Note to Self: Make every bow 1-2 range
Actually, yes; I’ve seen somebody suggest knife/dagger usage. But not on this thread or website.
I wonder if back in the 14th century, english longbowmen would have similarly myopic discussions about the worth of their profession.
4 Likes
Probably discussed whether bishops in chess needed to be buffed with addl. movement options
2 Likes
I gave a pretty whole and fair review of bows. It does little to armor but can still be fatal in volleys. Without armor though they can be fairly debilitating.
Maybe it should be half strength against the armor sub type. Knights need a revamp too to be fair. The next most useless class unless class you are plugging a door. Just add it and the range adjustment as skills. Mages specialize as anything killers once you have broken the formation and myrmidons and mercs can be dodgy enough while fighters have hp soldiers are also armor and cavs have move etc etc. Good balance if you play your cards right.
Archers need standard longer range. Being locked to 2 range with Mages, Javelins and Hand Axes existing is a death sentence.
And 1 range Archers is a dumb solution
1 Like
I want to to make their range 2 - 2+str/4. Gives more strategy and growth.
A 1-3 range archer can work in my opinion.
Both 1-2 range and more range are far better design options than higher stats or a crit bonus.
Without skills I would prefer the close range option.
Making the range proportional to str could also work if you give a malus dependant from the distance.
I think a non linear relation would be better, but that is just balance.
I explained above why a range 1 archer is unrealistic but as for range it has to be something you can program as a skill or I would give you a hit and damage rate drop off as well.
It is around reply 55 ish or so and after.
A really bad explanation that makes no sense at all.
A bow shooting at close distance is more precise and deadly.
There is no “realistic explanation” for bows not being able to shoot at close distance.
He will probably die after shooting? Yes, but still, he can shoot.
Allowing them to counter at close range does not make them good in close combat.
Being able to counter at 1 distance but having low hp and def, would make the unit mainly used at distance but not useless in enemy turn.
Also, if a mage can cast a spell and counter in close combat, really there is no excuse for archers not being able to shoot.
Btw these are just gameplay mechanics, there is no point in reasoning from a realistic perspective.
4 Likes
I like it more how you did it in Inheritance. With Bows having varying ranges, but no 1 range bows existing (atleast from what i remember)
I don’t like 1 range Archers personally because then they are just physical mages.
I think that might be a bit much.
Imo, 2-3 RNG Archers early game and up to 5 RNG late game could work well.
1 Like
Wow. Being under constant attack makes no sense? As in a flurry of blows makes no sense to you? It is a good explanation you failed to comprehend. There is no time to retaliate. The attack doesn’t stop the moment they miss.
I know 5-6 is where most good archers will fall. The great ones reach 7 the best reach 8.
The number of attacks you see are just like a show of how many meaningful attacks you got otherwise a spd 30 myr is just a good as as an early game 15 in many cases. In real life it is many trades and failed blows condensed into a one or two that did connect shown in the game. The archer has no means to retaliate when pressed close quarters. Just constant swings when you are right on top of them shuts them down.
It was agreed some super human archers can retaliate with some consistency by others but I still have doubts.
Yeah and no one ever complained, but Inheritance has a really different balance.
I also prefer bows to have 2-REAL range, but still, I think that 1-3 range bows could be a good choice if someone prefers it.
They are just gameplay mechanics, thinking about realism is useless.
You are supposing that a guy can close the distance from an archer without being shot.
If you want to put it this way, giving the guy with more range the first attack would be the most realistic option.
Really, you can’t use realism as an argument in a discussion about a turn based game.
You can close on any exposed target that isn’t looking at you. As the commander you left them open and shooting at another target so yeah they closed in. Also covered in the talk.
It got pretty real and turned out just fine. It is two range for a reason.
If you attacked them on your phase you technically attacked the either charging or fleeing target and if you didn’t you either looked away and were distracted or just chose not to deal with them is the idea.
It was also listed that turns are 5 seconds and tiles are three meters, I mean they literally just dash in and start hacking away. I am not sure what the disconnect is other than you didn’t want to read it or you just don’t want imagine it properly idk.