OSI Please do not kill the Archer
Darren Mantle
On Fri, 04 Sep 1998 21:22:45 GMT, Lad...@mindspring.com (Lynn) wrote:
>
>I posted this under another thread, but I would like to
>get some other opinions and DD's thoughts on the subject.
>If anyone knows how to get DD's attention to the subject
>PLEASE try it. I have been criticized enough for using the
>"cap lock" and the word Damn. :) (It worked and that was
>the goal). Dundee, do you know how to get his attention?
>
>Here are my thoughts on Archery. Now flame away if you feel
>that is what is necessary, but I would much rather see some
>_constructive_ suggestions. :) Suggestions of something other
>than KILL the Archer. :(
>**************************************************************
>I do wish someone would do a test with equally qualified characters
>in each weapon just to get the swords man off of the Archers back.
>
>If I were going to do it I would not use GM's, I would use Adepts.
>Find an Adept with the "halberd, sword, long bow, X bow and heavy
>X Bow, etc.. Each of the weapons. Stats must be about the same
>for Str. Int. and Dex.. Str. makes a big difference with most of the
>weapons. Get an AI monster and have each of the characters try
>to kill it. A Troll or Org would be a good test monster.
>
>Then see how many swings or arrow/bolts, it takes to kill the thing
>with each weapon. Not how many hits, how many swings or arrow/bolts.
>Also check the amount of time between each swing (or arrow/bolt) for
>each weapon. (how long did it take for them to kill the monster).
>
>I also want someone to show me someone that has EVER hit the
>target with an arrow/bolt when they were running. I NEVER
>have, and I think Dundee has said the same thing.
>
>There WAS a time when you could hit the target when in motion, but
>one of the patches changed that a long time ago.
>
>The only reason melee weapons people do not like Archers is because
>they can not get close enough to hit them. Sorry folks, that is what
>Archery is all about. An Archer runs, stops, sets up and fires then
>runs again. In UO the melee weapons people click on the monster and
>sit back and chat until the fight is over because the program does the
>rest. :( An Archer cant do that. They are moving all of the time.
>There is much more to being a Archer than the melee weapons people
>realize. :( All they know is they get hit and cant hit back.
>
>Some people are better at moving around with the Archer than others.
>It takes a lot of practice with the Bow to get good at the tactics.
>Unlike the Sword or Halberd, where you sit back and let the program
>do the work for you, and all you need to do is watch your life force. :(
>
>If the AI monsters using magic were smart enough to run when a
>swords man got near them, you would complain about that also.
>A PC is smart enough to stay out of the way.
>
>There ARE some weapons that ARE better than others in RL. If the
>game is going to have the weapon in it, then it should be better in the
>game also, or just take it out of the game. :(
>Is there anyone here that thinks a halberd and a cutlass should do the
>same damage when used by equally qualified warriors? Of course not.
>
>If you choose to use a cutlass don't start bitching because it does not
>do the damage of a halberd. The same goes for the Bow.
>
>The only reason anyone is bitching about the Bow is because most of
>the PK's are using it. Spoil the Bow and the PK's will just find the
>next best weapon and that is the one everyone will be bitching about. :(
>
>The Bow is NOT over powered as it is NOW. You just think it is
>because you cant get to the Bowman. Sorry, that is how the Bow works.
>
>I say cut down on the number of PK's and leave the dang Bow alone.
>
>I have had an Archer from October 97, and gone through ALL of the
>changes to Archery. Archery is just NOW at a point that my Archer
>can compete with other characters and actually get a kill before someone
>else takes the last "killing blow". I have run around firing at
>monsters for 15 min. only to have a swords man come in and take the
>kill before I could get off another shot. That is not fair.
>
>OSI, please do some tests before you KILL the Archer. :(
>Get some people from SCA to do some RL demonstrations for you.
>Do some tests on AI monsters with each weapon using equality
>qualified characters. Then publish the results of your tests.
>
>Magic will take back the PK spotlight when the Archer is dead.
>Mark my word. :(
>
>LadyLyn
>
>--
>* LadyLyn (no address, no mail)
>* Once burned twice remembered *
That was certainly a well thought out post. Unfortunately you seem to
miss the main point that everyone is complaining about with archers.
No one really cares how effective the archer is in combat with
monsters, the problem is in pvp. There is good reason that all pks
are GM archers. I've played this game for about a year now and my
master armsman has fought several pk archers over the months. I
actually managed to get one down to half of his hits once before he
killed me. This was because he was cocky and stood toe to toe against
me. You seem to be complaining that hand to hand fighters need only
click their tafget and sit back. Well obviously you've never tried to
fight an archer with a war mace. You think you have to run around?
What about the guy who has to stay 2 inches from your ass to have a
chance of getting a hit in? As far as fighting monsters go, I'll give
you credit, you appear to try to actually fight monsters rather than
get them trapped behind something and then just plug away at them
leisurely the way ALL other archers do. Show me how I can do that
with a mace. I also play a mage. A long time ago mana costs went up
and spell delays went in to balance magery. As it is now the average
master mage has mana for 4 ebolts. With magic reflect included most
mages are lucky if they can do enough damage with four ebolts to kill
anyone. And dont forget that they have to retarget for every one
(yea, I know this is chaanging, its about time). Now we have the
archer with his heavy crossbow that gets to fire 200 shots without
retargetting that do twice the damage my damn ebolt does. And you
still think archery isn't overpowerful? Finally, you tried the
"realism" angle with the arguement that archerery is a ranged attack
and hand to handers have to live with it. Did you ever notice in
historical movies what happened when the infantry or cavalry charged
the archers? They ran like hell, or they got slaughtered. Right now
in this game if I charge you with my war mace you get your damn
archery skill counted against my mace skill to prevent me from hitting
you. What the hell is that? Are you parrying my mace with your bow?
I think that sums up my major problems. The biggest problem with
combat in this game is everyone thinks every form of combat should be
even on a one on one basis. That just wont work. If we actually had
more people cooperating in combat. The fighters in the front holding
of the monster, the archers behind peppering arrows, and the mages
healing and throwing in the odd spell. That would be interesting to
see. Instead its, "how can I snivel a way to kill the ancient wyrm
all by myself without being hit so I can ave all its treasure to
myself." Soon mages wont be able to snivel kill tough creatures with
blade spirits. I think this is good, but now they need to be fair and
deal with the flourbag bunker using archers in the same way. Lets
face it, any single character in this game can kill ANY monster
without fear after only a few days of macroing the right skills. This
is pathetic. Lets smarten up the monsters, make them tougher,
randomize the damn spawns a little (Oh look! Another zombie carrying
130 gold for me has appeared!) and make people have to work togeter in
the game.
End of long winded rant.
Kyle of Trinsic, Sonoma
Handel
Tactics 100) If I go up against an Adept archer I get my clock cleaned
every time. Archery is way over powered (or all the other weapons are way
under powered).
Lynn wrote in message <35f555de...@news.mindspring.com>...
Barry Smith
> Here are my thoughts on Archery. Now flame away if you feel
> that is what is necessary, but I would much rather see some
> _constructive_ suggestions. :) Suggestions of something other
> than KILL the Archer. :(
How about fixing those very convenient laser guided missiles you call
arrows or bolts? Speaking of your realism, how many arrows or bolts have
you seen (other than in UO) that TURN corners, hmmm? I already know all
the bs about, "but the shot has already been determined as the shot is
made, etc etc..." This is the main problem I have with archery. I can
accept the manuverability and range benefits of archery. Your right. The
archer should have those advantages. But to allow arrows and bolts to
chase people down like a Magic Missile spell...8( Please. Also, I feel
that the damage bolts and arrows do is significantly higher than melee
weaponry. How do I know this? Through many monsters hit point bars and
watching how fast their hps dwindle in comparison to melee hits.
Granted, it all does depend on the weapon user's skill too, but, to use
your "2 characters totally alike" analogy, the archer's damage is gonna
win every time. I'd bet money on it. Well, maybe gold... ;)
Barry Smith
>
> On Fri, 04 Sep 1998 16:04:32 -0700, Barry Smith <bsm...@premier1.net> wrote:
>
> |How about fixing those very convenient laser guided missiles you call
> |arrows or bolts? Speaking of your realism, how many arrows or bolts have
> |you seen (other than in UO) that TURN corners, hmmm? I already know all
> |the bs about, "but the shot has already been determined as the shot is
> |made, etc etc..." This is the main problem I have with archery. I can
> |accept the manuverability and range benefits of archery. Your right. The
> |archer should have those advantages. But to allow arrows and bolts to
> |chase people down like a Magic Missile spell...8( Please.
>
> your problem? You do realise that you can't dodge arrows in real life, right?
> If that's what you're looking for the Diablo games are ---> that way. UO is
> an RPG, not a video game.
I know; I'm still waiting for it to come out. 8P Yeah, UO is a rpg.
Diablo has the best missile firing system to date IMO, pal. The
simulation doesn't waver by allowing missiles to do odd things like 360
degree area of movements. If you prefer wacked out missile movements as
being more realistic then the ability to dodge or take cover vs.
incoming missiles, then UO is ------> that way.
> |Also, I feel
> |that the damage bolts and arrows do is significantly higher than melee
> |weaponry. How do I know this? Through many monsters hit point bars and
> |watching how fast their hps dwindle in comparison to melee hits.
> |Granted, it all does depend on the weapon user's skill too, but, to use
> |your "2 characters totally alike" analogy, the archer's damage is gonna
> |win every time. I'd bet money on it. Well, maybe gold... ;)
>
> Archery weapons give you a high damage rating in exchange for low speed.
> Other weapons may be better depending on the target's armor.
I suppose...
Barry Smith
> I think you would be VERY surprised if it were really checked out.
> My Archer with 75 str. and 88 Archery can not do near the damage
> my Bowyer can with 95 str and 88 Archery. Also take into consideration
> the Bow being used. A lot of Archers are using Magic Bows.
> My tests have been done with my 99.2 skill level Bowyers Bows.
>
> On the arrow thing. The best thing to do is take OUT the animation
> for the arrow. This would make a lot of people feel better about it. :)
> An Adept Archer also misses 2 out of 5 shots on an average. :)
I agree Lynn. There's just something too alien-looking about missiles
that turn left and right and reverse their courses, ya know? 8)
Michael Wilson
A few good points there I think.
I am an archer, and would like to make a few points/suggestions myself.
The swordspeople do not pay for their weapon other than an original outlay,
do they have to pay 100's of gold or spend half an hour looking for chickens
so that we can use our weapon?
I have also read on this newsgroup people who say that the rate of fire is
far too great and unrealistic. But remember that a UO day is only 2 hours
of real time, therefore when your archer takes 5 seconds to fire, infact it
is around 1 minute of UO time to make the attack, which I would say was not
unrealistic.
I think if Archery was going to be restricted a good way would be to reduce
the armor allowed to be worn whilst using a bow. In reality imagine trying
to use a bow wearing Plate Arms and also think of the limited vision of a
Plate Helm!!!
Maybe also archers could be issued with quivvers for their arrows, only
arrows in here can be fired, and it can only hold say 20 arrows/bolts. It
could also only be re-loaded 1 minute after last firing the bow.
Well thats my lot.
A few points and suggestions, I doubt that any would be implemented but a
thought anyway.
Gul'Darn
Chesapeake
Shadwell
>
>I posted this under another thread, but I would like to
>get some other opinions and DD's thoughts on the subject.
>If anyone knows how to get DD's attention to the subject
>PLEASE try it. I have been criticized enough for using the
>"cap lock" and the word Damn. :) (It worked and that was
>the goal). Dundee, do you know how to get his attention?
>
>Here are my thoughts on Archery. Now flame away if you feel
>that is what is necessary, but I would much rather see some
>_constructive_ suggestions. :) Suggestions of something other
>than KILL the Archer. :(
>**************************************************************
>I do wish someone would do a test with equally qualified characters
>in each weapon just to get the swords man off of the Archers back.
>
It's been done. Take it from me, I am a GM archer/mage and
master in swords and tactics. All I need is regular exceptional
bow, a horse and an ample supply of GH potions. With these,
I've never been beaten by a melee fighter since the archery patch
unless my lag was worse. I really pity those poor halberd
wielders. They are fodder in PvP right now.
>If I were going to do it I would not use GM's, I would use Adepts.
>Find an Adept with the "halberd, sword, long bow, X bow and heavy
>X Bow, etc.. Each of the weapons. Stats must be about the same
>for Str. Int. and Dex.. Str. makes a big difference with most of the
>weapons. Get an AI monster and have each of the characters try
>to kill it. A Troll or Org would be a good test monster.
>
My archer has a measly 67 hps. And yet I regularly take my
exceptional heavy xbow to Shame alone to kill earth elementals.
It usually only takes 9 or 10 hits to fell them. My GM fencer with
89 str takes a lot longer even with his spear of power.
>Then see how many swings or arrow/bolts, it takes to kill the thing
>with each weapon. Not how many hits, how many swings or arrow/bolts.
>Also check the amount of time between each swing (or arrow/bolt) for
>each weapon. (how long did it take for them to kill the monster).
>
see above
>I also want someone to show me someone that has EVER hit the
>target with an arrow/bolt when they were running. I NEVER
>have, and I think Dundee has said the same thing.
>
Why is this a problem? Archers are way too powerful compared to
other forms of melee combat right now. Usually running is your best
defense unless you're a skilled PvPer.
>There WAS a time when you could hit the target when in motion, but
>one of the patches changed that a long time ago.
>
>The only reason melee weapons people do not like Archers is because
>they can not get close enough to hit them. Sorry folks, that is what
>Archery is all about. An Archer runs, stops, sets up and fires then
>runs again. In UO the melee weapons people click on the monster and
>sit back and chat until the fight is over because the program does the
>rest. :( An Archer cant do that. They are moving all of the time.
>There is much more to being a Archer than the melee weapons people
>realize. :( All they know is they get hit and cant hit back.
>
Again, I must disagree. A melee fighter against a nasty monster is
gonna have to spend time watching his hps instead of chatting.
As an archer, I just need to run, shoot, run, shoot, gulp a GH, etc.
Unless the monster uses magic or fireballs(hellhounds), they
rarely hit me(monsters get slower the more damage they take).
>Some people are better at moving around with the Archer than others.
>It takes a lot of practice with the Bow to get good at the tactics.
>Unlike the Sword or Halberd, where you sit back and let the program
>do the work for you, and all you need to do is watch your life force. :(
>
>If the AI monsters using magic were smart enough to run when a
>swords man got near them, you would complain about that also.
>A PC is smart enough to stay out of the way.
>
>There ARE some weapons that ARE better than others in RL. If the
>game is going to have the weapon in it, then it should be better in the
>game also, or just take it out of the game. :(
>Is there anyone here that thinks a halberd and a cutlass should do the
>same damage when used by equally qualified warriors? Of course not.
>
With my supremely accurate kryss of power, I can kick a hally
users' butt any day :-)
>If you choose to use a cutlass don't start bitching because it does not
>do the damage of a halberd. The same goes for the Bow.
>
I wish they would finally get a weapons balancing patch that works
right. It gets so boring watching everyone use the same 5 weapons
and the same 5 spells over and over.
>The only reason anyone is bitching about the Bow is because most of
>the PK's are using it. Spoil the Bow and the PK's will just find the
>next best weapon and that is the one everyone will be bitching about. :(
>
>The Bow is NOT over powered as it is NOW. You just think it is
>because you cant get to the Bowman. Sorry, that is how the Bow works.
>
>I say cut down on the number of PK's and leave the dang Bow alone.
>
Here I absolutely agree. Instead of renerfing archery, improve the
potential for the other weapons.
Note to pissed off melee warriors: Next week, archers won't be able
to chug down those GH potions with their bows equipped any more.
When the next pk archer attacks you with a heavy xbow, surprise
them and get "close and personal" with a good one handed sword
or mace with decent speed. Then *you* can gulp the potions and
bash their heads in during their agonizing wait for another bolt to
fire. If they run(archers hate close up fighting), stay on their ass!
Here's a suggestion for OSI if they still read this board: Bring back
the reactive armor spell in its original incarnation. A little known
secret of this spell was that it *worked* against archers when you
got close enough for melee. When fooling around one night, the
guy I was shooting bolts at took NO damage from 10 shots and
I got that red sparkly effect when shooting him up close. Of
course, this was before they killed that useful spell because of
whiners. *sigh*
>I have had an Archer from October 97, and gone through ALL of the
>changes to Archery. Archery is just NOW at a point that my Archer
>can compete with other characters and actually get a kill before someone
>else takes the last "killing blow". I have run around firing at
>monsters for 15 min. only to have a swords man come in and take the
>kill before I could get off another shot. That is not fair.
>
>OSI, please do some tests before you KILL the Archer. :(
>Get some people from SCA to do some RL demonstrations for you.
>Do some tests on AI monsters with each weapon using equality
>qualified characters. Then publish the results of your tests.
>
Society for Creative Anachronism? Aren't those the guys that
dress up in chain mail in RL?
>Magic will take back the PK spotlight when the Archer is dead.
>Mark my word. :(
>
Corp Por! bah...use an original spell, pkers!
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|How about fixing those very convenient laser guided missiles you call
|arrows or bolts? Speaking of your realism, how many arrows or bolts have
|you seen (other than in UO) that TURN corners, hmmm? I already know all
|the bs about, "but the shot has already been determined as the shot is
|made, etc etc..." This is the main problem I have with archery. I can
|accept the manuverability and range benefits of archery. Your right. The
|archer should have those advantages. But to allow arrows and bolts to
|chase people down like a Magic Missile spell...8( Please.
If you understand that the shot has already hit or missed, then what is
your problem? You do realise that you can't dodge arrows in real life, right?
If that's what you're looking for the Diablo games are ---> that way. UO is
an RPG, not a video game.
|Also, I feel
|that the damage bolts and arrows do is significantly higher than melee
|weaponry. How do I know this? Through many monsters hit point bars and
|watching how fast their hps dwindle in comparison to melee hits.
|Granted, it all does depend on the weapon user's skill too, but, to use
|your "2 characters totally alike" analogy, the archer's damage is gonna
|win every time. I'd bet money on it. Well, maybe gold... ;)
Archery weapons give you a high damage rating in exchange for low speed.
Other weapons may be better depending on the target's armor.
Dennis F. Heffernan UO: Venture (Catskills) Dennis.H...@gte.net
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"They feed you on the guilt to keep you humble, keep you low/Some man and
myth they made up a thousand years ago." Melissa Ethridge, "Silent Legacy"
Manta
>get some other opinions and DD's thoughts on the subject.
>If anyone knows how to get DD's attention to the subject
>PLEASE try it. I have been criticized enough for using the
>"cap lock" and the word Damn. :) (It worked and that was
>the goal). Dundee, do you know how to get his attention?
>
>Here are my thoughts on Archery. Now flame away if you feel
>that is what is necessary, but I would much rather see some
>_constructive_ suggestions. :) Suggestions of something other
>than KILL the Archer. :(
>**************************************************************
Cant agree more.. it takes some skill to use a bow properly because you cant
hit something while moving yourself... and i suspect you cant hit
something/someone while there moving too! But OSI is going to stuff archery
up no matter what anyone says here ... I have 2 archer characters i put a
lot of time into .. they are NOT PK's.. I chose archery because the best
defense against PK's is to match their weapons and skills instead of just
standing there with a halberd or something. In a single PvP encounter PK's
usually recall out like the cowards they normally are if you hit em with
equal force...you hit the nail on the head when you said magery will now be
the PK strategy of choice.. its obvious.. I am now building a strong mage
just to survive when the archery patch comes out.. So what next? patch
magery to be useless too? If UO was intended to be a sword fighting game
then other weapons should not have been allowed... it will be impossible to
ever match different weapon types perfectly and all these patches do is piss
people off who have put months of work into special skills like archery just
because PK's favor it.
Nevermind
disagree with, that is your closing statement:
"Magic will take back the PK Spotlight when the Archer is dead."
"Mark my word. :("
Actually, I doubt magery will ever be as powerful as it once was, simply
because most any idiot with a fire field scroll and a few heal potions can
get their resist up to a high level, with no actual PvP talent.
I suspect that the hally or the viker will take over.. they seem to be
pretty useful.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nevermind
ICQ: 2961668 I have moved to a new shard! I am now:
Shandalar, Apprentice Mage, Journeyman Archer Pacific Shard
Sean, Apprentice Lumberjack/bowyer, Journeyman carpenter.
"I feel stupid, and contagious, here we are now, entertain us!
A Mulatto, an albino, a mosquito, my libido, YAY! ... Oy! ... Yeah!"
Kurt Cobain -- Smells Like Teen Spirit (The song, not the Deodorant!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nevermind
>your problem? You do realise that you can't dodge arrows in real life,
>right? If that's what you're looking for the Diablo games are ---> that
>way. UO is an RPG, not a video game.
Uhh, I beg to differ. If I see someone in the woods, and he is holding a
heavy crossbow in attack position with a bolt in the crossbow, and he brings
it up, and he fires it, I would dodge it. How? I would dive. Ever seen
someone do a headfirst slide in baseball? Same thing. I Dive and I run like
hell. I dont stand there and say "hmm, I think hes gonna shoot me." *THWACK*
"hmm, I was right."
Any idiot would dive out of the way if they were being shot at with a
crossbow.
Oh, once I got closer, I wouldnt have to dive. Why? Because beating the
living $#!^ out of someone with a Viking Sword tends to cause their aim to
be slightly disrupted. I may be speaking for myself only, but I doubt that I
would be capable of loading a heavy crossbow with the crank, bringing it up,
and firing while I am being assaulted. (See one of my other posts for an
interesting note about the heavy crossbow...)
Just my thoughts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nevermind
ICQ: 2961668
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Uhh, I beg to differ. If I see someone in the woods, and he is holding a
|heavy crossbow in attack position with a bolt in the crossbow, and he brings
|it up, and he fires it, I would dodge it. How? I would dive. Ever seen
|someone do a headfirst slide in baseball? Same thing. I Dive and I run like
|hell. I dont stand there and say "hmm, I think hes gonna shoot me." *THWACK*
|"hmm, I was right."
You wouldn't even have time to think if he was close enough for you to see
what he was doing. Do you have any idea how FAST an arrow or crossbow bolt
is?
Shadwell
>On Sat, 05 Sep 1998 01:23:46 GMT, nospa...@mindspring.com (Shadwell)
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 04 Sep 1998 21:22:45 GMT, Lad...@mindspring.com (Lynn) wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I posted this under another thread, but I would like to
>>>get some other opinions and DD's thoughts on the subject.
>>>If anyone knows how to get DD's attention to the subject
>>>PLEASE try it. I have been criticized enough for using the
>>>"cap lock" and the word Damn. :) (It worked and that was
>>>the goal). Dundee, do you know how to get his attention?
>>>
>>>Here are my thoughts on Archery. Now flame away if you feel
>>>that is what is necessary, but I would much rather see some
>>>_constructive_ suggestions. :) Suggestions of something other
>>>than KILL the Archer. :(
>>>**************************************************************
>>>I do wish someone would do a test with equally qualified characters
>>>in each weapon just to get the swords man off of the Archers back.
>>>
>>It's been done. Take it from me, I am a GM archer/mage and
>>master in swords and tactics. All I need is regular exceptional
>>bow, a horse and an ample supply of GH potions. With these,
>>I've never been beaten by a melee fighter since the archery patch
>>unless my lag was worse. I really pity those poor halberd
>>wielders. They are fodder in PvP right now.
>>
>Ok, you have already defeated the test. You added a horse and
>GH potions. :(
>you are already out of order. :)
Ok. Leave out the horse and the GH potions. I'll still win. Read on
as I refute your rebuttals :-)
>>>If I were going to do it I would not use GM's, I would use Adepts.
>>>Find an Adept with the "halberd, sword, long bow, X bow and heavy
>>>X Bow, etc.. Each of the weapons. Stats must be about the same
>>>for Str. Int. and Dex.. Str. makes a big difference with most of the
>>>weapons. Get an AI monster and have each of the characters try
>>>to kill it. A Troll or Org would be a good test monster.
>>>
>>My archer has a measly 67 hps. And yet I regularly take my
>>exceptional heavy xbow to Shame alone to kill earth elementals.
>>It usually only takes 9 or 10 hits to fell them. My GM fencer with
>>89 str takes a lot longer even with his spear of power.
>>
>Again, you are comparing apples and oranges. Would you expect
>a fencing weapon to do as much damage as a halberd? Why should
>it do as much damage as a Bow? Again, your argument holds no water.
>
You're thinking logically here. This is UO and things are a bit
different. I *do* expect a fencing weapon to do as much damage as
a halberd if they balanced the skills correctly. You think getting
impaled by a spear is any less painful then having your head cut off
with a halberd?
>>>Then see how many swings or arrow/bolts, it takes to kill the thing
>>>with each weapon. Not how many hits, how many swings or arrow/bolts.
>>>Also check the amount of time between each swing (or arrow/bolt) for
>>>each weapon. (how long did it take for them to kill the monster).
>>>
>>see above
>>
>>>I also want someone to show me someone that has EVER hit the
>>>target with an arrow/bolt when they were running. I NEVER
>>>have, and I think Dundee has said the same thing.
>>>
>>Why is this a problem? Archers are way too powerful compared to
>>other forms of melee combat right now. Usually running is your best
>>defense unless you're a skilled PvPer.
>>
>The Bow can not be compared to the melee weapons. :( It CAN be
>compared to Magic. It is a distance weapon.
>Again, your argument has flaws. :)
What I can't understand is why you aren't happy with the way archery
is now. It totally dominates in PvP, unless you're facing a very good
mage. It's even on par with melee in fighting monsters too. You
seem to have this fear that OSI is going to renerf archery in favor of
other weapons. What I've heard is they are enhancing the other
weapon skills to bring them up to par with archery. The only
changes to archery will be to fix the obvious flaws like moving
while firing and drinking potions with bows equipped. Sounds
pretty reasonable to me and I play a GM archer primarily.
>>>There WAS a time when you could hit the target when in motion, but
>>>one of the patches changed that a long time ago.
>>>
>>>The only reason melee weapons people do not like Archers is because
>>>they can not get close enough to hit them. Sorry folks, that is what
>>>Archery is all about. An Archer runs, stops, sets up and fires then
>>>runs again. In UO the melee weapons people click on the monster and
>>>sit back and chat until the fight is over because the program does the
>>>rest. :( An Archer cant do that. They are moving all of the time.
>>>There is much more to being a Archer than the melee weapons people
>>>realize. :( All they know is they get hit and cant hit back.
>>>
>>Again, I must disagree. A melee fighter against a nasty monster is
>>gonna have to spend time watching his hps instead of chatting.
>>As an archer, I just need to run, shoot, run, shoot, gulp a GH, etc.
>>Unless the monster uses magic or fireballs(hellhounds), they
>>rarely hit me(monsters get slower the more damage they take).
>>
>Again, there is that GH Potion.... Its gone with this patch accounting
>to DD. I never used it myself. :)
>
Try using them before the patch goes in. You'll see why most people
consider archery to be overpowered. Drinking potions while
shooting a bow at the same time is extremely effective. Halberd and
shield users must unequip to heal or use potions. By the time they
do that, they're usually dead.
>>>Some people are better at moving around with the Archer than others.
>>>It takes a lot of practice with the Bow to get good at the tactics.
>>>Unlike the Sword or Halberd, where you sit back and let the program
>>>do the work for you, and all you need to do is watch your life force. :(
>>>
>>>If the AI monsters using magic were smart enough to run when a
>>>swords man got near them, you would complain about that also.
>>>A PC is smart enough to stay out of the way.
>>>
>>>There ARE some weapons that ARE better than others in RL. If the
>>>game is going to have the weapon in it, then it should be better in the
>>>game also, or just take it out of the game. :(
>>>Is there anyone here that thinks a halberd and a cutlass should do the
>>>same damage when used by equally qualified warriors? Of course not.
>>>
>>With my supremely accurate kryss of power, I can kick a hally
>>users' butt any day :-)
>That's nice, glad you can. Some of us avoid PvP. I think you are
>overstating things a bit also. :)
>>
Nope. Come to Sonoma and fight me with a halberd vs my kryss. You'll
lose. And it's not because of weapon damage. It's because of
*tactics*. I'm talking about real tactics, not the stat. It's
amazing the number of wanna be badasses that have been humbled
because they didn't use their brains in a fight.
>>>If you choose to use a cutlass don't start bitching because it does not
>>>do the damage of a halberd. The same goes for the Bow.
>>>
>>I wish they would finally get a weapons balancing patch that works
>>right. It gets so boring watching everyone use the same 5 weapons
>>and the same 5 spells over and over.
>>
>You wish the would get a weapons balance that favors the weapon
>you use. sorry, but that is the way your post sounds. IMO.
>
Totally wrong and opinionated. I want to see all weapons be balanced
to encourage diversity. Don't you get sick of seeing everyone with
a bow or halberd/bardiche? The way your posts sounds, you seem to
prefer keeping the bow as the ultimate weapon and relegating all
other weapons to decoration status. IMO :-)
>>>The only reason anyone is bitching about the Bow is because most of
>>>the PK's are using it. Spoil the Bow and the PK's will just find the
>>>next best weapon and that is the one everyone will be bitching about. :(
>>>
>>>The Bow is NOT over powered as it is NOW. You just think it is
>>>because you cant get to the Bowman. Sorry, that is how the Bow works.
>>>
>>>I say cut down on the number of PK's and leave the dang Bow alone.
>>>
>>Here I absolutely agree. Instead of renerfing archery, improve the
>>potential for the other weapons.
>>
>Thanks, finally. we agree on something. :P
But you seemed to disagree above ????
>>Note to pissed off melee warriors: Next week, archers won't be able
>>to chug down those GH potions with their bows equipped any more.
>>When the next pk archer attacks you with a heavy xbow, surprise
>>them and get "close and personal" with a good one handed sword
>>or mace with decent speed. Then *you* can gulp the potions and
>>bash their heads in during their agonizing wait for another bolt to
>>fire. If they run(archers hate close up fighting), stay on their ass!
>>
>The GH potions should not be used with ANY weapon equipped.
>Yes, the Bow is a DISTANCE weapon. No argument there.
>
>>Here's a suggestion for OSI if they still read this board: Bring back
>>the reactive armor spell in its original incarnation. A little known
>>secret of this spell was that it *worked* against archers when you
>>got close enough for melee. When fooling around one night, the
>>guy I was shooting bolts at took NO damage from 10 shots and
>>I got that red sparkly effect when shooting him up close. Of
>>course, this was before they killed that useful spell because of
>>whiners. *sigh*
>>
>Why should they put a BUG back in the system?
>
Whoa! Hold on! A BUG? Reactive armor was one of the most
useful spells in the game that gave melee warriors half a chance.
And you seem to be taking this too logically again. It's MAGIC,
not real life. It's supposed to provide a mystic defense against
physical attack. Nowadays, all it's used for is helping blade
spirits kill dragons quickly. On players, it just gives a farting
noise 10 seconds after you put it on. Another useless spell,
just like 2/3 of the spells in this game.
>>>I have had an Archer from October 97, and gone through ALL of the
>>>changes to Archery. Archery is just NOW at a point that my Archer
>>>can compete with other characters and actually get a kill before someone
>>>else takes the last "killing blow". I have run around firing at
>>>monsters for 15 min. only to have a swords man come in and take the
>>>kill before I could get off another shot. That is not fair.
>>>
>>>OSI, please do some tests before you KILL the Archer. :(
>>>Get some people from SCA to do some RL demonstrations for you.
>>>Do some tests on AI monsters with each weapon using equality
>>>qualified characters. Then publish the results of your tests.
>>>
>>Society for Creative Anachronism? Aren't those the guys that
>>dress up in chain mail in RL?
>>
>They sure are. They go out and really fight every Saturday morning
>around here. :) It is something to watch. they have full army's,
>Pick man, Swordsman, Archers, and on holidays even horseman. :)
>>>Magic will take back the PK spotlight when the Archer is dead.
>>>Mark my word. :(
>>>
>>Corp Por! bah...use an original spell, pkers!
>Why should they, that ones works very well most of the time.
>
How about:
An Ex por
Vas Ort Flam
Vas Ort Flam
*throw greater explosion potion*
=dead player
Now if only they would make Mind Blast work...
Bannor
>No one really cares how effective the archer is in combat with
>monsters, the problem is in pvp. There is good reason that all pks
>are GM archers. I've played this game for about a year now and my
>master armsman has fought several pk archers over the months. I
>actually managed to get one down to half of his hits once before he
>"realism" angle with the arguement that archerery is a ranged attack
>and hand to handers have to live with it. Did you ever notice in
>historical movies what happened when the infantry or cavalry charged
>the archers? They ran like hell, or they got slaughtered
Sorry Mate but Hollywood doesnt reflect well the effectiveness of the bow.
In the battle Of Saint Crispins The english won against a superior force
with the loss of ten men i think, against the loss of many thousands of
french dead.
The Long bow was responsible. The archers bunkered them selves behind
stakes that slowed the French Knight charge. One hit from a arrow one the
shoulder say , was enough to throw a knight from the saddle who then had not
enough dex to get back up and was killed by the foot soldier
chingachgook
>with a mace alone. :) That is pure foolish. Try it in RL some time. :)
Sorry lynn, but had to raise an eyebrow at that comment. If I attack an
archer in real life with a mace, then the archer would most DEFINITELY get
his clock cleaned. I am an archer in real life and have competed with
several different types of bows, the majority being traditional. If someone
runs up to me and whacks me with a mace, I don't think I would stand there,
string an arrow, and shoot from the hip. I also wouldn't be running around
like a maniac, stringing arrows, and shooting on the fly. I would be trying
to crawl away, praying to my maker, bleeding profusely all over the place.
I think archers should also only be allowed to wear minimal armour, such as
leather, with no gloves and no helm. Have you ever tried to fire a bow in
RL with chain gloves or worse yet, plate gloves, or aim thru the visor of
plate helm?
For sure, archery definitely needs some work done to it IMO.
Chinga, Atlantic
Cor Bosman
>archer with his heavy crossbow that gets to fire 200 shots without
>retargetting that do twice the damage my damn ebolt does. And you
>still think archery isn't overpowerful? Finally, you tried the
Sorry Darren, but this is nonsense. I play a master archer/mage and
my worst ebolt is way better that my best xbow shot. To really hit
a monster i switch to ebolt, because my xbow is not doing near that
amount of damage (exceptional xbow ofcourse). Maybe you are confused
by the bad fsck-ed up xbows still lingering around.
>deal with the flourbag bunker using archers in the same way. Lets
>face it, any single character in this game can kill ANY monster
>without fear after only a few days of macroing the right skills. This
>is pathetic. Lets smarten up the monsters, make them tougher,
>randomize the damn spawns a little (Oh look! Another zombie carrying
>130 gold for me has appeared!) and make people have to work togeter in
>the game.
Now this makes more sense. Archery is a bit too powerful, I agree, but only
for the reasons you mentioned. I can dance around someone and he cant get near.
I know exactly how to time my shots so I need to stand still for a bit. And
then i run again. This might need some fixing. But damage wise I dont really
see the problem. I was fighting with a gm warrior carrying an axe earlier,
and he did more damage than me cause he hit twice as often.
Indeed..smarten up the monsters.. make the archer unable to dance around too
much, thats the way to go.
Regards,
Cor
--
----
Cor Bosman
>it up, and he fires it, I would dodge it. How? I would dive. Ever seen
>someone do a headfirst slide in baseball? Same thing. I Dive and I run like
>hell. I dont stand there and say "hmm, I think hes gonna shoot me." *THWACK*
>"hmm, I was right."
I think i read about you in the news paper..
"Guy tries to dodge a .45 and got killed".
Have you ever fired a xbow in real life? You cant even blink your eyes
before the bolt hits you between the eyes.
Cor
--
----
Shadwell
Ah, a fellow Mindspring user :-) So, are you a defector from the
godawful Worldnet service too?
>>>>>
>(snip)
>>>>
<snip>
>>
>This is just the problem. One person wants the program changed
>because a Bow user in RL cant possibly string a bow and fire as
>fast as the Archer in UO. (so they say) and they YOU say this is
>a game and anything goes. Just too many opinions on just what
>any of the weapons can and should be able to do.
>
>It seems to be just a matter of which end of the killing weapon
>you are on, as to every ones opinion how things should be balanced. :(
>
But why shouldn't the weapons in UO be balanced? If their system
were working right, all the weapons would thier own respective
strengths and weaknesses.
>One arrow in the right place could kill a man in RL, so why should it
>take 3 or 4? A well placed blade of any kind could do the same. :(
>
But this a game. If it worked like that in UO, nobody would play
because they would be constantly getting killed in one blow all
the time.
<snip>
>>>>
>Not per hit, and they miss a lot. That is why I want OSI to do some
>testing with the weapons, not just say, "well I think this is about
>right". TEST THEM, that's all I ask.
>Oh, and the reason this is even in here is a lot of the Swordsman keep
>complaining that an Archer can fire while running. Sure they CAN fire
>but they never hit anything.
Swordsmen complain because archer and mages are able to deal out
damage from long distances. Not good in PvP. However, when a
sword guy and an archer fight monsters, who usually get the loot?
The sword guy does because he's right next to the monster when it
drops.
<snippity snip>
>>
>If this is the only thing making the Archer overpowered, its fixed then.
>NO ONE should be able to drink potions while equipped with ANY weapon.
>
Except one handed ones. They do less damage, so there has to be an
equalizing factor to keep the fight fair.
>>
>My characters are all three Archers in one way or another. One
>the oldest is a pure Archer, another is a Mage/Archer and the third
>is a 99.2 skill level Bowyer with Archery at 88 and tactics at 89.
>
Your bowyer is better than mine. You must have worked a *long* time
on that, considering how slow the skill goes up. Do you know about
the exceptional bows and heavy xbows made by good bowyers?
If you saw the damage these bows do, you might be a little less
adverse to PvP :-)
>I do NOT use ANY magic weapons. I even gave my two Magic heavy
>X-Bows to the two guys that rescued me from Wind after I was PK'ed
>there. I thought they deserved something for coming through the
>PK mob at the teleporter to get me out. :)
>
Magic weapons and armor are way overrated IMO. Since the stuff is
now so difficult to find in monster loot, no one takes their magic
items out in the field anymore. They just show it off in town or sell
it for exessive prices on the Trading Post.
<snip>
>>
>You just said the only thing that made the Bow the ultimate weapon
>was the use of GH potions. If that is taken away it should be evened
>up according to your last paragraph. :)
I didn't say that was the only thing that makes bows more powerful.
>>>>>The only reason anyone is bitching about the Bow is because most of
>>>>>the PK's are using it. Spoil the Bow and the PK's will just find the
>>>>>next best weapon and that is the one everyone will be bitching about. :(
>(sniped)
>
>You seem to have missed the fact that the Bow is about to get nucked.
>From everything I can see it will be about as useless or more so than it
>was last October. :( That is the reason for this thread.
>I would love to get the attention of DD, to try to explain why it is NOT
>the Bow, its the other weapons that need adjustments. :(
>
>Lyn
Please refer me to the official announcements that bows are about to
be renerfed. I've heard of only two upcoming limitations. One is not
using potions with a bow equipped. The other was a vague
statement that bows might use stamina for each shot fired. I'm not
too sure about that one.
chingachgook
All disagreements aside, I would call it a loss if they destroyed the
archer to the point that he was ineffective.
I have an archer character on Catskills, though I use him little. IMO, it's
the magic heavy Xbows of " I'll put a whoopin' on ya right now" that i would
like to see minimized more than anything. I got hit with one last night
that took nearly forty HP off with one arrow. OUCH!
You have a good argument and have somwhat swayed my oppinion on this subject
through your posts.
Respectfully,
Chinga
J Aitken
Otara, Napa
Matt Miller
have the tactical advantage of mobility, but there has to some sort of
balance if you want anything other than a bunch of archers playing.
I see two possible solutions. One would be forcing archers stand still
for a while before they fire. Only allow half the round time (or whatever is
best) to be counted down while the archer is running. This should be enough
to make archers somewhat vulnerable, but not enough to make them sitting
ducks.
The other would be to allow melee fighters to swing while running, with
decent accuracy.
--
Matt Miller | http://pw2.netcom.com/~matmillr | a.a# 357
Admirable Vanir of Sonoma in UO
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Matt Miller
Lynn wrote in message <35f72d55...@news.mindspring.com>...
>On Sat, 5 Sep 1998 05:03:37 -0700, "Matt Miller"
><matmillrR...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>> Not being able to hit an archer is a legitimate beef. Archers should
>>have the tactical advantage of mobility, but there has to some sort of
>>balance if you want anything other than a bunch of archers playing.
>> I see two possible solutions. One would be forcing archers stand still
>>for a while before they fire. Only allow half the round time (or whatever
is
>>best) to be counted down while the archer is running. This should be
enough
>>to make archers somewhat vulnerable, but not enough to make them sitting
>>ducks.
>> The other would be to allow melee fighters to swing while running,
with
>>decent accuracy.
>
>There is already a long delay before each shot. A slow count of 8 for
>my character. She has NEVER hit ANYTHING while running. :)
The problem isn't archers who fire while running it's the fact that an
archer can run-fire-run-fire. If they know the round time they stop at about
the right moment, fire, and run off again. They may sit there for a little
while if they misjudge it, or lose a few arrows to fireing while running but
they are still very hard hit.
>Hit ratio on an Adepts Archer is about 3 out of 5 shots.
When I fight archers my typical hit ratio is 0 out of 0.
>
>It only seems like a short delay when a PK is firing at you. :>)
>It is agonizingly slow when you have a monster on your heels. :P
>
>If the delay was longer an Archer would be killed by a Grizzle Bear
>every time, or any fast moving monster.
It would be the same amount of time. In fact you could run more since
you wouldn't have to worry about loseing arrows. All it does is make you
stay in one place long enough so that a determined melee fighter can get in
a few hits if he manages stay on top of you. Mages are frozen and they have
to retarget to, they manage.
--
Matt Miller | http://pw2.netcom.com/~matmillr | a.a# 357
Admirable Vanir of Sonoma in UO
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
>
Dennis Francis Heffernan
<matmillrR...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
| The problem isn't archers who fire while running it's the fact that an
|archer can run-fire-run-fire. If they know the round time they stop at about
|the right moment, fire, and run off again. They may sit there for a little
|while if they misjudge it, or lose a few arrows to fireing while running but
|they are still very hard hit.
Then you can catch up to them if you want, or if you're fleeing you'll
pull away.
| It would be the same amount of time. In fact you could run more since
|you wouldn't have to worry about loseing arrows.
We don't have infinite running room.
|All it does is make you
|stay in one place long enough so that a determined melee fighter can get in
|a few hits if he manages stay on top of you.
Which means we are dead. You can cross the screen in two seconds.
| Mages are frozen and they have to retarget to, they manage.
Go to Stratics, and compare the casting time for magic to the shot time on
a bow (never mind a crossbow). Casting time on spells is half the circle, in
seconds. Venture's shot time, with a nearly-obscene DEX of 85, is just over
four seconds by the formula (and about four and a half to five by my count).
You can Energy Bolt me before I can shoot you any day of the week. A fast
player can Lightning Bolt me twice before I can shoot him once. And that's
the fastest possible bow in the hands of a fast PC. It's too slow to impose
the same kind of rules mages deal with.
WILLIAM HARTWELL
(first off I shall explain that I am the Mrs. of the above address,
not William himself)
I play a little archer char on Baja, and would be most upset if the
archery skill were badly crippled, for the following reasons:
1. I wear nothing but leather. Studded leather sometimes, but no
bone, no chain, absolutely no plate! My weapon is a bow. Not
heavy crossbow, nor even crossbow. A bow. Magic one, if I can
find and keep one.
2. I use no magic. That's right. Not from lack of int, but because
I felt my char would be superstitious and suspicious of *all*
non-'natural' lores, as her ranger class would dictate. I will
drink the occasional LH or Cure potion when necessary after doing
battle with a snake or spider, and my play partner does cast magic
on me to save my skin, as I have been playing all of 5 months with
this char and have
3. all of 41 hp's. As you can tell,
4. I do not macro skills or attibutes. I play this char 2-3 hours twice
a week, and have been PK'd or monster killed about as often as you
would expect, or less. My light armor allows me to escape not easily
but adequately. My lack of possessions (mostly arrows) *usually*
means that I'm not looted badly upon death.
5. I guess it's pretty obvious that I RP this char totally. In fact,
this discussion would be impossible for my char to even have online.
I enjoy playing this little char more than any other that I've played,
possibly for the above reasons. I dodge tank mages, gargoyles, and
thieves. I kill great harts and minor monsters with glee. The only
reason I'm still around is because of my archery; I don't have a house or
a horse. My play partner bought me a boat once, which decayed because of
the infrequency of my play. Having someone to play with regularly has
added to my longevity and my enjoyment (and no, not only do we not use
ICQ, we haven't even exchanged RL names or emails), certainly, as has
the intensity of the role play.
Give up my archery 'advantage'? I suppose, if all other things were
equal, I could and would. But the fact remains that it is primarily
my archery skill that enables me to play a UO in any wise like that
I thought I was going to play when I began the game. When you're up
against hacks, cheats, and Doom-style hack'n'slash players, you have
3 choices: quit, join them, or be creative. I didn't want to quit; I
loved the original Ultimas too much. I didn't want to join them; I
am adamantly opposed to third-party programs being used to give one
unfair advantage in the game, and consider those who do so immature,
unoriginal, and unethical. I'm really tired of players telling me I
have to play the game _their_ way, so they can continue to enjoy it,
and I can continue to be PK'd to their hearts' content. I do not think
the archery advantage is one that has seriously impacted other players'
abilities to continue to play the game, whereas castrating it would
indeed adversely affect my _ability_ to play, not just my enjoyment.
calla
--
... and why is she smiling?
perhaps it's because she's learned that a smile is
fortune's umbrella