Why does archer have the third strongest armor, when it's a ranged class?

No, it won't get nerfed because this game is garbage.

I'm done arguing with what may as well essentially be a rock. Go ahead and claim a hollow, useless, meaningless victory, boom, you deserve it.

 

I'll be honest with you, if you can't kill 95% of ninjas, you should start training some pvp.

 

A lot of people want to remove archers instakill. Let's all be honest for a sec. If archer didn't have instakill, would anybody use it?

Unless that ninja is someone like brandino

 

He's like one of the 0.01% of ninjas though.

 

Ninjas im talking about are Sibs, Ebola, and Shawndaddy. Sibs specifically cause he hunts me down.

Exactly, people want to nerf a balanced class just because they cant handle being sniped by it constantly. Guess what people, thats its job, deal with it.

Not worthless to me , this game isnt garbage baws, you are just mad you cant find any reasonable reason archer needs to be nerfed. You and several other people are just upset you die to archer a ton. boo hoo

 

Boomdrone, honestly, this is my final post on this topic so please actually read it.

I DON'T PLAY ANYMORE. I couldn't care any less about the state of the game, so I couldn't possibly be angry about dying to archers. In fact, I WAS THE ARCHER. I never gave a sh*t about whether or not another archer killed me, in fact I've said it TWICE now that I viewed death as a convenient way to restock and move. Not only that, I was the one playing archer and arguing against it. So is Risa. We weren't the ones getting killed, we were doing the killing.

Not only that, I and many others pointed out, FROM EXPERIENCE AS ARCHERS, exactly why archer is too powerful for the class. Whenever you would make a point about why archer is 'balanced', we POLITELY argued why your points were wrong. I can only assume we won those arguments, because you have resorted to pidgeon chess arguments and unsubstantiated claims of victory while making such statements like "you're just mad you died a lot", which show that you're clearly not even reading any of my points, and instead are so set on the fact that you cannot possibly be wrong that you're making yourself look like an absolute idiot just to make a point.

I'm beginning to understand why people dislike you, boomdrone. It's not because it's unjustified hate, it's not because you're 'better' than them, and it's certainly not because you are good at debates. It's because you're so set on the fact that you are never wrong, and you will alienate and insult anyone who points out that, you know, maybe you're not perfect.

Before I leave this post to rot, boomdrone, I want you to do something. I want you to read my posts, and the posts of everyone else here who's arguing against you, and I want you to legitimately think about what we're saying. Then, I want you to come up with proper counterarguments to all of our points, ones that you can back up with multiple sources (such as accounts from other veteran players, raw numbers, etc) about why our arguments are incorrect. If you can do that, and have an actual discussion about this that doesn't involve you just thinking we're mad about dying, which I stress we're NOT, nor involves an answer like 'suck it up it's not changing', then we will continue.

Otherwise, I will have lost all respect for you, boomdrone. I will not hate you. I simply will regard anything you have to say as worthless input from a fool who will not be objective about his position. It's that easy.

Good damn luck.

 

to be honest he and plenty of other people have given very valid reasons why archer needs a nerf. Frankly the only reason I'm not arguing with you right now is the fact you can't understand anyone else's opinion but your own unfounded one. This response was unnecessarily rude, and frankly if you were willing to look at it from everyone else's perspective you see your own opinion doesn't have a factual basis. If you have properly reasonable claims and counterarguments please say them now, because right now the whole basis of your argument is unfounded

 

I understand clearly that these people are going to make any excuse they can to get a balanced class nerfed. Soon, maybe heavy will get a nerf for being too tanky, or dwarf. I may be a "interesting" person to say it lightly, but I do know that if archer gets nerfed itll open a can of worms that shouldnt be opened.

 

Please stop flaming at eachother and continue to discuss the original topic. Any further off topic discussion will be removed. Thank you.

 

Please lock the topic, the topic has been discussed, and thats it.

 

it's not been discussed though. points have been put forward and you've completely ignored them all and then claimed you have won. that's not discussion

 

Armor? Dose it really matter? I mean 25% of the classes are insta-kill, and one of them is Archer. Which, is probabe the class that kills Archer the most.

 

You're right, might as well remove armor from necro, heavy, soldier, and archer then since 25% of the classes are insta-kill and it doesn't really matter.

 

Edit: Never mind.

 

I honestly love how everyone wants archer nerfed just because it has instakill, soon all sorts of crap will get nerfed for bad reasons.

 

NEVER FEAR - I SHALL TAKE UP THE GAUNTLET! (you said you wanted to have a real argument with me
@BAWSS5 so you're about to get your wish )

Anyways... *ahem*

In the following I shall present an argument that completely and utterly refutes the arguments that were previously put forward before this thread turned into a glorified flame war:

First off, there is a fallacy that underlines every single argument for reworking Archer in this post and that is the logic that since Archer has an instant kill and can potentially get lots of kills it must be unbalanced! If the fallacy is not immediately obvious let me put it in another context. Take Heavy for example, it is widely agreed amongst those of us in the CTF forum that Heavy is one of the most balanced classes in the game, on the whole. However, it is entirely possible, and not actually that difficult to get a ton of kills on Blackout, or most any map, with Heavy. Furthermore, Heavies take a lot of hits to kill and skilled Heavies can take an extremely long time to kill and will often take out many people in the process. That sounds like a rather warped definition of balance if a super tank like Heavy is considered ‘balanced’ huh?

Now let us look at Archer. Archer is one of the weaker melee PvP classes, its health pool is only slightly larger than Heavy, and it relies almost entirely on ranged attacks to even be effective in the first place. Earlier on in this topic @boomdrone made a good point about how vulnerable Archer can be which is, if the Archer misses their shots they die. While this is not necessarily true as a general statement it is very true that Archers who miss their shots in short range combat will tend to get beat up in melee or if they miss their shots long range they will not be effective. So right away, it’s very easy to establish some major weaknesses in Archer. However, Archer has one thing going for it, and that is its instant kill.

Many on the forums agree that Archer’s instant kill is unfair and point to it as one of the main reasons why Archer is unbalanced and needs a tweak or a wholesale rework. The funny thing is, the way people talk about Archer’s instant kill you’d think that the Archer is nailing all their headshots! @obikenobi21 made a post about this earlier on stating that Archers have the advantage all the time in ranged combat. The fact is, this is simply not true. In fact, his statement warps the idea of what an advantage inherently is. An advantage is having an ability that an opponent does not that elevates the attacker to a more comfy position during a fight. That said, imagine the following scenario. A Ninja is running towards an Archer with the intent of taking them out. Or perhaps an Elf is making use of their wind and earth elements to do the same thing. Does the Archer really have an advantage in this situation? I think not.

This is so as Archer’s ranged power is strongly countered by Ninja’s very high mobility and stealthiness and Elf’s high vertical mobility. Sure, some may argue, as they have argued in this topic that mobility does not take away the inherent advantage Archer has in being able to one shot anyone from 30 blocks away or more. Nevertheless, they are mistaken because that advantage is countered by mobility as mobility significantly decreases the likelihood that the target will actually be hit. I think we can all agree for instance, that Soldier’s mobility counters Archer’s ranged power because Soldiers are very hard to hit. Indeed, to some degree extremely mobile classes like Soldier, Chemist, Elf, and Ninja have an advantage over the Archer as they can bypass Archer’s defenses and overwhelm it in melee combat.

The overall point is, just because Archer has an instant kill and is powerful long range does not make it unbalanced and in need of a rework. However would anyone here say that Heavy is in need of a rework, like a serious rework? Of course not, yet Heavy is still one of the most powerful melee classes in the game. So why do people say that Archer is in need of a rework? Because it has a one shot ability to make up for its weakness in melee PvP? True, an instant kill may not seem very fair to the one getting instant killed but for Archer it is entirely fair as it allows them to actually get kills and defend! In a similar fashion, Heavy’s extremely strong armor allows it to adequately compensate for its weaknesses and to be a juggernaut on offense or defense on most maps.

Furthermore, as many in this thread including @NomNuggetNom have noted Archer, much like Heavy, is free and easy to learn. That is true. Please make no mistake, I do not dispute that point. That said let us return to the example of the Heavy. It’s possible to take out half a defense as Heavy if you are skilled enough and the entire defense with a Heavy team. Yet I do not see posts complaining about all these extremely OP Heavies or nerfs demanding a cap on Heavy’s power and tankiness. Think about it, to some degree Heavy disregards skill because no matter how good you are with Ninja or Medic, the Heavy tends to have an advantage over you with much stronger armor and a decent health pool and weapon. Why then should Archer get picked on because it is easy to learn and a powerful ranged class? It is very unfair to criticize it simply because it is not difficult to use and wields such great power. Indeed, the ease of being able to shoot an arrow appears to be getting confused with shooting an arrow and killing someone with it! This is not to say that getting headshots is hard but it is not necessarily easy to do either, and to make a blanket statement about it is to disregard nearly all physical contexts and is thereby a bogus argument.

Moreover, what I have noticed in this topic is that those who argue in favor of Archer being nerfed seem to be stuck in this mentality that all Archers are extremely good, or that the only maps on CTF are extremely Archer friendly maps. Maybe that is not the mentality they are stuck in, but it is an extremely fallacious position to argue from! What should be getting discussed is how balanced the class is on a whole instead of distorting the discussion by talking about Archer only in contexts where it is very powerful.

Consequently, aside from the instant kill, there has been a great deal of discussion about Archer’s Punch II bow and how it is also a problem. This point would be well taken except it is likewise wrapped in the fallacy that the hypothetical Archer is going to nail every one or most of their shots with it. For example, in one of @obikenobi21 ’s posts he states that Archer needs to be reworked because it is very strong long ranged and can capably defend itself short range with the Punch II bow. There is some truth to this; however it is important to stipulate that when a target is in very close range the Archer has to go to their sword to avoid dying. Additionally, it is also important to note that it is not that difficult to get very close to an Archer without getting knocked back or at least multiple times. What is so wrong then, with having a knockback ability on the Archer’s bow to allow them to defend themselves at a shorter range especially when not nearly every shot is a guaranteed hit? Considering Archer’s weakness in melee combat it is hardly unreasonable to state that Archer should be able to attempt to avoid dangerous close ranged combat with their bow. The presence of multiple high mobility classes in game makes this proposition even less unreasonable.

Regardless, proponents of nerfing Archer’s Punch II bow will state that it is broken because it allows Archer to knock enemies back into headshot range. While this is indeed possible this argument is fallacious because it bases its claim on an assumption that Archer will actually be able to knock enemies into headshot range and headshot them. I have to admit, if the target isn’t moving the entire time – such as if they are trapped in a cobweb – this scenario is almost a certainty! But, seeing as most targets are moving and how context of the situation varies wildly between each map and each class the assumption that the Punch II bow is too powerful is questionable at the very least and ludicrous at the very most.

Therefore I contend that Archer is not unreasonably powerful in its own right and is not in need of a nerf. Many arguments that I have read over in this post seem to view Archer with blinders on and consistently assume that the person using it will be extremely skilled with it. @BAWSS5 for example stated that Archer was easy to learn and use and that it wasn’t long before they could sit somewhere and get tons of kills with it. This is a case example of the false analogy fallacy. Just because one person might have had a great deal of success with Archer that individual success does not apply to everyone else who uses it. Furthermore that success certainly does not mean that Archer is inherently unbalanced as how well the class is used and how strong it is are two separate things.

Another ‘blinder’ I’ve noticed is that those who argue in favor of an Archer nerf seem to be under the impression that all the CTF maps are Archer friendly. However, this is not the case as some maps are actually fairly inhibiting to Archer such as Graveyard. I mean, the logic that since some maps enhance Archer’s ability to get kills because they’re poorly designed means that Archer itself must be extremely OP doesn’t even make sense! It is simply false to assume that correlation proves causation!

The fact is, Archer is not in need of a change. On good, well designed maps that do not allow it to so easily abuse its abilities Archer is hardly excessively strong like Chemist is. Archer as a class offers a good balance between ranged power and melee vulnerability as it is avoidable even at long range and is one of the weaker classes in melee combat. Those who argue for a nerf distort the real strength of the class by making multiple fallacies and drawing from extremely narrow examples where outside factors enhanced the power of the class. I mean, technically one could state that Necro is OP if they were to draw from an example where its mobs actually got kills. However, that is clearly untrue as one or several examples where a class is OP does not mean that its design is unbalanced and in need of tweaking. Such is the case with Archer.

Gracias everyone.

-Admiral

 

*throws down gauntlet*

Lemme get back to you when I actually have better internet. Do not take this as a cowardly attempt to flee the glorious field of honourable verbal combat, as I know exactly how I shall counter your arguments. However, I have maybe 5 minutes of WiFi left and this webpage eats my phone's Data like it's fully loaded Nachos.

So, look forward to my reply in the morning.

 

My super informative, super logical argument/response to that completely huge essay and wording that i might or might not have bothered reading the whole thing. :
Archer's half op, half weak.
Thanks, bye.

 

The Admiral has spoken.
(plspls give me your essay writing skills c: )

Also, like your views. This must be shared with everyone who's ever debated about archer; it has to be the first well-stated pro-archer argument which covers just about every debatable topic about the class, at least the first I've seen.

 

What about mine? :c