Yertyl
Veteran
I have seen endless discussion about the specific instances of this, but to me it always boils down to the same theme:
The only ranged weapons that seem to be in a good place to me are throwing weapons, but their use is obviously much, much more limited than that of a bow or crossbow. Otherwise, I cannot think of a single instance in which the game would not be drastically improved by significantly slashing ranged damage across the board. I think this would bring the game much closer to what I feel the balance should be: A ranged fighter is more effective if they can shoot unimpeded for a long time and use most of their quiver -- otherwise, the melee fighter should win.
So please, just reduce those numbers? I am tired of every game being a decision of "Do I want to mass ranged units or do I want to make it artificially harder for myself?"
- regular archers/crossbowmen are way more powerful than melee infantry. We all fear sharpshooters and fians, but laugh about axemen.
- horse archers are way more powerful than melee cavalry. I think just saying "Khuzait" is enough to demonstrate this point, even with their less than optimal tactical use of those troops.
- This also contributes to the fast pace of battles, as melee units either rush archers or die trying (mostly the latter)
- it is usually way easier for the player to rack up more than a dozen kills with a ranged weapon, even if unskilled in the weapon
- when I go down on the battle field, it is more often than not to a random arrow to the face -- less fun than avoidable melee damage
- A glancing hit with a melee weapon can be reduced to single digit damage in heavy armor, but arrows always really hurt.
- And lastly, looter rocks are more dangerous than their pitchforks
The only ranged weapons that seem to be in a good place to me are throwing weapons, but their use is obviously much, much more limited than that of a bow or crossbow. Otherwise, I cannot think of a single instance in which the game would not be drastically improved by significantly slashing ranged damage across the board. I think this would bring the game much closer to what I feel the balance should be: A ranged fighter is more effective if they can shoot unimpeded for a long time and use most of their quiver -- otherwise, the melee fighter should win.
So please, just reduce those numbers? I am tired of every game being a decision of "Do I want to mass ranged units or do I want to make it artificially harder for myself?"
Last edited: