If the masses allow it, I would gladly post a sample of my vocal capabilities within the next few days as to promote this idea.

@EricFong:

EymKZBG0-bc

You want this?

Yuss please.

Also, I like your sig-pic.

@gregcau:

@OMTHUR:

Now why would you want THAT piece of shit weapon?

F_5dP_83O7o

Ah, that makes sense!

Joker tried to hold a katana in his mouth like Roronoa Zorro from One Piece and with just a slight loss of grip, he had to realise why it was a butt-stupid idea. Now he tries to become the world’s most dangerous and feared psychopathical criminal and makes up terrifying cover stories so no one knows his secret.

@lemonater47:

The katana was was capable of chopping a head off in a single blow and considering its wheight that’s impressive. Any medieval executioners couldn’t do that with a heavy axe. Usually took about two great hacks. Some of the worst in history it took a good 10 hits. But they were more becuase he executioner. Was new and missed lots, leaving a bloody mess as a head.

Their swords were sharp and well looked after and Japanese were very capable swordsman.

Then were so useful that’s larger version was made called the No-dachi. and in the 16th centurary they were so common that many peasant armies which clans started to use used katanas as a secondary weapon. After one battle you could supply all your peasant armies with katanas. Making them slightly more useful in combat, rain sing their morale a bit at no cost to the general in command. The Japanese did not have a modern army soldier still paid for most of their own equipment. A few daimyos did loan weapons and armour to the peasants to get more soldiers. It meant they were paid less and had to complete several years of service or die fighting.

Now don’t you muddy the issue with your well researched facts and scientific proof, mister!

That aside, I’m not even here to argue about how “awesome” the Katana in its myriad forms really is, I’m just here to tell all the stupid fanboys to GTFO.

And still: You cannot cause blunt force trauma on people with a katana, it’s a choppy-cutty thing, thus it is EENFEEREEOOHR!!!

Now why would you want THAT piece of shit weapon?

It looks like a malformed dildo, it’s only good for chopping up sausage and you can’t even bludgeon people with it! It’s incomprehensable why anybody would even remotely fancy this disgusting insult of a weapon just because the History channel made a “documentary” about it with the intellectual content of a “Fast and Furious”-film.

Also if you “really” want to wank about Japanese superiority, please just point towards their metric tucktons of awesome technology, but don’t swagger about with that curved catastrophe of swordsmanship.

Yolo Swaggins.

No, really, I nearly shat myself laughing.

It’s also the only one I can remember, but there’ve been several all over the place.

@lemonater47:

Some smoke and a few shields and those archer teams are rendered useless.

There’s a chat function, use it.

Oh, I always do! Mostly for trashtalking, but I still do.

And only few people listen when I’m lucky.

I think the problem for communication is that people generally do not really care about fulfilling a teameffort but try to go all One-man-army on the other team, rendering any attempt of coming up with a well-orchestrated counteroffensive.

In fact, I was experimenting/training/fooling around with smokepots the other day and promptly got yelled at for using them. It was an archer who apparently felt me trying to provide cover denied him clear sight for “easy kills”.

Either way, to add my thoughts to this topic:

I am not entirely sure about hardcapping classes. I do agree the potential damageoutput that so many archers provide is infuriating at times, especially on TO maps that are very corridorlike in their build.(speaking of Darkforest for the better part, Stoneshill’s ramobjective and the bottlenecks in Hillside) You could say that you only need to get one or two guys in close to chop those archers apart, but as a matter of fact those archers aren’t always so helpless in melee as the game might make you think and especially when huddled up in groups, archers with their +50% damage when stabbing you in the back will most likely dispose of any unwanted close encounters in short time.

On the other hand, hardcapping would mean to cut down on the game’s mechanics. The game promises to allow you to approach gameplay in any way you wish that lie in consensus with the game’s mechanics. Hardcapping a class by default would sort of cut into this option, twisting it into a “first come, first serve” scenario which is in my opinion unnecessary.

The mechanics to ensure teambalance already go into this, but it is more understandable because the number of participants on either side is easier to grasp as a balance issue than one side consisting of only one type of class.

Also, I feel it would be just a cheap cover-up of what is essentially providing a setup of archers-only-teams to be so strong: The game’s mechanics allowing it.

The devs tried their best to add as many elements as possible to make the game as immersive as possible, taking inspiration from actual medieval warfare and weaponry. This includes that archers could pretty much fuck up any incoming force that was not properly equipped to withstand their fire.

However this is also a game, where things must be adjusted to provide a well balanced situation of fair competition.

In my opinion, it would be better to adjust the mechanics than to force hardcaps on anything and anyone. I still have nightmares from the Dow-Balancing ;_;

It may be that with one more element of immersion, the archer situation could be solved: Shaky aim. The longer the archers aim, the more their aim will be off and their shots become less reliable.

The way I’ve experienced it, many archers put an arrow on the string, draw and hold, waiting for any incoming enemy to release right away. Now in actual bow-warfare, your arm would tire and disrupt your aim, making steady shots nearly impossible. By increasing failchance as archers, the class becomes less attractive, which would decrease the amount of killingspree-hungry players choosing this class in the first place. Additionally, with the single archer having to put more effort into combat and learning to handle his weapon, the penalty to fight against teams consisting of many archers decreases as the shots are easier to avoid.

Other possible solutions could be stamina drain for the archer the more he holds or increased stamina drain for every time he draws the bow to increase breaktime between shots to regenerate, reducing the amount of arrows shot per minute.

@SavageBeatings:

@Hitom:

OMG! THAT MOVIE LOOKS AWSOME! THANKS!!!

It is quite awesome, although very historically inaccurate.

Historical accuracy has never been the strength of entertainment cinema.

“Your WIFE provided BETTER SPORT”

“OVER HERE, Squire! I need help with my codpiece.”

“COME, tedious fool! to the purpose…”

“After I run you through, next is your mother!”

@Aemil:

…The polehammer, well, I don’t know what else could be added to it’s tier, so maybe you could leave your suggestions. Okay, there was my suggestion, I hope it was comprehensible, and leave your other suggestions.

I suggest the Crow’s Beak hammer be introduced as secondary tier in the “Polehammer” tree.

Technically speaking, Crow’s Beak and Polehammer have identical visuals, but as of yet I haven’t seen any mentioning of the thorn on the Polehammer’s backside being used in any way, so here’s what I think:

The Crow’s Beak hammer would have less range and deal slightly less damage, but is remarkably faster than the polehammer. Now here comes the twist: The Crow’s Beak is known for his pointy thorn which was used to penetrate heavy armor while carrying a blunt opposite end to bludgeon enemies.

Thus, my suggestion is the Crow’s Beak should deal piercing damage when in regular swings, blunt when overheaded and also blunt when thrust as to clearly differentiate him from the polehammer.

Polehammer’s design (ingame)

Polehammer

Different design for Crow’s Beak / Bec de Corbin

Crow’s Beak

Now the Crow’s Beak in the picture is severly smaller than what I had in mind, yet I feel the basic design of the head of the weapon is exactly what I have in mind.to differentiate the two weapons visually.