Proposition Regarding match size and Roster

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have no idea how you've reached that conclusion. Having predominantly played as archer, throughout my Warband experience, I can say without a doubt that all an archer wants is fewer threats and fewer distractions. Large battles lead to more chaos and that's the last thing you want as an archer. At 6vs6 and smaller, archers can easily focus on one or two targets, whilst only having to worry about one or two threats and just fire away safely.

That's the whole reason the 5vs5 tournaments needed class restrictions in the first place, and why at 10vs10 it isn't an issue. Basic stuff.
 
captain lust said:
I have no idea how you've reached that conclusion. Having predominantly played as archer, throughout my Warband experience, I can say without a doubt that all an archer wants is fewer threats and fewer distractions. Large battles lead to more chaos and that's the last thing you want as an archer. At 6vs6 and smaller, archers can easily focus on one or two targets, whilst only having to worry about one or two threats and just fire away safely.

That's the whole reason the 5vs5 tournaments needed class restrictions in the first place, and why at 10vs10 it isn't an issue. Basic stuff.

At 10v10 it isn't an issue because the 10 people playing don't all enjoy playing archer. If 10 people were go to archer on pretty much any map, as long as they weren't ridiculously stupid and 3 or 4 of them were actually good archers, the archers would win.
 
Mr.X said:
captain lust said:
I have no idea how you've reached that conclusion. Having predominantly played as archer, throughout my Warband experience, I can say without a doubt that all an archer wants is fewer threats and fewer distractions. Large battles lead to more chaos and that's the last thing you want as an archer. At 6vs6 and smaller, archers can easily focus on one or two targets, whilst only having to worry about one or two threats and just fire away safely.

That's the whole reason the 5vs5 tournaments needed class restrictions in the first place, and why at 10vs10 it isn't an issue. Basic stuff.

At 10v10 it isn't an issue because the 10 people playing don't all enjoy playing archer. If 10 people were go to archer on pretty much any map, as long as they weren't ridiculously stupid and 3 or 4 of them were actually good archers, the archers would win.
Then why doesn't it happen? The ENL isn't some big roleplay event. Teams play to win and this never ever happens.
 
captain lust said:
Mr.X said:
captain lust said:
I have no idea how you've reached that conclusion. Having predominantly played as archer, throughout my Warband experience, I can say without a doubt that all an archer wants is fewer threats and fewer distractions. Large battles lead to more chaos and that's the last thing you want as an archer. At 6vs6 and smaller, archers can easily focus on one or two targets, whilst only having to worry about one or two threats and just fire away safely.

That's the whole reason the 5vs5 tournaments needed class restrictions in the first place, and why at 10vs10 it isn't an issue. Basic stuff.

At 10v10 it isn't an issue because the 10 people playing don't all enjoy playing archer. If 10 people were go to archer on pretty much any map, as long as they weren't ridiculously stupid and 3 or 4 of them were actually good archers, the archers would win.
Then why doesn't it happen? The ENL isn't some big roleplay event. Teams play to win and this never ever happens.

Because people don't want to play archer.
 
It's more of the fact that archer's don't always win, any intelligent person would find a tactic around it, maybe cav rush the spawn, maybe have inf with heavy shields to push archers out of position etc, It's a well known fact (in Europe anyway) that all archer spam doesn't work well. I remember IG tried it a few times a while back (not sure if it was matches or training) but it ended badly, inf with shields and javs just owned. I guarantee you won't have to worry about massive archer spam.
 
Lord_David said:
It's more of the fact that archer's don't always win, any intelligent person would find a tactic around it, maybe cav rush the spawn, maybe have inf with heavy shields to push archers out of position etc, It's a well known fact (in Europe anyway) that all archer spam doesn't work well. I remember IG tried it a few times a while back (not sure if it was matches or training) but it ended badly, inf with shields and javs just owned. I guarantee you won't have to worry about massive archer spam.

 
Shemaforash said:
X, according to your logic here. If I were to put up a team of 10 good archers, you're saying I will have a non-counterable strategy. Strange this hasn't happened yet.

You missed the part where I said 3 or 4 of them have to be good.
 
Mr.X said:
Shemaforash said:
X, according to your logic here. If I were to put up a team of 10 good archers, you're saying I will have a non-counterable strategy. Strange this hasn't happened yet.
You missed the part where I said 3 or 4 of them have to be good.
There's no room for your trolling here. I don't know who you think it's amusing but just take it elsewhere.
 
captain lust said:
Mr.X said:
Shemaforash said:
X, according to your logic here. If I were to put up a team of 10 good archers, you're saying I will have a non-counterable strategy. Strange this hasn't happened yet.
You missed the part where I said 3 or 4 of them have to be good.
There's no room for your trolling here. I don't know who you think it's amusing but just take it elsewhere.

I'm being serious. 10 good archers honestly beats 10 good infantry or 10 good cavalry on pretty much every map (except maybe cav on a really open plains). If the players are at the same level, the archers will win.
 
BkS and LES have successfully used all-archer strategies (both LES & BkS were Sarranid against Nord teams). LES was actually black-listed by another clan for doing so, and they wouldn't scrim us for months because of it. If I recall correctly, these matches were 7v7 or 8v8. Archer spam is better than any other class spam because they have so much presence on the field and are the dominant class in terms of map control. Enforcing an archer class limit only supports this conclusion, lust. :roll:

It doesn't take a genius to realize that archers also scale better than infantry or cavalry. There are only so many people that can fit around a single opponent in a melee, but exponentially more archers can simultaneously fire at that target. A widely spread team of archers can protect its own flanks from range, and cover the majority of any map. If you want to argue that cavalry will beat archer spam, or that you can just pressure them with infantry, then you've not had the (dis)pleasure of running into a gigantic crossfire. The only way you could pull it off is with perfect coordination. You would need to hit all parts of the spread simultaneously so that no cluster of archers could cover the others.

Of course the map will dictate how effective an archer spread can truly be, but all of the native maps can be horrendous with archer spam. From what I've seen of the 4 custom maps in this year's rotation, they can also be played with a predominantly ranged team successfully.
 
Mr.X said:
captain lust said:
There's no room for your trolling here. I don't know who you think it's amusing but just take it elsewhere.

I'm being serious. 10 good archers honestly beats 10 good infantry or 10 good cavalry on pretty much every map (except maybe cav on a really open plains). If the players are at the same level, the archers will win.
That's not the argument now is it. The argument is that 10 good archers will beat *anything* on pretty much every map, when it's been clearly shown that most maps at 10vs10 on Medium reward a fairly well mixed class distribution.

Orion said:
BkS and LES have successfully used all-archer strategies (both LES & BkS were Sarranid against Nord teams). LES was actually black-listed by another clan for doing so, and they wouldn't scrim us for months because of it. If I recall correctly, these matches were 7v7 or 8v8. Archer spam is better than any other class spam because they have so much presence on the field and are the dominant class in terms of map control. Enforcing an archer class limit only supports this conclusion, lust. :roll:
What archer limit? Where? Also, 7vs7 and 8vs8 are less class balanced than 10vs10, which is what I'm saying never needs class restrictions (wouldn't be affected by them unless they were very tight restrictions).

Part of the problem is that you play on Fastest, which shifts the balance of power away from archers, since melee fights are resolved faster and archers have less time to shoot into them. Also archers lack long weapons, which get a ridiculous boost to power in fastest. Those things are fine and that's just the way balance has resolved itself in the US scene but what you're asserting about larger numbers is simply wrong.

There may be something I haven't considered about Fastest that means greater numbers of archers scale in a certain way. I don't know. But at medium, in 10vs10 matches, archer spam (over 50%) has been tried and it always fails. The only exceptions are pretty much Snowy Village with vaegirs and sometimes Field by the River, depending on the opposing faction. Defending Village, with some setups can also benefit from archer spam and crossbows do a pretty good job doubling up so spamming them on village can work too.

It doesn't take a genius to realize that archers also scale better than infantry or cavalry. There are only so many people that can fit around a single opponent in a melee, but exponentially more archers can simultaneously fire at that target. A widely spread team of archers can protect its own flanks from range, and cover the majority of any map. If you want to argue that cavalry will beat archer spam, or that you can just pressure them with infantry, then you've not had the (dis)pleasure of running into a gigantic crossfire. The only way you could pull it off is with perfect coordination. You would need to hit all parts of the spread simultaneously so that no cluster of archers could cover the others.
Hmm... how to hit all parts of a line of archers simultaneously. Maybe a direct charge from spawn? Would a complex tactic like that achieve such an impossible goal? Also, don't forget that we don't play plains in Europe, so archer lines aren't really a thing.

Orion said:
Of course the map will dictate how effective an archer spread can truly be, but all of the native maps can be horrendous with archer spam. From what I've seen of the 4 custom maps in this year's rotation, they can also be played with a predominantly ranged team successfully.
Good luck archer spamming on San'di'boush.
 
Hey America,
If you think archer spam works so well why not set up a scrim with the UK team and try it out?
Or maybe we could break out the rioters to do some american bashing?

by rioters I mean the UK 5as squad, as opposed to actual rioters (I don't indend to destroy america US customs, honest)
 
captain lust said:
Mr.X said:
captain lust said:
There's no room for your trolling here. I don't know who you think it's amusing but just take it elsewhere.

I'm being serious. 10 good archers honestly beats 10 good infantry or 10 good cavalry on pretty much every map (except maybe cav on a really open plains). If the players are at the same level, the archers will win.
That's not the argument now is it. The argument is that 10 good archers will beat *anything* on pretty much every map, when it's been clearly shown that most maps at 10vs10 on Medium reward a fairly well mixed class distribution.

Orion said:
BkS and LES have successfully used all-archer strategies (both LES & BkS were Sarranid against Nord teams). LES was actually black-listed by another clan for doing so, and they wouldn't scrim us for months because of it. If I recall correctly, these matches were 7v7 or 8v8. Archer spam is better than any other class spam because they have so much presence on the field and are the dominant class in terms of map control. Enforcing an archer class limit only supports this conclusion, lust. :roll:
What archer limit? Where? Also, 7vs7 and 8vs8 are less class balanced than 10vs10, which is what I'm saying never needs class restrictions (wouldn't be affected by them unless they were very tight restrictions).

Part of the problem is that you play on Fastest, which shifts the balance of power away from archers, since melee fights are resolved faster and archers have less time to shoot into them. Also archers lack long weapons, which get a ridiculous boost to power in fastest. Those things are fine and that's just the way balance has resolved itself in the US scene but what you're asserting about larger numbers is simply wrong.

There may be something I haven't considered about Fastest that means greater numbers of archers scale in a certain way. I don't know. But at medium, in 10vs10 matches, archer spam (over 50%) has been tried and it always fails. The only exceptions are pretty much Snowy Village with vaegirs and sometimes Field by the River, depending on the opposing faction. Defending Village, with some setups can also benefit from archer spam and crossbows do a pretty good job doubling up so spamming them on village can work too.

It doesn't take a genius to realize that archers also scale better than infantry or cavalry. There are only so many people that can fit around a single opponent in a melee, but exponentially more archers can simultaneously fire at that target. A widely spread team of archers can protect its own flanks from range, and cover the majority of any map. If you want to argue that cavalry will beat archer spam, or that you can just pressure them with infantry, then you've not had the (dis)pleasure of running into a gigantic crossfire. The only way you could pull it off is with perfect coordination. You would need to hit all parts of the spread simultaneously so that no cluster of archers could cover the others.
Hmm... how to hit all parts of a line of archers simultaneously. Maybe a direct charge from spawn? Would a complex tactic like that achieve such an impossible goal? Also, don't forget that we don't play plains in Europe, so archer lines aren't really a thing.

Orion said:
Of course the map will dictate how effective an archer spread can truly be, but all of the native maps can be horrendous with archer spam. From what I've seen of the 4 custom maps in this year's rotation, they can also be played with a predominantly ranged team successfully.
Good luck archer spamming on San'di'boush.

It hasn't been clearly shown to me, so that's not an argument either.

I think Orion's referring to the mentions of an ENL class limit (it was mentioned somewhere in this thread)

And tell me, if fastest shifts the balance of power AWAY from the archers, how would that make more archers = better? If anything fastest shifts the balance toward archers honestly, because they can shoot so much faster. Melee fights really don't end that much quicker. At least not faster than the archers can shoot.

Archer lines aren't a "thing" on plains in America either. You play enough American scrims to know that lust. We don't line up our archers unless we have a zerg tag.

Newsflash: Archers can hit things that are close up to them as well.


@Crazyboy: Sure. How does "West_Coast_Battle_Server" sound? :grin:
 
Mr.X said:
Newsflash: Archers can hit things that are close up to them as well.

@Crazyboy: Sure. How does "West_Coast_Battle_Server" sound? :grin:

What argument is that newsflash supposed to support?
I mean you have to be hugging them to stop them firing, and most archers have melee weapons so I don't see how that's relevant?

West Coast? - Surely if archer spam is as powerful as you claim we could play on a european server and you'd still win right?
If you actually want to put your money where your mouth is, I'd be happy to face you on an east coast server.
 
crazyboy11 said:
Mr.X said:
Newsflash: Archers can hit things that are close up to them as well.

@Crazyboy: Sure. How does "West_Coast_Battle_Server" sound? :grin:

What argument is that newsflash supposed to support?
I mean you have to be hugging them to stop them firing, and most archers have melee weapons so I don't see how that's relevant?

West Coast? - Surely if archer spam is as powerful as you claim we could play on a european server and you'd still win right?
If you actually want to put your money where your mouth is, I'd be happy to face you on an east coast server.

The newsflash is to argue lusts "gl archer spamming on sandi'boush" comment. The "west coast" comment was to argue that US and the UK will never have a truly even match anyway (at least, not even enough to determine balance issues), so there's really no point. Plus I'm not captain. D:
 
Mr.X said:
I think Orion's referring to the mentions of an ENL class limit (it was mentioned somewhere in this thread)
I'm thinking of introducing class limits to the ENL along with the proposal to decrease the number of players to 8vs8. I would never support class limits at 10vs10, simply because they aren't necessary to encourage balanced play. The game does it anyway at those numbers.

Mr.X said:
And tell me, if fastest shifts the balance of power AWAY from the archers, how would that make more archers = better?
I agree. I'm just fishing around for any shred of reason/evidence/explanation in your arguments. I've got around two hundred matches at 10vs10 from the ENL backing up my points.

Mr.X said:
The newsflash is to argue lusts "gl archer spamming on sandi'boush" comment.
Well I look forward to seeing how that works out for you.

Mr.X said:
The "west coast" comment was to argue that US and the UK will never have a truly even match anyway (at least, not even enough to determine balance issues), so there's really no point. Plus I'm not captain. D:
Pretty sure crazyboy made it clear that we'd face you in a situation that would offer you a straight up advantage (East Coast USA) with you playing as all archers. I think beating you there would pretty much render your arguments null and void.

Shemaforash said:
Lust, I wasn't trolling. I was following his logic.
I was calling out X for trolling, not you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom