectiveness, must be done at the level off the website (basically meaning it's a no-can-do.)

What options are we left with then? Maybe lower weight on medium-tier to higher-tier armors while reverting that arrows weight decrease. Make it so melee can catch pesky archers without making the archers deal less damage. That way the dedicated melee might be able to catch the archers while being able to tank a bit.

Just spitballing ideas at the moment though.

[Artyem]

I don't know exactly how it could be done, but if you could increase the protection values against ranged weapons on medium / heavy armors, I think that would help quite a bit.  On the other hand, this would further encourage the use of heavy armor and we'd be complaining about heavy armor next.

[Herezy92]

To be completely honest i think people are making ranged look stronger than they really are. Very rarely do i see ranged winning a round, most of the time its infantry demolishing the other sides infantry. I think ive lost more rounds due to having less infantry and more ranged on my team compared to winning due to having a higher amount of ranged.

[...]

Omg  what ? 
NO
WAY

How many times i saw somehting like 8 vs 18 and winning the round because the melee were just "machine-gunned" from everywhere by kiting archers.

[Joseph Porta]

I think the problem starts when they decide to change heavy cav difficulty...

Back in the days when Fallen have more than 3 members we were making FALLEN_ARCHER_DEATH_SQUAD nights and invade servers. But there were one server we never invade. It was Eu1 with Great Khans members on it. Cos when we do join it with our FALLEN_ARCHER_DEATH_SQUAD we were fucking trembled to pieces by GK members switching from donkeys to hipopotams. And becouse there is no good cav on NA server we preffered that one.

KingBread, my hero!

[Switchtense]

Just remove ranged for good. After I am not playing Archer anymore that is.

[22nd_Earl_NoscopeGabe]

Fo sho! Add a range cap son!

[Grumbs]

Unfortunately, legitimate nerfs aren't exactly desirable either. What's more unfortunate, is that nearly every proposal to disincentivize ranged without touching effectiveness, must be done at the level off the website (basically meaning it's a no-can-do.)

Can we expand on this a bit please?

Disincentivising ranged without touching their effectiveness? Effectiveness for whom though and in what situations? I think you can adjust some stats without making them much less effective for the genuinely good players. They will adjust while the random ranged may have an incentive to play another class because they can't reach the skill level needed. That will reduce the amount of ranged without them necessarily being less effective in the right hands.

We still have...

Missile speed. Good players will judge for the distance better, good melee will dodge the shot
Ammo. Good players will choose their shots wisely, there will be less projectile spam in the hopes that you or a team mate hit a target
Weight. Good players will think about their positioning more and the bad players get forced into melee

People still have a good incentive to go ranged in order to kill melee (or any other class). If melee has more effective armour ranged will simply have to switch who they target. Ranged shouldn't really have pierce damage, but you can adjust armour soak again (if that was what you did). A problem is that medium armour is used by ranged as well (especially xbowers)..there isn't really enough difference between melee and ranged in melee range

There are probably more things that could be done just by adjusting weapon stats so that people don't just play ranged because they are bad, and the good ranged are still rewarded

[Joseph Porta]

The only two posts I find truly agreeable in this entire thread.

I might start (meaning I've never looked at the scripts before) checking out conquest, but don't hold your breath.

I already replied to this post but I cant stress enough how a 3 flag conquest domination system will annihilate siege.

Im baffled how you can agree with this bad beyond whatever idea.

[LordRichrich]

Simplest thing to do is to just nerf archery. Steve himself thinks it's way to OP and regularly plays on his melee char instead.

I think removing pierce from bows would be a GREAT start. It would still make you effective vs meduim armour, but those in plate (and rightfully so) would be more protected.

[Tydeus]

Some are wrong more often than others. 

The only problem I have with people being wrong is when they are too stuck up to admit it. Kinda like when you buffed agi for now reason, decided to ban allers for not trying hard enough, decided to keep HA and HX as viable classes in this mod... yeah I could go on, but I wouldn't want you to cry yourself to sleep too hard tonight.

This is specifically what I'm talking about, Jona. You go and do the very thing you complain about. You start out by saying "people being wrong... when they are too stuck up to admit it" and then follow up by passing your opinions off as fact "kinda like when..." Jona, I beseech you, you're too intelligent of a person to be doing this stuff, please reflect upon the ideas you have, before you go and publicize them.

Agi was buffed for several reasons, whether or not you agree is irrelevant, the truth of the matter is that nearly all of the skilled, long time players were in agreement that STR was far better than AGI. WM scaling was quite poor, so poor that only a very low percentage of melee players would actually cap their WM. You had free wpp that meant you didn't even have to get a single point in WM to be competitive. Then you had the fact that HP is tied to STR while AGI doesn't really have anything useful like that, but to go further still, IF and equipment requirement were also tied to str. This last point means that everything associated with both killing someone and surviving (aside from simply fleeing) was dictated by STR. What's more, is that all of these things had a stacking effect (Plate armor goes further with higher HP pools.)

I'm sure you don't actually mean to say I banned allers, because I had nothing to do with that decision and haven't even taken the time to look at anything more than the logs San posted (which would seem to support the ban.)

I detest HA, HX and HT like anyone else, but trying to hold against me the fact that I haven't removed three classes from this mod that are in fact, a core part of this series, is quite ridiculous. If Shik can be trusted, these games started out as a horse archer simulation game. Now, with that being said, I have just as recently as two days ago suggested that HA are likely deserving of a nerf.

Valour for archers who attack enemy archers? That's not actually rewarding those who do well and could potentially be less effective than actually shooting melee or horses. As stated in another thread recently, due to score functionality (which is relevant, because that's the ONLY thing valour is based on) a person who gets valour is actually accomplishing a fair bit in comparison to the rest of his team. Recognize that score is generated by the amount of health an opponent loses, modified by their score offset, which increases/decreases based upon how well they have done in previous rounds. Thus peasants are often worth much less than the "Pros".

Pause and think about this for a second. Next, for the sake of argument, assume my next two statements are true (the first of which can't actually be debated.) If valour is based on damage dealt, and HA get valour easier than anyone else, doesn't this mean HA are overpowered with respect to how much damage they deal in comparison to everyone else? The answer should be obviously, yes. Now why is this relevant? Because I'm trying to change the conversation into something more meaningful.

Not all classes are meant to have the same killing potential as the rest (this is partially where proximity bonus comes in), but it's certainly not the case that mounted ranged should be found as the most deadly.

Although you might find it a bit cryptic, I am in fact suggesting that they should be nerfed and that the conversation should shift its focus more towards that.

So again, I beseech you, please reflect upon your ideas prior to publication, it really is for everyone's benefit.

[Switchtense]

Again: Somebody like Steevee is just insanely good at archery. Do you nerf Polearms just because Chase says that it is OP and easy to play?

I seriously cannot understand everybody complaining about archers.

There are very few skilled ones who get these great scores. 90% of all archers get negative K/Ds on every map.

I have been playing a lot lately (Holidays woop). Several hours a day. On EU1, EU2, NA1. I have absolutely no problem getting shot all the time. No matter what class I play.

I am playing Polearm without a shield, archer, LHB cav, Swashbuckler, 1h Cav without shield and 2h.

Of course there sometimes are annoying archers or horse archers. Sometimes there are quite a few archers online at the same time. But I have never been at the point where I would think "Damn, there are too many archers online right now."

Sometimes I get shot 5 times in quick succession, sometimes I don't get shot at all. That is how it works.

[bagge]

Simplest thing to do is to just nerf archery. Steve himself thinks it's way to OP and regularly plays on his melee char instead.

I think removing pierce from bows would be a GREAT start. It would still make you effective vs meduim armour, but those in plate (and rightfully so) would be more protected.

Taking the moral high ground because he abused his archery wpf to the very max?

Edit: By other words, he's just being full of himself (sorry Steevee you know I like you but come on).