The Problem

No. Why would you think that?

 

Because I'm a heretic. :)

 

You know, Neat explained his WTF moments with archer, and I personally believe if it really is a "WTF" moment I can see some kind of disbelieve, intolerance, or surprise involved. I've had my WTF moments with knights who send me flying more than 50 yards with a charge swing, and also I've got to admit, the fact that bombs roll for a period of time before blowing up can be quite aggravating to deal with when you're running a way. My WTF moments occur when a bomb doesn't explode on impact when I thought it would. Naturally, I'd hide in a trench from the bomb only to find it joining me in it's place.

Personally I don't find it fair to remove the force trigger of the archer when knights have perks like bomb jumping and bomb "bowling". I People are overdoing archers too much and I can see the future where knights would become the only competent class in existence -.-.

@Jackard

Age has a point, if battles weren't filled with surprises, where's the fun in that? Even chess has it's surprise attacks and counters.

Mmmmm hmm Oh well believe what you want, if you got any concerns take it to the profile page.

 

And I don't agree with the Nerfs. What's the point nerfing everything to such an extent? It's just like chopping off a serpents head only to find another one growing out of the other end. In fact, the worst part is, chopping both heads would remove the entire serpent just like KAG being nerfed to a pulp. There's no serpent for anyone to slay anymore, and definitely KAG would have it's purposes of having 3 different classes, building elements and surprises defeated. I'm an archer myself, and I don't like to see other classes get barraged by nerfs as well as my own class.

Besides what can I say? This game is already nothing but a nerf festival when we haven't even reached the borderline of new siege equipment and updates. It's sad and pathetic really.

 

Did I mention how I absolutely love seeing knights slam into walls and making an ouch notation? As much as it sounds unbelievable, I still loved that surprise element of a flying enemy knight.

 

Sorry but you're making us sound like fools and we should stop the "no you" fallacy right now.

 

Oh well, this can go on forever, but if that's what you believe, than I can't change that. Good day.

*Pissing in the wind*

 

Sorry for my Klatchian but YOU ARE A FUCKING IDIOT SPOOLONI.
This thread is about balancing, srs bsns and things like this and you just came here, made some shitty posts about archers being too weak in close combat (THEY ARE RANGE UNITS IF YOU DIDN'T KNOW).
And now you are complaining about nerfs and you think that instead of balancing the game they should add more siege weapons?
It's clear that you don't have a single idea about the game so stop making a shit in a thread with an IMPORTANT stuff.

 

Another point that, from what I've read, hasn't been brought up is the new*ish* teleportation bug. I get hit by anything and randonly start flying around :p.
OT:
Bombjumps do need to be nerfed, especially with a situation where one team Knight uses anothers to negate the defenses, it can get ridiculous.

 

Oh no I wasn't making statements on archers being too weak in close combat, I was defending the fact that they should remain the way they are. Archers are generally range units, yes, but when they used to be an entrenched class they were competent that way and since the new trap bridges have changed, archers are forced out of their nests to find better positions in battle. Also, "close combat' is a relative opinion as archers have abilities to arrow climb walls and hide in trees. Staying in range can basically mean staying as far as possible from a knight's sword while that range can vary in x or y coordinates.

Also, I wasn't saying they should add more siege weapons, what I was claiming was that we're making big changes way too early that can be affected when we reach the borderline of new implementations. Plans have been made for them, and I think that's a valid reason for us to wait before making aggressive approaches. Also that last sentence was barely blunt enough for me to even take it into consideration. First of all, people come in this thread to share their concerns hence why the blog post stated for the community to come here and share their opinions. Secondly, some things are more important to people than others, just because you believe that believe that archers or buildings are "oh peed" doesn't really mean they're overpowered to other people. Something else could be overpowered to them like tunneling or sky-bridges or even bomb jumping.

If those explanations up there seem like "shit" to you, I believe you're just being a bigot and more or less prefer this argument to be one-sided. Also just to make things "clearer" for you, I prefer these changes the way they are NOW. I believe they should also stay this way until further notice. So please, before calling me a "fucking idiot", revise your post so it doesn't look like a bunch of dick-riding fallacy.

 

Of course it makes theoretical sense but it doesn't make game sense. Plenty of stuff in games is reversed due to how BS it would be if it were realistic. For example: friendly fire. There is no friendly fire because it would be bloody ridiculous when it comes to large knight fights, despite the fact that you clearly hit your friends with your sword every time you're in one of them. Getting hit by an arrow being charged while trying to kill an archer in close combat no less is bollocks because it's basically saying you HAVE to take damage just to kill an archer with your sword. That's not rewarding in the slightest. Like I keep saying it's all about rewarding skilled play and playing the game right. Stabbing an archer who is your enemy is obviously the right thing to do. You can't wait until he runs away and you can't expect to stab him whenever he's not charging an arrow because archers can spam the hell out of you. You have to be able to stab him sometime, so why are knights punished for it by getting hurt? Not to mention, as an archer, getting that close to a knight should be punished because you're really putting yourself in danger. Instead if you notch arrows you can take a knight to half health even if you die in the process. Come on, you don't need to be smart to know there's something inherently wrong with that!

 

Not really, like I've said before, Archers have only 2 lives, and often a charge attack is just about enough to take down an archer without hastle. Archers generally use to be a viable entrenched classes before the structural nerfs. However, now we have to shoot knights in ground level and when we fight knights on ground level just to get better shots, we often get chased back to our towers on higher ground in which we spam arrows to slow the knight down. I personally engaged in many close combat battles with knights by climbing up trees and "strafing", while the knight will eventually throw a bomb and it's an instant death if an un climbable wall isn't behind me. I feel that you people are just shoving archers in deep holes after forcing them out of their nests which is incredibly unreasonable. Like I said, knights also have very powerful bombs that don't really act like actual grenades but rather explosive bowling balls. If you're going to remove a natural physic from archers which is the response to nerve mass interruption, than I said I'd have to suggest something to be done with the bomb roll or the knock back that can send you flying and causing you fall damage.

I don't feel that archers are supposed to be heavily punished because they bump into the knight. After all, there are so many more ways a knight can kill an archer and I believe that is balanced although archers are suppose to have some kind of "close combat" tactical advantages which would be arrow climbing or tree hopping. At most I'll support is only allowing that notch arrow to be released if it's more than 1/2 charged, that'll enable both knight and archer that engage in battle to master the aspect of timing in battle.

I would also like to mention how indecisive people can get in the post, a month ago at most, a lot of people demanded that entrenched archers should be nerfed while allowing "offensive" archers and knights to get a better chance to infiltrate their enemy's structures, now that we removed the archer's ability to spam downward arrows from their bunkers, knights and archers on the offensive side could easily snipe entrenched archers when they "tooth pull" or reach open air. In fact, I feel that the lower ground archers have a much bigger advantage especially with the day and night cycle when the entrenched archer is clearly seen due to the lanterns in his/her area. Now, a lot of people are saying we should punish archers from going into close combat by guaranteeing a death which was already quite eminent in the first place ( *leading target into a bomb* ). I just feel that this isn't going to be the last nerf for any archer/knight and eventually we might as well remove every single surprise element which people can't seem to accept or tolerate. Furthermore, I'm one of those people who insisted on keeping knights and archers the way they are and respect that each class has a special element which can be exploited in creative and legitimate ways.

 

Offensive archery is cool.
Camping on the battlefield, not in your base, is cool too.

Killing a knight in 1v1 by an arrow spam isn't cool.

That's all I have to say after reading your wall of text.

 

Arrow spam can be countered by a marching shield. After all, the archer has limited arrow amounts and the archer can't exactly block an incoming bomb thrown behind him/her or into the air above him/her.

 

Huhuhuuhuhuh.

If you shield yourself you are slower so basically the archer can easily run away.
And even better if you have one block high hill in front of you. Then there is no single chance you won't get a hit at some point. And add to this getting an arrow when you kill the archer.
Archers usually have more arrows than they actually need so you can't force them to spending all of them in like 2 seconds.
And really, bomb? You think the combat is ok because the knight can use a bomb to kill the archer? That's just stupid. +Dodging bombs in the last build is reeaaaly easy.