Prelude: World 16

[certace]

tfw we're about to have another salt world where hunger doesn't exist for the top 1% (I pray that's not the case but i know it's copium), and ppl are yapping about archery even though they don't pvp

The Dog of Alcibiades... you try to divert attention from the arches by talking about salt, the developer already knows that salt causes absurd wars and that the average player will never get salt because of the factions, if he decided to go ahead it is either because he has a plan or simply because he does not care about wars, so we must fight for what little that we have left... THE ARCHES

Although I saw a very interesting comment there about salt being a high-level forageable item on beaches, someone suggested that that would only make the foraging bots exploit, but really between there being a lot of bots looking for salt and average players having chance of finding salt by chance, or for salt to be completely dominated by factions and never seen by average players, I think it's a good idea to make it a forageable.

[certace]

It isn't cool it's just a stupid reason for nerfing archery as it is a single extremely rare benefit. Should somebody not know about it, and die to it, that would suck.

I'm certainly not saying it's a bad thing to be able to defend your base with some measure of safety against people that are likely to be far stronger than you, just that I do think the visitor gate thing seems to be unintended. Maybe walls need some type of embrasure/loophole/slit like on battlement wall that could be fired through, but players on the outside could also (attempt to) fire through it. Or an archery tower, but someone in the tower should be susceptible to being shot themselves. I don't think too many players would be opposed to such implementations so long as there is some type of counter available.

I don't see much sense in the enemy trying to attack you through your own embrasure/loophole/slit, but I would see logic that they are the weakest parts of the wall/palisade

[Kaios]

I don't see much sense in the enemy trying to attack you through your own embrasure/loophole/slit, but I would see logic that they are the weakest parts of the wall/palisade

Suggestions like that are mainly based on the complaints players have with regard to current archery already, I guarantee if someone is taking pot shots at them from inside of a wall they will be annoyed that they can't hit them back in some way. Weaker walls is a great idea though it makes sense.

[Okocim]

I don't see much sense in the enemy trying to attack you through your own embrasure/loophole/slit, but I would see logic that they are the weakest parts of the wall/palisade

Suggestions like that are mainly based on the complaints players have with regard to current archery already, I guarantee if someone is taking pot shots at them from inside of a wall they will be annoyed that they can't hit them back in some way. Weaker walls is a great idea though it makes sense.

wdym, you can shoot trough visitor gates both ways, and if you don't want to be shot at just block the line of sight from the visitor gate lol. Ah right... You can't cleave trough visitor gate.

[h3r0]

I don't see much sense in the enemy trying to attack you through your own embrasure/loophole/slit, but I would see logic that they are the weakest parts of the wall/palisade

Suggestions like that are mainly based on the complaints players have with regard to current archery already, I guarantee if someone is taking pot shots at them from inside of a wall they will be annoyed that they can't hit them back in some way. Weaker walls is a great idea though it makes sense.

Could just make pot shots sufficiently weak when firing from them, or from within the palisade.

[Kaios]

wdym, you can shoot trough visitor gates both ways, and if you don't want to be shot at just block the line of sight from the visitor gate lol. Ah right... You can't cleave trough visitor gate.

I'm saying that in relation to firing at someone behind a wall through other means, such as an archery tower or upon a battlement wall. Maybe you quoted the wrong post though because I did mention that too, it's just I think that's probably a bug. You aren't allowed to engage in combat and walk through a visitor gate, no one should be allowed to fire through them from either side if that's the case. You're right, the main complaints in that regard are because a melee fighter can't do anything about it.

It used to be that anyone could fire over walls, from the outside and the inside. That was not great.

[h3r0]

wdym, you can shoot trough visitor gates both ways, and if you don't want to be shot at just block the line of sight from the visitor gate lol. Ah right... You can't cleave trough visitor gate.

I'm saying that in relation to firing at someone behind a wall through other means, such as an archery tower or upon a battlement wall. Maybe you quoted the wrong post though because I did mention that too, it's just I think that's probably a bug. You aren't allowed to engage in combat and walk through a visitor gate, no one should be allowed to fire through them from either side if that's the case. You're right, the main complaints in that regard are because a melee fighter can't do anything about it.

It used to be that anyone could fire over walls, from the outside and the inside. That was not great.

It's definitely a bug and makes no sense but melee fighters complaining is stupid, if they already know about it, because then they just wouldn't go up to the visitor gate. Imagine their horror when archery is actually allowed from palisades like we are suggesting.

Who would've thought that you could get shot in a game that features arrows, and not be able to teleport through a wall for your revenge cleave.
Who wouldn't have thought that all walls extend invisibly, into the sky, blocking all projectiles.

[certace]

wdym, you can shoot trough visitor gates both ways, and if you don't want to be shot at just block the line of sight from the visitor gate lol. Ah right... You can't cleave trough visitor gate.

I'm saying that in relation to firing at someone behind a wall through other means, such as an archery tower or upon a battlement wall. Maybe you quoted the wrong post though because I did mention that too, it's just I think that's probably a bug. You aren't allowed to engage in combat and walk through a visitor gate, no one should be allowed to fire through them from either side if that's the case. You're right, the main complaints in that regard are because a melee fighter can't do anything about it.

It used to be that anyone could fire over walls, from the outside and the inside. That was not great.

I don't understand, if I am the melee attacker and you are the bow defender, and there is a visitor's gate that defends you, clearly I am the attacker, then why would it be wrong for the defender to have an advantage in his own base? ? And what prevents me, as a free melee attacker, from moving freely from the visitor's door? I mean, what's the point in the first place for a hand-to-hand fighter to go to a visitors' door if he couldn't attack anyway?

[h3r0]

wdym, you can shoot trough visitor gates both ways, and if you don't want to be shot at just block the line of sight from the visitor gate lol. Ah right... You can't cleave trough visitor gate.

I'm saying that in relation to firing at someone behind a wall through other means, such as an archery tower or upon a battlement wall. Maybe you quoted the wrong post though because I did mention that too, it's just I think that's probably a bug. You aren't allowed to engage in combat and walk through a visitor gate, no one should be allowed to fire through them from either side if that's the case. You're right, the main complaints in that regard are because a melee fighter can't do anything about it.

It used to be that anyone could fire over walls, from the outside and the inside. That was not great.

I don't understand, if I am the melee attacker and you are the bow defender, and there is a visitor's gate that defends you, clearly I am the attacker, then why would it be wrong for the defender to have an advantage in his own base? ? And what prevents me, as a free melee attacker, from moving freely from the visitor's door? I mean, what's the point in the first place for a hand-to-hand fighter to go to a visitors' door if he couldn't attack anyway?

Sorry to keep butting in. But it's not wrong to use a a defender. It's a bug, I think, but it almost does make sense, and it almost seems like a real mechanic. It certainly does not make a melee fighters life more difficult. Of all the things to complain about. I thought we were talking about nerfing/buffing archery. They literally just want to nuke archery from existence for some reason, because somebody hurt them once in their life, or shot them through a palisade.

[Okocim]

I don't understand, if I am the melee attacker and you are the bow defender, and there is a visitor's gate that defends you, clearly I am the attacker, then why would it be wrong for the defender to have an advantage in his own base? ? And what prevents me, as a free melee attacker, from moving freely from the visitor's door? I mean, what's the point in the first place for a hand-to-hand fighter to go to a visitors' door if he couldn't attack anyway?

The point is to have something to complain about on forums and be able to point it out as reason for why archery needs another nerf.