Introduce distance damage falloff for (archer) projectiles



  • Headshot damage would be not affected or minimally affected by this.
    This would:
    1. Emphasize the close quarters aspect of the game
    2. Add realism
    3. Make balancing projectile damage easier/smoother because it would not be stuck in how many hits it takes to kill target X as much
    4. Be a good counterweight to archer balance fix
    5. Reduce the reward for the archer in hitting distant targets
    6. If clunkyness is removed, encourage archers using ranged weapons in close quarters

    I think it would be a moderately hard to do thing. I am willing to wait for it to have archers balanced though.



  • Oh boy.
    “2. Add realism”

    A Longbow from the middle ages can kill its target well over 300 paces away. Distances, you don´t even shoot in this game.

    And wow, taking even more fun away from archery? It already is incredibly hard and rare to hit and kill targets and long ranges here. No need to make it even weaker.

    I don´t know where you play but archers use their weapons all the time in close ranges, so what do you want?



  • @Sultanofswing:

    5. Reduce the reward for the archer in hitting distant targets

    Wha? If you’re getting hit from years away, you’re standing still… If I get hit from years away, the archer deserves the kill wholeheartedly.



  • @William:

    Oh boy.
    And wow, taking even more fun away from archery? It already is incredibly hard and rare to hit and kill targets and long ranges here. No need to make it even weaker.

    lolwat



  • @William:

    Oh boy.
    “2. Add realism”

    A Longbow from the middle ages can kill its target well over 300 paces away. Distances, you don´t even shoot in this game.

    And wow, taking even more fun away from archery? It already is incredibly hard and rare to hit and kill targets and long ranges here. No need to make it even weaker.

    I don´t know where you play but archers use their weapons all the time in close ranges, so what do you want?

    Oh boy.
    You obviously have no idea. Longbow is more deadly at close range than long range, simply because the arrow is at its max speed when it leaves the string. The air resistance, gravity and whatnot make the arrow only slow down from there, and even when the arrow hits its peak hight and starts falling down, the speed is never gonna be the same as the moment it left the bow. That is physics and you can argue all about it but you cannot change that.
    Noone is arguing that longbow can kill people at long distances, he’s arguing that even longbow does less damage the longer the shooting distance is.



  • With the current speed of projectiles, long distance shots are already heavily discouraged and I yell at archers who think they’re snipers.

    I could agree with this change if projectile speed were increased some, but I think bow damage would have to take a hit in general in that case so that bows won’t be overshadowing crossbows even more.



  • @Nemeth:

    @William:

    Oh boy.
    “2. Add realism”

    A Longbow from the middle ages can kill its target well over 300 paces away. Distances, you don´t even shoot in this game.

    And wow, taking even more fun away from archery? It already is incredibly hard and rare to hit and kill targets and long ranges here. No need to make it even weaker.

    I don´t know where you play but archers use their weapons all the time in close ranges, so what do you want?

    Oh boy.
    You obviously have no idea. Longbow is more deadly at close range than long range, simply because the arrow is at its max speed when it leaves the string. The air resistance, gravity and whatnot make the arrow only slow down from there, and even when the arrow hits its peak hight and starts falling down, the speed is never gonna be the same as the moment it left the bow. That is physics and you can argue all about it but you cannot change that.
    Noone is arguing that longbow can kill people at long distances, he’s arguing that even longbow does less damage the longer the shooting distance is.

    There’s no arguing that, I agree. However, the bow already does terrible damage to Vanguards and Knights at mid to close range. In order for damage drop off to work, you would need to start the bow off at 100% damage at close range and have drop off from there. High risk high reward type stuff. And for real, an arrow should One-hit-kill ANYONE if hit in the head. There should be no arguing against this. As it stands now, Knights and Vanguards and take a hit to the face without dying. Maybe I’m wrong and the hit boxes are wonky, but that’s just what I’ve seen so far.



  • Maybe crossbows need to be buffed so bows dont overshadow them?
    This idea is mostly meant to synergize with increased projectile speed, because there are 2 arguments against increasing projectile speed plain:
    1. Archers become OP
    2. Archers become anti-fun machines

    So Increased projectile speed + this is a good compromise in my view.



  • @Cookaroo:

    There’s no arguing that, I agree. However, the bow already does terrible damage to Vanguards and Knights at mid to close range. In order for damage drop off to work, you would need to start the bow off at 100% damage at close range and have drop off from there. High risk high reward type stuff. And for real, an arrow should One-hit-kill ANYONE if hit in the head. There should be no arguing against this. As it stands now, Knights and Vanguards and take a hit to the face without dying. Maybe I’m wrong and the hit boxes are wonky, but that’s just what I’ve seen so far.

    Warbow 1 shots Vanguards with a headshot and 2 shots Knights with body shots. Not sure how that’s terrible damage. The majority of melee weapons can’t 2 shot a Knight and only one can one shot a Vanguard (excluding charge attacks).



  • @Nemeth:

    @William:

    Oh boy.
    “2. Add realism”

    A Longbow from the middle ages can kill its target well over 300 paces away. Distances, you don´t even shoot in this game.

    And wow, taking even more fun away from archery? It already is incredibly hard and rare to hit and kill targets and long ranges here. No need to make it even weaker.

    I don´t know where you play but archers use their weapons all the time in close ranges, so what do you want?

    Oh boy.
    You obviously have no idea. Longbow is more deadly at close range than long range, simply because the arrow is at its max speed when it leaves the string. The air resistance, gravity and whatnot make the arrow only slow down from there, and even when the arrow hits its peak hight and starts falling down, the speed is never gonna be the same as the moment it left the bow. That is physics and you can argue all about it but you cannot change that.
    Noone is arguing that longbow can kill people at long distances, he’s arguing that even longbow does less damage the longer the shooting distance is.

    :lol:

    I shoot the Longbow in real life but thanks for this incredibly deep lecture on physics, I feel like I finally understand how things work in this world of miracles now! :roll:

    A longbow does not have ANY(!) problems to kill/incapacitate its target at OVER 300 paces (which was my example earlier), not at all.
    With some friends, longbowmen as well, we once shot at an old car door at 200m. The door was fucked. Now replace the door with a Man-at-arms or a Vanguard if you wish. What do you think will happen? The arrows bounce off, because they are so powerless, right? :roll:

    And we don´t shoot medieval high-power longbows with 80-160lbs (sources vary about that), remember that.

    In the battle of Crecy, the English opened fire at ~500m(!) on the french troops. Now come again and tell me those weapons should lose power after what… 50-100m in this game?

    Ridiculous.



  • @SlyGoat:

    @Cookaroo:

    There’s no arguing that, I agree. However, the bow already does terrible damage to Vanguards and Knights at mid to close range. In order for damage drop off to work, you would need to start the bow off at 100% damage at close range and have drop off from there. High risk high reward type stuff. And for real, an arrow should One-hit-kill ANYONE if hit in the head. There should be no arguing against this. As it stands now, Knights and Vanguards and take a hit to the face without dying. Maybe I’m wrong and the hit boxes are wonky, but that’s just what I’ve seen so far.

    Warbow 1 shots Vanguards with a headshot and 2 shots Knights with body shots. Not sure how that’s terrible damage. The majority of melee weapons can’t 2 shot a Knight and only one can one shot a Vanguard (excluding charge attacks).

    Sure, if you can get a hit on one of them without getting beheaded. I’m saying any arrow from any projectile should be a One-Hitter.



  • @Cookaroo:

    Sure, if you can get a hit on one of them without getting beheaded. I’m saying any arrow from any projectile should be a One-Hitter.

    :hopel:

    Don´t you people understand what this would do to this game? Like 2/3 of a team would use bow and arrow and they would just kill E V E R Y T H I N G in NO time.



  • @Cookaroo:

    @SlyGoat:

    @Cookaroo:

    There’s no arguing that, I agree. However, the bow already does terrible damage to Vanguards and Knights at mid to close range. In order for damage drop off to work, you would need to start the bow off at 100% damage at close range and have drop off from there. High risk high reward type stuff. And for real, an arrow should One-hit-kill ANYONE if hit in the head. There should be no arguing against this. As it stands now, Knights and Vanguards and take a hit to the face without dying. Maybe I’m wrong and the hit boxes are wonky, but that’s just what I’ve seen so far.

    Warbow 1 shots Vanguards with a headshot and 2 shots Knights with body shots. Not sure how that’s terrible damage. The majority of melee weapons can’t 2 shot a Knight and only one can one shot a Vanguard (excluding charge attacks).

    Sure, if you can get a hit on one of them without getting beheaded. I’m saying any arrow from any projectile should be a One-Hitter.

    Then we can change the game’s name to Archery: Projectile Warfare.



  • “2. Add realism”

    Did you take physics?

    Reduce the reward for the archer in hitting distant targets
    6. If clunkyness is removed, encourage archers using ranged weapons in close quarters

    Uhm, why? Hitting a target from far away is basically the epitome of skill in an archer. Why would you want to detract from that? Also, “ranged weapon”, Means from a range. Archers are not meant for close range combat except when confronted, and then’s the time to pull out the tiny sword and pray to god.



  • @SlyGoat:

    Then we can change the game’s name to Archery: Projectile Warfare.

    Sorry, I meant any projectile that’s a head shot should be a one-hit-kill.



  • @Cookaroo:

    @SlyGoat:

    Then we can change the game’s name to Archery: Projectile Warfare.

    Sorry, I meant any projectile that’s a head shot should be a one-hit-kill.

    Would still be blatantly overpowered. I already have about 50% accuracy with a shortbow firing as fast as possible and a good number of those are headshots.



  • I disagree with punishing an archer for hitting someone at long range. It’s already hard enough as it is to hit someone at long range, why discourage it further?

    Further, would archers even notice? It’s not like they can tell how much damage they’re doing from far away, let alone care.

    I just overall think this is a bad idea. If you think Archers are overpowered, which I currently do not, then simple things like draw-time and arrow speed are the things you should look at first.



  • @Cookaroo:

    @SlyGoat:

    Then we can change the game’s name to Archery: Projectile Warfare.

    Sorry, I meant any projectile that’s a head shot should be a one-hit-kill.

    A broadhead firead at a steel full-helm would just bounce off, so why do you want this?



  • @William:

    :lol:

    I shoot the Longbow in real life but thanks for this incredibly deep lecture on physics, I feel like I finally understand how things work in this world of miracles now! :roll:

    A longbow does not have ANY(!) problems to kill/incapacitate its target at OVER 300 paces (which was my example earlier), not at all.
    With some friends, longbowmen as well, we once shot at an old car door at 200m. The door was fucked. Now replace the door with a Man-at-arms or a Vanguard if you wish. What do you think will happen? The arrows bounce off, because they are so powerless, right? :roll:

    And we don´t shoot medieval high-power longbows with 80-160lbs (sources vary about that), remember that.

    In the battle of Crecy, the English opened fire at ~500m(!) on the french troops. Now come again and tell me those weapons should lose power after what… 50-100m in this game?

    Ridiculous.

    What are you arguing exactly? All I said is, longbow does more damage the closer you are to the target. That is fact. If you shot the old car from 10m, you’d do more damage than when you shot it from 200m. That is high school physics for you, and no matter how much you’ll argue, it won’t change mother nature.
    Also, this is not real life, the longbows we are using in game are not the British longbows as you should have noticed from the range. So that pretty much makes all your points invalid. Thanks for the history lecture though.


Log in to reply