Throwing weapons (need balancing )

[bruce]

I just find the amount of damage high-tier throwing weapons do over the top, as well as the "reload speed". The "throw on the move" part is sensible (well, except backpedalling, but whatever), and are a major appeal of throwing weapons to people who want to engage in melee (so you can use them to defend vs horses/etc, to throw something after runners/other ranged/etc as you close the distance).

However, these days I'm more afraid of someone with heavy throwing axes / spears / jarids (let's not even mention the instakill lance) then a melee char, a crossbowman, or just about any other thing - a melee char I can (try to) block, a crossbowman while doing equal damage to someone with jarids (with 7-8 PT) has one shot and if he misses he's got to fight in melee, a archer, while he can spam more arrows, they do less damage then throwing weapons and he can't fire on the move (so he has to either engage in melee or run away), and of course, a horseman you can block/stab as well. On the other hand, a thrower (or hybrid thrower) will kill me in two shots, often even if I'm carrying plate, and the reload speed means he can throw quite a number of projectiles at me before he has to, eg. engage in melee.

Which is probably the reason why people are bothered with throwers, which gets especially annoying when they're in numbers when even shields stop being credible protection (everything under a huscarl / heavy board gets broken really easily, and with the coverage nerf they're fairly vulnerable at the sides/etc unless it's a huscarl of course).

[Vance]

Reduced ammo would fix much. Accuracy I can't comment on having never used a thrower.

Realism-wise I think throwing axes are for throwing over shields, not at them. Very close range artillery basically, not good at shield breaking.

[Tai Feng]

Which is probably the reason why people are bothered with throwers

Actually, they're bothered with it because they consider it should be inferior weapon in every way to everything. When cavalry stabs 5 people it's OK, but when thrower kills 1 person it's mass outrage.


Observe EU server we play on and please tell me, how many top people score kills with throwing and how many with other weapons? Whenever I look at people who have most kills it's never someone with throwing. That of course does not mean something is perfectly balanced, but it does make you wonder.

[Rendar1970]

Exaggerating a bit are we?

Come play on NA server, Im not making any exaggeration when I tell you that nearly all players who are not an archer/xbow have atleast 1 stack of throwing.

You're forgetting one were important thing: wpf change. Hybrids are now much better than they were.

Yeah this is pretty BS.  How exactly does the WPF change have anything to do with this?  You dont need to invest a single wpf in throwing to be good at it.  On the NA server alot of the top throwers have 0 WPF in throwing, just alot of STR.




Also, as per your last post.  Your dead wrong again.  People are not bothered by throwing because it should be a viable playstyle.  People are bothered by throwing because a toon 100% dedicated to any other role, can simple just add throwing on top, and be twice as deadly.

Throwing should be like everything else, dedicated throwers excel and remain as they are now, people with other builds who just dabble should be mediocre as best.

A Cav build that gets PD 1 cant just turn into a mega archer.  So why should a pull Polearm spec suddenly be able to throw as well as the full dedicated thrower?

[justme]

top are filling ppl that are most skilled, regardless to their class

[Jinxits]

Im not going through all 10 pages but this is my two cents.

Throwing for one is only thrown while crossbows and Bows have added force behind them. You cant tell me that someone can throw a couple lb spear a hell of a lot faster and harder then a 1/4 lb bolt/arrow. One there is more force because of the force the bow and crossbow put and add to the projectile. Yes I argue the speed and damage as well as others. Nerf it abit Im not saying make arrows and bolts better I know it wont happen to many people complain. And arrows and bolts are quite where they should be anyways. How ever one shot kill with a throwing axe or spear to the arm leg and so on like I have seen is a bit absurd. I havent really tried throwing to much to really be a judge on it or not but what i have seen is that throwing is OP'ed you can see it if you watch some throwers get 6 kills in a row with just thrown weapons without having to hit any of those people 2 times. And they arent just peasant kills. So yea. NERF throwing.

[Tai Feng]

Come play on NA server, Im not making any exaggeration when I tell you that nearly all players who are not an archer/xbow have atleast 1 stack of throwing.r?

Yes, infantry that has free slots should have throwing in cRPG, just as archer or xbow who has free slots should have melee weapon.
That doesn't mean there's something wrong with throwing. I see plenty of melee here on EU who have no throwing, yet.

The rest of your post is, I'm sorry, exaggerating.

top are filling ppl that are most skilled, regardless to their class

Then find me skilled persona with crossbow consistently being on top the way skilled cavalry, 1H and skilled 2H do so.

I agree that skilled people will still do good with bad equipment/class, but scoreboard is still a pretty accurate indication of usefulness of the class.

[tankmen]

really? cause the NA servers are full of throwing weapons each one taking chunks of health or killing people, a level 30 thrower pure str and 11-12 PT can two shot me in lordly plate, hows that fair? he breaks my shield before i can get within a few feet then spams the rest of his axes before i can get close... they need slower throw time and or damage, because sure he may miss but if its a battle he will kill me then proceed to pick his axes up and of only lost 2-4 axes that are stuck in me and my shield... i hear people defend throwing by saying it has low ammo? really? u can kill in 2-3 yet archers takes 8-12 or cant even hurt them,so archer maybe has 3-4 kills of arrows while throwers have 10+? cause archers cant 1 shot peasants a thrower can. if a high level archer picks up a hunting bow it wont do shit, if a thrower picks up a rock it can kill plate... or a knife or any low level throwing item, hows that balanced?

[KaMiKaZe_JoE]

I think that throwing weapons should act as a natural supplement to an infantryman's arsenal. They should serve as a way for players to defend against other ranged units and charging cavalry, as well as to soften up enemy infantry forces prior to engaging them in melee combat. However many thrown weapons are currently innacurate, and simply exist as a form of projectile spam which, when it lands, causes rage-inducing one/two hit kills.

I think a good solution to this problem is to slightly decrease the damage dealt by throwing weapons, in particular the high-tier (jarid, lance, heavy ax) weapons. I also think that there should be more time inbetween shots, ie: slower chamber speed. I also think that the accuracy of an immobile thrower should be significantly increased.

Optimally, I would like to see any infantryman who is not a dedicated thrower enter battle with two or three throwing javelins/lances/axes/whatever at most. This would force said non-dedicated thrower to conservatively use their ammunition instead of spamming them as they do now. It will actually be possible for them to conservatively and intelligently use their thrown weapons because they will have increased accuracy. Spam would be reduced. There would be a smaller number of SHIT flying through the air hitting random people. Cavalry would be able to participate in the battle more, instead of hiding, because infantry will have to make a conscious decision as to whether they wish to save their thrown weapons, or potentially waste them on cavalry.

In other words, I propose we make thrown weapons something that almost any infantry dude can effectively use, but which requires some critical thinking. Do I throw one of three of my axes at that archer who's not looking at me right now? Or should I save it for a situation when I might REALLY need it, like when a horse is charging at my face? Should I throw both of my javelines now, at the begning of the fight, or should I save them for the end of the round when we're chasing down that one, naked delaying guy/bitch? Can I even hit that HA with my throwing-lance-of-doom, or should I wait until he gets closer?

And by increasing accuracy, throwers will actually be able to make these decisions with good heart, because they'll be sure they can actually hit what they're throwing at.

For those dedicated throwers, I think thrown weapons should be a bit cheaper. If they would only be getting 2-3 shots per slot, then they shouldn't have to pay as much as they do now. Nobody shouldn't be able to play the way they want, if that way is fair to other players.

tl;dr: More accuracy, so throwers can actually aim. Less ammo and more time between throws, so throwers won't spam. Less damage, so throwers won't cause rage with so many 1 shot kills. Appropriatly cheaper thrown weapons, so dedicated throwers won't be paying for 4 darts when they'll only have two per slot. Or three per slot. Someone else come up with the number, I don't throw much.

[Fluffy_Muffin]

(click to show/hide)

I think that throwing weapons should act as a natural supplement to an infantryman's arsenal. They should serve as a way for players to defend against other ranged units and charging cavalry, as well as to soften up enemy infantry forces prior to engaging them in melee combat. However many thrown weapons are currently innacurate, and simply exist as a form of projectile spam which, when it lands, causes rage-inducing one/two hit kills.

I think a good solution to this problem is to slightly decrease the damage dealt by throwing weapons, in particular the high-tier (jarid, lance, heavy ax) weapons. I also think that there should be more time inbetween shots, ie: slower chamber speed. I also think that the accuracy of an immobile thrower should be significantly increased.

Optimally, I would like to see any infantryman who is not a dedicated thrower enter battle with two or three throwing javelins/lances/axes/whatever at most. This would force said non-dedicated thrower to conservatively use their ammunition instead of spamming them as they do now. It will actually be possible for them to conservatively and intelligently use their thrown weapons because they will have increased accuracy. Spam would be reduced. There would be a smaller number of SHIT flying through the air hitting random people. Cavalry would be able to participate in the battle more, instead of hiding, because infantry will have to make a conscious decision as to whether they wish to save their thrown weapons, or potentially waste them on cavalry.

In other words, I propose we make thrown weapons something that almost any infantry dude can effectively use, but which requires some critical thinking. Do I throw one of three of my axes at that archer who's not looking at me right now? Or should I save it for a situation when I might REALLY need it, like when a horse is charging at my face? Should I throw both of my javelines now, at the begning of the fight, or should I save them for the end of the round when we're chasing down that one, naked delaying guy/bitch? Can I even hit that HA with my throwing-lance-of-doom, or should I wait until he gets closer?

And by increasing accuracy, throwers will actually be able to make these decisions with good heart, because they'll be sure they can actually hit what they're throwing at.

For those dedicated throwers, I think thrown weapons should be a bit cheaper. If they would only be getting 2-3 shots per slot, then they shouldn't have to pay as much as they do now. Nobody shouldn't be able to play the way they want, if that way is fair to other players.

tl;dr: More accuracy, so throwers can actually aim. Less ammo and more time between throws, so throwers won't spam. Less damage, so throwers won't cause rage with so many 1 shot kills. Appropriatly cheaper thrown weapons, so dedicated throwers won't be paying for 4 darts when they'll only have two per slot. Or three per slot. Someone else come up with the number, I don't throw much.

I like the idea. It would add more tactical trows and less chaos

[Tai Feng]

he breaks my shield before i can get within a few feet

Try tactics.

[Ganon]

A random thrower can take 40-60% of my str based lvl30 char in milanese plate (with proper helm, boots and gauntlets), while a pure thrower with a str build can just oneshot me. That is not balanced, no room for discussion.

[Fluffy_Muffin]

Not true either, so again no room for discussion i guess 

[Ganon]

Not true either, so again no room for discussion i guess 

It just happened a few minutes ago in crpg. You must be talking of native or some other mod!

[Jorium]

I think that throwing weapons should act as a natural supplement to an infantryman's arsenal. They should serve as a way for players to defend against other ranged units and charging cavalry, as well as to soften up enemy infantry forces prior to engaging them in melee combat. However many thrown weapons are currently innacurate, and simply exist as a form of projectile spam which, when it lands, causes rage-inducing one/two hit kills.

I think a good solution to this problem is to slightly decrease the damage dealt by throwing weapons, in particular the high-tier (jarid, lance, heavy ax) weapons. I also think that there should be more time inbetween shots, ie: slower chamber speed. I also think that the accuracy of an immobile thrower should be significantly increased.

Optimally, I would like to see any infantryman who is not a dedicated thrower enter battle with two or three throwing javelins/lances/axes/whatever at most. This would force said non-dedicated thrower to conservatively use their ammunition instead of spamming them as they do now. It will actually be possible for them to conservatively and intelligently use their thrown weapons because they will have increased accuracy. Spam would be reduced. There would be a smaller number of SHIT flying through the air hitting random people. Cavalry would be able to participate in the battle more, instead of hiding, because infantry will have to make a conscious decision as to whether they wish to save their thrown weapons, or potentially waste them on cavalry.

In other words, I propose we make thrown weapons something that almost any infantry dude can effectively use, but which requires some critical thinking. Do I throw one of three of my axes at that archer who's not looking at me right now? Or should I save it for a situation when I might REALLY need it, like when a horse is charging at my face? Should I throw both of my javelines now, at the begning of the fight, or should I save them for the end of the round when we're chasing down that one, naked delaying guy/bitch? Can I even hit that HA with my throwing-lance-of-doom, or should I wait until he gets closer?

And by increasing accuracy, throwers will actually be able to make these decisions with good heart, because they'll be sure they can actually hit what they're throwing at.

For those dedicated throwers, I think thrown weapons should be a bit cheaper. If they would only be getting 2-3 shots per slot, then they shouldn't have to pay as much as they do now. Nobody shouldn't be able to play the way they want, if that way is fair to other players.

tl;dr: More accuracy, so throwers can actually aim. Less ammo and more time between throws, so throwers won't spam. Less damage, so throwers won't cause rage with so many 1 shot kills. Appropriatly cheaper thrown weapons, so dedicated throwers won't be paying for 4 darts when they'll only have two per slot. Or three per slot. Someone else come up with the number, I don't throw much.

+1  great suggestion