Archers buffed too much

[Helrekkr]

I'm not too worried. They'll get nerfed somehow next patch and all fotm spammers should go away at least.

[Elmetiacos]

Native archers shoot faster and more accurately, but people who play native don't hide behind barns. They use shields!

This is because in Native you are limited to a particular troop type with national equipment and so there's a 50/50 chance you can't be an archer even if you want to be. People in Native will play to their faction's strengths and only the Sarranids (since most servers ban Khergits) tend to result in high concentrations of archers. cRPG also allows ladders, which don't benefit infantry or cavalry but allow archers and crossbowmen to take advantage of all the best vantage points which their Native counterparts can only stare up at.

[YuRneRo]

in case - in medival times - arrow launch from longbow  is NOT gettin flesh behind heavy armores (only between stack)

or  pumpedout  hit around things of set.

i thing need some  new patch ...where is knights will be a knights.

[KyndridOLD]

Actually... english long bows from range made plate mail look like fucking paper.

[Vygar]

I don't have an issue with archers unless I decide to run around without a shield.  Throwers on the other hand....very annoying.

[B3RS3RK]

Archers are fine now.It takes high level to use the better bows accurately and it requires all their wpf.They need to wear light armor to hit anything really and they are shooting slow due to the new animation.Bow damage is cut, so you cant really kill Plate-users(Hence Mail) alone.

Archers are more of a support role in cRPG now than the Snipers they were before, which is very good.

[Gorath]

Actually... english long bows from range made plate mail look like fucking paper.

No.  And before you scream AGINCOURT! you need to be reminded that it was the mud and terrible conditions that fucked up the armored cavalry while the archers simply took advantage of the situation and exacerbated it.  When the battle of vernoix (sp?) came about afterwards, without he terrible conditions, the knights in tempered steel plate armor rode the enemy archers down like a bunch of scrubs.  The arrows may have punctured a small hole in the plate, but wouldn't penetrate the jack underneath, much less the flesh of the knight himself.

Not that any of this reality/historical bullshit means fuck all in a video game.

[Amadeo]

Not that any of this reality/historical bullshit means fuck all in a video game.

Agreed ... the "well in real life" arguments are annoying. Real life war isnt fun ... no matter what weapons you use =P

[Joxer]

No.  And before you scream AGINCOURT! you need to be reminded that it was the mud and terrible conditions that fucked up the armored cavalry while the archers simply took advantage of the situation and exacerbated it.  When the battle of vernoix (sp?) came about afterwards, without he terrible conditions, the knights in tempered steel plate armor rode the enemy archers down like a bunch of scrubs.  The arrows may have punctured a small hole in the plate, but wouldn't penetrate the jack underneath, much less the flesh of the knight himself.

Not that any of this reality/historical bullshit means fuck all in a video game.

[IRL arguments coming]
Actually at that time plate wasnt that dominant. Longbow was very effective against mail, not plate. Plate at that time was very thick and heavy. Horses also were mostly unarmored. When later on Battle of Vernuil came abouts it was the first time effective plate against longbows was on the field. There was a huge development in steel working. It was the lombard cavalry from milan. That armor was much lighter and they rode through the longbowmen also because it was light enough to protect alot of the horse.

[Baddy]

I'm willing to bet that if shields were more popular than 2h then there wouldn't  be as much crying about archers.

Get one of the cheapo shields. Use while advancing. Stop being scrubs.

[Baddy]

[IRL arguments coming]
Actually at that time plate wasnt that dominant. Longbow was very effective against mail, not plate. Plate at that time was very thick and heavy. Horses also were mostly unarmored. When later on Battle of Vernuil came abouts it was the first time effective plate against longbows was on the field. There was a huge development in steel working. It was the lombard cavalry from milan. That armor was much lighter and they rode through the longbowmen also because it was light enough to protect alot of the horse.

Well you're right that mail was the dominant armor. Plate was just too expensive to make. Also, it wasn't very heavy. Battle plate armor would only weigh about 50 pounds, lighter than modern infantry loadouts. Plate wearers were still quite agile on the battlefield and could easily run down archers. Only time you ever see those big heavy ass plate is in jousts, since the idea is 100% protection as nobody wants to die in a lowly joust instead of glorious battle!

[StanleyPain]

I'm willing to bet that if shields were more popular than 2h then there wouldn't  be as much crying about archers.

Get one of the cheapo shields. Use while advancing. Stop being scrubs.

[Gorath]

I'm willing to bet that if shields were more popular than 2h then there wouldn't  be as much crying about archers.

Get one of the cheapo shields. Use while advancing. Stop being scrubs.

Yeah but all the 2h elitists view shielders as scrub no-skill players so that'll never happen.

[Baddy]

Yeah but all the 2h elitists view shielders as scrub no-skill players so that'll never happen.

That's funny considering 2h takes the least amount of "skill" to roll the field. Double funny if they're using katana or flamberge

[Helrekkr]

Plate was not at all uncommon on battlefields, at least from the 14th century on.