Visit the Beginner's Box
Introduce yourself, read some of the ins and outs of the community, access to useful links and information.
Discussion in 'Balance' started by Verzuvius, Jan 10, 2015.
Would reduce camping and encourage archers to actually make something.
Wouldn't that make archers OP?
And isn't knights and builders already OP?
Hahaha ... no. Archers are absolutely fine the way they are, and builders are not OP ... they're the class which received the least change from classic to beta and through the updates, and for a reason. And thanks for not making any suggestions on how they'd actually become "better at midrange"
Could you at least say your suggestion to make them better at midrange combat? OP lacks of information...
The majority of good archers usually play more like you'd expect a short range, high-damage, "assassin" type class to play than the ranged class they are. Archers pretty much have a melee special attack, but they have also been slowed, rendering them difficult to manage when using this special attack. Grappling hooks encourage rushing, stomps, etc, while the archer does not fulfill its role as a ranged class, which is what I would expect form a class titled "archer."
My biggest gripe, however, is not any of those things. I do not mind having a more assassin-like class than a ranger-like class. What I do mind is that currently seem to have a conflicted role in combat. To see mid range archers put in place or vice versa, I would like to see:
Faster charge on bows with shorter range to make close combat more manageable OR slower charge on bows with longer range to make towers more balanced
Quicker grappling hook throw speed OR grappling hook angle limits (or both)
Relating to faster shot charge, a better use for shot bow special OR something like legolas special reimplemented to make towers useful
Faster movement speed while charging a shot to make close range easier OR slower movement speed while charging a shot (with additions such as longer range-longer charge) to make back lines useful
If anyone else has something to say, please feel free to let me know. These are just my ideas on what's wrong with archers or could be improved at the moment, especially regarding further defining their role in combat. If you disagree, please do not get angry, but rather maturely point out why that idea would be bad and whether that aspect should be changed differently or left the same.
The thing is, the archer's best counter is the shield, if the archer can't penetrate said shield without having to get close enough for the knight to slash him, he's practically worthless. The knight also has bombs and water bombs he can use to gain quite an easy advantage against archers that are close to him, while archers sniping from a tower cannot be hit by said bombs, but cannot hit the knight back if he has a brain/godly reflexes.
But if we where to add every single change Sytoplasma suggested (especially the ones favoring the CQC archer) they'd become quite unbalanced, and knights would rip their hair off. Archers are fine the way they are, long ranged support with bomb arrows/water arrows, or short range harassment if the archer is smart enough to grapple away when the time comes.
On the other hand, most changes included on the second part of your suggestions (after the or) would benefit archers quite a lot, without making them needlessly powerful against knights, they could snipe off unsuspecting builders (and knights under 4 hearths?) with the legolas shot and be a good addition to most teams while becoming more of an "archer"
Thank you for the feedback! These are mostly things I threw out there to get people thinking along the lines of archers' role in the game. Also, I understand triple special arrow being OP, and I'd be fine if not glad to see the maximum of 1 special per shot we have now stay if legolas were put back in.
The only thing that would be reasonable is if you bring back the 3 arrows in sequence instead of a triple burst shot.
But even then you can't really take this all to seriously since you didn't suggest anything yourself
"Make archers better at midrange" they say "why can archer only bring down shield at close range?" they say. You know when a knight doesn't use his shield? When he's waving his sword at someone. When it comes to knight combat, most knights tend to not use their shield unless they're using a bomb or they're facing a stab spammer. So, if you use the openings your friendly knights give you to plunge a few arrows into the enemies' skulls, you can turn the tide of a battle. Also, you are staying at mid-range by doing this, you don't get into the range of enemy swords, but you still have to watch out for bombs and arrows.
I think archers are fine mid-range. I would rather their long-range be buffed (remove the disappearance on triple shots or replace with legolas again).
Archers are just fine mid-range especially because they can much more easily hit moving targets with things like bomb, water or fire arrows than a knight can hit a moving target with a water bomb (mid-range)
Separate names with a comma.