Does the archery code need tweaked?

[nauta]

So as not to derail the combat thread (click on the links to get the backstory):

That said: can't the people getting shot at just run away?

I know this is a derail and I'll apologize in advance - but, oh do I loathe the archery code.

So with that disclaimer.  The answer to this question? Is almost without exception.  No.

So let's say you're out and about doing your thing.  Your brain is wrapped up in skinning a kill, waying your buddy, chatting with your hunting partner.  In short, you the player are thinking about anything but insta-fleeing some guy on a beetle with a .50 caliber sniper rifle.

Mid skinning attempt or, if they're very clever, just as you start fighting a critter.  An arrow flies in from the west and strikes your PC in the head.

By the time your brain processes that you've just been shot for > 50% of your hp, the archer has already reloaded and is firing again.  A second shot to the head and you are dead.  That's 75% of interaction with "Raiders" with bows.

The next 20% of the time?  That first arrow had Perraine or Heramide.

So yeah, barring the two above situations?  The right response is spam enter move commands until you're back inside the nearest quitsafe place (which is not the right RP response).  Unfortunately?  The folks with the bow are probably watching you before they start shooting, waiting until you are dismounted so you can't run (End) to the nearest safeplace, and then just... shoot you again, while you try to bandage.

Oh... or you make it, this time.  And they bring two archers the next time - as mentioned.  Archery code is dumb - Riev isn't wrong.

I have some things to say on it -- I think it's a good topic -- but I just wanted to save the original thread from derailing first.

[bardlyone]

I love that archery is as deadly as it is. It feels realistic that it is so.

That said: Unless you are being shot at by a pc that wants to harry you but let you live, like the first encounter I ever had with a desert elf, YEARS ago, you don't have much chance against an archer unless you run the second you're hit, and lose them.

Well, against a skilled archer. Just like a skilled warrior or extremely dangerous critter.

I don't think archery needs to be less damaging. I do think that increasing the delay between possible shots to something longer (if not the same delay as bashing, at least some more delay) would be an improvement.

[Delirium]

Archery is fine. It's already less deadly than it probably should be. People have a chance to run.

Use a shield, and know how to use it. Or be able to hide. There are defenses, if you're savvy.

If you just stand there, well yeah, you're in for a bad time.

[Synthesis]

The solution is to make badass-level archery as rare as badass-level melee.

Ideas:

1) Make slings a separate skill.  You can no longer train bow-archery with free ammo.
2) Every archery "miss" destroys the arrow.  You can no longer shoot at things that you KNOW you'll miss EVERY TIME in order to train archery from novice to jman with a single arrow.
3) Re-code the skillgain so that archery improves at the same rate as weapon skills.

[nauta]

Two minor archery tweak suggestions:

1. Make people train shooting a bow by shooting a bow.  Move sling to throw (rather than archery).  Arrows are expensive.

2. Nerf slings.  Little known fact: slings are deadly and have as good of range as arrows.  I've taken down drov beetles with three sling bullets from a human with reasonable strength.  Moreover, whereas with archery you are left vulnerable (wield arrow; hold bow), with the sling you can have a weapon in the primary hand (or a shield) and hold the sling.

ETA: Yeah, what Synthesis said, basically.

[Riev]

Archery is fine. It's already less deadly than it probably should be. People have a chance to run.

Use a shield, and know how to use it. Or be able to hide. There are defenses, if you're savvy.

If you just stand there, well yeah, you're in for a bad time.

Like everything in the game, a properly advanced skillset and planning tend to be superior.

However, even if a Warrior MASTERS bash, its not as reliable as a Ranger's arrow. Mastered swords are not as reliable to get through parry or block. Mastered Shield Use and Parry does nothing against a Ranger's arrow (tested, you attempt to parry 1/5 at best).

You cannot always hide. You can't "guard" from a direction to increase the chance that your BIG ASS KITE SHIELD THAT COVERS FROM SHOULDER TO KNEE will be effective.

My issue with the comment is this:

There are defenses, if you're savvy.

So we have to be savvy about the game's code and limitations, not savvy about defense and tactics in game? I think that's the point, is that you have to go to some pretty extreme things to defend against a skill that, as Synth mentions, is fucking FREE to train to a level of master, and can be done in 5-6days played. Whereas no warrior can master their combat skills in so short a time without "twinking" or doing "unrealistic" things.

[Delirium]

Split out slings from archery and make shields more effective, and add a guard check.

That stuff I agree with. But watering down archery when it's only ever "two head shots and done" in rare scenarios when the RNG favors you with its blessings, is silly at best.

[nauta]

Also, whitt, everyone should have this in their client highlights:

Code Select Expand


#HIGHLIGHT {arrow flies in from} {bold red}


Because I agree: the ambush can be surprising indeed! :-)

Also, re) poisons.

These days, I've noticed heramide to be very rare indeed, peraine less so.  According to the descriptions on some arrows, and lore, some arrows take/deliver poisons better than others.  If this isn't codedly implemented, I'd like to see that.

[Riev]

So then, yes. Archery code needs to be tweaked?

Watered down/less damaging? No. And I don't know that anyone called for that.

But tweaked, changed around a bit, defenses against it improved... yes.

[Lutagar]

Nerf everything I don't use tbh

[Delirium]

Yeah, I got the impression from an original post in the other thread that people were calling for it to have a longer delay and less damage, etc.

Which would just make it annoying and a PITA.

Split out slings/archery so that people can't magically switch to a bow, that I'm cool with.

[Synthesis]

In general, I think it should take about 20 days played to reach the "double neck-shot" 1v1 PvP potential.  It takes about 20 days for a warrior to get to the WTFPWN level, so I don't see why a ranger shouldn't have the same limitation.

Assassins can backstab to WTFPWN level faster, because they a) have to be in the same room and b) are saddled with an incredibly dangerous post-delay.

[Hashi]

I think the biggest problem with archery is in PvE.  Mobs simply don't react to getting shot from two rooms away, which is very strange and game breaking.  Simple fix would be for mobs to move in a direction that they get shot from.

[Delirium]

I think the biggest problem with archery is in PvE.  Mobs simply don't react to getting shot from two rooms away, which is very strange and game breaking.  Simple fix would be for mobs to move in a direction that they get shot from.

Then you should be able to shoot a mob once and wait for it to bleed out.

But you can't.

Right now, what we have is a decent balance of realism vs gameplay considering current code.

[nauta]

I think the biggest problem with archery is in PvE.  Mobs simply don't react to getting shot from two rooms away, which is very strange and game breaking.  Simple fix would be for mobs to move in a direction that they get shot from.

I suggested a while ago that the mob do a 'flee self' when fired at 50% of the time.  Sometimes it'll run close to the PC, sometimes not.  If a mob -always- moved to the PC, then we'd never use archery against aggressive mobs (alone), since, e.g., that rantarri would then move to you, then to you again, and you'd be dead (because you have no defenses up when firing).

But if it moved in a random direction, you might not always be dead.

[Hashi]

I could still see many benefits to using archery to hunt strong mobs, applying poisons primarily.  There's a poison in game supposedly called the "hunter's poison" that I've personally never needed to use as a hunter that would be very useful if mobs reacted to getting shot.

[tortall]

I think the biggest problem with archery is in PvE.  Mobs simply don't react to getting shot from two rooms away, which is very strange and game breaking.  Simple fix would be for mobs to move in a direction that they get shot from.

I suggested a while ago that the mob do a 'flee self' when fired at 50% of the time.  Sometimes it'll run close to the PC, sometimes not.  If a mob -always- moved to the PC, then we'd never use archery against aggressive mobs (alone), since, e.g., that rantarri would then move to you, then to you again, and you'd be dead (because you have no defenses up when firing).

But if it moved in a random direction, you might not always be dead.

+1!

[whitt]

The solution is to make badass-level archery as rare as badass-level melee.

Ideas:

1) Make slings a separate skill.  You can no longer train bow-archery with free ammo.
2) Every archery "miss" destroys the arrow.  You can no longer shoot at things that you KNOW you'll miss EVERY TIME in order to train archery from novice to jman with a single arrow.
3) Re-code the skillgain so that archery improves at the same rate as weapon skills.

Completely agree.  Might yield on #2, maybe not guarantee a broken arrow.

4) Increase the delay on aim to match Bash/Trample/Charge.
5) Remove the ability to single out a target beyond "tall figure", "figure", "short figure" more than one wilderness room away.
6) Have NPCs flee self when hit and damaged.

[Armaddict]

Not sure I like the immediate flee self.  As noted...if you could depend on them to bleed out from the strike to their neck, that would be different, but as is, archery is essentially the best way for a ranger to bring down most profitable game.  Where a lot of NPC's tend to ally with each other for no reason other than they're both NPC's, having them fleeing randomly towards each other isn't really helpful to anyone, nor does it actually tone down archery.

Archery can certainly do with some tweaking, but so can a lot of skills; Bash needs to be less dependent on height and consider a lot of other factors, for example.  Altogether, I find the way archery works now to be mostly inline with what I'd expect out of getting shot in the fucking neck by an arrow, and I find the arguments that you can't defend against it to be grossly overexaggerated.  Shield users are hard to shoot at when they are good at using shields.  Rangers with high parry seem to have a moderate chance of knocking it out, where a maxxed warrior is outright frustrating to try and shoot arrows at while focusing on effectively 'kiting'.  Sure, you can recklessly shoot arrow after arrow at them and count on one to get through, but if they're charging at you you don't want to be caught by that brief after-delay.

All I can say is that if people are maxxing out archery that fast, I'm not twinking out nearly as hard as some people.  My last ranger took 30 days to get it to master, but maybe because that's because I was only shooting at things I actually wanted to hunt.

Making slings separate seems reasonable, but I so rarely see them used as is that I'm kind of assuming people only use them when they're alone to twink out.

Honestly, I think as far as PvP, the best thing you can do to nerf archery is make the mounted archer bashable.  It's hard to change the before-delay due to how the code works with timers (ever wonder why sometimes it's short and sometimes its long?  I suspect that it's tied in to system 'ticks', where when you input the command it's waiting until the next 'tick' before the action takes place.  If I'm mistaken, nevermind), but we can make it so that hanging out there drawing a bow isn't nearly as safe against other players as it is now by being mounted.

[Riev]

Shield users are hard to shoot at when they are good at using shields.  Rangers with high parry seem to have a moderate chance of knocking it out, where a maxxed warrior is outright frustrating to try and shoot arrows at while focusing on effectively 'kiting'. 

I can confirm that semi recently, with a decently high agility and mastered shield use and parry, I did not attempt to block a single arrow shot at me, nor any from the person I was guarding.

[Armaddict]

Well.  As of a year and a half ago with mastered throw, I threw 3 knives at a newish Byn Runner holding a shield and had all 3 of them bounced off.

Within the last year, I've fired an arrow as a master at another ranger and had it knocked out of the air before disengaging and running.

[Riev]

Throwing != Archery

One arrow seems a bit out of whack, however in typical arm fashion, I'm sure HAVING the skill at a high level helps knock it out of the air?


I'm still not even saying affect the damage at all. I think some changes to archery recently HAVE helped, but if I'm wearing a full neckplate, and you hit me in the neck, it shouldn't do 60+ damage just because you hit the neck. Armor should factor into archery -very- heavily.

[The Lonely Hunter]

Not only do I believe that archery doesn't need to be toned down but I think that it could do for some status effects. Got shot in the leg/foot? More movement lag. Neck shot? Bleeding. Shot in the arm? Chance to drop whatever is held.

Archery is strong for a skilled archer but I believe that it should be. Zalanthas is a dangerous place and an arrow to the face hurts. I wouldn't mind seeing the archer having a little lag before they can move after firing the bow though - it makes it equally dangerous to shoot at people that can knock that arrow out of the air and come stab you in the neck with it.

[Armaddict]

Throwing != Archery

One arrow seems a bit out of whack, however in typical arm fashion, I'm sure HAVING the skill at a high level helps knock it out of the air?

While I acknowledge the first, I also find it highly unlikely that one has it factored in and the other does not.  I can go back further to just after shield use when in, when everyone and their mom was using a shield, and point out how hard it was to be a reliable archer at that time due to all the shields (though at that point there was a bug where blocking the arrow with a shield wouldn't block the poison on the arrow), but that's going way back to a time where such is unreliable.  Suffice to say, I don't think they decided throw should be blocked by shields, but arrows should not.

The latter I can't say for certain, but I know that while I rarely play warriors, the last one I played was knocking almost all arrows and chucked spears away without ever once even buying a bow.

Altogether, anecdotals presented versus my experience, I stand by that defense against archery is doable; sometimes it requires some luck, and sometimes it requires a decent reaction to the idea that arrows are being fired at you.

[Molten Heart]

.

[Riev]

I mean, its MY experience versus YOUR experience, and that's the issue here, since neither of us can 'test' anything in proper conditions. I'm just saying I've seen, and personally been part of, the receiving end of arrows that never once even ATTEMPTED to parry.

Combined with how easy it is to raise, and it being so powerful as far as ranged damage, with the SAFETY of being able to fire from more than one room away, I think some limitations might be acceptable. In order to backstab, I need to be in room, a bunch of other conditions need to be met, and I have a severe lag. In other to bash or disarm, I need to be in room, and since its melee range you can just flee and due to combat lag and movement speeds, can easily outrun.

[nauta]

Not only do I believe that archery doesn't need to be toned down but I think that it could do for some status effects. Got shot in the leg/foot? More movement lag. Neck shot? Bleeding. Shot in the arm? Chance to drop whatever is held.

Archery is strong for a skilled archer but I believe that it should be. Zalanthas is a dangerous place and an arrow to the face hurts. I wouldn't mind seeing the archer having a little lag before they can move after firing the bow though - it makes it equally dangerous to shoot at people that can knock that arrow out of the air and come stab you in the neck with it.

True story.  I was testing the effects of taints against a gith.  I fired a tainted arrow at it -- it bounced off its shield (or maybe I missed, I forget).  The gith then picks up the arrow and fires it back at me, hitting me... for the taint!  (This was all without staff intervention.)

There are a lot of clever scripts on NPCs.  Kudos to the script writers.

Things are a lot more entertaining in PvE when you aren't maxed out.  I often wish that sweet spot between being OK (apprentice-ish) and being awesome were slower, but it always seems that I jump from being OK at combat to being the best ever almost overnight.

[Armaddict]

It'd be cool if there were some way to take cover, or hide from ranged attacks. Stealth is an option but it's plausible one could still hide/shield themselves behind something without being stealthy.

I agree, but that's what I always thought of with the shield.  As noted by Riev, we have contrasting experiences with shields.  I've gone to the point that when I shoot an arrow, and it bounces off a shield, I break away rather than waste arrows.

I think staff needs to let me and Riev log into the test server and shoot arrows at each other.  In the case I'm wrong and it's a lot harder than it has always appeared to me, then there should be a definitive way to grant the target a 'cover' to hide under.  As is, I've purposely trained reactions to the lone archer scenario, and even implanted it into a military clan's documentation.  The Lone Archer, well played, has been a scourge on many a group, but mostly because of people freezing up and waiting for directions, rather than having that reaction trained and rehearsed.

[whitt]

Altogether, anecdotals presented versus my experience, I stand by that defense against archery is doable; sometimes it requires some luck, and sometimes it requires a decent reaction to the idea that arrows are being fired at you.

But you precede this with:

The latter I can't say for certain, but I know that while I rarely play warriors, the last one I played was knocking almost all arrows and chucked spears away without ever once even buying a bow.

So I'm confused.  You have one example from some indeterminate amount of time ago that indicates warriors with a shield can defend arrows and that equates to every other guild being reasonably able to defend against arrows? 

What is the reasonable defense for every other guild. 
(hint - travel with more and better skilled archers)

[whitt]

Next question - How do you, as the target, engage the archer?

Typical archer raider...
watch e
shoot <target> e
shoot <target> e
n
n
shoot <target> s
shoot <target> s
e
e
shoot <target> w

rinse, wash, repeat...

If somehow... someone manages to get into your room? just leave.  Don't RP at all... just leave
move to distance... shoot.

Dunebuggies and sniper rifles.

[Riev]

Admittedly, most people -do- die to a Lone Archer because they don't know what to do, but honestly that seems about right. You can't charge them, because they'll just move a room away and re-hide immediately.

You can't run away, because you're in that area for a reason.

Best you can do is run to a room that requires them to turn a corner and surprise them. But they're hidden. So good luck.

[Armaddict]

You have one example from some indeterminate amount of time ago that indicates warriors with a shield can defend arrows and that equates to every other guild being reasonably able to defend against arrows? 

No.  My one example was from within the last year.  I only shot at a total of 4 PC's with that character.  The target in this case was a ranger (because I can guild sniff), and they successfully knocked the one arrow I shot out of the arrow as a master archer.  Hence I said that it was not impossible.

Then that one example was challenged, and I went on to digress into various other experiences over a long time frame that say that yes, it is very possible to be foiled as an archer by skills of the target alone.  I'm sorry that they're spread out over a long period of time, but I don't just run around shooting at everyone, and in this discussion, it's the master archer that is being discussed, which rules out a lot of fledgling raiders that die quickly.

It's a long term impression that I'm putting together to say that I think the idea that it's not defensible against is overplayed, based on a multitude of personal experiences.  I've also injected the possibility that I'm wrong in which case I'd agree, allowing for the idea that I'm either not remembering correctly or I've had really shitty luck, in which case I'd agree.  But with those experiences of mine, I tend to lean towards other people possibly having bad luck, or having a bad experience and overplaying the prevalence of it.

[nauta]

I know that gith with shields are pretty damn good at deflecting arrows shot at them from a master archer.  I've seen it many times.  PCs, however, I'm less sure about.

[whitt]

I'm sorry that they're spread out over a long period of time, but I don't just run around shooting at everyone, and in this discussion, it's the master archer that is being discussed, which rules out a lot of fledgling raiders that die quickly.

And my question is less geared at how many times have you shot an arrow at someone and seen it defended.  How many times have you been shot at and been able to defend?  When you weren't playing a warrior guild character with a shield?

[whitt]

Third question.  When the archer picks as their target the Leader of a group, say the Byn, who can't just pell-mell run all over the place... but has to, you know, RP for their group.  So they emote their taking cover from the archer, get their guards in place.  Put hoods up and huddle together to try and "circle the beetles" to throw off the archer...

How much defense is being in the middle of a ring of six mounted riders all trying to defend you?  While you give instructions to the players that don't know how to type-code and OOCly react to IG laser-accurate sniper-rifle fire?

[Riev]

How much defense is being in the middle of a ring of six mounted riders all trying to defend you?  While you give instructions to the players that don't know how to type-code and OOCly react to IG laser-accurate sniper-rifle fire?

Frankly, at that point, you're putting the power in the hands of the archer. I find in those situations, as long as you're being SMART and playing along, they won't rain a Hundred Arrows down at you. But if they say "get out" and you sit there, they're going to do it.

The point is that if they WANTED to, they could decimate a group of seven in 20 arrows. 10 arrows a piece between two competent archers. With the lag time, that's... 30seconds? gone brb gotta pee

[Dunetrade55]

I'm really unsure of the need for an archery tweak. The times I've seen it used, it was quite literally death on a stick. Factor in some of the stronger poisons and you can easily immobilize/murder leadership PCs and leave the entire force in OMG WTF DO I DO?! mode, which I suppose is the point, as you pick the rest of with random taints to harrass them and slow them down... the more proactive will break ranks, rendering the situation even more of a clusterfuck to resolve. The more stubborn will question whoever barks the first order...

But these all boil down to a few situations I've observed, which really is all anecdotal. I hear it said shields and parry provide adequate defense, but only a few select guilds/subguilds get shield use to a workable level, and almost none reach parry without some 20 days of obsessive twinking. I've been a fan of a "protector light" subguild for a while, which doesn't cost karma, but I don't see it happening, so it must be a little too much... Maybe a minor boost to main guilds and subguilds for shield use cap. A shield, while a potent tool, does not seem all that complicatd to get to a middling level, while advanced shield tactics likely should be.

Mayhaps if defense and/or agility counted more in the check to see if you take an arrow to the knee? Well, that might be a trickier beast and I'm really not sure if that would wreck the current balance of archery as a scary force (which is as it should be). I would like it if some testing were done on archer versus various guild caps of defensive skills, if only for future reference.

[Armaddict]

Okay.  Long post of code-stuff incoming (this is essentially the training given to Tor; I always regarded Tor as a place for code-savvy players to share how code works with those who paid for the training, since coded combat is what you can depend on happening).

-First and foremost, if you are vulnerable to archers, you are vulnerable to archers.  Don't afk out in the sands.  You should either have lookouts for each direction, or be looking intensely in each direction yourself.  Your first defense is always awareness and acknowledgement that the sands are NOT safe, and that other players are often NOT friendly.
-Anything involving archery is a battle of delays.  As noted in a previous post, the 'before' delay seems to sync up with a tick on the server, meaning that if your first shot's delay is short, your second shot's delay is usually long.  Combine that with a brief, but notable after-delay that most don't acknowledge, and trying to fit in a second shot on an advancing target is sometimes disastrous unless you're mounted and can't be pinned down easily.

Lone Archer vs Group:
-Your group, due to code limitations, will not have time to receive orders.  This is an exercise that should be rehearsed, as a result, so that reactions are quick.
-Have assigned roles in your group.  Some, upon receiving surprise fire, should be reaching for shields.  Some, upon receiving surprise fire, should be arming bows to return fire.  Two should be pre-assigned to flank, and should be mounting up immediately to move orthagonal to the archer (i.e. if they are west, one flanker goes north, the other goes south).  The main group remains put.  The archer will either move to disengage, or be caught.  Upon flankers reaching the archer's position, the main group moves to that position.
-It is always preferable to move away.  If you are watching closely and catch the archer as his first shot begins, move the group away from his line of fire.  Code-wise, this is the equivalent of taking cover, until something else is implemented (which still wouldn't be as effective).
-Lone archers depend on inaction and speed of command.  Reacting quickly means that if they take a second shot, they -will- come under attack from a flanker.  Since most archers spam the shoot and stack the before delay on top of the short after delay of the previous shot, you'll often come on them helpless in mid-delay or in post-second-shot stun.
-You have two flankers.  Only one attacks if they both come on the archer.  The second remains available to pursue, since the first will be under effects of 'kill', 'bash', or 'charge' delay.

Lone Archer vs Solo:
-Best bet is to disengage entirely.  If you're alone, you have only yourself to worry about and you can return later for your goal.
-If you have a debilitating poison, return fire.  If not, run.
-If your attacker is using hide to evade pursuit rather than movement, you're given a free pass on disengaging.
---All of these notes above show why it's important to keep a well-rested mount.  Frequent short stops are incredibly superior to running your mount to exhaustion then taking a long break.
-If you must engage, remember it's a battle of delays.  His before-delay prevents quick attack unless he has extreme luck or you're showing extreme hesitation.  Movement delay becomes more important than shoot delay.  Move orthogonal to their direction, moving closer whenever their movement is lagging behind yours due to their attempt to 'shoot'.
-If the engagement continues for long enough, using the above algorithm, you will close on an archer, typically without taking any fire, or they will disengage due to lack of stamina.


This all changes if there are multiple archers, but that requires a lot more coordination on their part as well to put it to good use.  The most important part is awareness that you're in the wilds with no protection except yourself. 

While you give instructions to the players that don't know how to type-code and OOCly react to IG laser-accurate sniper-rifle fire?

Again, rehearse it beforehand.  People who don't remember their lessons will fall prey to the organized archer, but organized defense is just as effective if you keep a level head and use the same code they're using to kill you in order to kill them.  I've never had an archer slow down their attacks to type out emotes and such.  Generally, when they start using the code to kill, they're looking to win.  Suspend your need to emote and react for the sake of writing the novel and make it a mental description after the fact.  Code is the limitation, we don't have diagonal directions, and you use the same rules that they do.  But there are three ways to come out on top in the lone archer scenario:
-You successfully evade them and establish distance, aware of the danger and unable to be surprised.
-You catch them, and they're at an extreme disadvantage as a result.
-You herd them so that continued engagement is discouraged, and they break off for their own preservation.

[Armaddict]

Note:

The above is indeed not optimal for person to person interaction, and I'd like to note that I've not had to use any of it since...I think it was Howls, in the Red Fangs.

I don't know if that's because there's no raiders, or just fewer people insisting on being the lone archer in their raids.  The reason I break it down into delays that well isn't because of recent experience, but because of the era where I joined the game; during this time, the majority of people you met out in the desert tried to kill you, and a good portion of them were fucking ungemmed krathis and elkrosians who would come in and drop a fireball on your head like they're Annie in LoL or something.  You learned these kind of things from dying to it a lot, not from overanalyzing it after one time.

I died a -lot- to raiders early on.

[whitt]

Again, rehearse it beforehand. 

Excellent post.  And I agree.  Rehearsing is the right cure.  Turnover and PC availability makes that less than likely.  Take, for example, your flanker idea.  Totally agree.  You're already in position however where you need a minimum of four PCs in the target group.  I don't know how often there's a ride with an experienced leader and two experienced potential flankers.  Generally it's the leader and a gaggle of runners.  But yes.  Taking the time to ICly teach reactions would be the ideal solution, regardless of any tweaks.

Code is the limitation, we don't have diagonal directions, and you use the same rules that they do.

Which is why we're discussing tweaking the code.  And the target is playing with, but not following the same rules that archer is.  The archer is going straight to code, using every one of the broken pieces of code to their advantage from targeting a cloaked figure's keyword, to stealth, to easily maxxed archery, and twink fleeing.  Chances are the target is actually out there doing something other than trying to kill another PC in the most efficient code-method possible.

What is the downside to some of the suggested tweaks:
1) Make Archery advance at the same speed as other weapon skills (meaning most folks will hang at Advanced).
2) Remove the ability to target keywords you can't see from more than one room away.
3) Increase the delay on aiming.
 

[Armaddict]

Excellent post.  And I agree.  Rehearsing is the right cure.

On that note...man, when I have PCs that are trying to explain coded ways to work within the code of the game, it's really frustrating when they roll their eyes at me and reduce it to twinking.  I'm trying to share knowledge of code in game, since it's hard to share it out of game.  I'm not twinking you out, I'm preparing you for when (not if) you get twinked.

Which is why we're discussing tweaking the code.

Some of it I'd agree with.  However, I'm a little averse to the idea of everything becoming a passive 'skills will take care of it'.  I think you -should- have to react well to situations to come out on top unless the other player is being a total suicidal nitwit.  Mostly, I'm not saying the above is a feasible alternative to making arrows less reliable, just kind of my blurb about how the lone archer is entirely subject to the same rules that you are, which are the rules of the code.  When it comes to Archery, that assumption they're in it to kill you is a safe one, because they're at a distance; interaction is impossible, aside from code interaction.

I don't consider it a broken mechanic, just one that's really hard to input storytelling into due to the nature of it.  It's ranged.  It's based on aggression and the desire to kill/survive.  It's both really powerful, and really scary to use against things that you know will kill you if you...even suffer a bit of lag after the fact.

In the case that my anecdotes/experiences are wrong, I'm fully in favor of shields doing a better job (my impression, currently, is that they do at least a fair job), and I'm fully in favor of groups being able to take cover.  But there is no situation where I think that a player should be able to be lazy or not react to an archer due to preparation.  They're dangerous.  They should be dangerous.

Edit:  Also, I'm coming across other than how I intend.  I'm not saying don't change anything, I'm actually trying to increase awareness of things as far as I understand them, which is 'Hey!  There are things that are helpful against this, don't tell people it's hopeless!'.  When my anecdote/experience is called false, I try to defend it, which makes it seem like I'm against everything altogether.  Really, I just want to impress that I think things, if working as I understand them, are good, and people should continue to use these practices to defend themselves until such a time as they have that huge wonk of code knowledge I just posted.

[650Booger]

my parry and shield should be able to defend against arrows being fired at a PC that I am guarding, with some consistency.

[whitt]

However, I'm a little averse to the idea of everything becoming a passive 'skills will take care of it'.  I think you -should- have to react well to situations to come out on top unless the other player is being a total suicidal nitwit.

I agree here too. 

What I'm asking for:
- A skilled archer to require as much time training as a skilled swordsman aka multiple IG Years, not weeks.
- The ability for other players to interpose themselves between an aggressor and their target, similar to guard and rescue for melee.
- The time to time read, process, and react that I'm being shot before the coup d'grace lands, similar to the delay after the Kill/Kick/Bash command allows for emoting.

[Armaddict]

- A skilled archer to require as much time training as a skilled swordsman aka multiple IG Years, not weeks.

How quickly are people maxing this out?  It usually takes my rangers right around 25-30 days of playing time to hit mastery.  Then again, it takes me about 50 days to get parry, so I don't think my method of 'hunt what you need, not to skill up' makes that reliable.

On a sidenote, I've always been a fan of the long term weapons grind because after journeyman, you're pretty much better than most of what you encounter aside from other PC's.  I do think advanced weapon skills should come to them earlier though.  Archery seems to be fundamentally different in that it's far less functional than a weapon skill at journeyman, and far less functional than a weapon skill at advanced.  It just turns into massive damage upon mastery.

Would it be better if we just tuned up accuracy on it so that failing a shot is a lot harder once you hit advanced, but it becomes really hard to hit that oh-my-god-it-hurts-critical that seems to come only on mastery?

Edit:  Hell, tune this up to make rangers do that D&D thing where they choose two weapon style or ranged style.  Ranged style improves archery faster but gets lower weapon skills.  Or something.  Blah blah!  IDEAS.

[Jingo]

Something needs to give. Archery is deadlier than backstab, easier to train, safer to PK with and very easy to script and abuse.

Shields should give 50% block from arrows even at novice. Any idiot should be able to protect their center of mass with any slab of wood.

Realistically a handful of stone-age archers shouldn't even be able to dent a formation of heavy infantry and really shouldn't even hit charging cavalry. But given the high lethality of archery code in Armageddon, perspective is incredibly skewed. The "tactical advice" in this thread is sound, but a poor defense for what is allegedly not a broken mechanic.

[Harmless]

have the option of aiming for the head/neck, body, or leg? Increased chance of missing with head/neck or leg, but possible damage boost/status effect, or increased chance of hitting with body but obviously will be less likely to hit other vital parts and therefore do average damage?

In turn have uncalled shots be a bit more random for what part of the body they hit if untargeted, instead of having the skill boost seem to make neck/head shots more likely all the time.

I agree w/ synth in nerfing slings by making them a separate skill. Makes total sense to me for realism. Unfortunately almost every archer currently has used slings to train archery and the arrow economy is really hard.

I don't think that auto-destroying missed arrows is a reasonable or needed change; I think realistically arrows landing in sand can be re-used some of the time. Make it a chance to lose the arrow instead

I don't mind that archery is friggin deadly.

Boost WATCH so that you can start watching someone in a far-away room. It's BS that you can only "lock on" for a watch when in the same room. That would make defending much easier, because you begin to track the archer's movements after their first shot.

Make a much increased chance to dodge arrows when you're watching said archer.

[Dar]

It'd be cool if you could adopt a 'cover' stance. In which case movement gains an intense amount of lag. Your defense against archery increases, and the odds of shield blocking/parrying multiple considerably. If you try to cover on a mount without having it on master, you fall off it.  Have the NPCs automatically adopt that stance whenever being shot.  Have it toggleable for PCs to automatically adopt it, or not.

[Hauwke]

Not a bad idea Dar, but it sounds sort of hard to code. It may have the issue of being too powerful and may even accidentally trickle over to melee beca
use of increased block/parry chance.

[Miradus]

Not a bad idea Dar, but it sounds sort of hard to code. It may have the issue of being too powerful and may even accidentally trickle over to melee beca
use of increased block/parry chance.

I don't know that I have a problem with that. Most muds I've played had multiple combat stances from aggressive to defensive, with a tradeoff between defense or offense depending how you rolled. (i.e. aggressive stance meant higher offense and lower defense than base.)

Fighting npc is pretty simple and straightforward. Players though ... there's not a lot of tricks in the tool bag that aren't out and out code exploitation.

[Hauwke]

Yeah neither would I so long as it made agility rock bottom sort of thing, like very few swings ever sort of thing. You are full defense in other words.

[Synthesis]

Throwing != Archery

One arrow seems a bit out of whack, however in typical arm fashion, I'm sure HAVING the skill at a high level helps knock it out of the air?

While I acknowledge the first, I also find it highly unlikely that one has it factored in and the other does not.  I can go back further to just after shield use when in, when everyone and their mom was using a shield, and point out how hard it was to be a reliable archer at that time due to all the shields (though at that point there was a bug where blocking the arrow with a shield wouldn't block the poison on the arrow), but that's going way back to a time where such is unreliable.  Suffice to say, I don't think they decided throw should be blocked by shields, but arrows should not.

The latter I can't say for certain, but I know that while I rarely play warriors, the last one I played was knocking almost all arrows and chucked spears away without ever once even buying a bow.

Altogether, anecdotals presented versus my experience, I stand by that defense against archery is doable; sometimes it requires some luck, and sometimes it requires a decent reaction to the idea that arrows are being fired at you.

A while back, they severely nerfed parry vs. arrows.

Warrior-level mastered shield use -does- block most scrublord arrows.  It might block about 33% of master-level archer shots.  It definitely will save your ass in terms of getting away, but still only if you run quickly.

[azuriolinist]

Armor should factor into archery -very- heavily.

This.

I admittedly have little experience with master archery (both wielding it and having it used against me). I'm with the opinion that rather than having archery nerfed, there be more effective defenses against it. Like someone said somewhere above, archery should be dangerous, at a high level. That doesn't mean there shouldn't be measures against it.

Like Riev pointed out, armor should play a big role against arrows, especially heavy armor. There's no way some arrow should be able to pierce through a gorget made out of shell. Maybe break it, somewhat. But not go through it. I think if the victim has good enough armor, there should be a serious chance of arrows bouncing off of the equipment. Of course, this would all depend on the make of the arrow, too.

Shields and parry definitely should have a chance to factor into it, too, (if they aren't already) with parry having only a slight chance to knock arrows out of the air. Or, rather, base agility off of the chance to knock an arrow from the air. Even still, I don't think parry should be much use against arrows. You don't see people in RL doing that sort of shit.

If there should be any adjustment to archery, maybe adjust the before/after delay based on the shooter's agility and archery skill. A novice archer with poor agility would probably fumble around with arrows.

I'm partially against the idea of making it more difficult to skill up archery, as that just adds to the grind. I didn't find it easy to skill up, either, though that might be based on circumstances. I do like the sound of making slingshots be based on a skill other than archery.

[Hauwke]

I wasnt going to weigh in with a full opinion but I feel like my opinion may be (probably not but whatever) valuable.

Defenses against archery:
The whole armor thing stems back to armor all but useless except in perfect circumstances I.e a foe with very low damage per hit. A weak breed for example, wheras a suit of the very best armor is wherable only by a select few and is ridiculously heavy so it narrows it further to who it benefits, and thats the armor that actually works when in all reality a good plate of armor made from something solid would stop it, a leather jerkin? Yeah an arrow could go through, but a half inch thick gorget made of shell designed to withstand all sorts of punishment. Yeah that would at best just crack.

Parrying an arrow? It seems in the line of catching an arrow in your bare hands, sure its possible but you are an idiot to not just jump aside instead. Using your shield however should be a very viable solution, at mastered warrior level shield use against master archery it should be a 50-50 chance to block if not more. The archer is aiming for the vital spots sure, but he cant influence the arrow after it leaves his bow so the rest after aiming is left up to wind and the target, if you see the arrow coming I am almost willing to bet you would cover yourself, if not your whole body at least your face because 'OHMYGODNOTTHEFACE!' Is a genuine rl reaction to things.

As for the whole twinking up of archery, Ive seen medium level archery kill npcs. Ive died to an arrow to the face after a missed parry even when I had undoubtably maxxed parry, if I didnt there was something wrong. and have seen others do the same.
Not once have I seen parry work, attempt sure, work no.

[Insigne]

An archer shouldn't be able to two-shot a heavily-armored warrior, neck shot or no.

If parry should factor into defense against arrows, which I think is some anime-level shit, have it be based on whether or not you're watching the archer or their direction.

I'm slightly opposed to slings being based on a different skill, but only because of the lack of availability of arrows. In NPC stores, when I can find them, they seem to go from 100 upwards apiece.

[John]

The solution should be making slings a separate skill OR drastically slowing down the rate at which archery advances. Unless cheap arrows suddenly become a thing (to make it comparable to "buy a weapon once and use it for IG years"). Unless of course a complete retool was done on how archery works, introducing new skills, etc.

It's worth pointing out that when you use a melee weapon the skills that come into play are fighting style (dual wielding or two-handed) + weapon type (slashing/bludgeoning/piercing/chopping) + hidden offense skill. When you use a bow only two skills potentially get used: fighting style (archery) + hidden offense skill. If you want to make ranged attacks comparable to melee attacks then you need to introduce weapon skills: bow/sling/crossbow. I'd personally combine archery and throw and call it ranged.

[Riev]

Archery is also significantly affected by the agility score of the person using it. Similar to strength in melee, but its worthwhile mentioning that its not "just archery + offense". In fact, I'm not even confident offense has anything to do with it at all.

[Miradus]

I have done a lot of bow-hunting for deer throughout my life. Even if you don't want to kill something, I advise you to go buy a target bow and a hay bale and enjoy it as a sport. It's very challenging.

Before I lost vision in my left eye I wasn't too bad.

Deer will OCCASIONALLY see an arrow coming. Even though it's traveling at about 400 feet per second. They don't really dodge, but they will flinch as it's coming in. I'm not sure if they see the flash of it or what. But they'll sometimes flinch and lower their body and your arrow will go a little high. The best shots are front to back or back to front (literally up the ass) because even the flinch won't cause a complete miss.

Shields were THE defense against arrows in medieval warfare. Particularly the massed shield wall against the hail of arrows coming in from the front or above. I don't see someone parrying an arrow outside of some epic Japanese films but stopping an arrow with a shield is something even a common footsoldier should be capable of doing.

[azuriolinist]

Archery is also significantly affected by the agility score of the person using it. Similar to strength in melee, but its worthwhile mentioning that its not "just archery + offense". In fact, I'm not even confident offense has anything to do with it at all.

Oh. Heh. Always had the idea it was strength for some reason.

[Riev]

Archery is also significantly affected by the agility score of the person using it. Similar to strength in melee, but its worthwhile mentioning that its not "just archery + offense". In fact, I'm not even confident offense has anything to do with it at all.

Oh. Heh. Always had the idea it was strength for some reason.

I mean, insofar as it affects what kind of bow you can use... which might have an effect on damage. I don't know the archery code in and out, I'm just trying to mention that a high offense score doesn't mean archery hits more often, or for more damage.

And to the point that "dual wield" and "two handed" might factor into a melee hit, but "shield use" wouldn't, so there's that tradeoff too.

[Drayab]

Just spitballing here, but what if guarding someone gave you a chance to block a missile aimed at them, as an advanced usage of the guard skill.

Guarding each other with shields up would then be like 'locking shields,' a formation strong against archer attacks.

I do also think that shields in particular should provide more protection against archers than they currently do, from my own experience in game. I think I've parried more arrows than blocked them, which seems odd. Then again, it doesn't actually come up that much so maybe statistically it's alright but my specific instances have been skewed by a small sample size.

[Marauder Moe]

I agree that shields should be way more effective against arrows.

Would also be great if there was a command like

Code Select Expand

>shield east
that, assuming you have a shield, provides a big bonus for you and your 'guard' target against projectiles coming from that direction. 

[Insigne]

Just spitballing here, but what if guarding someone gave you a chance to block a missile aimed at them, as an advanced usage of the guard skill.

I like it. Block attempt fails or you're not holding a shield and you have a chance at taking the hit instead!

Would also be great if there was a command like

Code Select Expand

>shield east
that, assuming you have a shield, provides a big bonus for you and your 'guard' target against projectiles coming from that direction. 

I feel like this could be done with the existing 'watch' command.

[Miradus]

I'd settle for just decreased chance to hit with each consecutive arrow.

First one hits at full chance, full damage. Each consecutive arrow halves that to indicate that your target is aware they're being shot at and is actively evading or taking cover.

[Bahliker]

Ideas and thoughts for the spitball range:

+1 to be able to target only visible keywords at range.
+1 to being able to "lock on" with watch (target) (direction) with the same keyword restrictions as shooting.
Chance to hit the wrong target, adjusted for factors such as distance, whether the shot was a hit or miss, if the target is in combat, if the target was following or being followed by a group, if the target is mounted, etc.
Having run on decreases chance to get hit. 
Simply holding a shield adjusts hit chance from archery based on size (weight maybe) of the shield in addition to normal shield skill.
Being aware of the shooter diminishes hit chance, watching the shooter or the shooters room greatly diminishes hit chance (perfect shots are unlikely except when hidden or otherwise given visibility advantage)
Cover command, takes effect immediately but has an after delay based on agility, grants bonus vs ranged and maybe even reduces some spell damage, variable bonus based on terrain type, hide skill, certain guild options, penalty against the first round of combat, cancelled by standing or moving once the short delay is over.

[Hauwke]

If archery was affected byoffense we would see years old warriors able to neck shot elves with a bow. Which I have never seen but it could be possible.

[Patuk]

Years-old warriors still don't have scan, so the elves will live to see another day.

[Hauwke]

I mostly used elves as an example but yeah.

[Dunetrade55]

I know it's not the same, but when I was younger and my reflexes better, I parried a few paintballs with a gloved hand (a gentle, curved, guiding touch, is this cheating? Don't know, don't care) or even just turned sideways to dodge them. I guess being the kid people would hurl basketballs at relentlessly in gym class has its advantages. At the same time, an arrow is different, at range it follows quite an arc. At maximum range you're just looking at *shield up* when you see the arrows fly, unless I'm mistaken. My archery experience was brief, in the Boy Scouts, so take that with a grain of salt. Miradus likely has a much better idea on that. Parrying arrows? Not impossible, but unlikely unless you're pretty damn good, which, that's a lot of ifs, down to agility, parry skill, and defense.

[Inks]

No it doesn't. Shield vs arrow should be tweaked so journeyman even has a small chance to block shots, and master shield should have a 50% effectiveness vs master arrow.

[Lizzie]

I'd settle for just decreased chance to hit with each consecutive arrow.

First one hits at full chance, full damage. Each consecutive arrow halves that to indicate that your target is aware they're being shot at and is actively evading or taking cover.

I like the idea of this - not necessarily the details but the general idea. That subsequent arrows fired at the same target from the same archer has a decreased chance of hitting the mark, because the target is now paying attention to incoming arrows.

[Miradus]

I'd settle for just decreased chance to hit with each consecutive arrow.

First one hits at full chance, full damage. Each consecutive arrow halves that to indicate that your target is aware they're being shot at and is actively evading or taking cover.

I like the idea of this - not necessarily the details but the general idea. That subsequent arrows fired at the same target from the same archer has a decreased chance of hitting the mark, because the target is now paying attention to incoming arrows.

I stole the idea. It's based off of how "backstab" was implemented in MUME. The first backstab has a greater chance of hitting but subsequent ones get harder. On the understanding that a target who just lost half their hp might be a bit more wary of being stabbed in the back again within the next couple of minutes.

In Arm it would be a tradeoff between that versus a mob charging at you for the kill.

[Feco]

In general, I think archery is fine.

[Armaddict]

In general, I think archery is fine.

I'm in this boat as well, but am not averse to tweaks.

I'm still really thinking that much higher accuracy to advanced archery would change things a lot, by slowing down the progression towards master archery.  That is without an intimate knowledge of how it progresses, though.

An 'aware' flag to recent combatants would likely be a good idea.  Harder to backstab, harder to hit with ranged weapons, harder to steal from, etc.

Someone who's been riding around in the wilderness peacefully for three days is easier to hit than someone who knows they're under attack, and this has the side product of dealing with that pesky idea of firing at people locked in combat as well.  Not impossible, but hard.

[Jingo]

Archery is fine if you're not the one getting shot.  I'd say it favors the ambusher far more than the other ambush skills do.

But I'd be happy if Backstab, Sap or Throw were given comparable boosts in lethality.

I'd be happy with a flat percentage to block arrows just from holding a shield.

I'd be happy if there was some sort of delay/precision trade off available to archery. Crossbows vs Bows anyone?

[Synthesis]

In general, I think archery is fine.

I'm in this boat as well, but am not averse to tweaks.

I'm still really thinking that much higher accuracy to advanced archery would change things a lot, by slowing down the progression towards master archery.  That is without an intimate knowledge of how it progresses, though.

An 'aware' flag to recent combatants would likely be a good idea.  Harder to backstab, harder to hit with ranged weapons, harder to steal from, etc.

Someone who's been riding around in the wilderness peacefully for three days is easier to hit than someone who knows they're under attack, and this has the side product of dealing with that pesky idea of firing at people locked in combat as well.  Not impossible, but hard.

Mastering it is easy as long as you have access to the right mobs.  We're talking like 5-7 days, if you can get quality practice in every time you hunt.

That's -my- biggest issue with archery.  It takes a long-ass time for a warrior to get good enough to make people want to flee instantly.  It takes a long-ass time for an assassin to get good enough to be confident enough to even risk a legit PC backstab (backstabbing newbie scrubs in the 'rinth doesn't count).  A ranger, though, can get good enough to fuck your ass up from 2 rooms away with very little risk to himself, and very little risk involved in the process of getting that good.

That being said...nobody has ever PK'ed me with arrows.  X-D got really, really close a couple of times, but magick saved me once and shield use saved me the other time.  It's just really annoying that a relatively noobish PC can essentially deny you access to an area via threat of instant damage that you have to sleep off (if you haven't branched bandage).

[Malken]

Oh, the things that Iyola and I have done to master archery *shudders* Sometime I wonder how I ever got enough free time in the past to get anywhere on Arm!

[Harmless]

Just gonna leave this here as your sling demonstration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzDMCVdPwnE&list=PLGnWLXjIDnpBR4xqf3FO-xFFwE-ucq4Fj&index=12

He also makes a bow and shoots it in another video. They look like very different skills.

[The Warshaper]

Just gonna leave this here as your sling demonstration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzDMCVdPwnE&list=PLGnWLXjIDnpBR4xqf3FO-xFFwE-ucq4Fj&index=12

He also makes a bow and shoots it in another video. They look like very different skills.

What a TWINK. 😜  Very good video of all things sling.

[Dunetrade55]

I dig that video, it makes David and Goliath look all that much more believable. POW, you'd be lucky not to have rock shards in your skull.

[Miradus]

Yeah, but Armageddon slings ...

[lostinspace]

Archery is fine if you're not the one getting shot.  I'd say it favors the ambusher far more than the other ambush skills do.

But I'd be happy if Backstab, Sap or Throw were given comparable boosts in lethality.

I'd be happy with a flat percentage to block arrows just from holding a shield.

I'd be happy if there was some sort of delay/precision trade off available to archery. Crossbows vs Bows anyone?

Agree completely, throw is thematically one of my favorite things, but codedly it's pretty much just shitty archery with the advantage of having a weapon in your hands if you're jumped. Also shields should block throw and archery very often at master, should block baskstab when worn on the back, and shouldn't have any bearing on sap (but helmet armor should).

As for making archery harder to level, I am alright with this if we also don't change shields to be more effective against them, no reason to add a counter and nerf a skill into the ground at the same time.

[Feco]

I don't think shields should block backstab on the back.  I think it's been long established that backstab is a "criticial strike," and not a literal stab to the back.

I guess it could block it sometimes, but I dunno.  The massive lag from backstab already makes it a pretty risky move.

[Harmless]

Yeah, but Armageddon slings...

If you were to LOOK at a 'slingshot' in armageddon, you will see it described as the type of weapon in the above video. I am unsure why the game went with the word 'slingshot' to create the confusion.

[Fathi]

Split out slings from archery and make shields more effective, and add a guard check.

That stuff I agree with. But watering down archery when it's only ever "two head shots and done" in rare scenarios when the RNG favors you with its blessings, is silly at best.

This bolded bit seems accurate in my experience.

I have a cumulative total of almost 300 days played on a few badass long-lived rangers. Maybe I just wasn't using the right equipment or my PCs' stats all sucked, but in over a decade playing this game I can only remember two times when my ranger's max archery fucked someone up that badly.

I had a ranger with great stats, great equipment, and archery skill that had to be maxed given her playtime and longevity, although I can't verify this because it was before skill levels displayed. She still regularly had to shoot gith 4-5 times to kill them, and she never managed to one-shot or two-shot  or three-shot kill a PC despite having a few opportunities over the years when she tried. I spent a long time on that PC thinking archery was underpowered because she never seemed capable of the great feats of fuck-upping that PCs around her talked about achieving. Any time I needed to kill a thing quickly I opted for melee combat because archery seemed comparatively less useful.

I really do think the randomness of archery makes it okay as-is.

Obviously in a statistical sense my anecdotes are just as meaningless as anyone else's, but I really think that if archery were that powerful I would have experienced more of that over the years. My rangers don't tend to be tavern-sitters and they had ample opportunity to mess people and animals up with archery, the skill just never seemed that consistently powerful to me.

Based on my own personal experiences I would never ever ever in a thousand years say archery was more powerful than backstab and the amount of people who seem to think it is makes me wonder if I've been playing rangers wrong this whole time. 

[Jingo]

Three arrow kills seems to be the norm from what I've witnessed. And as quickly as it takes to finish my emote.

Actually, I've played a lot of assassins. And I keep running into people who tell me back stab is mega powerful. I'm not sure if I'm right but it's got significant post-action delay issues that make it extremely dangerous to use or practice on anything but snakes and rats. And the final damage rating seems to correlate far too much with strength.

[Dunetrade55]

When I first started playing, some super-ranger geared to the teeth joined the Byn. He assured me he was going to train me, I liked the guy. Byn goes on trip to Allanak. Single arrow hits this guy square in the face and p much dead... to be fair it was a staff animated gith who shot it, so some things were probably tweaked as this gith rained death upon us as we tried to explain mount code to someone more newbish than I.

I don't think the real power in ranged combat is the insta-gank, more the versatility and applicability of poisons, some of which are just like, ok, so you're helpless in hostile territory. I don't think this should be removed but considering a shield could realisticly, and has historically, been used as a defense against archers, that it could, perhaps, stand to have its current applicability as a tactic reviewed and possibly tweaked in favor of shield use vs. ranged weaponry, although others with more anecdotal evidence than I say it's working fine, which it may very well be.