A look at Ranged Combat (Warning Lots of Math)

[DatOneGuy]

Yeah, I never bothered to look at the math but that more or less confirmed my hunch that range combat is useless as a primary combat form. I still agree with something someone mentioned at one point though. In group combat there will be more weakly armored people that a ranger sitting in the back can mess with. I'd view them more as a support combat role than anything. Maybe something like 1/5 to 1/10 of your combat force sport 200MM for that purpose?

Having a group of archers is a great thing, archers can also go UA as their cap is at 300, they'll just never be your 'best UA', but they can have `enough` eventually to be a match to a regular person.

[novaalpha]

Funny how this thread operates on an assumption that people who face each other would have equal (or even similar) equipment Q, and there will be equal number of them.

Please, go on

[Sarchi]

Funny how this thread operates on an assumption that people who face each other would have equal (or even similar) equipment Q, and there will be equal number of them.

Please, go on

This.

Even though it's easier for people to raise stats (and this consequently levels the playing field somewhat because even 'nobodies' can get decent combat stats) there are still a hell of a lot of weaker players with weaker armor. So a ranger with a good bow, good arrows, and good rangering stats can/should still easily fuck up someone with the first shot. Just hide behind their house outside their wall and down that son of a bitch.

I still think the game will maintain a ratio where the tougher players are a small minority compared to the weaker majority. This perhaps gives rangers a deadly edge over the average hearthling, although it'll be interesting to see what happens with archery in terms of war between major factions. I have a feeling that it's going to be basically useless in that scenario unless you apply it in a creative way.

[DatOneGuy]

Well in W3 waiting until later to toss out a lot of the reasons why things were good meant other people were behind, sadly now that they know in W5 there are probably 1-2 silent powers out there who could give the top cities a run for their money.

[Windforce]

Eventually, given a few months, most of your average villages will be able to make Q50+ steel plate with your top end villages pushing out Q100+.

Just look at world 3.

Before they nerfed the dmg of RBows, they were able to easily pierce tru the deflect/soak of Q90+ steel plates. After the RBow dmg nerf, it wasnt even piercing tru the deflect/soak of a good steel plate or 130+ bronze plates. (This is considering all armor parts inc gauntlets, pants and varp)

What does this mean in a end-game combat situation?

In a 1 VS 1 fight, your target would either run, or more likely start closing the distact to you and hacking you before you can get your 2nd shot off forcing you to go into UA or Melee mode.

In a 2(You + Fighter) VS 1 fight, your target will more likely be dead before you can even break his armor. That, or your partner will be dead then he'll come and get you (same as above).

[novaalpha]

In a 1 VS 1 fight, your target would either run, or more likely start closing the distact to you and hacking you before you can get your 2nd shot off forcing you to go into UA or Melee mode.

In a 2(You + Fighter) VS 1 fight, your target will more likely be dead before you can even break his armor. That, or your partner will be dead then he'll come and get you (same as above).

Morale: never fight unless you have 4vs1.

[cloakblade]

Funny how this thread operates on an assumption that people who face each other would have equal (or even similar) equipment Q, and there will be equal number of them.

Please, go on

We have to otherwise the whole argument becomes silly. Basically if it ties with the damage it becomes worth it simply because we are assuming equal footing.

[DatOneGuy]

Well, you would also have to take into account that somewhere between 4-6 people at max can be attacking surrounding one person UA/MM at a time, there's also the 2v2 or 5v5 where you see that a certain Marksman:UA ratio wins.

[Projeear]

This thread amused me.



My thanks, plebian.

[Windforce]

Well, you would also have to take into account that somewhere between 4-6 people at max can be attacking surrounding one person UA/MM at a time, there's also the 2v2 or 5v5 where you see that a certain Marksman:UA ratio wins.

May not be the best ranger to say this but...

I'm just saying my experience from world 3 end fight at nople. Even with a Q163~ RBow with Q175+ arrows, I only actually manage to get pass the AC of 3 of the 15 ppl at nople and even then I had to shoot at least two times to KO him.

After about a minuet of none of my shots getting pass any of the other guy's AC so I just swarped out my sword and stab killed 4 more guys (some were assist kills).

Well I dont say RBow is totally useless end-game, its still good for taking out averagely armored targerts, but against a heavily armored guy, you are not going to have much luck taking him out before some UA/Melee guy kills him.