Does the archery code need tweaked?

[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.