General Knight Changes

Just like all Nerds are...

 

Arcrave why so dedicated to shitting on me if you aren't a nerd yourself? Kindly devour a plate of cocks

 

GB2GeyVille Nerd your dad is wait...

 

Nerd Orgy: the visual novel: the action-packed teen drama: starring Arcrave in this 90s fun for all the family penis packed dweeb fest

 

I came here to read constructive comments about the topic, not dis. Plz guys

 

That's what I thought too, apparently that isn't what we do here though.
What do you think about the balance of Knight @Saigon ?

 

With the new shield changes I think it's quite alright - archers are meant as support, not the ranged equivalent of knights

 

Spoiler

Geti has already said that the topic of the Archer being "support" is irrelevant to the discussion of whether classes are balanced and is only relevant to the roles classes should fill.
Archers aren't the support class; Builders are
Builders can provide healing, special ammo and ammunition replenishment, create vehicles and teleporters for their team, which pretty much only exist as something to get allies from place to place. They build the defences which allow their team to move forward rather than stay home and protect the objective, and they provide a way of getting through said defences and letting their allies attack the objective when they're frontline. They are also listed on the wiki as the "Support" class, a wiki which is a little outdated but still shows the general intention of the game when people aren't trying to argue why Archers should stay weak. Nearly everything the Builder does is for the benefit of their team rather than the Builder; thus, the Builder is the "Support", while the Archer WAS the Ranged class, but actually needs support in the form of a Knight rather than being a support in order to get any kills, unless you're a xXprograppallstompaaXx. The Archer possesses no "support" abilities the Knight doesn't: water arrows=water bombs, brief stuns=brief stuns, burger arrow=taking the burger with you and just fucking eating it yourself without having to worry about an arrow flight pattern.

Knights has great anti-player and decent anti-terrain ability in his basic kit, plus mobility through the Shield; the Builder has decent anti-player and great anti-terrain ability in his basic kit, plus mobility in the form of building ladders etc.; and the Archer has to be content with the lowest DPS anti-player ability, no terrain destruction, and a mobility ability which is the fastest, but doesn't help him at all if there's a solid wall around something, or if he's in water, or if he's in freefall [Knights can simply glide out of that because they're totally weak at mobility and everything].
The Shield changes we have now aren't going to stay around for long though, as Geti has said. They allow a lot more opportunities to get around the nigh impenetrable Shield now, but won't do so anywhere near as much for much longer.

 

Either way, I still prefer a melee class to be stronger than a ranged class, I just liked that the knight had to aim his shield a bit more, which made it harder for him to both block a sword and an arrow in a fight

 

That's why earlier in the thread I was asking that the Shield hitbox be made literal, as in the pixels of the Shield in the sprite=the Shielding hitbox, and then if a Knight wants to block arrows he NEEDS to tilt the Shield up or down as necessary, and will always have either his head or legs exposed. At the moment, seeing as the Shield is being brought back closer to where it was, it's going to be RMB=Archers can't hurt you outside 11 tiles again, and aiming will not be a bother.

 

Lag is the reason why this can't be a thing. If the shield hitbox were literal, it would be far too easy for lag to create situations where your shield is useless. It was a problem with original shield hitboxes, it's a problem now, and making them any smaller will only make the problem worse.

The shield hitbox isn't going back to it's original value. It's being tweaked to a middle-ground, where it's easier to compensate for lag, while also possible to hit around said shield when you should be able to.

 

Unless you're lagging so badly that you can't press RMB when you see Arrows coming [in which case you shouldn't be playing the game], you still have a Shield that covers 2/3rds of your body even if you didn't aim it, and if you have the time to use your Shield, you have the time to aim it in the set direction you see Arrows coming from. That isn't "useless" in the slightest. Lag is no reason against it at all. If your lag is so bad that you can't anticipate Arrows, you should be playing Builder, because you won't be able to anticipate other things like a Knight's slashes regardless of what your Shield is like.

So are you telling me it will be possible, with careful aim, to hit Knights from front-on/above if they aren't aiming their Shield properly? I haven't seen anything said about what they're changing the angle of the Shield to yet.

 

Okay, yeah. I see, the thickness is the issue[ inb4 that's what she said]. I mean the angle should leave 2/3 of the body exposed, then, rather than asking for an actual hitbox system. It runs on an angle system, doesn't it? Rather than a hitbox? People saying hitbox all the time gets me confused.

@Yagger Okay, so, angles then. I meant literal as in the Shield covers the area shown. Whether it's done by angles or hitboxes I don't care.

 

you can hit knights shielding downwards from upwards if they aren't aimed properly. literal hitboxes for shields would increase to the sudden deaths during fights, since lag would give the laggier player the advantage since they'd be basically teleporting / jerking around the screen attacking and you wouldn't be able to shield towards them.

 

The average archer, in this build, is now stronger than the average knight, evident by many more archers, and their higher KDRs... So why are we talking about how to buff an archer... If anything, we need to decide what changes to keep, and what to revert, to re balance the classes.

 

Wouldn’t say the average archer is better, new knights do a lot better still than new archers. There's more of an advantage for any class with greater numbers. I think there are a lot more of them though, but that doesn't bother me until it starts creating stalemates.

 

Archers have a harder time being useful on all levels of skill- skrub, decent and #MLG- than Knights do.
More Archers are bound to be played for a while after a new build, just because of the hype around an update for the class anyway as people hear the update and decide to try it out.
They ARE actually improved now, but @Superblackcat they're still not as useful as a Knight, and they aren't going to stay in their current state for long because it's already been said Shields are being put back closer to where they were and Kegs are moving further back on the Knight model. [note: on the last one that makes sense, because otherwise it's like carrying a Keg made of butter every time you get hit by an Arrow: It makes Archers more useful against Kegs but it isn't balanced]

 

By the way, since when does a builder have more DPS than an archer?

Hell, given the right situation, I can do more damage to a single target per second than even a knight can.

Spamming half-shots allows you to outdps a builder, spamming quarter shots from the top of a tower allows you to out DPS a knight.

Arrow damage is entirely based on velocity, so these low velocity shots are capable of dealing 1 full heart of damage given the right situation, while also allowing you to refire 2-4x as fast.