Archer is Vanguard's weakness. Vanguard is most popular to play. Put 2 and 2 together



  • _Mods- this needs it’s own thread, because everyone is forgetting the original concept of class design, and why vanguards don’t have a shield but knights do.
    _

    In Chivalry, every class has strengths and weaknesses. Knights have long, powerful weapons and shields, are strong in health, but slow. Man at Arms are fast but have low health. Archers have maximum range weapons but are one hit kills most the time and have the weakest and shortest melee weapons. Vanguards have the longest melee range (and among the strongest weapons), can equip some of the archer and man at arms weapons (like the short sword) have solid but not great health, have a charge attack, can helicopter and drag better than any class, but they cannot equip shields.

    Who is going to win in the following battle?

    Archer versus Knight: Most likely the knight. When the archer shoots, the knight will block with his shield. When the archer aims for his feet, an experienced knight will JUMP while holding his shield. He will close space and dismantle the archer. Even if the archer gets in a couple of stabs, he is likely toast.

    Archer versus Vanguard: Vanguard cannot equip a shield. He is likely dead at long range. If he gets to about ten feet away, the archer is chopped in half with his charge strike, but the Vanguard has no protection from arrows.

    Vanguard has no protection from arrows.

    Vanguard is the most popular class because it’s the easiest to play and get many kills quickly (due to the absurd range their melee weapons have and the “helicopter” and drag crap).

    THIS IS WHY the forums are crawling with people saying the archers are OP. They AREN’T, but against Vanguards Archers have the upper hand, and Vanguards are the most numerous class.

    This game is supposed to have a STRATEGIC component to the class you select, and it is supposed to depend on what is going on in your present game. In a game where the enemy is full of archers, KNIGHT or MAA with a shield is the wisest choice (or archer to counter their archers). In a game full of vanguards, the best choice is knight or archer: a knight can ALMOST duplicate vanguard range, and an archer can stay out of it entirely.

    It’s like rock-paper-scissors, people.

    Knight > Archer (shield beats arrows)
    MAA > Knight (speed beats slow)
    Vanguard > MAA (range beats speed)
    Archer > Vanguard (piercing beats no shield)

    **The real fact of the matter is that the classes are quite balanced as it is. There are just too many people who only play as vanguards, and vanguards can’t wear shields.

    **Just now I played a guy who said something like this: **“You expect me to change to a different class because my class’ weakness is precisely the strength of the classes I’m playing against?”

    **And the obvious answer to that is YES DARN IT! That’s the FREAKING POINT of having four classes! If you are surrounded by archers, change to a class that has a shield! How is that not obvious? But people like this guy don’t want to use all four classes. They want to use ONE class, because it’s the only one they are comfortable with. **They want to be able to stab with the brandistock over and over again with impunity. They don’t want to deal with the inherent weaknesses of their class. Instead they want Torn Banner to change the game so they can continue to feel like He-Man with their brandistock without having to worry about getting shot with an arrow, when switching to a knight (and knowing how to use the shield, including jumping or ducking or strafing) would solve the problem.

    **Learn to use other classes, people. Leave the vanguard and his brandistock alone for a while. Go be a man at arms with a shield strapped to your back until you see an archer. Go be a knight and over power them. Stop being a WHINER who only wants to play the game one way who then cries when someone else uses the natural opposition to a brandistock stab-spamming vanguard. Smh.:chargrined:

    EDITED TO ADD: GROUPS OF ARCHERS.

    What kind of “genius” expects to win a 4-1 battle against ANY class, archer or no? Here, let me help:

    The Idiots Guide to Beating a Pack of Archers:

    Rule 1: DON’T FIGHT A 4-1 BATTLE! You wouldn’t run up to a group of 4 vanguards and expect to win, so what in all that is Holy would make you think the outcome would be different if they were archers instead?

    Rule 2: Approach a group archers with a group of your own, so it’s 4-4.



  • I don’t know the exact values, but a light crossbow shot to my torso will take around half of my health as a knight. The archer can fire about 1 arrow in 5 seconds when you account aiming time. There are often multiple archers too, at least 4 per team in a public match. Some of them will have faster ranged weapons and thus fire at a bigger RPM, remember that each hit flinches me and guarantees my death if I’m in melee at the time.

    A decent archer will hit at least 1/3 of his arrows, this number is decreased if I’m actively trying to evade the arrows with movement, but it is much harder in melee because you lose sight of your enemy.

    Did I mention that it takes a fair bit of effort to actually kill an archer when you finally get to him? Their melee is just as good as MaA’s due to the backstab bonus, and often they are grouped together surrounding you.

    ALL the classes are weak against archers. The archer is overpowered. They have some counter-strategies (hide at spawn, matrix and give yourself a headache, get counter-archers) but none of them are FUN, and this is why people bitch about the archers so much. I play knight the most and every match you will hear me say “fuck archers”. I don’t want to hide in cover and watch a red bar progress half the time I’m playing this game.



  • I am sorry to say but knight is not the anti-archer class. Only anti-archer is another archer.

    You seem to hilight shields in your post but have you actually tried to close in to group of archers with shield? In 1v1 shield is great but if there is more than one archer they can just spread out and shoot your sides. And when you finally get to them, you are gimped in group melee, thanks to the shield, and they can just keep flinching you if they take turns attacking.

    And I absolutely LOVE spending 30 seconds regenerating as knight when someone shoots bolt to my torso from other side of map.



  • @Monsteri:

    I don’t know the exact values, but a light crossbow shot to my torso will take around half of my health as a knight. The archer can fire about 1 arrow in 5 seconds when you account aiming time. There are often multiple archers too, at least 4 per team in a public match. Some of them will have faster ranged weapons and thus fire at a bigger RPM, remember that each hit flinches me and guarantees my death if I’m in melee at the time.

    A decent archer will hit at least 1/3 of his arrows, this number is decreased if I’m actively trying to evade the arrows with movement, but it is much harder in melee because you lose sight of your enemy.

    Did I mention that it takes a fair bit of effort to actually kill an archer when you finally get to him? Their melee is just as good as MaA’s due to the backstab bonus, and often they are grouped together surrounding you.

    ALL the classes are weak against archers. The archer is overpowered. They have some counter-strategies (hide at spawn, matrix and give yourself a headache, get counter-archers) but none of them are FUN, and this is why people bitch about the archers so much. I play knight the most and every match you will hear me say “fuck archers”. I don’t want to hide in cover and watch a red bar progress half the time I’m playing this game.

    Let me get this straight… You think ONE KNIGHT against a GROUP of archers should win a melee battle? Are you fucking serious? Good god did you take a mace to your head without your helmet? One person against a group of ANY of the classes is going to lose 99% of the time. If you ran up to a bunch of vanguards, would you be so pissed when you lost? Nope, because for some completely amazing reason you think that a group of archers should be easy kills, but a group of anything else is surely death, so you run up to the archers alone thinking the outcome should be any different. Sadly this is a common mental illness. :chargrined:

    Bro, a PACK of archers against ONE knight is ALWAYS going to end in the knight losing.

    A pack of MAA against one knight will end the same way.

    A pack of KNIGHTS against one knight. Etc etc.

    ANY CLASS going against a GROUP WORKING TOGETHER is going to LOSE 99% of the time. It just pisses people off when it’s archers because you expect them to always be easy kills.

    Your complaint amounts to the fact that archers work together. That is 100% what it is, though you won’t admit it. Archers DO tend to work together. BECAUSE they are so easy to kill. **So why don’t you do the same thing with knights? Why not? Why is it that other classes don’t counter the tendency of archers to work together by doing exactly the same thing?

    **It’s the hero complex, plain and simple. A group of knights will beat a group of archers. It happens EVERY SINGLE TIME on Moor when Agatha archers hide behind the rock on the Agatha left side by the pickets: a vanguard and a knight race around up the hill to the rock and absolutely lay waste to the archers hiding there. Every. Single. Time. Do archers whine about it? Nope. They go right back to the rock and shoot the enemy… until two vanguards and a knight run back over the hill and slaughter them again.

    **You counter ONE archer with a shield. You counter FOUR archers with two or three allies. It’s that freaking simple, but for some reason basic arithmetic frequently flies right over everyone’s head.

    **@Kreittis:

    I am sorry to say but knight is not the anti-archer class. Only anti-archer is another archer.

    You seem to hilight shields in your post but have you actually tried to close in to group of archers with shield? In 1v1 shield is great but if there is more than one archer they can just spread out and shoot your sides. And when you finally get to them, you are gimped in group melee, thanks to the shield, and they can just keep flinching you if they take turns attacking.

    And I absolutely LOVE spending 30 seconds regenerating as knight when someone shoots bolt to my torso from other side of map.

    There it is again. GROUP of archers, against ONE knight. Are you all really that daft? You beat a group of archers with a GROUP OF YOUR OWN. Jesus Christ please god tell me people really aren’t that braindead…

    Let me just re-quote you really quickly…

    @Kreittis:

    In 1v1 shield is great

    In a math equation if you multiply one side of it by 4 the equation is only valid if you do the same thing on the other side. My freaking lord you’ve GOT to be kidding me…



  • I agree in principle, but Archers are overpowered in some ways against everyone.

    Against a Knight a good archer will shoot around a shield anyway, jumping often exposes the legs more, in some ways crouching just when you think they are about to shoot is better but still not fullproof and leg hits still do a fair bit of damage. Plus archers have fast weapons and good foot speed which can be difficult to counter as a shield knight: facehuggy overheads then feint to kick will easily stun a Knight. There’s not that many melee weapons that can one hit an archer in the Knight repertoire, and only one you can wield with a shield (1H messer). A good knight can counter this but still…

    I do agree that with an archer nerf Vans and MaA would be obviously more powerful than they already are though.

    Class balance needs to be handled very delicately though. Small tweaks here and there will go a long way. MaA is already getting that dodge in flinch nerf, Vanguards could do with having knockback toned down a bit and some of the obviously OP weapons slightly nerfed.

    Just get rid of backstab damage for archers, increase reload times for xbows and make drawing bows require stamina would also go a long way to balancing everything.



  • Here’s the most important parts:

    @Dr:

    I agree in principle, but Archers are overpowered in some ways against everyone.

    Against a Knight a good archer will shoot around a shield anyway, jumping often exposes the legs more, in some ways crouching just when you think they are about to shoot is better but still not fullproof and leg hits still do a fair bit of damage. Plus archers have fast weapons and good foot speed which can be difficult to counter as a shield knight: facehuggy overheads then feint to kick will easily stun a Knight. There’s not that many melee weapons that can one hit an archer in the Knight repertoire, and only one you can wield with a shield (1H messer). A good knight can counter this but still…

    I do agree that with an archer nerf Vans and MaA would be obviously more powerful than they already are though.

    Class balance needs to be handled very delicately though. Small tweaks here and there will go a long way. MaA is already getting that dodge in flinch nerf, Vanguards could do with having knockback toned down a bit and some of the obviously OP weapons slightly nerfed.

    Just get rid of backstab damage for archers, increase reload times for xbows and make drawing bows require stamina would also go a long way to balancing everything.

    There is no “still.”

    There are counters to everything all these brandistock stab-spamming vanguards are complaining about. Every single one. Why do you think so few level 50+ don’t play as archers if they are so “OP?” It’s because those people know better. Archers are only “OP” against people who play like moths running into lights, refusing to adjust their playing style.

    NOTE: I’m with you on the stamina thing and reload, and maybe the backstab (but what about vanguard helicopter/charge?). A stamina drain for continuing to draw the bow is REALISTIC for an archer, and should be added.



  • @Elite:

    In a math equation if you multiply one side of it by 4 the equation is only valid if you do the same thing on the other side. My freaking lord you’ve GOT to be kidding me…

    Allright, I’ll bite.

    Let’s assume that we have 4 shield knights closing in on 4 archers. Those 4 archers can spread out and keep shooting knights who do not aim theirs shields at them. At this point, we can safely assume that all knights have taken some damage.

    When the knights finally reach the archers, we have 4 invidual 1v1 knights because archers have spread out. Let’s assume that knights and archers are both equally skilled in melee. If the archers landed ranged hits on knights, they can dispatch them with 1-2 shortsword stabs. Knights need minimum 2 hits to land to kill an archer if they wield onehanders (exception being messer but that headshot slash is difficult to land once archers are aware of you). Archers also have superior foot speed and faster weapons. It is more likely that archers win the melee scrap than knights.

    And please, stop your insults before you even start them. It just makes you look mad because you can’t play archer 24/7.



  • A good archer will hit you even if you are holding a shield… plus, you are not always facing the archer to get the protection from shields. Not to mention that shields are a huge hinderance against other melee classes.

    tldr: nerf archers



  • @Kreittis:

    Allright, I’ll bite.

    Let’s assume that we have 4 shield knights closing in on 4 archers. Those 4 archers can spread out and keep shooting knights who do not aim theirs shields at them. At this point, we can safely assume that all knights have taken some damage.

    When the knights finally reach the archers, we have 4 invidual 1v1 knights because archers have spread out. Let’s assume that knights and archers are both equally skilled in melee. If the archers landed ranged hits on knights, they can dispatch them with 1-2 shortsword stabs. Knights need minimum 2 hits to land to kill an archer if they wield onehanders (exception being messer but that headshot slash is difficult to land once archers are aware of you). Archers also have superior foot speed and faster weapons. It is more likely that archers win the melee scrap than knights.

    And please, stop your insults before you even start them. It just makes you look mad because you can’t play archer 24/7.

    I actually play archer and man at arms about even. Mostly because I love their voice acting. As for why I get all bent out of shape over people wanting to nerf archers, it’s for two reasons: (1) Most of them are brandistock stab-spamming vanguards who refuse to change classes, and (2) archers are SUPPOSED to kill a few enemies who don’t see it coming. That’s REALISTIC. They are SUPPOSED to be a pain in the ass! Name a medieval battle where they weren’t.

    In any case, the bold is the issue (“knights do not aim their shields at them”). Good knights are going to be moving targets holding their shields, and at least two out of those four are going to miss.

    And experience tells me your presumption is flat out wrong in the first place: nearly every time a group decides they are going to "GET THOSE ARCHERS!" it results in mass archer slaughter. (and I know you know that this is true, because you’ve probably personally spammed "THOSE ARCHERS ARE CUTTING US DOWN" "GET THOSE ARCHERS! OH THE BRAVERY OF BEING OUT OF RANGE!" along with a group of fellow Chivalry Autists hunting groups of archers exclusively for a bit. I’ve done it too, so I also know.)

    @MissingNo:

    A good archer will hit you even if you are holding a shield… plus, you are not always facing the archer to get the protection from shields. Not to mention that shields are a huge hinderance against other melee classes.

    tldr: nerf archers

    The bold is the only real issue: brandistock-stab spamming vanguard detected. Learn to use a shield and it becomes an asset instead of a hindrance.

    As has been pointed out, moving around, ducking and jumping will prevent an archer from hitting you through your shield. I play man at arms and archer a lot more than I do knight. I am not all that great at knight. But when I am approaching an archer I RARELY get hit by an arrow when I have a shield. It’s really, really easy, man. You walk forward, make them think you’re not going to move, JUMP and poof! their arrow flies by you or hits your shield. Don’t be predictable. That’s all it takes.



  • Not because of realism. No feature should be added because it’s “realistic”. He suggested stamina drain because it means that if you miss a bunch of shots at an incoming enemy, you’ll be a piece of cake to stamina daze. Archers don’t have to deal with stamina like all the other classes do at the moment.

    Also, I know 4 knights will win 4 archers most of the time, but did I ever argue that all-archer teams would win?

    The main point I was bringing up in my post is that it’s not anyhow rock-paper-scissors like this:
    Archer > Vanguard
    Knight > Archer

    The main argument in your opening post was that archers are in fact not overpowered, and people think so only because they play vanguard. Well, that’s clearly not the case, because they’re just as good versus knights and MaA.

    Archers need a good nerf or two, adding stamina drain and removing the backstab bonus being the oldest suggestions circulating around. I’d also nerf crossbow reload speed.



  • @Monsteri:

    Not because of realism. No feature should be added because it’s “realistic”. He suggested stamina drain because it means that if you miss a bunch of shots at an incoming enemy, you’ll be a piece of cake to stamina daze. Archers don’t have to deal with stamina like all the other classes do at the moment.

    Also, I know 4 knights will win 4 archers most of the time, but did I ever argue that all-archer teams would win?

    The main point I was bringing up in my post is that it’s not anyhow rock-paper-scissors like this:
    Archer > Vanguard
    Knight > Archer

    The main argument in your opening post was that archers are in fact not overpowered, and people think so only because they play vanguard. Well, that’s clearly not the case, because they’re just as good versus knights and MaA.

    Archers need a good nerf or two, adding stamina drain and removing the backstab bonus being the oldest suggestions circulating around. I’d also nerf crossbow reload speed.

    They are NOT just as good against knights and man at arms. When I play archer, the range advantage I have with a vanguard is stronger than against a knight with a shield. Now CLOSE range combat that’s different: once I can’t shoot arrows, suddenly the vanguard becomes harder to fight than a knight (Due to the vanguard’s ridiculous melee range. Should Torn Banner nerf that just because I like using an archer /fucking sarcasm). With a man at arms, my experience is that it remains constant the whole way.

    Now, those nerfs you suggest are not things that would enrage me. As long as no one is talking about “MAKE ARROWS HURT LESS” I wouldn’t get too upset about it. Spamming arrows from a bow SHOULD tire out the archer. Increasing reload time is a reasonable compromise. Removing backstab, I don’t know. Archers are at a disadvantage in melee combat, and if you nerf them by making ranged attacks more difficult, it seems a bit overkill. Either nerf range or nerf melee but not both (and really, nothing should be done. You SHOULD get riddled with arrows if you refuse to play anything but a vanguard).

    In the end, learning to use another class to counter an archer’s RANGE is just something people ought to do.



  • @Elite:

    I actually play archer and man at arms about even. Mostly because I love their voice acting. As for why I get all bent out of shape over people wanting to nerf archers, it’s for two reasons: (1) Most of them are brandistock stab-spamming vanguards who refuse to change classes, and (2) archers are SUPPOSED to kill a few enemies who don’t see it coming. That’s REALISTIC. They are SUPPOSED to be a pain in the ass! Name a medieval battle where they weren’t.

    “Guys, it’s okay that archers are OP because it’s realistic.”

    @Elite:

    In any case, the bold is the issue (“knights do not aim their shields at them”). Good knights are going to be moving targets holding their shields, and at least two out of those four are going to miss.

    I wish that I could aim my shield at four directions at once.
    But I admit that newbie archers are very easy to dodge once you are aware of them. But once you face guys like Planetus and Hawk, you are going to get hit unless their mouse runs out of batteries or something. Should we assume that both groups are skilled or not? If both groups are skilled, archers are more likely to win. If both groups are newbies, knights are more likely to win and that’s because archers have higher skill ceiling. Of course, skilled knights will absolutely slaughter unskilled archers and vice versa.

    @Elite:

    And experience tells me your presumption is flat out wrong in the first place: nearly every time a group decides they are going to "GET THOSE ARCHERS!" it results in mass archer slaughter. (and I know you know that this is true, because you’ve probably personally spammed "THOSE ARCHERS ARE CUTTING US DOWN" "GET THOSE ARCHERS! OH THE BRAVERY OF BEING OUT OF RANGE!" along with a group of fellow Chivalry Autists hunting groups of archers exclusively for a bit. I’ve done it too, so I also know.)

    Well, newbie archers are about as easy to kill as newbie men at arms, newbie vanguards and newbie knights.

    And of course I spam “kill archers” every time I get hit because I spam voice commands all the time. I haven’t actually exclusively hunted archers ever because I like to play objective. If I would go archer hunting I would probably use norse/broad + heater MAA because they are just flat out better at dealing with archers.



  • I think a big part of this is not so much that archers are crazy op, it’s just they are so fucking anti-fun in this game that everyone hates them, especially in groups and when they make up a large percentage of a team. Even when on your own team they can be anti-fun sitting back at spawn, team-damaging, and not helping attack objectives.



  • Here’s the thing that makes archers an incomparable pain in the arse:

    Yes the game has a rock-paper-scissors dynamic, but on occasion scissors get a f**king fort.



  • If you want realism, arrows should bounce off armor.
    Archer is my main class, even though I’ve been playing more MAA lately. Even 4 archers are to many in a 24 player game, if for example two really good archers, lets say Planetus and J-P are on the same team the other team is pretty much screwed because 1-4 will die before they even reach the enemies, then they’ll have to deal with the melee meanwhile the archers can keep shooting them. Doesn’t matter if you can take on 4-5 people by yourself in a pub, one shot from an archer and you’re dead, there’s no way to defend against it, it deals a shitload of damage and you get flinched whenever you get shot.
    Other than that, 1v1 situations are easy as an archer unless you face a MAA.



  • I didnt even read the OP completely because I can already see its flaw.

    It is based on “in theory”.

    In Practice, archer shits all over everything by a long way: and ruins the balance of the game. Knights and MAA are still incredibly vulnerable to archers, if not QUITE as much as vanguards. As already stated: the only reliable counter to a good archer is a better archer: especially in 5v5s.

    In the game of rock paper scissors - archer is the fucking shotgun, it doesnt have a weakness. No, ofc you dont take archer then use only melee: but the ranged aspect of the class contains the most potential effectiveness of any of the classes, yet when challenged in melee - the archer is armed with very, very effective weapons to defend themselves with: not to mention backstab - and that they can simply run away from knights and not be caught due to the chase mechanic not working properly.

    Archer>Knight
    Archer>Vanguard
    Archer>MAA

    Why? because the archer has effective ranged weapons and can reliably and easily kill all the other classes before they even get to him, but on top of this: he is incredibly dangerous 1v1 in melee with his secondaries.

    The class does too much damage, that cannot be defended against. It is ridonkulous, ruins the game and needs a hefty nerf to ensure that it is balanced in line with potential effectiveness of the other classes.

    Once again, as I always say whenever i talk about archer: was playing with planetus again last night till like 3am and we had tremendous fun as he ruined every single game for the other team. “you see that guy over there? no head” x40.

    Soon basically their entire team has tower shields, are running around in circles like nutters and are actively trying to hunt him, and still they get mowed down, and the closer they get to him - the less and less likely it becomes that he will miss. Then when they get close ofc we double team them with his cudgel and my HWS.

    The tears were flowing, hot and salty



  • The most annoying aspect of archers for me has always been arrows flinching you regardless of what state you’re in. Arrows will flinch you not only in your windup, but on your release, recovery, parrying, and even charge attacks. This is a huge issue. Getting shot hurts enough already. Arrows flinching in all states is a death sentence. There are situations where you absolutely need to complete a hit or parry, and you can’t do that when you’re omni-flinched by a pebble to the foot.



  • archers range cannot be stopped except for another archer

    archer melee > knight and vanguard, and comparable to maa. Maa’s advantage is of course the dodge ability with the same speed weapons yet higher damage.



  • Love how noobs say: ‘‘SHIELDS COUNTER ARCHERS HRRHH’’. When an archer is good enough shield does jack shit.
    Played a few inter clan 3v3 lts rounds with J-P in the other team. It was all fun and games. He was laughing in TS because we bothered pick shields.



  • Even if shields were helpful, I don’t think anyone should be forced to slowly walk with a shield pointed straight at archers 24/7.
    I suggest that in order to make shields a reliable defense against archery, arrows should bounce right off the shield straight back into the archer from whence they came.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Torn Banner Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.