Mordhau
 urm
  • Likes received 70
  • Date joined 1 May
  • Last seen 8 Dec

Private Message

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

@CocyxTheGaySkeleton said:

@urm said:

@CocyxTheGaySkeleton said:

@urm said:
Can we get this thread back on track?
If you want to discuss the powerlevel of archery, there are already multiple threads with that topic.
This is about longbow, and specifically its point cost.

yah, i think it's weighted correctly atm because it's a very situational weapon. in my mind it should be used as like an AWP in csgo where it should be fairly useless in a fair amount of situations (unless you're insane like s1mple and just noscope dudes all day). it's a specialist weapon, reducing the point cost so ppl could make more hybrid classes seems bad to me

I disagree. If anything, it is more of a lack of all trades compared to recurve and xbow. I would always prefer recurve against melee and xbow against other ranged, and only in the rare (in small scale/compet) case where I care about both I would pick longbow.

i sniped an edit in there so i'll just post it here instead: perhaps it can use a buff so it's more weighted as a specialist weapon, cause i like the idea of specialists classes being used in certain situations. it would make the comp scene more tactical oriented, yah?

basically rather than reducing it's point value so ppl can make more hybrid classes (which i dislike), u make it WORTH the points it costs

With the way archery mechanics are, I doubt longbow can ever be a specialist weapon
Also specialist weapons should be generally cheap for their power level, or there is no reason to run them, you are better off just practicing and using the weapon that's always useful.
Longbow damage numbers are already about as high as devs are willing to see them on a ranged weapon. I doubt it will ever be directly buffed in its power.
Also if a ranged weapon was powerful enough to use exclusively, its point cost would largely stop mattering, as you don't need a proper melee with it or even armor, as other ranged will one shot you with huntsman anyway

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

@CocyxTheGaySkeleton said:

@urm said:
Can we get this thread back on track?
If you want to discuss the powerlevel of archery, there are already multiple threads with that topic.
This is about longbow, and specifically its point cost.

yah, i think it's weighted correctly atm because it's a very situational weapon. in my mind it should be used as like an AWP in csgo where it should be fairly useless in a fair amount of situations (unless you're insane like s1mple and just noscope dudes all day). it's a specialist weapon, reducing the point cost so ppl could make more hybrid classes seems bad to me

I disagree. If anything, it is more of a lack of all trades compared to recurve and xbow. I would always prefer recurve against melee and xbow against other ranged, and only in the rare (in small scale/compet) case where I care about both I would pick longbow.

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

Can we get this thread back on track?
If you want to discuss the powerlevel of archery, there are already multiple threads with that topic.
This is about longbow, and specifically its point cost.

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

@CocyxTheGaySkeleton said:
the fact that 99% of archer mains get laid the fuck out when they switch to a melee class out of frustration should tell u a lot about the skill of archer mains

archery is situational, u shouldn't main it

if we are talking about pubs, then pretty much everyone playing them is shit
in competitive/pug scene, there are pretty much no archer mains, even people like me who are known as "archer mains" spend 90% of their time playing melee.

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

@smellycathawk said:

@urm said:

@Peregr1ne said:
The longbow needs tweaking generally. Maybe the point cost could be the same as the recurve and crossbow but honestly the longbow and crossbow are both stupidly overpowered at the moment, for the same reasons crossbows were overpowered in Chivalry. Both weapons boast insane damage which at times can one tap people in the chest which might be okay if the arrows/bolts didn't travel like bullets. I can tell you that trying to dodge such projectiles with a recurve even with ranger is next to impossible. And one lucky bodyshot will end everything for me.

I just don't see how people can think these two weapons are weak. The few times that I use the crossbow or longbow are when I pick them up off the ground from a teammate/enemy and even then, with only 3 shots at my disposal, i'm capable of doing some significant damage to the opposing team. Enemy archers especially I can pick off one by one while barely even trying. By contrast, whenever i'm up against the average longbow/crossbow main the amount of times I get killed by them is absolutely ridiculous. I've played scrims fairly recently, using the same loadout I use in pubs, and I've actually had more trouble dealing with the average pub longbow/crossbow main at range than a full tier 3 competitive player in melee.

This doesn't seem to match my or pretty much anyone's experience, honestly.

index.jpg

right, posting shitty reaction memes is a great way to argue

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

Also landing long range shots on someone who is actively dodging is just not going to happen reliably. The arrows actually travel relatively slow, and if you move in an unpredictable way, you are almost guaranteed to dodge them. The only realistic way to use archery is shooting at unaware targets that are occupied with something else, or are traveling in a straight line (such as running up to a point fight).

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

@Peregr1ne said:
The longbow needs tweaking generally. Maybe the point cost could be the same as the recurve and crossbow but honestly the longbow and crossbow are both stupidly overpowered at the moment, for the same reasons crossbows were overpowered in Chivalry. Both weapons boast insane damage which at times can one tap people in the chest which might be okay if the arrows/bolts didn't travel like bullets. I can tell you that trying to dodge such projectiles with a recurve even with ranger is next to impossible. And one lucky bodyshot will end everything for me.

I just don't see how people can think these two weapons are weak. The few times that I use the crossbow or longbow are when I pick them up off the ground from a teammate/enemy and even then, with only 3 shots at my disposal, i'm capable of doing some significant damage to the opposing team. Enemy archers especially I can pick off one by one while barely even trying. By contrast, whenever i'm up against the average longbow/crossbow main the amount of times I get killed by them is absolutely ridiculous. I've played scrims fairly recently, using the same loadout I use in pubs, and I've actually had more trouble dealing with the average pub longbow/crossbow main at range than a full tier 3 competitive player in melee.

This doesn't seem to match my or pretty much anyone's experience, honestly. Longbow/crossbow only one shot naked body or other archers when using huntsman. If bows were that strong, you would see them used in skirmish and FL pugs/scrims/competitive all the time, however very few teams even try, and it rarely goes well.

104 70
  • 26 Jun
 urm

@smug said:
Recurve + Ranger is probably better in ranged duels vs pub retards. I doubt even above average longbow players have the aim, while also being hindered by the slow projectile speeds and draw time AND crosshair sway to hit someone who's strafing properly with ranger.

The only thing the crossbow is better at than the longbow is counter archery which is a nonissue if you get good at the LB, and it would be even less of a factor if huntsman didn't exist.

The crossbow is immensely underwhelming for it's drawbacks.

In pubs yes, crossbow is a bit weak. Although it is great for killing engineers using mounted crossbows.
It is also much safer to use when the enemy has multiple archers going specifically for you.

In competitive though you can't rely on being significantly better than the enemy archer, so crossbow is better than longbow there for sure, even if they had the same point cost.

104 70
  • 1
  • 26 Jun
 urm

I agree that recurve and xbow are better than longbow. The main thing going for longbow is that it's good both against melee and archers, unlike recurve being bad in ranged duels and xbow being bad against melee. I could see the cost being reduced to 10 or even 9. 9 might be a good number, because then you are choosing between recurve + perks or long bow.

I doubt it would see play in comp though, even at 9 points. Recurve mobility allows you to play very close and land shots much more reliably, and if the enemy is running an archer you just switch to xbow for pretty much free kills (unless they are running xbow in which case you are forced into an xbow shootout most of the time). The only niche I could see it being used in, is when you are far better than the enemy archer, so you can win the longbow vs xbow duel and then keep shooting into melee enemies with longbow which is more efficient than using xbow.

104 70
  • 23 Jun
 urm

@ZugZugNeverEnds said:
for the actual useful perks in game right now.

Bloodlust if you got the points to spare (but then you gotta cut down on armor, so no)
Dodge (duh)
Second Wind
Tenacious

and of course; huntsman and ranger for the archers.

IMO Tenacious is strictly worse than bandages, especially so in competitive play

104 70
  • 23 Jun
 urm

Ranger and Huntsman are both quite nice, since they were made cost 1.
Otherwise most of them are not worth their cost though, that's for sure.

104 70
  • 16 Jun
 urm

Quarterstaff is actually a very strong weapon, I would even argue it's the strongest of all 1/2 point weapons in a duel.

I use it on all of my archer loadouts both in FL and skirmish competitive pugs, and regularly beat players of roughly equal skill with it.

If anything, it might need a slight nerf, not a buff.

104 70
  • 11 Jun
 urm

@Gambit said:
There's already a huge divide in game modes, with frontline taking 80% of the population and the others being pretty inactive. I think more maps and an improvement on the current modes would be better. Still nice to brainstorm though.

yeah I tried playing skirmish today, and there was exactly 1 server with players in my area

104 70
  • 11 Jun
 urm

Multi-team gamemodes were quite cancerous in chivalry, although mostly because nobody played them so it devolved into 5 teams consisting of 1 guy, and 1 team with 2, so basically ffa.

104 70
  • 9 Jun
 urm

@smug said:

@BudSpencer_vs_TheHound said:

@SoRoofless said:
I agree, I think archers should have to land 2 body shots on each other, or a single headshot. This is pretty basic FPS logic for sniping.

In every other fps with bows and arrows in it, the arrows fly way way faster. In mordau you can basically sidestep incomming arrows on reaction, if you get shot from more then 30 meter away. Beside this game has health regen, so even if you manage to hit someone on longer range, because he stood still, thx to the immensely long reload and pulling the string animation of the longbow, your enemy is allready in cover waiting for his regen, the moment you are ready to fire again.

It feels really as if most of those suggestions made here come from people who never ever played the archer class in this game.Or at least not longer then 5 minutes.

ARCH.png

What are you even talking about? These are my stats from playing archer probably 9-10 hours in Mordhau. I was also a good archer in Chiv.

Any archer who advocates FOR huntsman is a bad archer PERIOD.

What is this supposed to prove?

104 70
  • 9 Jun
 urm

@ToLazy4Name said:

@urm said:
Average Pakistani IQ seems to be 84, which is not that low,

hmmmm

if you look at a rating of all countries, that's about in the middle. the lowest I've seen was below 60, which is quite scary indeed.

104 70
  • 9 Jun
 urm

@PinkerStinklage said:
secondary objectives/capture points is a must. like you mentioned, people hardly go to the point anyway due to it being so cramped, and end up just fighting at random chokes. give them something to do out there that actually helps.

yeah, the new map actually has a lot of horses, two ballistae and a mortar, but they are located in such away they can't be contested by one the other team. so they are just a source of random deaths instead of providing secondary objectives.

104 70
  • 9 Jun
 urm

@SWSeriousMike said:
I'd expect it to get worse for archers with javelins in the game now.
If you want to move with the pack and support, you probably won't use the recurve bow as long as Huntsman is in the game. Javelins just do it better/with less risk.
I'd just disallow medium+ armor for archers. That's enough incentive to shoot them. Huntsman takes it too far in my opinion.

Realistically, you are already not wearing heavy armor as an archer. The only archer build I use that wears t3 chest is my crossbowman, and even that's only due to huntsman dropping to 1. They could just make ranged weapons cost a bit more if they wanted to restrict armor

The main advantage bows have over throwables is ammo. Throwables do a lot more damage, but you get at most 4. They are also much easier to block than arrows.

Overall I feel like archery is a bit stronger this patch, mostly due to relevant perks being cheaper. Also it feels as if recurve+ranger is slightly faster during draw now, but maybe it's because I haven't played for a couple of days.

104 70
  • 9 Jun
 urm

I'm not even sure how to comment the new map, because it's just like old ones, but even worse in every aspect :(

104 70
  • 9 Jun
 urm

With the last patch notes devs said thanks for 1 million sales.

The numbers you are quoting are projections and a very high estimate based on publicly available data, which we don't really need, because devs announce the numbers anyway.

Average Pakistani IQ seems to be 84, which is not that low, so there is a possibility dpmagician is technically correct