1257 replies to this topic

[CIL]

Rob, I think that people dislike the knockback. I also believe that you are being somewhat unclear about your point. You say that you are hesitant not to chage it, meaning that you are most likely going to but you speak and say most people like the knockback (I believe that few do). Also, I believe that normal arrows should be changed back to pierce. Do you know anything about the Battle of Crecy during the Hundred-Years War? The English longbows decimated the French cavalry.

[Dalf32]

wats wrong with silverthorn arrows' knockback? it doesnt do anything until they're dead, and once they are, who cares whether or not they get knocked back?
once again realism rears its ugly head. if we were to make everything completely real it wouldnt be fun anymore. there must be a rock-paper-scissors mechanic (cavalry>archers>solders>pikes>cavalry) at least somewhat in order for us to maintain the fun of bfme.

[CIL]

I think that archers should be strong vs. all save at close range. Weak armour would make it very resonable. Also, I just want the knockback lessened to something like Boromir's. Having the arrows knock orcs back like Sauron is just stupid... I have shot deer with a bow and arrow and made them fall back so I see no reason for removing it.. Just reduction.

Edited by Crazy Intellectual Liberal, 22 March 2008 - 05:22 AM.

[Dalf32]

ok, i could get behind a reduction, but not removal of the knockback.
but ummm, dont you think it will cause a few balance issues if archers were strong against everything? you would never need to buy any other units! everyone would go straight for the archers and get a few meatshields to put in front, maybe one or two siege units and you would be unstoppable! totally unbalanced, me no likey.

[CIL]

Cavalry would still be the bane. High damage dealt to them yes, but at close range... Anyways, defensive battles would still be hard because of enemy 'pults. Kill the archers, siege machines to the gate, bash the gate and you breach it. Gate is breached usual equals loss for foe. Cavalry would have increased trample damage.

Edited by Crazy Intellectual Liberal, 22 March 2008 - 05:55 PM.

[Dalf32]

its not only about sieging; any sort of ground advance would become extremely unbalanced. it would become possible to take out entire armies with nothing but archers. sorry but you're not gonna convince me on this one

[Shikari]

I'm with dalf here guys. There's no need to overpower archers. The idea of balance is that the rock-paper-scissors system is somewhere near, erm.. "balanced."

[CIL]

I don't meen like making them hit high like heroes, just a little higher than now. 2 or 3 sets of cavalry could decimate the archers in the very likely event that they got in close. Problems like this are hard to deal with because there are very specific types of weapons meant for specific things. This also probably belongs in a new topic.. something like "Balance Issues."

[Dalf32]

either way it still messes up the balance and we would need to come up with a completely new system. i dunno, the idea's not for me i guess

[Devon]

Uh...guys....check the balance thread please

[CIL]

Oh.. One exists?

[Myrdin]

ok, i could get behind a reduction, but not removal of the knockback.
but ummm, dont you think it will cause a few balance issues if archers were strong against everything? you would never need to buy any other units! everyone would go straight for the archers and get a few meatshields to put in front, maybe one or two siege units and you would be unstoppable! totally unbalanced, me no likey.

archers vs everything, if you guys remember, the first wersion of ROTWK 2,0, was like this, you could just mass archers, they raped buildings heroes, units, every single thing that came in the range.

soo im with you on this, making somehting that is balanced, unbalanced against would ridiculous

[dojob]

Archers should be general support units that are good vs everything. I know this would mess up the R-P-S counter system but it would be more realistic, and you could counter them by upgrading units with shields, which would make arrows do a lot less damage to those units.

Here's what I want when it comes to units and countering:

Archers should be general support units good vs everything but weak against armored targets and vulnerable to being run down (perhaps they could get a minimum range...)

Pikes should beat swordsmen imo, but be more expensive in general; they should be defensive/meatshield units and be more vulnerable to flank attacks (so 4 orc hordes will lose vs a horde of uruk pikemen if they only attack from the pikes' front but win if at least one of the orc hordes attacks from the sides/back, unless they're in circle formation). Pikes should still be a hard counter to cavalry though.

Swordsmen should be general melee/bulk units that (depending on the quality of the unit) are either mediocre vs everything but highly spammable, ok vs everything and medium costs, or strong vs everything and very expensive.

Cavalry should be like they are now; strong vs siege and archers and very good for harassing, raiding, and (for most cavalry units) trampling. Although they should beat swordsmen by trampling them, they should lose if they sit there and fight in melee combat, since the swordsmen could just cut down the horses and then the riders easily fall afterwards.

Catapults and balistas should be stronger vs everything but with slightly (by a few more seconds) longer reload time and less accuracy and ofc low armor, since you could either destroy the catapult or kill the people who are using it.

[Myrdin]

archers strong vs everything ? did you ever see an archer ( without special arrows ) to TEAR DOWN a building. in real i mean, ok, soo other way, DID YOU EVER SEE A MAN TAKING DOWN A BUILDING USING SMALL WEAPONS ( pistols, shotguns and like this ), i believe NOT, becouse its ridiculous to take down stone, or anything with arrow i dont care for archers vs everything, EXPECT buildings !!!

btw why did you reapeat yourself soo much ?

[Scryer]

I am against making Pikes strong against swordsmen. If that was the case, I would end up not using swordsmen at all and I'd end up just spamming pikes because they're that much better. Swordsmen (regardless of whether they're late-game or early-game units) would end up becomming just early-game units for me.

I know that, realistically, pikes would be strong against swordsmen but I strongly think that in order to make swordsmen an important part of the game that you should make swordsmen the Pikes' counter. I think that Mordor and Goblin players would start spamming pikes instead of swordsmen if that was the case.

Edited by Scryer, 23 March 2008 - 09:01 PM.

[dojob]

archers strong vs everything ? did you ever see an archer ( without special arrows ) to TEAR DOWN a building. in real i mean, ok, soo other way, DID YOU EVER SEE A MAN TAKING DOWN A BUILDING USING SMALL WEAPONS ( pistols, shotguns and like this ), i believe NOT, becouse its ridiculous to take down stone, or anything with arrow i dont care for archers vs everything, EXPECT buildings !!!

btw why did you reapeat yourself soo much ?

Sorry, by "everything", I meant "Every unit" (when I think of counters and whatnot I usually don't consider buildings) though fire-arrows should be good vs buildings but it should be an ability imo.

I didn't repeat myself THAT much...


Pikes (like normal arrows) should suck vs buildings (or u could go so far as to prevent them from attacking buildings at all), so if you tried to spam pikes, then I'd simply micro with archers, get towers, and ur pikes are dead/useless.

And by my suggestion, pikes would be slower, more expensive, and much more vulnerable to flanking (though more armored in general), which means that sword spam would counter pike spam if I was able to flank you. If you'd read my post, then you'd understand that I don't want pikes to be a hard counter to swords, except in situations where the pikes are facing the swords (assuming that both those units are of the same quality)

Oh and robnkarla, could you please bring the Porcupine formation from BFME1 back? I loved that.

[CIL]

I like the shield wall or block formation stuff.

[Scryer]

archers strong vs everything ? did you ever see an archer ( without special arrows ) to TEAR DOWN a building. in real i mean, ok, soo other way, DID YOU EVER SEE A MAN TAKING DOWN A BUILDING USING SMALL WEAPONS ( pistols, shotguns and like this ), i believe NOT, becouse its ridiculous to take down stone, or anything with arrow i dont care for archers vs everything, EXPECT buildings !!!

btw why did you reapeat yourself soo much ?

Sorry, by "everything", I meant "Every unit" (when I think of counters and whatnot I usually don't consider buildings) though fire-arrows should be good vs buildings but it should be an ability imo.

I didn't repeat myself THAT much...


Pikes (like normal arrows) should suck vs buildings (or u could go so far as to prevent them from attacking buildings at all), so if you tried to spam pikes, then I'd simply micro with archers, get towers, and ur pikes are dead/useless.

And by my suggestion, pikes would be slower, more expensive, and much more vulnerable to flanking (though more armored in general), which means that sword spam would counter pike spam if I was able to flank you. If you'd read my post, then you'd understand that I don't want pikes to be a hard counter to swords, except in situations where the pikes are facing the swords (assuming that both those units are of the same quality)

Oh and robnkarla, could you please bring the Porcupine formation from BFME1 back? I loved that.

Sorry, I see what you mean now.

[CIL]

I think that we are getting off topic from the actual topic of the forum.

[Myrdin]

dude in a real fight, swordsman usually owns pikeman, sword is better suited for close combat 1on1 battles.

I can say this from my own experience, since know a group of Hystory swordsman, its group of people who make shows, travel around Europe, and make living with performing the acts of hystory battles ( REAL sharp weapons ! ). I spoke with the head ( or master ) of the group, and we were chatting, and while that we somehow ended by speaking about diferent weapons. A swordsman has advantige on close range combat above pikeman. Pikemans are generally used for anti cawalery purpose. Shorter wersions of pikes ( you can see many of thoose in chineese movies too ) are something different though.

of course, if the pikeman is skilled, he knows what the swordsman will do against him, and he can take advantige of it. But normal warior bearing pike, will mostly loose against swordsman