Archer/Crossbowman Athletics

[Swadius 2.0]

Why didn't the pursuers just drop some of their equipment to reduce their load?

You can't drop armor, and most of the time you need your droppable equipment to effectively fight.

It's the end of battle with only an archer to contend with, surely with their better athletics the infantry could have catch up if they dropped the few pounds worth of weapons they don't need to deal with a naked fighter.

 

[Halcyon]

Archers definitely should have a global speed decrease. They generally have far lighter armour than the infantry, which further exacerbates the problem. An infantryman in a padded coat is hard pressed to catch up to the average archer clad in a tunic, which shouldn't be the case.

Kiting is a bloody stupid bit of bum****ery that should be discouraged as much as possible. Historically, archers were pretty competent light infantry if they put away their bows; I believe that bumping their melee proficiencies a little should encourage them to draw a weapon instead of resorting to kiting if people got close.

NO archers do not need more nerfing. do you have any freaking clue why nords have 5 athletics?? its because they are the BEST melee class. let me repeat BEST. its a way to balance it, other melee types maybe be slower, but the nord should be able to cut them up like chopped liver.

Funnily enough, the stats don't reflect that. They only have a very slight edge in power strike when compared to the other footmen, and their proficiencies are broadly similar too.

let me refer you to this wonderful page: http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=tlDgAVprN9gx_6WfOcJk0dA&output=html

Now come ****ing tell me their proficiencies and stats in melee are familiar.

and saying that an infantryman in a padded cloth cant catch an archer in a vest, you forget the infantry man is carrying also carrying *most of the time* a shield and three other weapons.

 

[Night Ninja]

Now come ****ing tell me their proficiencies and stats in melee are familiar.

Go look at it again.

I said broadly similar. The only proficiencies that they're better in are 2h and throwing, and even then it's not by much. You said they were the BEST melee class, which indicates that you must have a severe head injury.

and saying that an infantryman in a padded cloth cant catch an archer in a vest, you forget the infantry man is carrying also carrying *most of the time* a shield and three other weapons.

That infantryman is a blithering imbecile, then. Does he happen to have four arms?

 

[Harn]

and whats the point of having weapon range, if you cant use it properly, or find the conditions under which you can use it properly? their athletics provide them with this ability.

You find the conditions by relying on your infantry and cavalry to keep the enemy away from you. Properly using the time they buy is up to you.

archers shouldnt be as fast as other troops? what you want to be slower? what would be the point of that? and there is less reason to have say: X ability in game mode A, but no X ability in game mode B

Archers/xbows are currently very good at fending off all three class types. They don't have a major weakness that can't be compensated for. They currently have range, speed, decent melee and the ability to use a shield.

Currently, infantry lack a definitive role in a rock/paper/scissors fashion. Infantry have to wade through a hail of arrow fire and cavalry charges, only to reach the spot an archer is holed up and have the archer start to kite across the map. Where's the balance in that? This athletic change would help fix the hole in the r/p/s model that is currently broken. Infantry would be a step closer to being the rock to archers scissors.

Granted, all classes have counters to each other to a degree, but currently archers by far have the biggest advantage in controlling the conditions to the vast majority of fights in that they can attack whenever and from wherever they want and force others to come to them. The ability to break off the fight and run away is just pushing it.

It's unfortunate that this change would hurt archers that don't exploit the situation, but there it is. :/

 

[Apthorpe]

It's the end of battle with only an archer to contend with, surely with their better athletics the infantry could have catch up if they dropped the few pounds worth of weapons they don't need to deal with a naked fighter.

I couldn't tell if you were joking here, referring to a future situation where infantry do have better athletics, or simply misinformed, but in case the third is correct, I'll repeat that infantry do not have better athletics than archers/xbows in any case. It's always equal except for the Nord veteran, who has one less athletics than the other inf and archers/xbows.

archers shouldnt be as fast as other troops? what you want to be slower? what would be the point of that? and there is less reason to have say: X ability in game mode A, but no X ability in game mode B

Archers/xbows are currently very good at fending off all three class types. They don't have a major weakness that can't be compensated for. They currently have range, speed, decent melee and the ability to use a shield.

Currently, infantry lack a definitive role in a rock/paper/scissors fashion. Infantry have to wade through a hail of arrow fire and cavalry charges, only to reach the spot an archer is holed up and have the archer start to kite across the map. Where's the balance in that? This athletic change would help fix the hole in the r/p/s model that is currently broken. Infantry would be a step closer to being the rock to archers scissors.

Granted, all classes have counters to each other to a degree, but currently archers by far have the biggest advantage in controlling the conditions to the vast majority of fights in that they can attack whenever and from wherever they want and force others to come to them. The ability to break off the fight and run away is just pushing it.

It's unfortunate that this change would hurt archers that don't exploit the situation, but there it is. :/

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Halcyon]

Now come ****ing tell me their proficiencies and stats in melee are familiar.

Go look at it again.

I said broadly similar. The only proficiencies that they're better in are 2h and throwing, and even then it's not by much. You said they were the BEST melee class, which indicates that you must have a severe head injury.

ah, ok i was addressing something else. that sort of is another discussion, but stats dont do everything they only help. the nords have pretty good weapons, i.e axes that have a bonus against shields, and having the 2nd best shield. so yes they are still the best melee class.

@harn:
i did not know M&B was based on a rock/paper/scissor model. Beside the fact that the roles can be exchanged. *i know this will sound silly* in your model: infantry/cavalry/archer. when it could also be: infantry/archer/cavalry. M&B should not be based on a strict model like this, there will always be advantages/disadvantages and other ways to flesh them out.

*they can attack whenever and from wherever they want and force others to come to them*

thats sort of their job + their advantage.

 

[Cwvym]

@ pawncakes this does not have to change.

I did this and I was laughing while dead people on ventrilo where simply aghast.

Should have some naked races to see what's what.

 

[PsykoOps]

If anything it could be increased. Inf can quite easily catch up to any archers, except the naked ones perhaps, but they cant catch naked infantry either. If your argument would be true then why is it that I continously get caught by swadian infantry in proper armor while I'm wearing the lightest stuff available? You can always try to run away but you can never run fast enough to kite properly anyway. Infantry is in a disadvantage when there's plenty of distance when the archers start to back off, that's what they do. Infantry has proper weapons and armor, to compensate that archers have fast feet, they have nothing else. To assert that infantry and archers should meet in equal terms in melee is ridicilous, if that were the case then give archers proper armor and weapons too.

 

[Griskard]

Actually, if there were three of you there is no excuse, why wouldn't you just fan out on him? That way the furthest he could go is to the edge of the map and then bam, he is stuck...

 

[Apthorpe]

@harn:
i did not know M&B was based on a rock/paper/scissor model. Beside the fact that the roles can be exchanged. *i know this will sound silly* in your model: infantry/cavalry/archer. when it could also be: infantry/archer/cavalry. M&B should not be based on a strict model like this, there will always be advantages/disadvantages and other ways to flesh them out.

*they can attack whenever and from wherever they want and force others to come to them*

thats sort of their job + their advantage.

He's saying that every class has its significant weaknesses except archers. If the rock/paper/scissors model doesn't help you understand it, just ignore it.

If anything it could be increased. Inf can quite easily catch up to any archers, except the naked ones perhaps, but they cant catch naked infantry either. If your argument would be true then why is it that I continously get caught by swadian infantry in proper armor while I'm wearing the lightest stuff available? You can always try to run away but you can never run fast enough to kite properly anyway. Infantry is in a disadvantage when there's plenty of distance when the archers start to back off, that's what they do. Infantry has proper weapons and armor, to compensate that archers have fast feet, they have nothing else. To assert that infantry and archers should meet in equal terms in melee is ridicilous, if that were the case then give archers proper armor and weapons too.

The stats don't agree with your statement. They probably caught up to you because you took inefficient routes. Check out the Unofficial Troop Editor stats if you don't believe me. However, if you still disbelieve that archers and infantry have equal running speed (nord inf excepted as they're slower), test it out in game for yourself.

 

[looy]

The problem is, run speed is balanced for combat but not for kiteing and moving across the map, we need sprinting and infantry should get more sprint.

 

[Halcyon]

@harn:
i did not know M&B was based on a rock/paper/scissor model. Beside the fact that the roles can be exchanged. *i know this will sound silly* in your model: infantry/cavalry/archer. when it could also be: infantry/archer/cavalry. M&B should not be based on a strict model like this, there will always be advantages/disadvantages and other ways to flesh them out.

*they can attack whenever and from wherever they want and force others to come to them*

thats sort of their job + their advantage.

He's saying that every class has its significant weaknesses except archers. If the rock/paper/scissors model doesn't help you understand it, just ignore it.

i understand, but nerfing archer athletics, is taking their advantage away.

 

[Cwvym]

I don't think archers and xbowmen can be lumped together. Slowing down xbowmen would reduce the dual purpose role they have now, making them less effective in melee, which is unlikely to encourage them to swing that pick, but possibly more likely to bring a second crossbow.

Turning archers into turrets is not guaranteed to enrich the tactics either.

Doing something novel like providing covering fire for infantry and cavalry might. This usually means that some poor bastard is going to get killed whilst typing, but that's what you get for being in charge.

Or, picking up one of the many crossbows or bows left on the ground and using it to shoot the naked idiot could possibly work too. As much as the archer can pick up a shield, every infantry has some sort of proficiency in bows and crossbows.

Throwing weapons are even easier to find. Be nice if they were a bit better. It's a better idea then nerfing the archer - de-nerf the throwing weapons, and see how glad to be naked that archer would be with an axe in the back.

 

[Apthorpe]

i understand, but nerfing archer athletics, is taking their advantage away.

Let me get this straight. You think that the main archer advantage is athletics? Hmmm... How about a long distance attack that neither infantry nor cavalry can match? It's the basic reason the archer/xbow is deadly - he can kill an enemy long before the enemy has a chance to do damage to him (excluding throwing weapons, but they're not very effective against archers/xbows).

I don't think archers and xbowmen can be lumped together. Slowing down xbowmen would reduce the dual purpose role they have now, making them less effective in melee, which is unlikely to encourage them to swing that pick, but possibly more likely to bring a second crossbow.

Turning archers into turrets is not guaranteed to enrich the tactics either.

Doing something novel like providing covering fire for infantry and cavalry might. This usually means that some poor bastard is going to get killed whilst typing, but that's what you get for being in charge.

Or, picking up one of the many crossbows or bows left on the ground and using it to shoot the naked idiot could possibly work too. As much as the archer can pick up a shield, every infantry has some sort of proficiency in bows and crossbows.

Throwing weapons are even easier to find. Be nice if they were a bit better. It's a better idea then nerfing the archer - de-nerf the throwing weapons, and see how glad to be naked that archer would be with an axe in the back.

Throwing weapons used to be a lot more powerful. The effect of that? Melee was a lot less common, because  people would carry big stacks of throwing weapons and become miniarchers. Also, with lower athletics archers will not be 'turrets.' They just won't be able to outrun the infantry who have been enduring their fire for the entire charge.

 

[Frankmuddy]

You call it 'boring standoff', I call it 'chosing to fight on ground that gives you an advantage' aka rule #1 of pretty much any warfare. I

I agree with you. I do. It's the 60 guys in spectator mode waiting for the round to end that have a problem with the idea. : (

Personally, I think being naked gives you a somewhat unreasonable speed boost over someone wearing clothes or light armor. A leather llamellar vest, sword, cap, spear, and round shield isn't going to noticeably slow your run speed that much.

On the other hand, though, and speaking from experience in real world battle games, Archers can kite in real life. It doesn't work well, in fact it almost never works, but it does happen sometimes.

 

[AoC]

Very true. Archers/Xbowmans need their athletics decreased to 4/5 (i would rather go for 5), and Nord Veterans need their athletics increased to 6.

Also, Veterans are not best infantry - they have good shield (but have 3 shield skill, least amount compared to other infantry), but their melee weapons are not very good (swadians have better 2 handed, rhodocks better spears, vaegirs faster swords - thier weapons are average)(their two handed weapons are not very strong, despite good proficiency). Veteran's throwing kind of sucks nowdays, and is very heavy. Their armours are not very good (swadians have the edge here).

Nords have mediocre infantry.

Kitting should be not possible, archer need to support infantry. Otherwise, why using infantry at all ?

Also, veteran have 3 shield skill, archer have 2 shield skill. With any decent teamwork archer have instant iron shield, if he dont play with morons.

Archers main advantage should be long ranged attack. As it used to be IRL.

 

[Styo]

Or how about a stamina Bar?....

if not that then how about this... They should implement a wolf in the game so when someone keeps running away then wha..... whats this? a rabbid wolf ran by and ate him? huh that works 

 

[Halcyon]

i understand, but nerfing archer athletics, is taking their advantage away.

Let me get this straight. You think that the main archer advantage is athletics? Hmmm... How about a long distance attack that neither infantry nor cavalry can match? It's the basic reason the archer/xbow is deadly - he can kill an enemy long before the enemy has a chance to do damage to him (excluding throwing weapons, but they're not very effective against archers/xbows)

wow thanks for those very insightful words, i had no clue!
you people are basically saying that ranged attacks should only last so long, and if you get to the archers position he should die. If an archer sees you are dangerously close they are going to run so they can fire more arrows *i.e their RANGED attack which they are GOOD at* athletics is essential to this, and thats why there is no reason to nerf archer athletics.

 

[The Harmonizer]

I agree somewhat but I would rather see Archers and Crossbowmen Have only one point athletics lower then their infantry brethren.
So that archers and infantry can still move together as a team.

 

[Berserker Pride]

That makes sense you wouldn't want them getting left behind.  And that is enough that infantry can catch them eventually even if they try to kite naked.  Although you would want vets to have 6 athletics if that was the tweak.