The imbalance of ranged weapons in infinity engine games

[forgottenlor]

 

There's no rule saying that every character skill in an RPG needs to have the same relative power at low and high levels.

 

And there's no rule saying that every weapon needs to be (equally) optimized for raw damage-over-time.

 

In fact, not designing the game using such rigid "equality" rules makes the game more interesting, by giving the players an incentive to diversify their character skills, take characters that complement each other into the party, and use the same characters differently at different levels.

 

Since you can have 6 party members, each of whom can gain proficiency in multiple weapons in addition to many other class-specific combat skills, this really shouldn't pose a problem.

 

 

There is no rule saying that every weapon/character type needs to be equal in damage over time, or preventing different characters from being powerful at different times over a game.  However, understanding these things is something that usually only someone well versed in the rules of the game, or someone who has made a playthrough will realize. I suppose its like mages in the old D&D rules, who were wimps at level 1, and the best class at high levels because their magic became extremely powerful. The question is if this variable power developement is desireable. I personally prefer more balance over time, because it allows for fewer catastrophical party builds, but to each his own.

Edited September 6, 2013 by forgottenlor

[J. Trudel]

 

 

now if we take into account parrying and such then the rate that an archer will be able to deliver armour penetrating shots to an armoured opponent charging them from say 30 yards should be about 2-3, while the same amount of time fighting in melee if both are at equal skill will be 1 at most.

 

 

 

A good 40 yard dash is around 5 seconds, so its safe to say a 30 yard dash will be around 4 seconds. It makes a lot of arrows in 4 seconds, I know some masters archers may manage that with 30 pounds bows. But in 4 seconds I think that most good archers with a strong bow would manage only one good shot. 

 

It think it's safer to say that a ranged weapon work as good at range as a melee weapon work in close quarters. 

[Inarius]

 

 

 

now if we take into account parrying and such then the rate that an archer will be able to deliver armour penetrating shots to an armoured opponent charging them from say 30 yards should be about 2-3, while the same amount of time fighting in melee if both are at equal skill will be 1 at most.

 

 

 

A good 40 yard dash is around 5 seconds, so its safe to say a 30 yard dash will be around 4 seconds. It makes a lot of arrows in 4 seconds, I know some masters archers may manage that with 30 pounds bows. But in 4 seconds I think that most good archers with a strong bow would manage only one good shot. 

 

It think it's safer to say that a ranged weapon work as good at range as a melee weapon work in close quarters. 

 

Id agree about 1 good shot in 4 seconds, i cant remember where but i seem to remember reading about 2-4 seconds per shot using a bow was common. Also you do have to consider something like a longbow had a minimum 90 pound draw, but at the same time these are people who trained often to use the things so they were conditioned quite well to their use so an arrow every 2-4 seconds using one of those isn't too far out there. 

That being said I'm not for making weapons compare to their real life counterparts too closely. I like that greatswords are swing weapons not primarily thrusting ones for instance and my only real issue with bows in baldurs gate 2 was how immunities cropped up in droves towards the late game. There were only so many +3 and +4 arrows in the game so if you had more than 1 archer in your group you tended to run out of those very very quickly. It wouldn't be as much of a problem if simply being able to deal damage to an opponent with immunites wasn't tied to the +x bonus of the arrow. Personally I would've preferred if the bow bonus was damage and to hit and different arrows gave no bonus damage but instead bonus effects like stunning, poisoning, elemental damage types (ie fire, ice, etc) or bleeding effects.

Edited September 7, 2013 by Inarius

[Sezneg]

This entire thread makes me curious as to firearms in PE, and how they will fit into the balance curve; so much of the combat mechanics seem built around avoiding spiky unreliable damage... then they throw in the hand cannon.

[TrashMan]

Personally, I'd want to see greatsword USED as greatswords. Slashing AND thrusting. Half-swording.

 

Alos, I don't wanto t see arrows that are magicly super-effective against armor for "balance". Hell no.

[jamoecw]

 

 

 

now if we take into account parrying and such then the rate that an archer will be able to deliver armour penetrating shots to an armoured opponent charging them from say 30 yards should be about 2-3, while the same amount of time fighting in melee if both are at equal skill will be 1 at most.

 

 

 

A good 40 yard dash is around 5 seconds, so its safe to say a 30 yard dash will be around 4 seconds. It makes a lot of arrows in 4 seconds, I know some masters archers may manage that with 30 pounds bows. But in 4 seconds I think that most good archers with a strong bow would manage only one good shot. 

 

It think it's safer to say that a ranged weapon work as good at range as a melee weapon work in close quarters. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI

 

as for masters?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1KC1Os-_NE

 

though if we assumed the same level of proficiency, we would have to really curb their ability to do other things in order to make it balanced with melee.

[J. Trudel]

 

 

 

 

now if we take into account parrying and such then the rate that an archer will be able to deliver armour penetrating shots to an armoured opponent charging them from say 30 yards should be about 2-3, while the same amount of time fighting in melee if both are at equal skill will be 1 at most.

 

 

 

A good 40 yard dash is around 5 seconds, so its safe to say a 30 yard dash will be around 4 seconds. It makes a lot of arrows in 4 seconds, I know some masters archers may manage that with 30 pounds bows. But in 4 seconds I think that most good archers with a strong bow would manage only one good shot. 

 

It think it's safer to say that a ranged weapon work as good at range as a melee weapon work in close quarters. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI

 

as for masters?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1KC1Os-_NE

 

though if we assumed the same level of proficiency, we would have to really curb their ability to do other things in order to make it balanced with melee.

 

 

Clearly bows at 90 pounds. Com on there no way you would do anything to an armored guy. And this is mostly a very close range bow, I'd say by the video below that it's utterly inefective beyond 30 yards. You may get one shot at 10 yard before the guy is one you and 2 shots if hes at 20 yards So I do think it may still be equal to a melee weapon. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SycS4QSH9Ek

 

If you look carefuly, the drop for 10 yards is really big. 

Edited September 10, 2013 by J. Trudel

[jamoecw]

 

 

 

 

 

now if we take into account parrying and such then the rate that an archer will be able to deliver armour penetrating shots to an armoured opponent charging them from say 30 yards should be about 2-3, while the same amount of time fighting in melee if both are at equal skill will be 1 at most.

 

 

 

A good 40 yard dash is around 5 seconds, so its safe to say a 30 yard dash will be around 4 seconds. It makes a lot of arrows in 4 seconds, I know some masters archers may manage that with 30 pounds bows. But in 4 seconds I think that most good archers with a strong bow would manage only one good shot. 

 

It think it's safer to say that a ranged weapon work as good at range as a melee weapon work in close quarters. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1o9RGnujlkI

 

as for masters?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1KC1Os-_NE

 

though if we assumed the same level of proficiency, we would have to really curb their ability to do other things in order to make it balanced with melee.

 

 

Clearly bows at 90 pounds. Com on there no way you would do anything to an armored guy. And this is mostly a very close range bow, I'd say by the video below that it's utterly inefective beyond 30 yards. You may get one shot at 10 yard before the guy is one you and 2 shots if hes at 20 yards So I do think it may still be equal to a melee weapon. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SycS4QSH9Ek

 

If you look carefuly, the drop for 10 yards is really big. 

 

that isn't drop, he's aiming down.  besides aren't we talking about shooting fast at 30 yards?  so a 90# bow at haf draw shoots well enough for 30 yards, a 180# bow shoots slower but can shoot from further away unless you are using quarter draw to shoot fast at close range.

 

now keep in mind it is compared to 2 hander:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWYT5-8zyT4

most hits aren't too forceful, so not a lot of armour penetration there either.

[Rsinthis]

I agree in that arrow damage never really scaled as a character grew more powerful except for attack speed for the most part. Gj OP

[Quetzalcoatl]

Implementing an accuracy penalty for attacking a target while it's moving or attacking from too far a distance could be a way to balance things out. Although that may devolve in kiting-esque shenanigans.

[Cubiq]

I'm not sure what your point is. I don't have any problem with finding something useful at low levels, and less useful at high levels.

 

It's not as if it's illogical, even. Bows store energy to a fixed value that is then released to do damage. Ditto crossbows. Assuming your character can exert more force than the available materials can store - which makes sense given they can punch dragons to death - then the bow is going to seem correspondingly weaker.

 

Well that's not really true.

Just like a melee weapon needs to be harder for the characters with high strength not to shatter it, so too can you have sturdier and stiffer bows that requre more strength to load and can whithstand the greater bending strains to unload a more powerful shot.

Since we know: greater the action, greater the opposite reaction.

 

And I think with high dex characters you can just make them fire multiple arrows at once to balance the dps.

(but there wont be str/dex stats in the game from what i just read)

[Lephys]

And I think with high dex characters you can just make them fire multiple arrows at once to balance the dps.

(but there wont be str/dex stats in the game from what i just read)

At what point does it become forced, though? I mean, if you're going to give them the means of firing multiple arrows at once, accurately enough to not completely nullify the effectiveness of arrows, then why not simply grant that person the ability to throw arrows and skip the bow altogether? Or, better yet, generate arrows and hurl them at people magically? I mean, at that point, it's just a flavor. "Well, this bow and these arrows are just as feasible as those awesome magical spells you've got there, but only because we completely abandoned any integrity of the actual usage and effectiveness of a bow and arrow." At that point, it's almost just a magic spell with a bow-and-arrow-firing animation tied to it.

 

Granted, I'm all for making sure bows, in general, can compete against other similar standard attacks, and giving people special abilities specific to bows/arrows, even magical abilities and such. But, there's no need to just force a bow to be as effective as something else if it simply isn't, is all I'm getting at.

[neo6874]

Reading through this post (again), it sounds like you're kind of looking for a Dungeon Siege style of bows -- where you were required to have a certain STR/DEX to actually use.  Although, in DS I recall that your attributes changed as you did things (so using heavy weapons got you str, bows dex, and various spells their various schools).

 

 

Granted, if this follows in the footsteps of most D&D-esque IE games, you're not going to be getting DEX/STR(/whatever) very often, so they'd need to be very clear about that from the start (or limit the "off attribute" in some way so that your ranger doesn't get gimped, because you have only 15 STR, and won't be able to get another point for 3 more levels ... at which time, the 16STR bows will be "too weak").