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



  • In addition to that ^

    At long range, if you get hit by an archer, its primarily your fault. Projectile speeds aren’t fast enough for you to be unable to react to it.

    The most dangerous area to be in is medium range. Even at this range, it is not a 1-sided argument; archers are still about ‘prediction’ over aim, simply due to projectile speeds. The most vulnerable is when you’re fighting someone, they usually like to shoot right when you start your windup -> when you are most predictable.

    At close range you can either disarm their bow or they can try to take a risky shot and be destroyed because of it.

    Once more people start to learn to consistently mindgame archers, opinions will start to change. I do agree that flinch in release by projectiles is stupid though.



  • @lemonater47:

    Archers have the lowest DPS and are at a disadvantage in melee combat. Except with daggers but they could use a nerf. Archers aren’t OP. Some people just don’t like sudden random death from no where. But that’s the whole premise. if you think archer with a shortsword is OP in melee why don’t MAA’s use it??? Archers heavily rely on their opponent being over confident in melee. Otherwise the archers chances aren’t that great. A drag or feint can get an archer killed.

    Lowest DPS, but they can kill you at range without any chance for retaliation. Arrows also flinch pretty much in any state. I wasn’t saying shortsword was OP, though I’d argue its close or at the very least is strong enough that it makes the other options somewhat less viable. Also, archer melee is decent given their backpedal speed and such. I’m not saying its OP, but given their ability to deal such damage at range, their ability in melee is far too capable.



  • @lemonater47:

    Archers have the lowest DPS and are at a disadvantage in melee combat. Except with daggers but they could use a nerf.

    Archers aren’t OP. Some people just don’t like sudden random death from no where. But that’s the whole premise.

    if you think archer with a shortsword is OP in melee why don’t MAA’s use it???

    Archers heavily rely on their opponent being over confident in melee. Otherwise the archers chances aren’t that great. A drag or feint can get an archer killed.

    man at arms don’t have a backstab bonus which is triggered easily by strafing while attacking. The other reason maa don’t use shortsword is because they have the broadsword.

    As far as dps goes, it depends on whether you’re talking about bow damage or melee damage but each of those points can be argued. With a 1 htk headshot you could say that they have the MOST dps… 1 second = 100% damage. You could say that if they DONT hit the head then they may have the lowest dps. If you’re talking about melee, they can dispatch a knight much faster than a knight could kill them potentially, so you could say in this case the knight actually has the lowest dps. They can also kill vanguards in melee with 2 simple hits making them in a lot of cases better vanguard killers than a knight with a longsword, or even take a vanguard down faster.

    as for getting hit far away, this is usually the case because you can’t always watch what an archer is doing since they are constantly shooting, and if you only focus on what the archer is doing, then you’re not really focusing on waht the melee is doing, and vice versa.



  • @50ShadesofClay:

    man at arms don’t have a backstab bonus which is triggered easily by strafing while attacking. The other reason maa don’t use shortsword is because they have the broadsword. As far as dps goes, it depends on whether you’re talking about bow damage or melee damage but each of those points can be argued. With a 1 htk headshot you could say that they have the MOST dps… 1 second = 100% damage. You could say that if they DONT hit the head then they may have the lowest dps. If you’re talking about melee, they can dispatch a knight much faster than a knight could kill them potentially, so you could say in this case the knight actually has the lowest dps. They can also kill vanguards in melee with 2 simple hits making them in a lot of cases better vanguard killers than a knight with a longsword, or even take a vanguard down faster. as for getting hit far away, this is usually the case because you can’t always watch what an archer is doing since they are constantly shooting, and if you only focus on what the archer is doing, then you’re not really focusing on waht the melee is doing, and vice versa.

    Not to mention the archer model/bow doesn’t always accurately track where they are aiming, which makes it even more difficult to read when/where they are shooting.



  • @SHH_:

    Not to mention the archer model/bow doesn’t always accurately track where they are aiming, which makes it even more difficult to read when/where they are shooting.

    that is also annoying. I hate it when im running at an archer thinking they dont see me, because they are looking almost 90 degrees away from me, and then all of a sudden i get shot with an arrow that comes out of their kidney.



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    that is also annoying. I hate it when im running at an archer thinking they dont see me, because they are looking almost 90 degrees away from me, and then all of a sudden i get shot with an arrow that comes out of their kidney.

    I can see how that might be frustrating, especially when that archer is using a heavy crossbow, you never know if he’s aiming at you.

    Personally I’ve grown accustomed to it, having ranged fights with archers it seems like they can turn quite a fair bit and still be aiming at you, this needs to be addressed.



  • indeed, unreadable aim direction

    and of course though not a bug, crossbows staring at me is not a friendly feeling



  • @lemonater47:

    Archers have the lowest DPS and are at a disadvantage in melee combat. Except with daggers but they could use a nerf.

    Archers aren’t OP. Some people just don’t like sudden random death from no where. But that’s the whole premise.

    if you think archer with a shortsword is OP in melee why don’t MAA’s use it???

    Archers heavily rely on their opponent being over confident in melee. Otherwise the archers chances aren’t that great. A drag or feint can get an archer killed.

    But archers are OP, they are biggest game changers.



  • @rumpelstiltskin:

    But archers are OP, they are biggest game changers.

    For better or for worse. Too many archers can mean the team with that many archers looses as well as wins.

    Like I said. Archers are sudden random death from nowhere. But in terms of the classes individual effectiveness they are the worst. Team wise they can work or not work depending on the map and who the archers are. They are the most dishonourable class. Killing from a distance.

    But it a good vanguard wrecks more damage than a good archer.



  • It’s more efficient to have good archer on your team than good knight/vanguard/maa because archers make the biggest impact on the game which is ridiculous considering that 3/4 classe are melee. The only way to counter good archer is by another good archer. Even if you run full team melee of veterans with +1k hours on their account, you can still get destroyed by one very good archer and average melee. That is bullshit. Ranged class shouldn’t be able to carry a team so much.

    In EU competitive scene no1 can be bothered to play LTS because it’s decided by which archer kills someone first. Lotto archer-fest.

    And don’t start with “hurr archers are only OP in competitive”, this game shouldn’t be balanced around public games. It’s time to nerf the archers.



  • @rumpelstiltskin:

    It’s more efficient to have good archer on your team than good knight/vanguard/maa because archers make the biggest impact on the game which is ridiculous considering that 3/4 classe are melee. The only way to counter good archer is by another good archer. Even if you run full team melee of veterans with +1k hours on their account, you can still get destroyed by one very good archer and average melee. That is bullshit. Ranged class shouldn’t be able to carry a team so much.

    In EU competitive scene no1 can be bothered to play LTS because it’s decided by which archer kills someone first. Lotto archer-fest.

    And don’t start with “hurr archers are only OP in competitive”, this game shouldn’t be balanced around public games. It’s time to nerf the archers.

    Is Nova actually saying “archers are fine, just get better with shield (wut?) and learn 2 strafe?”. Did he also say “you can react to the projectile speed?”. Oh sure, ill just run towards him then just observe the angle the projectile approaches me at and make appropriate adjustments to my direction and shield positioning.

    I dont even… HHHRHRRRRRRRRRR… BHRHRHRHRHHRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR. UUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHRRRRRRRRRRR… ARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH FUUUUUUUUCK WHY U SAY THESE FUCKING THINGS SHIIIIIT FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK ARGHHHHHHHH

    DPS is meaningless to balance discussion here as archers can hit at any range: and they get more and more accurate the closer you get. And Archer DPS is not exactly low…

    Keep headshot damage the same? IDK here - but im pretty sure the top archers get a lot of headshots… (planetus “you see that guy? no head” x40). He doesnt seem to find it so hard, neither does DJ.

    Dont get me wrong, I love a good archer carry like the next guy: when DJ has a great game and hits basically every shot its great fun to go in there and mop up their thoroughly molested melee with 0% effort and come away with a pub KD - but its not fair :P.



  • @rumpelstiltskin:

    In EU competitive scene no1 can be bothered to play LTS because it’s decided by which archer kills someone first. Lotto archer-fest.

    NA still hasn’t realized this.



  • @Karasu:

    NA still hasn’t realized this.

    I’ve had this stance for over 8 months now.

    As a good archer LTS is so fucking boring because it always comes down to me picking off the enemy archer because I understand the concept of mindgames and pre-firing. Moor LTS is the worst offender, where archers try to pick each other off at their maximum range, missing 95% of their shots each round until one lands and the archer dies in 1 hit.

    Then of course you get an archer advantage since the enemy archer is dead and a numbers advantage as well so whoever gets the first pick off wins. LTS is just a bad gamemode for competitive play, Counter Strike solved the problem of sudden death gamemodes decades ago by adding objectives. :cower:



  • We’ll ask someone for a scrim. They say LTS. We say no. They call us elitists.

    True stories.



  • @Flippy:

    We’ll ask someone for a scrim. They say LTS. We say no. They call us elitists.

    True stories.

    In our case we just facepalm and reluctantly agree :(



  • I think LTS scrims are fun without archers.



  • LTS got much less interesting with the addition of those endgame icons. It also buffed Archers as it makes it much harder to flank them or even use cover. Not the way to go in my opinion: floating icons etc. should be kept at a bare minimum - I think even objective markers offer way too much hand-holding that reduces the tactical options most of the time (and often ends up favoring Archers too).

    As for Archers themslves and the topic here: Yes Archers are the main counter to Knights and limiting them causes the Vanguard population to go up or even rampage because of missing counters. However, this only applies to mass-Vanguard where 4 Archers are simply not enough. Too bad limiting Archers makes the probability of encountering mass-Vanguard much higher. Now Torn Banner could keep going the wrong way and introduce a Vanguard limit reducing the player options even more and making the game even less diverse.

    Or they could remove the Archer limit making the game more diverse (and better in my opinion) and providing the options to deal with Vanguard spam. But then we run into the old problem: the main counter to Archers… is Archers. Which is probably the main reason they introduced the limit in the first place. If one team starts to use Archers to great effect the other teams Archer count will increase in an effort to snipe them. This increase in Archers causes the first team to use even more Archers to counter them more effectively. Which in turn might cause the second team to use even more Archers.

    So the way to deal with this is:
    (1) Make Archer balance high priority.
    (2) Balance Archers:

    • less easy to play (higher risk, less forgiving)
    • not the main counter to itself (it should be more effective to pick up a shield and charge than sniping them)
      (3) Get rid of the Archer limit (and overused floating icons - the King needs no tracking device either)
      (4) Add a Hardcore mode (100% FF, team flinch, 1st person only, ranged spread, no floating icons and less health regeneration)


  • @Evil:

    So the way to deal with this is:
    (2) Balance Archers:

    • not the main counter to itself (it should be more effective to pick up a shield and charge than sniping them)

    That might not be possible, In almost every situation in which there is a ranged class combatant the most effective class to take him out is another member of that ranged class. This is due to the fact that these classes are the only ones who can be within striking range of the opposing ranged combatant, but the opponent themselves must lay within their striking range. Basically this pattern is born from the fact that if you can hit him he can hit you, something that isn’t always true if a ranged class is fighting a melee class



  • LTS nuuuuuu



  • @Karasu:

    NA still hasn’t realized this.

    I can say that everyone in Vq and multiple other NA clans knew that LTS was a crap game mode way back because of this very reason. There are multiple threads from a long time ago discussing it. I can’t speak to what NA players are playing now, but i think most of the people that realized LTS was bad back then quit by now.


Log in to reply