Content Cop: People who defend headshots

So you're suggesting a bleed? What if we made it so the bow would only fire if you pulled it back all the way instead? That way it could appear to be shown that you have enough "power" to instakill.

 

Thought I'd expand on a couple points given I have a bit of spare time.

No, We're really not saying that instakills are too overpowered because we don't know how to defend against them. There are some situations where it's pretty damn difficult not to be hit. Let me explain why. Looking up online, a bow at full charge will fire an arrow at about 53m/s (1 metre is 1 block conversation). That means after you draw the bow fully (which I've already explained in a previous post is about 1200ms or 1.2 seconds) to get into headshot range takes a further 0.56 seconds. Looking up online, assuming you see the arrow right from the get go (which is really rare) the average human reaction time for visual stimuli is 0.25 seconds. If you saw it right from the start, then yes, it's physically possible to dodge that arrow (factoring in time to get out of the way too) at the shortest headshot distance. However, if you don't see it right from being fired from the bow at 30 blocks, you've got a quarter second window before it becomes too late to do anything. A quarter second window is not a lot of time. Makes it even harder when they're camping and you can't always see them. If you're not firing full power arrows you're no better off because whilst the arrow takes a little more time to get there, the arrow is very difficult to see, meaning you'll still find it hard to dodge. Once you get hit by 1 arrow at that distance it's game over, you're done, back to spawn. I'm not saying archer shouldn't have some form of headshot mechanic, but I think it's a little unfair given those current statistics to give people that potentially short a time to dodge and then instakill them if they get hit even once.

In other news, I've already said this before, but I don't even mind instakills staying. The only reason why I'm looking at it this way is because chap has said instakills are going, so that's the end of that. I think if we were going to be keeping them we'd definitely need to balance it by making the other classes stronger, but amping up the power isn't necessarily a bad thing. From a balancing standpoint, I can totally understand why people do get frustrated at times, hell I've been annoyed at it too.

@lionafp just because someone is bad doesn't mean their ideas are invalid, your argument is ridiculous. Archer is meant to be a killing class, it doesn't capture or directly recover. It's ability is centred around killing and so ultimately it's going to have to have a higher killing potential somewhere to balance out it's inabilities elsewhere, just for the sake of balance. With that said, there's a lot of people out there arguing that archer is too good at that for a multitude of reasons. At shorter ranges there's a particularly short window to avoid the arrow which I've already spoken about, not to mention the archers can be smart and predict your dodging too!. Ultimately it's not about the ridiculous VoR argument rhoske put out because although there are more archer friendly routes it doesn't mean that you're safe (I can headshot through the waterfall and on the sides of the valley too you know...). Poor moves on the part of players aren't to be ignored, you have to take that into consideration with criticism, but it doesn't excuse all of the criticism or justify why archer has such a large potential to kill. Archer needs to be able to counter everything long range, that's it's role, but it doesn't need to be this good at it, and it also doesn't mean that there should be no way to prevent death once you've been hit by it. You can dodge it, but you have to have some pretty damn good reactions to do it consistently (as well as some amazing peripheral vision

 

I love you Mr Meme Man, so much @Dankmastr_Memesn

 

Y

If you learnt how to code ctf would be saved already

 

For the people that say that instakills dont make sense: you're saying that the instakill don't make sense and should be removed? Right?
Wb some other classes for example Ninja. They can become invisable right? Oh, that doesnt make sense neither, does it?
Let's remove it!

 

Archer is the cheapest class in the game and should lose it's headshot.

Another thing I'd like to add is that the removal of instakill is only good and would make archer require more skill. The archer class is defined by the weaponry and tools, not by a cheap ****ing gimmick. Grow the **** up and stop saying that it shouldn't be removed.

 

The most annoying thing about archer is bows spam. Make the drawback longer. The thing is that the majority of the mods are archers that's why it hasn't been nerfed yet. I don't like it when archers start spawn killing or just random killing on maps that are heavily favored for archer. The maps that heavily favor archer should be removed

 

Archer is underpowered smh pinecones

 

The **** are you trying to accomplish here

 

We need to focus on bigger issues like brawl killing ctf and how we should stop that

 

The Meme Queen herself has just been challenged. Sh*t is about to hit the fan.

 

I don't think @Dankmastr_Memesn wants to remove the instant kill because it doesn't make sense, rather it's ridiculously overpowered. If you're refering to the portion where he was bringing definitions into this, I believe that segment was to point out that archer doesn't need the headshot ability, and is hence not defined by it; the whole "instakill is the only way for archer to work" argument is what that segment's about. If you didn't get the "doesn't make sense argument" from that, then I don't know where you got it from.

 

Absolutely, I completely agree. I said you can make the instakill harder to pull off, but it's definitely not the best option in this case. Just because it's there doesn't mean we should and as in this case, it's probably best to do as you say and to make it less obnoxious but almost as powerful

 

If you want to find the actual argument behind the instant kill for an archer, you don't have to go looking at the definition of the word archer to find why it is accurate. You simply have to look at medieval warfare and the original definition of the instant kill for archer back on MCPVP.

Originally, the archer's instant kill was not defined as a snipe, as it is here on brawl. It was defined as a 'Headshot,' that dealt lethal damage to all but a blocking dwarf if the target was at least 25 blocks away from the archer. You may think this is over powered, because it can kill anybody besides a blocking dwarf instantly, regardless of health, skill, ping, etc.

However, if you look at medieval warfare, you will find that this is completely valid. The most widely known and probably the most famous bow from the Middle Ages is the English Long Bow. This weapon had a draw weight of between 60 and 80 lbs of force, and had a theoretical maximum effective range of between 250 and 300 meters. Even at this extreme range, the arrows that it fired had the capability of penetrating the quarter inch (give or take) steel that made up the full plate armor of that day, and killing whomever was inside.

Taking that into consideration, while plate armor was designed to deflect sword strikes, and the curved helmet was equally as good at deflecting arrow strikes as it was sword strikes, if an arrow was well-placed enough to hit head-on to a helmet, it would pierce the armor and kill the wearer. No questions asked.

This is the basis for the archer's instant kill. It is not the fact that it randomly kills anybody. It is the fact that you are rewarding a skilled archer for hitting someone at range by giving them a 'headshot' that kills the target, like it would in real life.

There are many ways to keep the headshot while making it harder to obtain and more balanced. Removing instant kills while it seems like a good idea in the short term, will have a very detrimental effect to the state of the CTF game in the long run that will only show itself once they are removed.

TL;DR
Archer's instant kill isn't simply an instant kill. It is a headshot to reward skilled players, and given the capabilities of medieval and modern bows, the instant kill on a headshot is perfectly feasable.

 

The best way to put this is, did medieval warfare also have magical creatures able to use the power of the 4 elements to fight, because outside of myth I'm pretty sure that didn't happen!

 

If you follow Arthurian Legend, yes. However, that was not the point of that. I was merely stating that the headshot is a plausible thing. I wasn't arguing that it shouldn't be changed, I was simply arguing that it shouldn't be completely removed.

 

Of course, but I'm saying you can't just automatically link it to medieval times when ultimately it's got myth involved. Additionally it would add fuel to the idea that people could survive headshots given magic