Archer changes general

It's funny how every Class is called 'OP' and/or 'UP'.
We don't rly need CrateArrows (even if this was just a joke suggestion) because we have Cata's and Archer Crate carrying.

Everything is perfectly balanced as long as you don't compare it to other things.

If you ever played a game called 'Battleforge'; it was the epitome of a balancing problem cuz
RTS with over 400 Elements (Units/Building/Spells) and different game modes. But i think this was a problem from the community too.

 

If anything is to be added its really not something we can control anyways. Time to stalk!

 

Well said. Game balance is very tricky, and adding more variables in the form of new moves or special attacks muddies the waters and makes the game balance 'equation' all the more complex and difficult, if not impossible to solve.

Because of this, I think that we'll have the best chance of a reaction from the devs if we stay focused on the balance issue, rather than whatever we think 'would be cool'.

 

I haven't read all the pages, but I did read quite a lot of it but anyway, forgive me if I'm repeating anyone/anything.

Not getting into OP/UP or "Support vs. Tank" I think that a simple thing that could be made was to change the speed of the archer's shots, it is incredibly slow and ridiculously low-ranged, it's kinda ironic when you prepare spot an enemy with your "zoom-out" but the arrow goes only 2/3 of it (and maybe it's less than that)

Also, why is it so big? When it sticks to the ground looks like a broom, not going to compare KABxKAG but on the Classic Version, the arrow's flight, and "design" were so great and realistic, one of the many unique qualities of the game.

So yeah, I think just those little changes would make a huge difference both on combat and utility of the class. But since the discussion took and path on suggestions I was brainstorming one thing: When the arrow hits the enemy and gets sticked on it, it makes the enemy slower, it could stash up to 5, the more you get hit the slower you get, and the only way to get rid of it is to have an fellow archer to take it off from you, it would add an debuff-like skill and also a support-like. What do you guys think?

 

Or it could just slow them down for a couple seconds, horizontal movement-wise. I'd prefer a 1.5 dmg buff though, honestly.

 

I´m not for the simple way to increase the damage output of the archer.

I know a lot of people, including me who know how to play an archer. Most people are whining, because they cannot kill an atacking squad, thank god that this game is balanced!

The archers strenght is to climb over everything and move with highspeed on ceilings and hide. Bomb arrows are getting the job done. Also fire arrows (more damage vs. players).


2 Archers can wreck every warrior from distance in 2 seconds. 1 Archer has a problem, ofc but thats ok (for me)

Archer improvements should be:

-Rope-Arrow
A Rope from the position of the archer to the position of the impact. Every teammate can hangle to the other side.

-Disease-Arrow
Only half a hearth damage, but enemy is slowed down and cannot jump any more, area damage, 5 seconds duration.

-Remote Bomb Arrow
*click*

People want to increase archers strenght, because he is the coolest class of the 3. And at the moment the most difficult to go. A knight can have success by clicking around and having luck, the archer cannot.

 

How? It takes 4-5 seconds for an archer to load Legola's Shot and even that can't take down a Knight (I'm guessing that's what you mean by "warrior")

 

you are doing 6 damage with 2 archers, after warrior charges his sword he has no defence = kill. You can jump around the knight and penetrate him from 2 sides.

After he atacks just jump backwards or grapplehook away load your shot, give him 1 shot so he is down on 3 hearths. With 3 hearths he dies by one legolas salvo :P

 

That sounds oh so nice and logical on paper but in practice you failed to take into account a few things.

For example, you'd only be able to do 6 hearts of damage if the knight was dumb enough not to shield (otherwise only 5) and ONLY if you manage to get atleast one archer close enough to stun him (which can prove difficult depending on surroundings), otherwise the knight shields the arrows fairly easily taking 0 damage. Might I also add how easy it is to get killed after an unsuccessful kill attempt with triple shot? "Jumping backwards or using the grapple hook" isn't that efficient since the knight can jab you to death or release a quick slash way before you can use the grapple or jump away. Why? Because his attacks are WAY faster than an archers and they get momentum from slashing which helps catching up to archers fairly easily, especially when they're in melee range.

Second, that synchronization is very difficult to pull off at close range and it's quite easy for a knight to just back away and shield against those arrows since triple shot takes 3-4 to reload and a charged slash takes 1 second plus it gives you a nice little momentum forward, making it possible to close to gap fairly easily and kill the archers.

Third, due to the annoying "arrow slashing" feature the knights have, a knight has a decent chance of destroying arrows mid flight simply by slashing them or jabbing like crazy. It's not 100% but stating that the knights have no defense when they attack is completely wrong and you should do your research before claiming such things.

In all honesty I've rarely seen two archers being able to synchronize as well as you make it sound. I've been able to do that once or twice but that was because the knight didn't expect me and I just jumped in and saved the other archer's butt and that's it. No planning, no synchronization, nothing. Just a bad knight that didn't notice one archer sneaking behind him.

At range it's easy to just sit back with other archers and just fire triple shot after triple shot hoping for a hit, but when you're trying to do that in melee range? Hah! Good luck finding a partner that knows when to stay and shoot and not run away when he notices the knight charging in. Very few good archers can tell when it's time to flee or when you should sit tight and open fire.

Edited: have to correct myself regarding using the grapple hook or jumping away after using a triple shot. It is possible but depends on the knockback and your aim. I sometimes end up pushing them down in to the earth since I try to strike from above and the knockback becomes almost useless. using the grappling hook to escape is possible but it depends on the knockback.

 

Okay, I didnt noticed the "2 archers" but: Everything Raelian said.

Also, you're talking about a close combat situation for an archer, wich is a ridiculously thing to ask to a "ranged" class, and even the few brave archers that stand up to battle on the ground level or at short distance, are victim of a little "grip" the knight does when he slashes so it's almost more useful to try a last close hit and then get slashed, then try to escape and get slashed anyway.

 

Hey guys,

Please bear in mind that anecdotal evidence is one of the weaker types. Of course, it is possible for an archer to beat a knight. It is even possible for a specific player who is great at archer to regularly beat average knights. It is easy to misconstrue this situation as a solid defense for the notion that archers are as effective as knights, but this defense relies on the 'subjectivist fallacy' and 'hasty generalization fallacy' (look it up; fallacious arguments are inherently invalid).

The fact is that when on even skill levels, knights can practically outright ignore archers, having to do little more than hold right click to completely render the archer ineffectual in the standoff. At most, archers can sometimes get some lucky shots in, but it is highly unlikely for an archer to successfully kill a knight if they are of similar competency, even if the archer has a favorable position; try it sometime in an empty server if you doubt it.

That said, this point does not take groups into account. I will grant that it is much more likely to catch a knight not shielding in your direction when he is engaged in combat. However, the archer cannot kill that knight even if he successfully lands an entire triple shot, which is easier said than done. Consider that the knight will probably be in fast, erratic motion if he is in engaged in said combat, and will be shielding in the archer's direction at least some of the time , as well. On top of all that, if the knight ends up killing any of these other proposed adversaries, the heart he gains from that foe's corpse negates that stray arrow that hit him, since knight vs. knight combat is typically one-sided from a damage perspective. Again, I invite you to test on an empty server with any reasonable parameters you wish to see that these claims hold up to experimentation. I will even help in good faith, if you like.

Also, the archer must successfully aim his shots, which is far from a sure thing if he is at a safe distance from the knight. Remember, I am not talking about top-tier seasoned veterans here. It is reasonable to assume that a certain level of competency with the game will skew results one way or the other; assuming 100% successful aim is problematic for obvious reasons. Archer misses are more significant than knight misses, too, because of the discrepancy in charge time favoring the knight.

 

I liked your post, but only because of this. This would be really useful, and more befitting of the archer's support class role. The other things were pretty dumb. (Remote mine arrow oh genius, it's like a bomb arrow but shittier)

 

I feel like Rope Arrows would trivialize defenses. What's the point of having a fortress if everyone can scale the walls due to one arrow?

 

It could be expensive, or easily broken, or short in length, or any number of factors. Builders can ladder over defenses without buying anything (they spawn with 100 wood which is trivial for ladders), archers have hookshots which get over anything and everything. Knights have... bombs. Which cost money, can be unreliable, and can even kill them.

Archers are the support class, according to pretty much everyone. Even if it was expensive, easily breakable, or etc, a rope arrow could be a nice addition for their arsenal. It'd help out knights at the least. It could trivialize defenses sure, but so does a catapult or ballista with a good user.

 

According to the KAB Wiki:
Knight: Melee type
Archer: Ranged type
Builder: Support type

I'm not saying that I agree with that , nor the Wiki is flawless, I consider builder a much more defensive type class, however I disagree labeling the archer a "support" class.

 

That's the key. It doesn't take much skill to land an arrow in a spot for everyone to climb over the walls. It takes a certain amount of skill to launch another player over a wall and survive long enough to either get backup or do damage to justify throwing yourselves over.

 

Back on topic, If it's groundlevel and trinity shot... Probably can't miss. if you do, you really suck, and should play a different class ;). It's 2 hearts.

 

I think we can all agree that the archer is currently nearly worthless at long range. Yes, they can hit other archers, and they can even kill builders which is important (I'd honestly label them "Anti-Builders" for the moment), but against a knight, they're worthless unless the knight is distracted or a complete noob/idiot. It amazes me how they get shittier and shittier the further they are from combat, even though that should be their best suit.

You know, it just occured to me how much better archers would be if arrows had mass and velocity and punctured shields at great distances and did more damage when very far away, specifically when fired from distances of 30 or more tiles. Then make them shitty in close combat, but don't do like the classic where an arrow knocked a shield down from literally any range. No, make it a long distance range, give tall towers actual power. Two knights shielding upwards should nullify the barrage of arrows from a couple archers, but not one lone knight.

Eh then people will complain it's OP. Archers are so fucked. Making them better in close combat range is stupid but making them good at far range is begging for rage.

 

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It seems like the issue is less with Archers and more with fundamental game mechanics.

 

So sad, and so true.