Archer limit



  • What about a limitation of 25% Archers in one team?
    Seriously, I’ve seen often teams with about half the people archers and this just pisses me off.
    Too much archers are simply ruining the game, aren’t they?
    I don’t want to take knight as my favourite class is vanguard who can’t do anything against archers. And even the knight’s tower shield does not fully protect you of ranged weapons.
    It is just disturbing when I get out of base and I see about 6 enemy archers which are just waiting for me. Why do so many players take the archer class? Are they bad in melee or did they play first-person-shooters before? Were they frustrated because they were so often killed by archers that they took archer class themself?

    I don’t know if this would be the best idea but I feel like something has to be done.
    The archer’s weapons except the javelins are really unfair in my opinion. Even in the middleage archers were considered dishonorable.

    In medieval Europe the bow was used by gentlemen only for the hunt. It was unchivalrous (oh that irony), used by cowardly peasants and mercenaries. Until the later middle ages the archer was the most despised man on the battlefield.

    In 1139 Pope Innocent II. declared: “The deadly art, hated of god, of crossbowmen and archers should not be used against Christians and Catholics on pain of Anathema.”



  • Completely agree. I think a large part of the reason new players are put off from the game is because of archers. There’s nothing more infuriating than ferociously fending off 2+ guys at the same time, doing well, and then suddenly getting flinched or shot dead by some coward firing shots 100m away. 25% is still too damn much in my opinion. 15% should be the maximum, with a minimum cap of 1 on each team.



  • But me Javs! :(



  • You guys just dunno how to dodge arrow or block them, if an archer can shoot a guy in the feet with a Tower shield in front of him, it’s because he is a good archer and the guy is probably not a good knight! Since patch archer are even easier to kill but I agree they kinda need a nerf since the bow range is ridiculous! Vanguard got no protection indeed but archer aren’t protected from archers too, maa without shield and knight without a shield too cause not everyone plays with one! We can’t restraint everything we don’t like, else they wouldnt be any one hit kill weapon in my point of view



  • How are you supposed to dodge or block arrows when you are fighting someone else? :? Also considering their speed is it even possible to dodge them? You are probably messing with the archer’s aim and causing him to miss rather than dodging the arrow itself. Something which is impossible to do when you are focused on something else entirely; furthermore you can’t block arrows when you’re using a two handed weapon, right? Even IF you spot an archer from a mile away and zigzag towards him, there is absolutely nothing stopping him from hitting you. You don’t have a say - he does; you survive because he failed to hit you; you die because his aim was true.

    There is simply nothing more infuriating than being tagged with an arrow when you’re a swing away from a kill. Getting hit by an arrow is even worse than having a block not triggering against a facehugging maa. To be honest I have no idea why they are in the game.



  • Uh… If an archer was dishonourable, why would almost every English monarch ordain that all yeomen, peasants, and men of able body were to practice the sport of archery, for several hours, after church?

    Several of these kings even outlawed handball and football to “encourage” able-bodied men to train.

    The French army hired Genoese crossbowmen to ward off the English archers at Crecy…

    They’re in the game because they were an integral part of the medieval battlefield.

    "In 1139 Pope Innocent II. declared: “The deadly art, hated of god, of crossbowmen and archers should not be used against Christians and Catholics on pain of Anathema.”

    The rest of the memo was, “Go ahead and use them on those other people, yes, the ones over there, in the East. Just don’t turn around and use them on your tyrannical overlords.”

    Furthermore, I direct your attention to this: The grave of William Jauderell The Archer:
    Starts at 20:30, video timeline. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTDHOcWbVLQ



  • I agree in that having less archers is always better.



  • The only problem I have with archers is when they drag the team down. A good archer doesn’t always make kills. I will admit, it’s annoying to be on the team where all the archers think a bow is a Nagant or something.

    But the good ones, man, they’re hard to stop.

    And I should probably mention that those mercenary crossbowmen literally got team killed from spawn. They attempted to retreat… “tsk, tsk”



  • Its a server option. Some servers do have limits.

    An archer team can either do really well or really bad. One man can change a team doing really well. He can slighter all the archers. Its not hard to dodge arrows. And you can flank around.



  • @Carolean:

    Uh… If an archer was dishonourable, why would almost every English monarch ordain that all yeomen, peasants, and men of able body were to practice the sport of archery, for several hours, after church?

    The English used their longbowmen because they were effective and did quite a decisive contribution in a battle. The English longbows were the most deadly and effective weapon at this time. Still it was considered dishonorable because it was just unfair and cowardly, but was does it matter if you want to win a battle?
    Though Chivalry is a game and therefore it should be fair!
    I would say the title “Chivalry: Medieval Warfare” along with archers is a little contradiction as archers were unchivalrous but still part of medieval warfare. And I’m not saying that archers should be completely removed, I just don’t want that many in this game.



  • By definition, you CAN’T be “unchivalrous” unless you subscribe to the Chivalric Code. Which only knights were allowed, by law, to do.



  • Yeah. Just say they were considered unchivalrous by the nobility.



  • @Ravengrim:

    @Carolean:

    Uh… If an archer was dishonourable, why would almost every English monarch ordain that all yeomen, peasants, and men of able body were to practice the sport of archery, for several hours, after church?

    The English used their longbowmen because they were effective and did quite a decisive contribution in a battle. The English longbows were the most deadly and effective weapon at this time. Still it was considered dishonorable because it was just unfair and cowardly, but was does it matter if you want to win a battle?
    Though Chivalry is a game and therefore it should be fair!
    I would say the title “Chivalry: Medieval Warfare” along with archers is a little contradiction as archers were unchivalrous but still part of medieval warfare. And I’m not saying that archers should be completely removed, I just don’t want that many in this game.

    The English longbow was used by the peasants and commanded by a high status townsman. Usually.

    And the longbow was actually invented by the welsh and used by the welsh far before the English were using them. The English used smaller self bows beforehand and were severely out matches by the welsh archers. And the English bows struggled to penatrate through armour. The welsh were bangs illy conquered but the English used their bows from then on. And many English longbow men were Welshmen. Some English commanders didn’t like longbow men but others used them well. Agincourt was probably the most well known example. They had several thousand englih and welsh longbowmen behind stakes that rained death down on the approaching armoured French that ha to have visits on and marched through mud. By the time they got to the English try were wounded, dead and all tored and demoralised (if they were dead they couldn’t care less) and they got chopped down by the 900 foot troops the English had. He archers joined in the fight with hand axes and were far more manuverable. The French calavrry charged at one point and got obliterated before they reached the front line.

    French casualties 7000-10,000
    English casualties a precise 112 confirmed deaths.

    All becuase of the archers.



  • As I said, they were effective and did quite a decisive contribution in a battle.
    Didn’t know these bows and archers were Welsh originally.

    @lemonater47:

    French casualties 7000-10,000
    English casualties a precise 112 confirmed deaths.

    Sounds pretty overpowered then, doesn’t it? :D



  • @Ravengrim:

    As I said, they were effective and did quite a decisive contribution in a battle.
    Didn’t know these bows and archers were Welsh originally.

    @lemonater47:

    French casualties 7000-10,000
    English casualties a precise 112 confirmed deaths.

    Sounds pretty overpowered then, doesn’t it? :D

    Well when you army in comprised of 900 heavy infantry 6000 archers and the kings mounted body guard against a closely packed ground of heavily armoured infantry with no sheilds trudging slowly through mud a victory isn’t too hard to achieve. The only reason why the archers had joined the melee fight is after the first two waves they had 1500 prisoners. They were forced to start executing the prisoners as they had rested up and there were weapons lying all over the place.

    In chivalry everyone is spread out the bows fire slower than in real life and do less damage and those archers new they faced execution if they lost as they weren’t worth enough for random. The French had archers and crossbowmen but never used them.



  • @lemonater47:

    against a closely packed ground of heavily armoured infantry with no sheilds trudging slowly through mud a victory isn’t too hard to achieve.

    And this is exactly what I don’t like about the archers in Chivalry. Vanguards aren’t able to pack a shield and they are very easy targets for archers. If a somewhat experienced archer shoots at you there is absolutely nothing you can do about it. They even hit you when you’re running zigzag like crazy.

    I even managed to kill an enemy vanguard with 3 throwing knifes in a row although he tried to evade.
    If it was up to me there wouldn’t exist any ranged weapons in this game. I know this won’t happen but what really takes out the fun of this game for me is when I am on the battlefield and I see about 3-5 archers at one glance, arrows and bolt hissing around my head. I just want a good and fair battle and not having to worry about enemy archers at all time.
    Archers aren’t really a problem if there a two of them in a team, but too many of them are simply breaking this great game in my opinion. Therefore the limit.



  • @Ravengrim:

    Archers aren’t really a problem if there a two of them in a team, but too many of them are simply breaking this great game in my opinion. Therefore the limit.

    Yeah. Today when I played, it felt like there’s a lot more archers now than before. On several different servers, there were like seven-eight archers on each. I mean, come on! I constantly joined new servers because the games weren’t even enjoyable. On Battlegrounds I played as a Mason vanguard and there were seven archers, all kinds of archers for all kind of ranges - bowmen, crossbowmen, slingers, javeliners… Got fed up, tried to flank them, they pull out their little daggers and gang rape me. Rage quit engage! Usually I play knight with shield, but now I’ve decided to get used to the vanguard and I can understand all the vanguard players’ hate for archers now. Feel for ya, brothers.



  • You guys aren’t going to like my new tutorial…

    Just take solace in the fact that a lot of people who play an archer are more annoying to their own team than the enemy. Trust me, I know that feel.

    Seven archers standing atop the edge of the 2nd Agatha spawn on Hillside TO- bloody comparing quivers, they are.



  • Totally agree on an Archer Limit. Played so many times and faced 50% Archers AT LEAST per match.

    Singlehandedly took out 5 enemies on Citadel just to get shot in the back with a Shortbow. This is what really takes me out of the game.

    Problem is that being an Archer is just way too easy now. It’s point&click for short to medium distances and even at high ranges you just need to make small adjustments.

    Been playin Archer to try it out, firstperson + no crosshair…was Topscore 3 times in a row and I didn’t even concentrate that hard.

    So YES, PRO ARCHERLIMIT!



  • yes it is frustrating to be killed by an archer but it’s part of the game, be aware that there is an archer aiming at you is important! and btw shooting people while they are fighting requires skills not to hit your own teamates! When there is too many archers I just take a maa with shield and flank them thats it, use smoke pots and deception to get to your enemy


Log in to reply