Change To Archery

[Is Friday]

Cover exists in the wilderness. Rocks, trees, ditches, bodies, dunes, etc.

[Jihelu]

Cover exists in the wilderness. Rocks, trees, ditches, bodies, dunes, etc.

Cover also exists in: Laying the fuck down and praying the arrows don't hit you. Which is a solid gamble most of the time.

Though I don't there is a coded advantage to laying down to avoid arrows. If anything you probably get hit more.

[lostinspace]

If you have someone subdued, you should be able to hold them in front of you to stop arrows as well. Might make archers think twice if you got their buddy in front of you.

[Bogre]

Primitive material long range shooting

This seems informative, obviously anecdotal as just one guy shooting a recurve bow with primitive materials. He says, similar to Cal, 30-45 yards is kind of the expected range. And he's trying to hit things at 100 yards with a pretty high arc up - definitely doable, but I don't think you could expect pinpoint accuracy against a moving target. Time to target is fast but seems like 1-2 seconds, which would be feasible for a chance at instinctual ducking behind a shield or shifting to take a protective quarrel to the throat - considering that the reaction time is not just the flight time but the aiming, etc, if that person is visible.

We don't necessarily need to have code reflect reality perfectly, but I think modulating the ability to plunk 5 arrows pinpoint into a single PC over at long ranges over like, 12 seconds would be beneficial, especially if they are surrounded by alert, shield-bearing guards.

[Namino]

Cover exists in the wilderness. Rocks, trees, ditches, bodies, dunes, etc.

Cover also exists in: Laying the fuck down and praying the arrows don't hit you. Which is a solid gamble most of the time.

Though I don't there is a coded advantage to laying down to avoid arrows. If anything you probably get hit more.

Laying down gives you an enormous bonus to avoid ranged attacks. You've likely noticed it yourself even if it didn't register. You shoot a skeet six times and then suddenly start missing your arrows, looking north, and realize the sixth hit knocked him out.

The reason you started missing is because he is now laying down, being unconscious.

[kahuna]

Cover exists in the wilderness. Rocks, trees, ditches, bodies, dunes, etc.

This would require a 'cover' command I think and could check the room for room_flags that would provide such. I don't see there being any cover in a flat desert, salt flats, etc. many areas are flat and barren in zalanthas right? Of course the grey forest would have plenty of cover.

[kahuna]

I think my take away from this thread is the desire to have more strategic combat when dealing with large battles.

[cal]

Right...also, actual IG ranges do not matter as far as, Oh this is 100 feet and that is 1000 feet...what matters is the equivalent. It does not matter that a room away is really 600 yards...because IRL that is an impossible shot...but IG it is not and in fact you can hit your target pretty much every time, So it is the same as optimum RL range 12-30 yards...I am not sure if it is possible to make that more clear.

By Brokkr's comments you should be able to lob arrows at ranges of 3-5 rooms...after all, that is realistic during war. But since we cannot we have to revert back to what I already posted.

Also, as to the OP...I actually would be fine with that...BUT since you want that realism...Then hits need to do FAR more damage. After all, one can kill any land animal in north America with a single arrow/bolt.

Also to Bogre's video. Another reason hunters IRL generally do not like to take shots past around 30 yards is the time to impact...at say 80 yards the sound arrives almost a full second before the arrow, giving the deer LOTS of time to react and changing a fatal shot into a wound, flesh wound or miss.

[Is Friday]

OP doesn't want realism. OP wants archery to have a counter-play against it instead of the one-way street it currently rolls down.

source: I'm the OP.

[PriestlySiren]

Put someone in the center of four people, guarding them. They should be harder to hit. Twelve people, even harder. More than that, it should be super hard. My biggest complaint about the archery code is archery code twinks. If I were an archer sniping someone. I'm watching, I see people guarding them left and right? I'll switch my targets. Because ultimately where code fails, the players should be better.

If someone acts like Stinker McCrazyTwink, however, I'm not going to hesitate in using code against them.

[cal]

I have no issue with being able to defend people against archery. In fact, I think I would be pro protect dude with your body and shield.

I think it would even be rather easy to code...3 people guarding dude, highest guard skill draws the most arrows, after that to hit depends on shield skill, parry skill and defense. I am down with that.

Proposal: Shooting at an NPC or PC who is engaged in melee should give a 50/50 chance to hit the other person they're engaged with, or the ground. Maybe 33% target, 33% opponent, 33% ground. PCs who are able to leave the coded room and arrow spam people engaged in melee isn't a fun feature.

Discuss.

I am against that 100%. It is totally and completely unrealistic and shows that the person suggesting it has no clue to marksmanship be it archery or otherwise.

[Namino]

I have no issue with being able to defend people against archery. In fact, I think I would be pro protect dude with your body and shield.

I think it would even be rather easy to code...3 people guarding dude, highest guard skill draws the most arrows, after that to hit depends on shield skill, parry skill and defense. I am down with that.

Proposal: Shooting at an NPC or PC who is engaged in melee should give a 50/50 chance to hit the other person they're engaged with, or the ground. Maybe 33% target, 33% opponent, 33% ground. PCs who are able to leave the coded room and arrow spam people engaged in melee isn't a fun feature.

Discuss.

I am against that 100%. It is totally and completely unrealistic and shows that the person suggesting it has no clue to marksmanship be it archery or otherwise.

You're playing a game where people throw fireballs and kill building sized lizards with bone swordz. This isn't about realism. This is about balance.

The point of this thread is that archery, an already very strong (probably strongest) mundane skill, becomes supremely unmanageable in certain scenarios -- such as when people are firing into a melee from the next room over. People firing at range with archery without a melee are already incredibly difficult to handle, so much so that kite-archery has become the staple meta in Armageddon. When you further complicate it by locking your targets into position by conscripting them into a brawl before your archer begins to spam fire arrows from the next room, it becomes ever more unbalanced.

That being said the staff have explicitly stated balance isn't a primary objective of the current staffing group. That armageddon is not meant to be balanced. So perhaps this all is moot.

[MeTekillot]

if it's not supposed to be balanced then why do mundane extended subguilds cost 2 karma

[najdorf]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBxdTkddHaE

Nice test if you want to consider improving effects of armor vs archery. There are no metal breastplates, but also no metal arrowheads, so could be comparable.

Summary: even the best arrow shot from most powerful bow could not penetrate through this french armor.

[Hauwke]

Also, keep in mind.

Most of these armors made of shell or chitin are thicker than that thin steel plate, probably improving arrow stoppage by shear volume of material.

[cal]

Najdorf, That is against steel and not in the least bit compareable. There are plenty of videos online of arrows/bolts verses other types of armor as well. Arrows defeat nearly all of them with ease, Some of them are even modern materials and designs. And since metal, iron. steel actually do exist in game...one must assume like properties.

Namino, What I posted was about balance. I contend that Archery is NOT over powered, in fact, it is drastically UNDER powered IE balanced for current methods. If more methods of defense are added then the effectiveness of archery would need be increased.

[Riev]

3 pages, and its less about "balance" or "realism" and seems to be "I like archery don't touch it" and "Archery is stupid can we work on it".

For what its worth, I think Namino hit the nail on the head. Armageddon's current C-level officers are not interested in 'balancing' the game, or making it more realistic. It has been the current administration's goal to offer more player interaction with less direct staff involvement. They aren't likely to care that archery is imbalanced, as killing a PC is player interaction that doesn't require staff input.

The OP was strictly about "Should there be a negative to firing into a melee where 2 or more people are moving in likely erratic patterns?

[Heade]

Should there be a negative to firing into a melee where 2 or more people are moving in likely erratic patterns?

Melee combat isn't really that erratic. If it is, it's generally over quickly. If you watch 2 people fighting at that range, they generally will mirror each other's footwork in order to protect themselves and stay at an optimal range. So if 1 combatant circles left, the other also circles left as to stay on the opposite side of the "circle" to him.

This phenomena is likely why sport fencing occurs on a piste(or narrow track), as to limit side to side movement, force competitors to focus on parries rather than dodges, and keep action going since circling has a tendency to make melee combat a bit dull.

[Riev]

Should there be a negative to firing into a melee where 2 or more people are moving in likely erratic patterns?

Melee combat isn't really that erratic. If it is, it's generally over quickly. If you watch 2 people fighting at that range, they generally will mirror each other's footwork in order to protect themselves and stay at an optimal range. So if 1 combatant circles left, the other also circles left as to stay on the opposite side of the "circle" to him.

This phenomena is likely why sport fencing occurs on a piste(or narrow track), as to limit side to side movement, force competitors to focus on parries rather than dodges, and keep action going since circling has a tendency to make melee combat a bit dull.

Cool, but you are nevertheless trying to hit a target moving in a non-predictable pattern from a distance.

I'm not a marksman, but I'd think its hard to fire a pistol at someone moving (or serpentining). I don't think there's a call for "minimum 50% miss rate", but there are MELEE skills that have a miss-chance when the target is engaged in combat.

Simply wondering if there should be something similar for ranged combat as well. Not "I can shoot a dime from a mile away", this is "If two people are fighting, I can't even backstab one of them easily, so why can the sniper do it better?"

[Harmless]

Code Select Expand



mercy archery

You will now hold shots that hurt anyone but your target in a melee situation.

mercy archery

You will take a shot at your target even if it means possibly harming someone else.



Maybe a function that can set our preference for risk taking in archery. If we are being merciful about such shots then the character will aim off to the side that hopefully won't strike anyone but their target -- being conservative with what kinds of shots they aim for -- versus just going for the mark with a higher chance to hit but also a higher chance of accidentally getting someone besides the target they are in melee with.

[AdamBlue]

Softer surfaces that 'slow' projectiles tend to be more effective as armor than rigid when it comes to arrows.
For example, braided, brine-soaked cotton was so effective against arrows and swords when the Spanish came to the New World, that they adopted the design from the Aztecs. They could even stop obsidian swords from getting through by being a thick material enough that the edge couldn't reach the flesh, and the arrows would only poke oh-so-slightly into the armor, resulting in wounds so small that they were practically glancing, where they would penetrate through metal at the same distance. Check out 'Ichcahuipilli', it was even on the Deadliest Warrior.

[JohnMichaelHenry]

Maybe something as simple as a longer time delay would suffice? Taking more time to aim when the person is engaged sort of thing.

[gotdamnmiracle]

Is there currently a way to shoot a thing inside of an object?

Like

l wagon
You see a gith in the wagon.
shoot gith wagon
you fire your boxing-glove tipped arrow into the wagon!
You hit the gith in the face with your boxing-glove tipped arrow!!

I can't figure out how the syntax to shoot someone inside of an object works whereas shooting out of an object works just fine. Any help? Can we even do that?

[kahuna]

Shoot                                                         (Ranged Combat)

   This command is the one by which the archery, sling use, blowgun use, and crossbow use skills are utilized and represents taking aim and firing at a target with any of the missile weapons in Zalanthas: slings, bows, blowguns, or crossbows.

Syntax:
   shoot <target> <direction>
shoot <target> out
shoot <target> <wagon item>
shoot <distance> <direction>

Example:
   > shoot Halaster east
> shoot gith north
> shoot elf 2.wagon
> shoot kank out
> shoot far west

[gotdamnmiracle]

Shoot                                                         (Ranged Combat)

   This command is the one by which the archery, sling use, blowgun use, and crossbow use skills are utilized and represents taking aim and firing at a target with any of the missile weapons in Zalanthas: slings, bows, blowguns, or crossbows.

Syntax:
   shoot <target> <direction>
shoot <target> out
shoot <target> <wagon item>
shoot <distance> <direction>

Example:
   > shoot Halaster east
> shoot gith north
> shoot elf 2.wagon
> shoot kank out
> shoot far west

Apologies. Wagon was a bad example. Does this work for any object. Such as a stand of pymlithe trees or something? Are all these enterable objects "wagon items"?