Default Archer Limit

  • I originally typed up a couple of paragraphs about how sick I am of archers ruining the melee action of CMW, but deleted it because it was basically just a rant.

    Please enable a default limit on the number of archers per team to something around 15% (so on a 32 player server there could be two archers per team). I’m really getting tired of this. I want to play a melee game, not zig-zag constantly or have good fights constantly interrupted / ended by random archer fire (including enemy and friendly).

    Another good change would be to get rid of infinite arrow ammo.


    P.S. I’m not advocating a hard-coded limit. If someone wants to have 20 archers vs 20 archers on their server, more power to them. I’m talking about a default limit.

  • Suggested a 100 times, official servers will not do it. Private server admins have the choice to limit archers or not. A few do, but not many.

  • Why wouldn’t official servers implement a proportional limit on archers as a default setting?

    Obviously from my perspective it would be a good thing. Did the devs say something previously on this matter? Isn’t it rather odd that 60% of a team — sometimes more — can be made up of archers on a regular basis? This detracts from the fun of melee combat, which is the focus of the game.

    On a related note, while I disliked archers in Age of Chivalry, there were never more than two or three per team, and they were never as feared/annoying as in CMW…

  • I think I’ll just quit when mods come around. I expect only official servers to have a normal set of rules I don’t hate, and then all the archers will be there.

    That and the super small community, great. I mean, we can’t just do little things to make the game better. Nope. Then why the **** do we play in official servers? Its ruining itself. For god’s sake.

  • @HaHawk:

    Why wouldn’t official servers implement a proportional limit on archers as a default setting?

    Because if you purchased a game with 4 classes, joined an official server and then it told you - um no you can’t play the archer, nor unlock the weapons, because some people don’t like archers, then as a consumer you would be pretty pissed off.

    It would be like purchasing a new MMO and being told, sorry this world has too many wizards, you have to choose a thief, fighter or cleric.

  • I oppose this and any other class limit but completely disabling a class on a few “special” servers. If Archers are too strong just nerf them. If not a team might as well decide to pick a massive amount of Archers. Why starve them of this option? This makes up for a lot of interesting situations and encounters. Class limits just promote mediocrity and lack of invention.

    There might be some scrubs who actually want every game to be the same (or just the way they like) for the sake of not having to learn anything new. I like my game more interesting and versatile than this.

  • They are strong and annoying. I can tolerate them being strong but cannot tolerate them from being incredibly annoying to fight - they shoot you with impunity 100’s of yards away and you can do NOTHING about it other than switching to shield, which you may not want to do, and zigzagging like somebody in a seizure. Furthermore, archers love shooting at you when you’re in a melee with somebody else. You can’t possibly react to arrow fire in those circumstances. You can on the other hand react to multiple melee opponents coming at you at the same time. Setting up a limit is the right step forward - hell i say remove them from the game. Who the hell bought Chivalry to play as an archer anyway?

  • I bought Chivalry for playing as Archer, playing against Archers and not having stupid class limits taking away my options. Amongst other things.

  • i’ve seen full teams of archers, 9 would be a good day.

  • If you know how to kill an archer, you can kill many many archers.

    When a team has many archers one man can change the whole course of the battle. That’s the narrow line a majority archer team treads on.

Log in to reply