Regarding the nerfs to archer class



  • The recent patch notes are bringing forth round 2 of the archer class nerf, this time focusing on the damage output.

    The warbow/broadhead nerf is ridiculous. The only thing this will accomplish is get more archers to transition to warbow/bodkin or Heavy Crossbow, which is the opposite of what the anti-archer folk on these forums wanted since those will output more damage to melee. Of course, they’ll want you to nerf that too, but that brings me to my next point.

    You are making massive balance changes to your game based on the forum posts of a group of 10-20 people. Anybody can come post to these forums (which I only really take advantage of in response to some extremely stupid changes), but the vast majority don’t because they’re busy playing and enjoying the game. The people posting here are the same 10-20 who bicker and rage about a broken mechanic every time they get killed. I get to listen to two of those people in teamspeak pretty much every day, and yes they are the only two with 100+ forum posts. Going to be an interesting experiment to see how long it takes them to find this post.

    There are some weapons which do have some hard or often impossible to read mechanics - namely the fast ones like the greatsword and broadsword, but I would honestly rather leave the game be than continue to see balance patch after patch try to fix 100 issues that are simply made up of the frustrations of these 10-20 people.

    They were balanced before the patch a few months ago. Then you took away back damage and flinch, leaving archers with zero close-range abilities. No risk-reward for trying to land the shot on the approaching melee. No ability to provide support to friendlies by flinching an attacking enemy. Now you seem set on the path of removing the ONLY thing the archer has left, which is the reward of dealing big damage when you do land a shot. And it’s not like that’s full proof. It seems like no one wants to entertain the possibility of utilizing smoke, shields, or zigzagging. Nope we’d just rather nerf the archer class to the point of uselessness.

    I challenge anyone from TB to form your own opinion. Head into a game and try playing 30 minutes with each class and tell me which one gives you the hardest time. Then tell me that class needs to be nerfed.



  • I fully agree with any Archer downgrades , plebs who want to complain about this should write to the BBC.
    Archers have ruined many pub players experience in my opinion and were long over due a downgrade



  • @loin:

    I fully agree with any Archer downgrades , plebs who want to complain about this should write to the BBC.
    Archers have ruined many pub players experience in my opinion and were long over due a downgrade

    You pretty much just made my point. This isn’t about a balance to the class, it’s about “downgrading archers in any way possible.”

    Yes archers are annoying to play against, because their dominance is at range. Sure that’s frustrating, but it’s even sweeter when you get to decap an archer.

    The only frustrating part about archers to newer players is trying to learn it. All they do is complain about how hard the class and the unlocks are. I’ve never seen one complain that they were OP.



  • I absolutely agree. You’re spot on when you mentioned how the archer nerfs are based on a group of people who dominate the feedback TB receives. The damage patch ON TOP of the nerfs archers already got makes them hardly viable at all. Just because something annoys you doesn’t mean it’s OP, melee mains. On top of all this, there are still numerous glitches that screw with archers all the time, don’t see those getting fixed either. This one group of people are slowly killing the archer class simply because they don’t like them. That’s not balance. That’s bias nonsense.



  • I scrimmed Tempest today and 3 times within 5 minutes I had a weapon glitch with the x bow where if I used my secondary, my crosshairs would stay, and it would automatically switch back to my empty bow if I blocked or attacked. Got me killed every time because I can’t attack or defend myself. And that’s just a drop in the bucket of glitches that mess with archers constantly. Shooting helmets off with NO damage, freezing in place, etc. None of that gets fixed. But is that in the forums? Are people in a riot because an archer shot them in the head but didnt count? “Hey that should have killed me! That needs to be fixed!” No, they love it. I’m sick of the dominance of melee mains destroying this class because they don’t like it. It’s about time some people got in here and actually gave a perspective other than “dey shoots mauls across the map nerf pls”.



  • Landing big damage when you do land a shot is the issue. It is WAY too easy to land a shot and deal damage which for a melee player, means waiting forever to heal. Hitting someone in the torso or even the leg is almost as effective as landing a headshot, atleast the headshot lets you respawn to go straight back into the battle.

    I agree that this particular archer nerf is the wrong way about it, but they are by no means useless. They are still absolutely dominant with melee especially with weapons like the shortsword. I’m more confident in a 1v2 than a 1v1 against a moderately good melee archer.
    Even with the current beta nerf they can still land a fair amount of damage very easily which is the most frustrating part, in fact they have made it worse, as they have ruined anti-archer by making it impossible to 1 hit other archers with range, so they are more likely going to focus on hitting melee players instead.

    Now, if they actually wanted to fix it, I would prefer to see flinch re-introduced as long as it does not flinch when someone is in the parry state.
    Location based damage should be way more defined too, ever taken a tower shield out and held it up as you ran towards a bodkin warbow archer? They aim for the legs which is way too easy to land and then have a huge health advantage in melee when you eventually engage them. Severely lowering leg and torso damage would make archer more skill based and give people the option to use shields knowing that they have the advantage to meet the archer face to face on even ground.

    It’s either that, or nerf archer melee into the ground even further so that they can’t 1-2 hit you once you reach them.



  • Unfortunately, I don’t see this sort of change implemented in the beta being revoked. There is simply too much anti-archer dogma on the forums to see this change being reverted. Despite this, I will still give my input.

    Anytime there is some sort of way for a player to interfere with another player’s fight or immersion within a game there is a problem. People become annoyed of the method that is used to interfere with the immersion. Within Chivalry this is the archer class. Many people on these forums have a strong conviction that archers are way out of line and nigh unstoppable among the ranks of players. However, the reality is that they are simply annoyed of being hit in the middle of their coveted first person melee experience. It wouldn’t matter if the archer’s shots did no damage, if they didn’t flinch, or if they fired at one shot per minute. People will still find a way to complain about the fact that they are interrupted and hit from a range greater than an arms length away. There is no appeasing these people.

    I can almost guarantee that if this patch goes through, then the skilled archer players will still dominate leader boards much like a skilled man at arms, knight, or vanguard might. Then the same people who support nerfing archers will still be unsatisfied until slowly but surely the archer becomes a man with a marshmallow shooter.

    “Ok, so Flame you’re basically saying the patch won’t matter because good archers will still be good”

    No, not at all ambiguous forum responsee. My argument is that this patch isn’t fair regarding class balance and it doesn’t serve to alleviate the issue at hand. In fact, it might make it worse.

    Initially the classes were designed to have their own small trademark. Knights were beefy and able to use shields and medium length swords. The man at arms was fast with a great dodge ability. The vanguard has huge high damage weapons with a charge attack. Archers were given very low combat resilience due to their low health in exchange for the ability to flinch, have a back stab bonus if they dared to enter the fray and risk being one hit killed by almost anything the opponent uses, and finally to use the archer tools of extended range projectiles.

    Over time we have seen some adjustments. Knight weapons have become slightly weaker. Vanguards are more powerful. Men at arms still have their dodge ability and have remained almost unchanged. Now archers have now lost flinch, back stab, and finally the ability to one shot other archers at range with most of their weapons. If you have ever wondered why the majority of players are vanguards and man at arms with a few knights sprinkled into the field now you know why. MAA and vanguards are simply better. They have the most advantages. A MAA can wipe any player type in the game with only slightly above average skill needed due to the fact that they can dodge and abuse short range weapon mechanics. A vanguard has an incredible variety of weapons and a charge attack that drains opponents’ stamina and hits hard. The knight in comparison cannot reliably combat these class types well enough because it is simply too slow and has no ability or enough range with his weapons to counter these classes effectively. This is where the archer came in. The archer is an effective counter unit to both MAA and vanguard as they are much more lightly armored and have smaller shields or no shield at all. This balances the four classes out.

    So why does this matter?

    With less one shot kill or near death hit instances available to the archer that is caused by the damage nerf there will be a sharp shift in balance that favors more MAA and Vanguard play which is already resting at high levels. MAA and vanguards will be more resilient to all classes and will not have any other class to really counter them effectively to stem the tide of vanguard and MAA spam. However, there are complications.

    Archers also lost the ability to one shot kill other archers. You might as well say goodbye to archer vs. archer battles. Just landing the first shot to kill the other archer is already time consuming enough. Now needing to land two shots and then accommodate for regeneration, the archer will have little incentive to focus on other archers. It will be a waste of ammo and time. So guess who they will target more often? Ah yes, the melee troops. This amplifies the problem of archers being irritating and interfering with the fps champion’s immersion that they covet. You now have a higher volume of projectiles focused onto the melee than before. Sure the arrows wont kill as often, but they will chip at your health and sting you in the middle of fights more often.

    Now there is a choice. Allow archers to keep their damage and suffer the occasional one shot head shot of doom while the archers mainly focus on killing each other. Or, now redirect all the attention of archers just to constantly be hammered by a stream of arrows constantly chipping at your health and indirectly killing you with all of that wonderful assisted damage.

    As I mentioned before, this patch will probably go through. The anti archer champions are going to get hit with even more arrows. they will whine. Eventually there might be a day where we fire marshmallows to cause a sprint stutter on the opponent’s screen. And even though it doesn’t hurt the melee advocates, it still ruins their experience and will cause them to whine.

    I wrote this pretty late so if it doesn’t make a lot of sense now, I’ll actually type up a comprehensive version later.



  • @entire:

    The recent patch notes are bringing forth round 2 of the archer class nerf, this time focusing on the damage output.

    What??? That is awesome but what patch notes do you mean - I see nothing in the official news section???



  • Make archers aim with the tip of their weapon like in AOC.



  • @Flame:

    Unfortunately, I don’t see this sort of change implemented in the beta being revoked. There is simply too much anti-archer dogma on the forums to see this change being reverted. Despite this, I will still give my input.

    Anytime there is some sort of way for a player to interfere with another player’s fight or immersion within a game there is a problem. People become annoyed of the method that is used to interfere with the immersion. Within Chivalry this is the archer class. Many people on these forums have a strong conviction that archers are way out of line and nigh unstoppable among the ranks of players. However, the reality is that they are simply annoyed of being hit in the middle of their coveted first person melee experience. It wouldn’t matter if the archer’s shots did no damage, if they didn’t flinch, or if they fired at one shot per minute. People will still find a way to complain about the fact that they are interrupted and hit from a range greater than an arms length away. There is no appeasing these people.

    I can almost guarantee that if this patch goes through, then the skilled archer players will still dominate leader boards much like a skilled man at arms, knight, or vanguard might. Then the same people who support nerfing archers will still be unsatisfied until slowly but surely the archer becomes a man with a marshmallow shooter.

    “Ok, so Flame you’re basically saying the patch won’t matter because good archers will still be good”

    No, not at all ambiguous forum responsee. My argument is that this patch isn’t fair regarding class balance and it doesn’t serve to alleviate the issue at hand. In fact, it might make it worse.

    Initially the classes were designed to have their own small trademark. Knights were beefy and able to use shields and medium length swords. The man at arms was fast with a great dodge ability. The vanguard has huge high damage weapons with a charge attack. Archers were given very low combat resilience due to their low health in exchange for the ability to flinch, have a back stab bonus if they dared to enter the fray and risk being one hit killed by almost anything the opponent uses, and finally to use the archer tools of extended range projectiles.

    Over time we have seen some adjustments. Knight weapons have become slightly weaker. Vanguards are more powerful. Men at arms still have their dodge ability and have remained almost unchanged. Now archers have now lost flinch, back stab, and finally the ability to one shot other archers at range with most of their weapons. If you have ever wondered why the majority of players are vanguards and man at arms with a few knights sprinkled into the field now you know why. MAA and vanguards are simply better. They have the most advantages. A MAA can wipe any player type in the game with only slightly above average skill needed due to the fact that they can dodge and abuse short range weapon mechanics. A vanguard has an incredible variety of weapons and a charge attack that drains opponents’ stamina and hits hard. The knight in comparison cannot reliably combat these class types well enough because it is simply too slow and has no ability or enough range with his weapons to counter these classes effectively. This is where the archer came in. The archer is an effective counter unit to both MAA and vanguard as they are much more lightly armored and have smaller shields or no shield at all. This balances the four classes out.

    So why does this matter?

    With less one shot kill or near death hit instances available to the archer that is caused by the damage nerf there will be a sharp shift in balance that favors more MAA and Vanguard play which is already resting at high levels. MAA and vanguards will be more resilient to all classes and will not have any other class to really counter them effectively to stem the tide of vanguard and MAA spam. However, there are complications.

    Archers also lost the ability to one shot kill other archers. You might as well say goodbye to archer vs. archer battles. Just landing the first shot to kill the other archer is already time consuming enough. Now needing to land two shots and then accommodate for regeneration, the archer will have little incentive to focus on other archers. It will be a waste of ammo and time. So guess who they will target more often? Ah yes, the melee troops. This amplifies the problem of archers being irritating and interfering with the fps champion’s immersion that they covet. You now have a higher volume of projectiles focused onto the melee than before. Sure the arrows wont kill as often, but they will chip at your health and sting you in the middle of fights more often.

    Now there is a choice. Allow archers to keep their damage and suffer the occasional one shot head shot of doom while the archers mainly focus on killing each other. Or, now redirect all the attention of archers just to constantly be hammered by a stream of arrows constantly chipping at your health and indirectly killing you with all of that wonderful assisted damage.

    As I mentioned before, this patch will probably go through. The anti archer champions are going to get hit with even more arrows. they will whine. Eventually there might be a day where we fire marshmallows to cause a sprint stutter on the opponent’s screen. And even though it doesn’t hurt the melee advocates, it still ruins their experience and will cause them to whine.

    I wrote this pretty late so if it doesn’t make a lot of sense now, I’ll actually type up a comprehensive version later.

    Someone who actually understands! These ranged nerfs are only going to make archers even more annoying. And I also doubt that TBS will actually listen and change their minds on how to balance it to make it less annoying for melee. So have fun watching all archers aiming into the melee without worrying about other archers.

    The only thing I don’t agree with you here is is the back-stab bonus. That was one of the best and most needed nerfs. I main melee as an archer. But I can easily win against any class with a secondary (even cudgel) and still feel that it is too easy for a class that should feel threatened in melee.



  • Have you ever played a competitive match lol?

    When the fucking only way to counter an archer is with a better archer IN A MELEE GAME, something is gravely wrong. EACH engagement the team with the better archer will have brought 2 people down to 1-2HTK and maybe even killed someone. This fucking means that the enemy melee has easy time sweeping through your team because you’re all wounded and have to zigzag while fighting. Archers fucking killed any competitive scene that was left in the game.

    Archer is in no way defensible in its current form. Oh you might argue “ahhh but it counters MAA and Vanguards you see, so knights have a chance!”. Well no, knights are just as vulnerable as the other melee classes (1shot with HCB anyone?), and knights still aren’t underpowered - they can hit-trade, wins them a lot of fights. Even if vanguards dominated the fields after this patch (they won’t) we would simply buff knights. Maybe make him less of a landwhale and allow him to actually sprint, I don’t know. But seems more sensible to me to buff a melee class in a melee game.

    Archers don’t need the same amount of skill to have a huge impact as melee classes, not even close. Landing torso shots is piss easy with the crossbows for instance, and that one torso shot already won your team the following engagement.

    ITT: clueless people



  • @entire:

    They were balanced before the patch a few months ago. Then you took away back damage and flinch, leaving archers with zero close-range abilities.

    My troll detector is reading off the charts.


  • Global Moderator

    @dudeface:

    My troll detector is reading off the charts.

    Some people did like archer how it was.



  • Naturally mediocre archers liked archer because the easiness of it made them appear to be solid players.

    I am a woefully bad shot (high mouse sens. too) and I can do quite well with l-xbow.



  • I read the most laughable statement while playing yesterday,“I really hate archers,they get in the way of a game that supposed to be all melee” Someone tell Torn Banner,because some silly trickster snuck in this class without telling anyone. Lol

    I don’t really understand all of the archer hate really. Whenever I play the game, I constantly hear players complaining about the class,calling them easy mode. However if you look at the top killers in any given round,the top of the lists will be dominated by Vanguards and Knights.

    If Archers were really easy mode,then why aren’t the top ranks as well as servers filled with archers? Are we to believe that most players really see the Archer class and Nobly think," I won’t play an archer,its too easy,I want a real challenge so I’ll play a Van or a Knight" To think this, is honestly the case its laughable. In reality, a majority of players want to go in a game,dominate at ease with the slightest effort with much work at all to get positive kill counts as opposed to negative. I am not saying that there no players who genuinely play Van and Knights and desire to really learn the ins and outs of a class,they exist and typically they are on top of the kill counts on servers.

    The fact is, being an Archer is a genuinely difficult class and when they kill you,they kill you in the way they are intended,at range. I’ve heard players complain that the difference is that,with a sword you can block but an arrow you can not,well off course! Unless you are looking out all the time and wielding a shield,off course you wont be able to stop an arrow,who can? Anyone who says being an archer is on easy mode truly hasn’t played one if they can say such outlandish statements.

    For starters

    1. Aiming: While dueling sword to sword require ability and reflexes so does hitting a target at distance,especially a moving target. Even with Arrow cam and zoom aim,it is difficult to actually hit anyone and as an archer,you are playing the odds and hoping that one of your arrows is going to land and kill a target. When an enemy is charging that also brings up a new challenge, most half way competent players will zig and zag as they close into an archers and unless they are lazy and go in a straight line,the Melee attacker will close in the distance a majority of the times. If you think aiming at a distance require less skill then you have obviously not played the archer.

    2. Melee: To be able to withstand a knight or van coming at you with a melee weapon,you have to be more of a skilled melee fighter as an archer if you expect to come out of a melee encounter alive. While an armored opponent can suffer a hit or two and still prevail, an archer must practically be flawless in their melee combat to come out on top when fighting an opponent.

    3. Biting the bullet: Every heard the expression? It means to endure an otherwise painful situation that is unavoidable. The expression comes from musket men in past wars who had to literally bite open their bullet casing,load,aim and shoot,while praying not to be killed in the process. When shooting your arrows as an archer,to get kills that was archers literally need to do, focus and pray that an enemy doesn’t come from behind and lop off their head while aiming. Being a melee class is means that you have the freedom to bob and weave and parry to avoid death which is a luxury an archer does not have and its not surprise,how much players get delight in killing archers like that. Its a sitting duck,defenseless and easy to kill.

    I think nerfing archers is a mistake. Range is what they do and if you take away their damage at a distance then whats the point? Just like in Medieval times,if an archer got you at a distance your dead but if a Knight closes in,the archer is fucked and that’s how it should be. Arrows will come and sometimes you will get killed,accept it and move on.

    What I do think archers need is more utility to allow them to participate more in object based gameplay and discourage them from sitting back and camping. For example what about flaming arrows? Many of the Team Objective matches ask you to burn something down,why not have this be a role archers can do? Maybe give them limited fire arrows each time and give it a longer time to fire,but at least it gives them more of an active role gameplay.

    If archers were really easy mode most players would be playing archers and complaining about melee classes who interrupt their archery first person shooter game.



  • In reply to #13 a well written thoughtful passage of articulate Oxford educated Quality.
    Nothing beats being back shot by arrow or butter knife if its done by a Don or Peon tbh.
    Long over due downgrades to Archers are needed to save Chivalry the pc game.
    It is my belief that the majority of gamers purchased this game to play Knight Class.
    Back in the day this is what kept the player base strong until the other classes crept
    in front gradually. Esp the Archers



  • @loin:

    In reply to #13 a well written thoughtful passage of articulate Oxford educated Quality.
    Nothing beats being back shot by arrow or butter knife if its done by a Don or Peon tbh.
    Long over due downgrades to Archers are needed to save Chivalry the pc game.
    It is my belief that the majority of gamers purchased this game to play Knight Class.
    Back in the day this is what kept the player base strong until the other classes crept
    in front gradually. Esp the Archers

    I dont like being shot by an archer and dying randomly,but neither do I like being ran over by 2 Vanguards double teaming me and killing me. But based on my experiences playing, I don’t see the amount of outrage directed at the archer matching their actual impact on the battlefield or in competitive matches. I just dont see it.



  • @Oilystool:

    I dont like being shot by an archer and dying randomly,but neither do I like being ran over by 2 Vanguards double teaming me and killing me.

    The difference is you can do something about the 2 vanguards. You can’t do shit about the archer.



  • It’s probably a ridiculous request but either the arrows should do much lower damage to armoured spots, or there should be some sort of deflection. A knights leg armour would surely be designed specifically to deflect arrows and stabs to the shins since that is all enemies can see when his shield is up.



  • As I keep saying.
    Archers NEED to retain their anti-archer capabilities and lose their easy hit high damage on melee classes.
    All they have done with this patch is make anti-archer less than ideal so they will focus more attention on being annoying little shits and firing into melee fights to get assists or get godlike kills with the HCB from accross the map by hitting the player in the torso or the leg.

    The best way to fix it is to make it harder for an archer to land a high damage shot in the first place (You know, the head). The fact that they can still cause so much strife with leg and torso shots with such little need to aim, regardless of getting the kill or not is the problem. Reduce torso and leg damage so that archers have to actually aim for the head to be useful.
    If it becomes too hard for noobs to play archer, then reintroducing flinch when the enemy is not parrying, is all that would be needed.

    But no, we essentially get a global nerf to range that makes them even more annoying against melee players, given that they don’t care so much about anti-archer archers.


Log in to reply
 

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