The Ranged Problem.

[njames89]

I'd just say we need to be careful not to grossly overnerf in this case.

[Sellka]

lol, if that gets implemented, it means people cant play their class, because melee cant be assed to get shields and work together. Instead they try to avoid it by having a spasmatic attack on their hand.

I main as range, but it's not unheard of. I remember NA community having something the same and this was before na really had pop back in the day. I'm willing to not play my class to let the server get popped.

[Sellka]

forcing people to not play or change class goes fundamentally against the crowning ideal of player freedom that crpg tries to embody


can't do this, sorry m8

You're complaining about archers and I'm giving solutions, it's more productive than simply screaming NERF every few minutes. We want people to stay on the server yet archers force people away because they are too stubborn to take a shield or accept that they are going to get shot due to lack of protection. Again you are suggesting a nerf to a class that only has X amount of ammo and is most of the time useless in close combat besides blocking. What are archers suppose to do? I know that most cases I cannot afford to put 5-8 arrows in a person, which is the case at times. I have to aim for headshots and that's how I've found it for the longest time.

More so you posted photos of the reticule in very light clothing, you should post screenshots of what the armour does to that and try to shoot from a much further range at a moving target trying not to get shot. Shooting a guy standing still is easy as piss, an even then you can miss 2/3's of a shot due to veering

[Algarn]

You're complaining about archers and I'm giving solutions, its more productive than simply screaming NERF every few minutes. We want people to stay on the server yet archers force people away because they are too stubborn to take a shield or accept that they are going to get shot due to lack of protection. Again you are suggesting a nerf to a class that only has X amount of ammo and is most of the time useless in close combat besides blocking. What are archers suppose to do? I know that most cases I cannot afford to put 5-8 arrows in a person, which is the case at times. I have to aim for headshots and that's how I've found it for the longest time.   

Thing is, he isn't complaining about archers, but crossbowmen who are able to easily outfight a melee player while archers have to commit to their class and sacrifice melee power. The game needs class balance so not all archers/cavs are put in the same team. Besides, the thing that is just purely wrong with your idea, is the effectiveness of the ranged players on the server : why would a level 34 crossbow main be stopped from entering the server when a peasant with a short bow is already filling that slot ?

[Sellka]

Thing is, he isn't complaining about archers, but crossbowmen who are able to easily outfight a melee player while archers have to commit to their class and sacrifice melee power. The game needs class balance so not all archers/cavs are put in the same team. Besides, the thing that is just purely wrong with your idea, is the effectiveness of the ranged players on the server : why would a level 34 crossbow main be stopped from entering the server when a peasant with a short bow is already filling that slot ?

Unfortunately, both get slapped together and this thread is about Range in general. Also what you're talking about is more to deal with the auto/banner balance then what can be controlled by rules and what we can do over the code.

We could stop a lot of the crossbow things by having them require PD to use, would also kill the class because a lot of the players enjoy the use of 1h weapons with some bite to them, in sharp contrast to archers that have almost to no hand to hand capability

Which Night said if only we could assign PD to the Crossbow

[Gravoth_iii]

I thought xbow was the go-to i want to play something thats still fun class, is it really going to be reduced to the non-fun levels of everything else? I mean i barely play the game now, but if you want people to keep playing best thing is probably not to ruin something they enjoy but rather make others equally attractive.

[Finse]

Dont need to give crossbows need of PD, make the reload speed slower and make it more str req.

[Thryn]

You're complaining about archers and I'm giving solutions,

I did not complain about archers, I highlighted the disparity in skill point distribution between crossbows and every other class in the game. You should understand this because crossbowmen can shoot down a plate wearing player with two shots and then charge into melee and be HIGHLY effective whereas an archer cannot because you must invest in power draw. I said nothing about touching archers whatsoever, but if you continue to irrationally assume that I lump all ranged together because you believe that I'm a moronic two-hander who hates ranged, there's nothing I can do to quell your fears.

I have absolutely no problem with you making suggestions, but I will shoot suggestions down when I believe I have a valid argument against them (e.g. player choice trumping ranged player count limitation rules)

 it's more productive than simply screaming NERF every few minutes.

I didn't scream NERF RANGED OP OP, but instead put forth ideas that looked to improve balance. As for damage done by ranged, it is quite high. After all, even a Chinese player got up and complained about getting two shot by ranged because damage like that is a bit absurd. I also know however that melee players can deal outrageous amounts of damage (i.e. one shotting with a polearm) so that's why the balance team looked at the armor soak option before setting itself alight on the NERF RANGED pyre.

tl;dr we think that everything is doing too much damage so we are messing with tankiness b4 destroying the mod

We want people to stay on the server yet archers force people away because they are too stubborn to take a shield or accept that they are going to get shot due to lack of protection.

I personally want to buff shielders because right now, shielder is much weaker than the other melee builds and that's the truth. You don't get very much of a return on your investment, so by buffing shielders, I hope that we can give players an incentive to pick up the class.

 Again you are suggesting a nerf to a class that only has X amount of ammo and is most of the time useless in close combat besides blocking. What are archers suppose to do? I know that most cases I cannot afford to put 5-8 arrows in a person, which is the case at times. I have to aim for headshots and that's how I've found it for the longest time.

I feel like here you are once again grouping archers and crossbowmen in the same bubble which is a mistake.

More so you posted photos of the reticule in very light clothing, you should post screenshots of what the armour does to that and try to shoot from a much further range at a moving target trying not to get shot. Shooting a guy standing still is easy as piss, an even then you can miss 2/3's of a shot due to veering

ranged is hard

str archer is completely viable atm, sexy furry easily 3 shots my build and 4 shots it in the rain. before the armor soak & ranged movement speed changes, sexy furry could 2 shot me which is a bit on the strong side. i think that the changes have balanced it out in a fair manner but didn't eliminate his class from the viability pool. at the same time, sexy furry is limited in melee, which is what gives us what we players consider to be balance. however if you look at pistachio who has been playing arbalest lately, he can two shot me with the arbs and if I get close, pull out a military cleaver and be a very capable opponent in melee. i'm not arguing for a damage nerf like some would assume on the arbs, but how is it fair for pistachio to deal strong damage at range and strong damage in cqc while sexy furry cannot?

btw balanced build archers suck atm, archers are being examined

[Sharpe]

archers are being examined

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

I remember when Tydeus said the same thing.

As long as you're being proactive and productive, all should be well. I think.

[Butan]

I dont really understand the problem of crossbows when you try to compare them to archers to explain their pre-supposed extreme advantages.

If an archer goes against a crossbowman, he can spam him with arrows and deny the crossbowman reload after a shot. If they go in melee, of course the crossbowman should have an easier time having a build that is better in melee since they are more "clunky" in the ranged category (ignoring cover advantages and such). For me the "but my archer build will always be inferior in melee to a crossbowman" is how it should be in the end, with how reload time is extremely high in cRPG with crossbows. Also, when you inject the skill parameter, even an inferior archer can beat a superior crossbowman melee build so all is good.



The problem is much more understandable when you compare crossbows to pure meleeists, they can have a very nice shot or two on a dude and then go into melee on nearly equal ground, but then the crossbowman have near no melee option except 1h no shield or some inferior 2h/poles and the crossbows cost a lot to repair (maybe not a problem anymore today).


I think it wouldnt hurt to make the crossbows proportionally harder to handle (WPF, pre-requisites) but not much more is needed. Or as james said:

I'd just say we need to be careful not to grossly overnerf in this case.

[Grytviken]

I dont really understand the problem of crossbows when you try to compare them to archers to explain their pre-supposed extreme advantages.

If an archer goes against a crossbowman, he can spam him with arrows and deny the crossbowman reload after a shot. If they go in melee, of course the crossbowman should have an easier time having a build that is better in melee since they are more "clunky" in the ranged category (ignoring cover advantages and such). For me the "but my archer build will always be inferior in melee to a crossbowman" is how it should be in the end, with how reload time is extremely high in cRPG with crossbows. Also, when you inject the skill parameter, even an inferior archer can beat a superior crossbowman melee build so all is good.



The problem is much more understandable when you compare crossbows to pure meleeists, they can have a very nice shot or two on a dude and then go into melee on nearly equal ground, but then the crossbowman have near no melee option except 1h no shield or some inferior 2h/poles and the crossbows cost a lot to repair (maybe not a problem anymore today).


I think it wouldnt hurt to make the crossbows proportionally harder to handle (WPF, pre-requisites) but not much more is needed. Or as james said:

The problem is that they are able to do an obscene amount of damage from a bug, they are able to one shot anyone regardless of how much IF, armor and str the target has. Their average damage is already the highest of any weapon in the game ( arb that is ). I don't think anyone is saying to nerf them into oblivion, but range does alot more damage comparative to any melee str damage build. The Arbalest does twice as much damage as a Morningstar and is far more forgiving to use.

I don't see any melee players 1-2 shotting anyone with a decently balanced stat/armor build. Range on the other hand is able to do this quite easily with the speed bonus changes.

[Nightingale]

almost every melee weapon a strength build would utilize does by far more damage on average than the arbalest. Even before we toyed with armor soak values. Morningstar especially does almost double the damage output. Arbalest was only able to 1 shot very light armored individuals highly dependent on the targets iron flesh and strength. (basically, everything you said is false)

We are toying with armor soak and damage type multipliers so you should notice that xbow is less damaging. averaging anywhere between 18-41 depending on the armor you roll with.

[Grytviken]

almost every melee weapon a strength build would utilize does by far more damage on average than the arbalest. Even before we toyed with armor soak values. Morningstar especially does almost double the damage output. Arbalest was only able to 1 shot very light armored individuals highly dependent on the targets iron flesh and strength. (basically, everything you said is false)

We are toying with armor soak and damage type multipliers so you should notice that xbow is less damaging. averaging anywhere between 18-41 depending on the armor you roll with.

With 27 str, +3 weimar helmet, +3 heavy gauntlets, +3 Gothic plate with Bevor a body shot while running towards an xbow brought me down to 20% health. Headshot was instant death. This was a week ago when I tested it.

I think its fixed now.

[Nightingale]

A week ago we discovered bugs with armor soak and damage multipliers. I don't doubt with speed bonus shit like that was happening.

Thou other weapons especially a week ago where doing far more damage on average than the arbalest. A lot of fucky multipliers and armor soak values that we are tweaking and sorting out. hopefully will fix the issue.

[XyNox]

I get the impression that different servers run different damage calculations. I havent done any scientific tests but every time I try a build on EU3 or EU7, it seems to behave quite differently on EU1. It may be a placebo since you are under more stress when playing against people rather than just casually testing builds in peace but could it be that some servers didnt get "updated" properly or something, just like the CN server run differently ? Maybe somebody with video editing skills should test bow/crossbow reload/draw times frame by frame on EU1,3,7, etc. and evaluate if there differences per server. If there happen do be differences, one could assume those also affect damage calculation.

Regarding actual ranged damage, I dont get how some people come across these insane damage numbers. I played with a 18/21 6 PD 155 archer WPF and a MW longbow the last week. I quickly noticed that 6 PD is an absolute joke, at one point I shot a bot in DTV ( donkey crossbower I believe ) ! thirteen ! times and he was still not dead. Realizing that my bow alone wouldnt cut it and I would need to have a good melee weapon as my main source of damage, I played with a MW composite bow from there on. On countless occasions I shot people in the face and in the body another time and in the absolute most cases they wouldnt die. One time my arrow even bounced on a plate guy ... bounced with MW bodkins MW composite and 6 PD ... wow.

I ditched my archer from that point and played melee alt until I could respec into more PD. I just did, went for a 30 str 15 agi 10 PD 139 WPF pure archer with MW yew longbow. Even with that pure cannon build, I shit you not, a 1st wave peasant in DTV survives a shot with MW tatars. Not always but they are occasionally. I dont know whats going on but I think I am better off hitting my enemy with 5 PS, no melee WPF and a 0 slot weapon than actually shooting them. Sure though, headshots deal quite heavy damage, but since you are required to use high PD low WPF builds and hard hitting, low accuracy bows, those headshots are often more RNG than skill dependant. The hitdetection for ranged getting worse and worse every patch is not helping either.