Idea Please remove bowspamming

You might not realize that it can be rather annoying getting headshotted since you don't main/play much CTF.

 

Make it so the 1st draw does no kb and almost no dmg, make it so 2nd draw does no kb and some damage and fulldraw/3rd draw does kb & dmg?

 

To everyone who's complaining about bowspam:
You're not gonna get anywhere. Now shut up and either play the game or stop playing the game.

And to everyone who's complaining about insta-kills:
You're lucky Chap wants all insta-kills in this game removed, otherwise you would be getting yourself nowhere.
In fact, Chap already wants all insta-kills in CTF removed, so there it NO NEED for these threads complaining about insta-kills anymore.

All in all:
Js people could just suck it up and play the stupid game but NO they come to the forums and rant about it for a combined total of probably over 20 threads. The horse is dead: Stop beating it.

 

There's always going to be rants in every server's forums...and there's always going to be people like you so... Shrug ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

So which is it? Draw the bow back, or don't?

Doggies, don't get me wrong, I like you; you're a good guy. But that^ sentence just made absolutely no sense.

But you said you prefer to get into melee range when you're a mage. Also, if bowspam isn't effective, then why the f*ck is it annoying???? If it didn't do anything, you obviously wouldn't have made this thread. So, either
A). You're stupid, which I know isn't true
Or
B). You're putting up invalid reasoning along with the inteligent bit to make this whole situation seem bigger then it actually is
Or
C.) You don't know wtf you're talking about.
Or
D.) other

Multiple choice, and if you pick other, explain yourself please.

Again, why would you fight a ranged class with a melee weapon?

Yes the sword does do reasonable damage to a mage, you're correct here.

But come on, you can't base your entire argument on the off chance that the opposing mage might suck; that's a logical fallacy, it doesn't work.

Doggies, you are one of the best mages in this game, but you're not an archer. I play archer almost full time, and I have yet to see a mage whom was so terrible, they couldn't hit a target with ANY spells.

This is all assuming the archer could even get close.
You know what happens when you hit someone with a sword? They get knocked back. The mage could just turn around and throw the spell in the other direction.

All in all, you're basing all your points on the slim chance that the mage won't know how to use the damage spell. You forgot to mention the freeze, fire, and lightning spells. You are not only basing your argument on a mage not being able to aim the damage spell, but that they never once use the other spells?! Come on Doggies, I know you aren't stupid; this scenario you described has no backbone at all.

 

you would be right if nothing ever changed when people complained about it. Given things do change when enough people complain about it (ie engineer, chemist pots, pyro instakill, punch 2 on archer bow, no cap on dwarf xp) I think it's naive to assume that people won't get anywhere by complaining about it. If you don't agree with the thread then I suggest coming up with a good reason as to why it should be kept rather than trying to make it irrelevant by saying nothing will change. There is a need for threads complaining about instakills so it's kept relevant and people keep trying to post solutions to the problem. Less relevance = less ideas = less information for the staff to use to make the game better for everyone. On top of all that it's in the staff interest to listen to us and improve the game in ways we want so that brawl stays afloat and everyone (including them) has a good time. The horse is not dead, archer instakill has been debated for YEARS now, and it doesn't seem like it'll be stopping any time soon. Finally, if you'd actually read the thread he actually came up with a solution to the problem (how effective that is I'll leave it up to you to decide) but he didn't do it in an offensive way to any staff members. How is this ranting? Finally and most importantly, how is your post helping anyone?

@SpookDog_ I'll discuss this over discord given I've got quite a lot to say and I'm sure nobody wants another text wall

 

I believe I can answer this.
It's not necessarily that it's every situation, but in short range encounters archer gets more damage off by using it's stone sword than a bow would. I've already explained this in another thread but I can't remember where I posted it now so I'll just go over the basics again:
Bow takes about 1200ms total to draw fully etc and deals about 9 damage with 1/5 chance of 10
1.You've got a half second invincibility period with damage, but in the same 1 second it does 5 damage. That means a full chance of 10 damage in a second, not to mention it doesn't require aim and of course there's a chance you can do more with critical hits. Overall, damage wise the sword is better, but there's more.
2.Archer arrows at full potential can do a full 10 hearts of damage in an instakill, and so using them for minor damage means that you're effectively losing potential damage you could be otherwise using. You're not being efficient. It's better using the sword
3.the knockback has been reduced to punch 1 which means you get about 5 to 6 blocks of knockback at full charge. Now, assuming that a player is running they can move at 5.6m/s (which translates to blocks a second given 1m is 1 block conversion, ask the minecraft gods). That means that they can cover the distance you've just knocked them back in the time it takes you to redraw your bow, and that's not even assuming they're jump sprinting, by which they move even quicker. Unless you're hitting every single arrow, the most you can hope to do is delay them for a short while before they murder you.
4. Archer doesn't have bad armor in comparison to other classes and can take a few short range hits. It's obviously not going to be as strong relatively given it's long range, but it's got a fair chance against some low armor classes like ninja. It also has some decent steak to back that as well
It's not necessarily about why you'd use archer as a melee class, it's just in short range encounters it's infinitely more efficient than using the ranged bow
Given you're fighting a mage, the bow is going to be even less help since the damage spell recharges faster than your arrow, and you're not able to move much whilst charging. It's effectively free hits for the mage. You're better off with the more efficient damage, even though obviously mage really counters archer

 

You're right. Instead, you should just run away and get instantly headshotted smh

 

Yes, we know how much damage the sword does, that's not why we were asking. The scenario you've set up implies the archer was already close to the mage, for some magical reason. The scenario we're describing is: why is a lone archer charging a lone mage from a distance of over 8 blocks with a sword? It's just suicide. A mage can deal enough damage to kill an archer in three shots of the damage spell, so said archer has a slim chance of surviving long enough to deal enough sword strikes. And that's without including the other spells; with the other spells included, charging a mage as an archer, with no intention of using the bow, is just plain stupid.

Lord, I understand you're trying to help, and your math is bomb as f*ck, but your math is only valid if the archer manages to get close enough to deal the damage.

The question I posed, why would an archer try to use a sword on a mage still remains un-answered, and it might well stay that way. Why? Because it's hard to validate a method as effective when there is no actual evidence that it can work. But, there is plenty of evidence that it will fail.

If you want to kill a mage, f*ck the math, f*ck wasting all my steak and possibly my life on one person, just headshot him! Honestly, charging a mage with only a sword is nothing but a pointless and counter productive method of dealing with the situation.

 

If you're a lone archer fighting a lone mage, you're not going very far, if you try to run the mage is going to follow you and use those damage and freeze spells to slow you down. If that mage wants to kill you, chances are you're not getting away, just as chances are you're not going to get close enough to do real damage as much. Your best option as an archer fighting a mage is to hit it before it even gets out of headshot range. That's not what we're discussing though, we're discussing whether or not it's already gotten into shorter range, where mage is at it's strongest.

I understand that you have have to get close enough to actually deal the damage in the first place, but you have to understand what you're fighting. I already explained why archer bow damage matters, and in here it's even more apparent. Mage has infinite health with it's heal spell, and archer with its bow, for all it's power long range, doesn't do enough damage short before a mage can get a heal spell off, recovering all of it's health and forcing the archer to waste both arrows and time. That's not to mention the archer is also left more vulnerable to damage whilst it's charging with the bow meaning it can't avoid those spells, meaning it survives less time in combat. The advantage a sword has (and this is small bear in mind) is whilst it still doesn't have a lot of a chance of killing the mage before it heals, the damage it outputs with a few hits at once, combined with the ability to strafe (not have to draw the bow back leaving you vulnerable) means that it has a small potential to kill that mage where a normal archer wouldn't.

With all of that said, NONE of the strategies archer has are anywhere close to a good method of taking down a mage. Archer doesn't have much of a capability at all to deal heavy enough damage to kill a mage before it can heal. Truly the best method of dealing with a mage is not to engage it at all and try go for a headshot long range before it even sees you. You're not bowspamming it back given it's going to freeze you, and it wouldn't do enough damage to kill the mage before it could heal anyway. even then the mage can exploit you not moving and kill you before you landed much of any of that bowspam (as you said yourself, 3 hits with a damage spell ).

Except you can't. If you're in the situation you're talking about, that mage is gonna freeze you, stop you getting away and kill you before you get anywhere. Your true best play is not to get into the 8 block situation in the first place, because running away doesnt do much against a class that can freeze you in place, slow you down with fire, knock you off your path with lightning or just kill you in three hits whilst slowing you down with a damage spell.

Mage hardcore counters archer, there's absolutely nothing solid about it. If you kill a mage as archer with a sword, good job, because most wouldn't get anywhere close. You'd have less of a chance using that bow though

 

They don't. I guess they're talking about running away from a bowspammer only to be headshot seconds later.

Anyway, about mage is due to the fact that it's nearly impossible to get near a mage for enough time to kill them anyway. All their spells deal knockback, having an infinite health pool, and the fact that if you do somehow miraculously get near the mage to land some blows, the lightning/freeze spell makes all that hard work go to waste. I personally think to fix this issue would be to remove all knockback from spells excpet lighning and to remove it's infinite healthpool. (Suggestion here: https://www.brawl.com/threads/62048/)

 

Yes I know all of this; you've just repeated what I've said in my previous posts on this thread

A mage

Bow damage matters as much ( or in this case, as little) as sword damage. Why? Well:

I don't know about you, maybe we have different priorities, but I'd rather lose arrows and time over a life.

Whether you're charging a mage or charging your bow, you are equally vulnerable . Actually, one could argue you are more vulnerable charging the mage since you are

and since it only takes the bow

that's not a lot of time wasted

Of course you'd still have to get close to deal said damage, and close range is mages strong point, as you've said before. One could argue that strafing would actually help besides wasting even more time, which you clearly hate, except mage can just

*triggered*
Seriously though, wtf qualifies as a "normal archer"

That's the difference between our arguments. You're trying to kill a class that

while I'm simply trying to survive the encounter. This is probably why our points look so similar, but we can't agree. We're trying to complete two different objectives.

As I've said previously on this thread

It seems we have a miscommunication. I forgot a bit of detail, what I was trying to say was use the still ungodly op punch on the archer bow to push them into headshot range, although this is a bit easier said then done, it offers a higher chance of survivability then rushing the mage in an area where mage clearly has the advantage.

Unfortunately, this is not the scenario we are discussing.

As I've already told Gam previously in this thread.

As I've already said, we have different objectives.

As the archer, you can either

A). Fight a mage with a sword in an area that is mage's strong point and archer's weak point.
or
B). Use the punch on the bow while simultaneously backing away to get some distance, where archer is at its' strongest and mage is at its' weakest, maybe find some cover, get some help from teammates, etc.

Since you've already pointed out how strongly mage counters archer, I'd say reworking the fight as best as you can to your advantage holds the highest chance of survival. Keep in mind Lord, when I say "you", I'm not talking about you as a person, I'm just trying to get you into this unlucky archers shoes.

 

how else do you kill someone with mage ? are you just supposed to shoot damage every 50 seconds ? yeah uhuh , explain to me how mage is supposed to kill someone without spamming ? use ur head

 

If your trying to get the mage into headshot range than you are pulling the bow back significantly more than what is considered bowspam.
And about mage spam, Most mages will do it unconsciously at least once, like you sat with archer, if someone closes the gap with mage then its gonna panic a bit. Still the only time I will purposely attempt to damage spam is to mock an archer who actually is bowspamming.
"I can spam better than you"

Mage has 3 damage dealing spells:
Damage Spell: Low recharge time, decent damage, kb, armor effects damage
Flame Spell: Medium recharge time, 1 heart of damage (armor effects) on impact plus 2 hearts of burning damage and kb. Only classes this isn't as useful against is chemist/medic.
Lightning spell: Low recharge time, up to 3 hearts of true damage on impact, plus huge kb and any falling damage from launched targets, short horizontal range (lightning can still effect players 20+ blocks down as long as it is within that 4-5 block range and your not shooting through something.)

All in all to be an effective mage you have to use every spell.
inb4 told I'm off topic

 

archer is a degenerative class that shouldn't have so much impact in ctf. For crying out loud why should ctf be impacted so much by 1 single class? Its completely ridiculous. No other class can simply kill all of an offensive wave with ease and no harm 90% of the time. CTFs meta would be so much better imo if archer wasn't such a key role for certain games or even matches

grant it recovery would be changed completely the way it is played but on one side it will not change games that much as either side will equally be able to steal the flag as before. Plus, archer doesn't have the biggest impact for recovery once a player is on the other side of the map, unless the map is archer op

inb4 people calling me hypocritical for posting a joke on another thread which was not my true view on archer