ADD A FUCKING RANGED CAP ALREADY

[CrazyCracka420]

I'm sure people bitched about ranged in real life too.  You know the difference between real life and this video game?  People in real life had to deal with it.  Either with their equipment they used, the terrain they fought on, or the people they brought with them to battle (aka who you fought with).  They weren't able to bitch  and cry to God to limit the amount of ranged the enemy brought with them to battle.

Adapt and stop your bitching.  Problem solved (because there is no problem to begin with, only the one between your ears). 

What I love about crpg is that you encounter so many different scenarios when you fight.  Whether it be where the enemy gathers (i.e. terrain and map), what classes they have, and what classes your team has.  How the teams work together (or decide to rambo and solo a hill full of archers).  It's up to you to adapt, not up to the enemy to make it easy for you to kill them.

Everything has pro's and con's in the game.  What is the "pro" for ranged classes?  They can hit people from a distance. Stop the fucking derp already. 

[CrazyCracka420]

why do we have to get shields? why cant the range stop being pussies and fight.

I dont want to change my style of fighting because people are too scare to get dirty.

Why should you get to dictate how other people play the game?  If you're dying repeatedly, the problem is on you, not the people killing you. 

You don't have to get a shield.  You can continue doing the exact same thing you did last round.  And the round before, and the round before.  It's perfectly fine if you want to keep walking directly into the wall in front of you.  But don't bitch at the admins to move the wall.  You have the ability to go around, go under, climb over, or get a teammate to boost you over it.  But you can also keep walking into the wall, that's your choice too. 

[Grumbs]

I'm sure people bitched about ranged in real life too.  You know the difference between real life and this video game?  People in real life had to deal with it.  Either with their equipment they used, the terrain they fought on, or the people they brought with them to battle (aka who you fought with).  They weren't able to bitch  and cry to God to limit the amount of ranged the enemy brought with them to battle.

Adapt and stop your bitching.  Problem solved (because there is no problem to begin with, only the one between your ears). 

What I love about crpg is that you encounter so many different scenarios when you fight.  Whether it be where the enemy gathers (i.e. terrain and map), what classes they have, and what classes your team has.  How the teams work together (or decide to rambo and solo a hill full of archers).  It's up to you to adapt, not up to the enemy to make it easy for you to kill them.

Everything has pro's and con's in the game.  What is the "pro" for ranged classes?  They can hit people from a distance. Stop the fucking derp already.

Realism argument, adapt, everything has pros and cons...

Problem with the adapt argument is that adapting often means to change clas  or incorporate something that works well against the classes that you have issues with. So what do people do? They go ranged themselves. Or they adapt by sucking fun out of the game, hiding, standing around waiting for flags.

Pro's and cons? You mean balance basically, and no this game is not balanced. If it were ranged would get a big disadvantage when it comes to protection or in melee, and they don't necessarily

No points mentioning realism argument..

Am I QQing now? Pretty sure thats were you go next

[CrazyCracka420]

Class limits are lame, nerfs are unnecessary since Ranged isn't really OP, and adjusting stats would never fix that.

If Tydeus and friends want to get a little more ambitious instead of spending their time tweaking cRPG by skullfucking animations, they should try to polish up Siege 2.0, or rework it into a more proper Conquest/Domination gametype with respawns, three flags, and ticket respawns.

I still can't imagine it being THAT complicated. Take Field by the River or some other popular, open map. Add three siege flags, around both spawns and in the middle. Import Strategus tickets, and make them drain both from deaths and from not holding enough flags. Tune it for 5-10 minute rounds, with the same XP system.

There, 90 percent of all complaints about the game go away. All classes have their place. HA harrass infantry traveling to flags.. ranged defend a flag or suppress defenders. Infantry take and hold ground. Cav be cav wherever they want. Fun, full battlefield from the beginning to end of every round. So much less rage at the game. Much more fun for casual playing.

Fucking do it instead of retweaking the Sweet Spot Animation Hilt Density Algorithim of the pitchfork for 100 hours

Damnit should have scanned for a smoothrich post before I posted...he hits the nail on the head.  Change the game mode and all the bitching goes away. 

Realism argument, adapt, everything has pros and cons...

Problem with the adapt argument is that adapting often means to change clas  or incorporate something that works well against the classes that you have issues with. So what do people do? They go ranged themselves. Or they adapt by sucking fun out of the game, hiding, standing around waiting for flags.

Pro's and cons? You mean balance basically, and no this game is not balanced. If it were ranged would get a big disadvantage when it comes to protection or in melee, and they don't necessarily

No points mentioning realism argument..

Am I QQing now? Pretty sure thats were you go next

So you build the perfect melee build that is awesome for 1v1'ing other melee, and then you cry when ranged dominates you when they have favorable conditions?  I'm not using realism as an argument at all. I'm suggesting that people in real also complained "WAH THEY CAN HURT ME BEFORE I CAN HURT THEM".  And they adapted.  A person who trained with a 2hand sword their whole life didn't necessarily need to go and learn how to shoot a bow overnight, or learn how to use a shield.  They could have just not fought the archers on the favorable terrain for archers.  They could have stood behind their buddies who had shields until they got close enough to slaughter the archers. 

My point is that there is no problem, except for peoples' inability to adapt to the battlefield conditions.  Congrats on min-maxing to best devastate melee infantry, you're now weak to ranged classes.  Deal with it. 

[Grumbs]

Nah I have 5 shield skill, 1 hander at 138 + other melee abilities. If I wanted to I could get 5 PD instead and my build wouldn't change much. That would be me adapting to the situation in the most efficient, min max way. I'll shoot melee, shoot ranged, shoot cav. If I get into melee I'll drop the bow and my melee ability won't go anywhere

The problem is that adapting means to get abilities that exacerbate the ranged issue. My 5 shield skill points would be best put into stats so that I have a better melee build and xbow WPF actually . There is your pro's and con's . The game is just not balanced very well

[LordRichrich]

So you build the perfect melee build that is awesome for 1v1'ing other melee, and then you cry when ranged dominates you when they have favorable conditions?  I'm not using realism as an argument at all. I'm suggesting that people in real also complained "WAH THEY CAN HURT ME BEFORE I CAN HURT THEM".  And they adapted.  A person who trained with a 2hand sword their whole life didn't necessarily need to go and learn how to shoot a bow overnight, or learn how to use a shield.  They could have just not fought the archers on the favorable terrain for archers.  They could have stood behind their buddies who had shields until they got close enough to slaughter the archers. 

My point is that there is no problem, except for peoples' inability to adapt to the battlefield conditions.  Congrats on min-maxing to best devastate melee infantry, you're now weak to ranged classes.  Deal with it.

Grumbs hasn't min-maxed for maximum infantry killing power actually.

The problem is, there's very few terrains that AREN'T favorable for archers over infantry in some way. And there's always somewhere for them to hide around a tree so they don't get cav fucked.

No one wants ranged removed, a lot of people just want it toned down. The damage you can out put INDISCRIMINATELY is the problem. Yes, melee can (presumably) hit harder than ranged. But ranged can do so with 0% risk of the player they're targeting getting them back.

Also, to address the "Chase is good at X so we should nerf it too" argument, again Chase isn't dealing indiscriminate damage. I myself have killed Chase like one or two times before. Phase, Atze - any of the EU melee demi-gods I've likely felled them at some point. You know how many times I've killed Shosho, or Bagge, or Steve once they're aware of me? Zero. The only time I've killed them is through a surprise attack simply because they are impossible to engage from the front unlike Chase etc etc.

Again, archers can stay. Let's just tone done their damage output/missile speed/accuracy. Making archery harder to get kills or even land shots with will REDUCE THE VOLUME OF ARCHERS and those who are good at archery WILL REMAIN SO LIKE THEY HAVE THROUGH ALL THE OTHER ARCHERY CHANGES.

Christ, it's as though people somehow never get on servers when it's majority ranged XD

[MURDERTRON]

Archers in medieval times typically fired in volleys from behind their infantry.  They did not use guerrilla spec ops seal team 6 elf ranger tactics.

[San]

Getting rid of very long/indefinite hold and tying accuracy penalties with a scaling damage penalty as well would be two nice steps before talking about stats. I find indefinite holding a somewhat broken mechanic, negating any sort of prediction factor. I also find decreases in accuracy (shooting while running/turning/holding bow too long) somewhat useless when there will be some randomization in movement of the opponent dodging (Edit: and effective range of course, but that's tied with missile speed as well). An additional damage penalty would provide more tangible feedback (and maybe a very slight bonus when timed perfectly). Not guaranteeing headshots on an unaware target is the only time where I see accuracy really being a prominent balance factor.

[Grumbs]

There should be more penalties for using decent armour with ranged (especially a xbow). Then melee will have a tangible reason to stay melee. You don't really lose enough effectiveness in other areas when you switch to ranged, especially if you have a 32+ character. There is a real lack of incentive NOT to take some ranged ability. With no skill point investment needed for xbows you can even have more stats than someone who uses a shield.

Or heavy armour should be cheaper and be better against ranged than now, and make it so ranged don't use heavy armour

[Switchtense]

Then again, you wanna QQ about ranged it really is mainly an issue with vanilla warband that they added ranged classes as a 'sniping' class rather than a spray + pray class which is how i always perceived medieval warfare with archers - you line the archers up and all fire in roughly the same direction, you suppress and hit infantry but with no knowledge of your individual confirmed kills or not.

Would definitely be awesome if this was possible in cRPG. But there are not enough people to actually make arrow volleys happen. Also people would whine about "There are too many my old friendchers!"

[Xiou]

My point is that there is no problem, except for peoples' inability to adapt to the battlefield conditions.  Congrats on min-maxing to best devastate melee infantry, you're now weak to ranged classes.  Deal with it.

Untrue, the problem lies when the scenery involves a roof which is only accessible from one crazy jump which is then populated by a group of archers. They then have complete domination over the whole map as they are on a roof and no matter how big your carefully organized group of shielders is, you will get shot to pieces trying to get up and the one man with a poleaxe helping the archers is sure to screw you if you finally make the jump.

Sure, everyone hated archers in real life but they didn't jump on the roof of nearby houses and become almost invunerable. And yes, you can try to shoot them, and they hide over the ridge of the house and shoot you back.

I am starting to believe that ranged is not the whole problem, but that the maps allow for too much abuse of hard to reach places for ranged people to camp out.

[BlueKnight]

Untrue, the problem lies when the scenery involves a roof which is only accessible from one crazy jump which is then populated by a group of archers. They then have complete domination over the whole map as they are on a roof and no matter how big your carefully organized group of shielders is, you will get shot to pieces trying to get up and the one man with a poleaxe helping the archers is sure to screw you if you finally make the jump.

Sure, everyone hated archers in real life but they didn't jump on the roof of nearby houses and become almost invunerable. And yes, you can try to shoot them, and they hide over the ridge of the house and shoot you back.

I am starting to believe that ranged is not the whole problem, but that the maps allow for too much abuse of hard to reach places for ranged people to camp out.

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

<puke_hard.gif>

[Chosen1]

why not just add a team class balancer?

[HappyPhantom]

To be honnest, i wont understand the guys who decided to play a "point & click" when you are in the best game for medieval melee fight.

1. Ping.

2. Variety.

[Westgate]

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

The round was already over half over with many ranged dead. Oh yeah, and this is only 1 team.

What is with so many ranged recently?