High 'level' combatant against multiple lower 'level' ones

[Vanigo]

More often than any one of them attacks, sure, but he's going to be taking, what, like six attacks for each one he makes? (At first, anyway. It'll go down once the archers start dropping, obviously.) Even if only half of them hit for... seven damage, right? he won't last all that long.
I am, of course, pulling a lot of these numbers out of my ass, so feel free to correct me.

[Rift]

ranger bow + bone arrow = 22 damage? or 21 damage? jesus.. has it been that long since i've used a bow i don't remember?
well +20% damage = 23-24 damage anyway.. thats 3-4 damage after the -20 because of armor
in other words it would take 50-66 hits to kill em, assuming he doesn't heal any shp in the meantime that is.
since he does.. the longer the battle went on, the more he would heal the less people would hit him[cause they would be dead... ect]
Hmm.. Lets say the archers have 200 hitpoints too, and lets say the melee guy can deal... 55 damage a hit [reasonable enough conicdering 200hp] and, In other words he can kill a person in 4 hits but lets say he averages hitting them 2/3 the time, or 6 attempt-hits to kill.. lets say the archers hit him 1/10 or so, 20 archers they get 6 shots off before he kills the first one.
6*1/10*20=12 hits, he attacks the 2nd one.. 6*1/10*19=11.4hits ... 3rd 10.8 hits... 4th 10.2 hits.. .5th 9.6 hits... 6th 9hits
Well after killing the 6th one hes been hit 63 times or so... So thats basically dead.
On the otherhand if they didnt all have +20%damage it would be more like 1-2damage a hit and 100-200hits to kill.
inwhich case it would be like 64+8.4+7.8+7.2+6.6+6+5.4+4.8+4.2+3.6+3+2.4+1.8+1.2+0.6=126.6
In other words he would only take 126 damage after killing every last one of em


Also.. ignore my math skills, their poor at best, and my assumptions were pretty crazy to begin with... i never quite understood the hitchance of marksmanship.. i think it gets a bit of a bonus over melee/unarmed.. so i'd guess it would be more like 1/4-1/5 of the time hitting instead of 1/10.. in which case they would kill em... but suffer heavy losses unless they were using +20% damage

[theTrav]

20 archers with 100 marksmenship could fire against someone with 200 health and full armor and 100 melee using a sword and shield.. and i bet that 200health person could kill every single one of those archers..

The arrow damage is capped out at the moment isn't it... What's the max than can get through? Have you considered the effect of kiting and stamina loss on your calculations? I don't think you'd be able to keep hitting archers at your maximum hit rate.
Does the defensive maneuver have any effect against arrow strikes?

[Vanigo]

A forum search says that ranger bow+bone arrow is 23 damage, which with full martial comes to 27.6. Twenty archers doing 7.6 damage a shot would turn him into a pincushion.

[provo]

i know that alot of experienced players like being kick ass, and being able to kill 20 newbie archers.

but for game balance, that leans more towards operating in groups does anyone think that changing the system to allow weaker grouped players have a chance over stronger players would produce a more fun and enriching game?

The thing that puts me off MMORPG's are high school kids who spend every waking moment on the game, gaining crazy levels of power and then being able to fuck over everthing, meaning no one, not even in groups can stop them.

Or maybe at least a group of medium players could beat a signle or 2 good players. Im not too sure how the stats balance out.

[niltrias]

Gunnar Hamundarson?