arrow damage versus heavy armor

how many arrows to kill heavy infantry?

  • 3-4(current with high tier bow)

    Votes: 10 40.0%
  • 5-6

    Votes: 8 32.0%
  • 7-8

    Votes: 2 8.0%
  • 9-10+

    Votes: 4 16.0%
  • other(please comment)

    Votes: 1 4.0%

  • Total voters
    25

Users who are viewing this thread

just wanted to know how the community feels about arrow damage versus heavy armor,

i feel like being 3-4 shot to death(highest damaging bow) while wearing the heaviest armor in the game feels bad

i believe being shot to death with crossbow is fine bc crossbows realistically have good armor penetration but arrows do not the same penetration power and shouldnt do as much damage to heavy armor
 
just wanted to know how the community feels about arrow damage versus heavy armor,

i feel like being 3-4 shot to death(highest damaging bow) while wearing the heaviest armor in the game feels bad

i believe being shot to death with crossbow is fine bc crossbows realistically have good armor penetration but arrows do not the same penetration power and shouldnt do as much damage to heavy armor
I dont remember where and I might be wrong but I remember watching a video that showed that longbows had more penetration power than crossbows
 
4-6 should probably be the most reasonable number of bodyshots required to kill heavy infantry. What i'm not too keen on is how sometimes, an arrow or bolt can penetrate a shield and while the chances of it happening are low, that really only accounts for an archer 1v1ing a Vlandian sergeant. Since archer spam seems to be the favourite tactic for most Bannerlord players, what's more likely to happen is that when you're being pelted to hell and back by arrows, enough will penetrate that the person raising his shield will die sooner than the shield he's raising.

Barring the Vlandian Sharpshooter, I don't think TTK is really the issue with archers but rather there's no feasible way to punish an all-archer team composition. I'm not too sure how such a thing could be done without the Super Armor suggestion i posted in other threads but at the very least, I think it might be worth it to bring back menav cav:

Courser
New weapon: Fast Imperial Polearm
A shorter and lower damage version of the Archer Menavlion that well, swings faster.
  • Swing speed increased from 74 to 80
  • Length decreased from 168 to 160
  • Swing damage decreased from 104 to 75 (Weaker than the default menavlion's 87)

Perk 2
Line Breaker replaced with Fast Imperial Polearm
  • Two-handed weapon that trades effectiveness against spearmen and cavalry for ease of use
Back when the Courser had a Cavalry Menavlion, I've always felt that the Menavlion perk help kept the number of archer spammers in check since even though you were much more susceptible to getting stabbed by spearmen or other horsemen, it was much easier to attack shock troops and archers (generally anyone who doesn't have a spear) with the menav than it was with any other swingable weapon on horseback.
 
I think the numbers are kind of arbitrary. It depends on so many factors how much 'you should be able to endure'.
 
There is shield penetration?
Looks to be the case. I'm pretty sure it's not a coverage issue too, considering that the Sergeant's heater shields, leatherbound kite shield, worn kite shield, Aserai oval shields and Battanian oval shields all have near-perfect frontal coverage
 
Last edited:
did some research into the joules of a longbow which is :150 joules

and the force required to penetrate mail: 170 joules

so a longbow should not be able to penetrate mail

however, mail is not as thick around the arms and legs so that should still be vulnerable to longbows with bodkin arrows (and the steel reinforced crossbow of vlandia which is a 14th century invention, ironically without the reinforced steel hand held crossbows delivered less joules then longbows)

what is interesting is that bodkin arrows(designed to penetrate mail) are not as effective at penetrating textile armor as regular triangle shaped arrows (which explains why they had separate shapes)

so contrary to my previous thoughts textile armor is not useless

therefore lighter archers(less then 160lb draw) with non-bodkin heads should not penetrate mail even on the thinner areas such as the arms or legs but should do more damage to textile armored light infantry compared to the bodkin arrowed counterparts

I know this a game but having arrows do more damage then they should is leading to a very fps style game rather than medieval combat(reducing arrow damage is a nerf to archers but they should have normal running speed to balance that rather then this weird lazer beam arrow power but all archers run like they are obese)
 
Last edited:
Realistically heavy armour should make you neigh-invincible to most if not all ranged weapons. Gameplay-wise I think 10+ shots would make sense for the best armour set.
 
I think that we should make arrows deflect from heavy armour, that would be more realistic I think. I think that realism is very important, becouse this is a midevil gaime so I think the game should try to replcate that and stik to the good old times.
I think it is always so annoying when you have a 2 hand wepon and you get shot from all parts of the map but I do be wearing heavy armor. The game would really benefit from less archery and more deflection perks so that archers can be hit by noob players and as they are corrently very powered.

So I think that in conclusion heavy armor can be invisible to archery as that would improve gameplay and realims. Naked spots like a neck could maybe still be a spot to hit I thik.
 
I don't know what you're asking, but how many arrows can kill heavy infantry in the game? Or do we think it's reasonable how many arrows kill heavy infantry
 
I don't know what you're asking, but how many arrows can kill heavy infantry in the game? Or do we think it's reasonable how many arrows kill heavy infantry
The poll question is how much you think should be the requisite number of arrows required to kill heavy infantry. Currently, it's 3-4 with a high tier bow if the past several balance patches are any indication.
 
I think that we should make arrows deflect from heavy armour, that would be more realistic I think. I think that realism is very important, becouse this is a midevil gaime so I think the game should try to replcate that and stik to the good old times.
I think it is always so annoying when you have a 2 hand wepon and you get shot from all parts of the map but I do be wearing heavy armor. The game would really benefit from less archery and more deflection perks so that archers can be hit by noob players and as they are corrently very powered.

So I think that in conclusion heavy armor can be invisible to archery as that would improve gameplay and realims. Naked spots like a neck could maybe still be a spot to hit I thik.
Such great ideas, I think we should also add a bleeding mechanic, if you get cut there should be a chance a vein is cut so you will bleed out after a while, becoming slower and slower as time goes on.
Also we should have horses insta kill players if they bump them with enough speed, because that would be realistic :smile: If a horse charges your behind it should break your back and stop you from moving leaving you incapacitated and unable to play the game because it would be realistic :smile:
You know what, any attack to the legs that hits should make you limp or something, if 1 leg is hit you are limping with 1 leg, but if you are hit on both legs you are will have trouble moving, I think that would be realistic. Let's extend it to arms so if your sword arm gets hit you wont be able to swing as fast :smile:

FOR THOSE THAT DONT GET IT REALISM IS ****
 
Back
Top Bottom