Archer patch

Gandelf · Post by **Gandelf** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:22 pm

I just looked at the patch notes. It makes you wonder how they can make so many changes all at once without repercussions. Usually Mythic do things a little at a time, to ensure that classes are not over or underpowered. I can't honestly believe that archers were so seriously in need of so many changes. I suspect, like others have intimated, that they're testing the water for Warhammer.

Post by **Xest** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:47 pm

Gandelf wrote:I just looked at the patch notes. It makes you wonder how they can make so many changes all at once without repercussions. Usually Mythic do things a little at a time, to ensure that classes are not over or underpowered. I can't honestly believe that archers were so seriously in need of so many changes. I suspect, like others have intimated, that they're testing the water for Warhammer.

I think what's really sad is that it's taken the death of the game for Mythic to really bother to fix archers properly

Bow has never worked right (not always to the disadvantage of the class of course) since day 1.

Elrandhir · Post by **Elrandhir** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:54 pm

Xest wrote:I think what's really sad is that it's taken the death of the game for Mythic to really bother to fix archers properly Bow has never worked right (not always to the disadvantage of the class of course) since day 1.

Thing is, with Great Advertisement the game could still have a chance, pobably, because there are loads of MMORPG's where it takes much more time to learn and get to the Endgame then with Daoc.

The game is so simple now, compared to how it was in the beginning, and it's not a bad game, only thing makeing it outdated is really because it have been out for such a long time.

With good advertisement the game could have been so much more tbh, but I agree on that it is probably doomed to die soon now, and Im hopeing that they take with them all they learned and don't make the same mistake with Warhammer.

OohhoO · Post by **OohhoO** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:58 pm

[quote="Elrandhir"]And still I have killed more or less any Archer class that have attacked me when playing a Mage, I guess Im just that good then ]

ermmm
The patch hasn't been implemented yet?

Elrandhir · Post by **Elrandhir** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 2:46 pm

OohhoO wrote:ermmm
The patch hasn't been implemented yet?

I know, but the things said of the ranger in an earlier post is still there even now, most of them, I can't see why you brought up anything but the changes, because as he is right now, the Archer aint hard to kill.

Also the Ranger can't be compared to a mage, thats just plain stupid tbh.

I don't think he will be all that after the changes either, but it might get alittle more interessting to play him.

Gandelf · Post by **Gandelf** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:03 pm

The other thing is that historically, archers always work best en-mass. Think of Agincourt and Crécy, for example. Turning the sky dark with thousands of arrows was always a great winner and very terrifying, I'd imagine. It's difficult to see how you could make an archer an effective class to play solo (with due respect to archers who do play well solo). They can take a bit more damage than casters, but nowhere near as much as melée classes. Likewise, because they are slightly more resilient than casters, there damage is less, because casters tend to do the highest damage but die more quickly. Similarly, archers are not melée and can't do the same amount of melée damage as melée classes.

If they give the class more ranged damage, then casters are redundant and will complain. Likewise, giving them uber melée damage will upset melée classes. They are in an awkward position. I tend to think of them as snipers. They can pick off targets, using stealth while they locate an ideal target.

I think also, that players try to solo too much. Combat works much better in DAoC and other mmorpgs when classes work together to complement each other. It's a sad fact that many players shun working with others in favour of going solo, but that's their choice. The game can't be designed around solo players... not easily anyway!

It's difficult to see what they can do to the archer class without upsetting other classes, basically.

Elrandhir · Post by **Elrandhir** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 8:44 pm

Well the Ranger aint all to bad solo, but he aint Uber either, Bowspecced rangers do best in a Zerg, and melee once only have the option of soloing tbh.

Noone wants a Ranger in PvE (Except on some rare occasions), and noone wants a Ranger in a FG for PvP either, so he don't have much of a choice tbh, and sure you can play him in groups both for PvP and PvE, but it will make the group much worse (more so in PvP)

But the same goes for the asassins really, thats why they are solo, noone wants them in groups, except for people who don't care about haveing a good group setup, and those people aint many anylonger.

The Ranger is the one who is worst off, the Assassin is pretty easy to play and also to kill more or less anyone with(Easymode compared to a Ranger), the ranger only have 2 choices really, high Bow and Zerg ftw, or High melee and do 1 vs 1 fights.

And if useing the Ranger as a sniper and zerg, well it can be okay for awhile, but the amount of skill it takes is about zero like with everything that is about zerging, and if you instead go full melee, then you need to be really skilled and also have patience, because in the beginning you will get slaughtered by many, so high skill is really the only thing that will make you get somewhere.

Trez · Post by **Trez** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:51 am

Think of Agincourt

Hehe Gandelf, the only thing the longbowmen did in this battle was causing some confusion, they can claim maybe 5 knigts killed by arrows (where you would normally give them credit for 90% of the dead french).

Rest was killed due to mud aka drowning/being pushed under by the ppl behind and the longbowmen when they went into melee.

The reason why the knights drowned ect, is the terrain, it was muddy like hell and was made like a funnel, with the narrow end near the english.

Post by **Xest** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:35 pm

Historically mages didn't even exist Gandelf, does that mean they should just be removed from the game?

Elrandhir · Post by **Elrandhir** » Sat Mar 17, 2007 3:03 pm

I have played more or less all Classes there is until Endgame PvP, and the Ranger is really at he bottom of the foodchain, mostly because of the lack of choices you have in how to play him, he needs something to make him more interessting to play.

Don't get me wrong, you can do very well if you'r Sniper specced in Zergs, but common, how fun is it really in the long run to just shoot everything in sight to get as much RP's as possible, and as I said, the skill needed is more or less Zero.

Ofcourse this goes for more or less any class when people Zerg, but other classes have more choices, and most classes are also wanted in groups.

Assassins aint ofcourse, but you still have it much easier because he can kill more or less anything rather easy, mages are just walking RP's to an assassin who can play somewhat well, as a mage I can take out both Sniper and melee Rangers rather easy.

Main Tanks are more or less impossible to kill for a Ranger, it's not easy for an assassin either, but it's very doable.

Ontop of this assassins can climb into keeps and kill off people who are dumb enough to afk inside.

Im not saying the Ranger is bad if you know how to play him, but there aint to many choices in how to play him tbh.

I have managed very well on my Ranger, but when you have played the game for 4-5 years, with PvP as main interesst, you know how to play well, and also use eveything needed to win where those who aint to experienced wouldent stand a chance.