Pirate "shield" against archer arrows.

edited 1:48AM in Suggestions
After a couple hours of getting perforated by archers as a pirate I decided that pirates need some kind of defense to protect them from arrows...

I personally find it silly that archers are able to back-pedal (or run with rapid turning) constantly and slay innumerable enemies. But this has been allowed for many patches already in PVK... I suggest something equally silly.

Pirates don't carry shields into battle, but they shouldn't charge headfirst into volleys of arrows ready to die "valiantly" under the pirate code. Pirates are supposed to fight dirty, and laugh as you die with your honor bleeding out of your ass.

But when the chips are down, pirates are damn crafty and should be able to find a way to win.


My idea for the pirate's improvised shield against archer barrage is the skirmisher's powder keg.

In a headon fight, the keg is basically useless against the heavy knights who will whip out their shields and archers who will just shoot skirmishers dead before quickly running away.

I propose that the keg absorb a healthy amount of arrows before breaking, allowing pirates a silly trick to annihilate the archers whose class balance is silly to begin with.

on the flipside....

The keg will break much easier and be basically nullified by being smashed from enemy melee attacks.

How the keg breaks can also be done in different and silly ways. When it's not lit, it'll just break and the skirmisher can curse at it all piratey. If it is lit, the keg can still partially combust but mostly on the skirmisher, blinding him temporarily, while causing very minor damage to nearby enemies. (And a pretty fireworks display can go off)

This also provides a temporary fix to the issue of skirmishers constantly suicide bombing their enemies. (The actual fix should probably just be a tuned timer on the keg respawn, that prevents constant suicide bombing)


Discuss below and inb4 "OMG quit raging, archer balance is perfect."

Shut up! and play a different class you filthy archers!


Maybe we should just give the archer pointy ears... Then the current balance would make more sense...

Comments

  • SoloableSoloable Senior
    edited June 2013
    Well it can go a couple of ways you know.

    The Sharpshooter could be considered a Counter Measure against an Archer, and with the Skirmishers speed, it doesn't take too long to catch up anyway with an archer. The problem is that if somebody is half decent at aiming, you will most likely get shot by multiple arrows before you can even get at the archer.

    I prefer to put my brain into gear, and try to sneak up against an archer. However this doesn't always work.

    Your idea is somewhat fine, but the thought of arrows firing at a keg seems, strange.
  • Mr. Ownage™Mr. Ownage™ Land Lubber! Members
    edited June 2013
    ITS wrote:

    How the keg breaks can also be done in different and silly ways. When it's not lit, it'll just break and the skirmisher can curse at it all piratey. If it is lit, the keg can still partially combust but mostly on the skirmisher, blinding him temporarily, while causing very minor damage to nearby enemies. (And a pretty fireworks display can go off)

    I'd say that the more damage is done to the keg (when unlit), the less damage it does
    76561198032434879.png
  • DinahDinah Skirmisher's wench PVKII Team
    edited 1:48AM
    The speed decrease that the keg puts on you would be a nuisance, and the fact that you cant attack with a keg unless you blow it up, so its generally more effective to chance it and try to shoot the pesky archers with the gun while you advance and dodge.
    LOLIWDIT_zpsec1f606c.jpeg
    Agsma is me from the future
  • DenshinDenshin Beta Tester, Authorized Creator
    edited 1:48AM
    I personally just stick to my ideas that I will never advance on an experienced archers in his line of sight. You ideally only want to attack rangers if they're already distracted.

    But I wouldn't throw away the idea of having a more direct protection against projectiles as pirates, while I'm writing this I'm spontaneously getting the idea that perhaps the skirmisher can deflect projectiles with his sword if timed very precisely.

    QUOTE (Trojan•Clinique @ Nov 8 2011, 08:06 PM)
    Denshin is a rather overpowered class.

    QUOTE (Lucas =) @ Jan 12 2012, 08:16 AM)
    We're currently working on making Denshin less OP.
    signatureopaquesmall.png

  • simiussimius Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    In my experience an experienced archer has a hard time playing against an experienced skirmisher/ss. The rest is a matter of teamplay
    Dodging is a viable protection.
  • ThatOneBoxThatOneBox Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    if youre having a archer problem work with the vikings. keep a balanced team also. (not all skirms, not all captains, etc.)

    i'm telling ya just 1 of each class is gonan destroy pretty much anything.
  • edited 1:48AM
    Denshin wrote:

    I personally just stick to my ideas that I will never advance on an experienced archers in his line of sight. You ideally only want to attack rangers if they're already distracted.

    But I wouldn't throw away the idea of having a more direct protection against projectiles as pirates, while I'm writing this I'm spontaneously getting the idea that perhaps the skirmisher can deflect projectiles with his sword if timed very precisely.


    I know what you're talking about Denshin. It isn't very smart to play their "game" when it's easier to just flank them.

    I've been having issues mostly on the pvk_island Slammin Butt Pirates server. Pirates gotta go through that first death tunnel, there's the open area with the bridge, and sometimes the good archers cover the basement hall as well.

    Perhaps, what the game really needs is more map balance, as the maps haven't changed much at all with the additions of new classes.
  • KOKORONOKAWARIKOKORONOKAWARI Funny Little Japanese Drawing Person Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    A map's balance isn't directly related to class balance. Knights have it hardest on island, them having some advantage at certain points in the map only makes sense to me. The Archers can't really defend the four-ish direct ways to their chests from both teams. I would wait for teammates to go in and let them distract, let Vikings distract before going in, or go SS to shoot them back. The only times there is a very difficult time is if it is insanely stacked and most of my dream is just running randomly treating it like DM, in which case it is the players.

    Nichi2EditCROP_zpscolnflbv.gifKarenPirate1Crop_zps5ccbfa57.gifNichi1CROP_zpspr3i3epd.gif
    http://steamcommunit...m/groups/aclans Join and be pro today!


    10402520_1443600839260675_3566335342614205908_nRESIZE_zpsf8423ece.jpg
    output_6Dn6Cs_zpse8ae5afc.gif
    tumblr_mq1t1bZGDA1r30985o1_400_zps948e174a.gif
    tumblr_mviov3cTGP1r8bshso1_500_zpsbada721a.gif
    "I like axes"
    --kokoronokawari
    loli loli loli loli loli loli loli loli

  • bERt0rbERt0r Senior
    edited June 2013
    In my years of playing pvk i've probably been in about 10 decent matches on island, where each team really tried to win. Here, I am referring to the teams behind always attacking the team who is in the lead and not the losers fighting each other and sneak-stealing chests.
    The map is designed in a way that there should always be 2 teams ganging up on one.
    One troll is enough to ruin the game completly. In a scenario where Knights have 4 and Vikings 2, you can bet that there will be a single skirmisher trying to steal one of the viking's chests. This ties down vikings in their base and the knights have an easy time defending, waiting until they win. It is not always the pirates who fail, there is a pretty even fail distribution.
    Changes in Latitudes, Changes in Attitudes, somthing to something, Yaarrrrrgh!
    I be pro grammar!
  • SharpiemanSharpieman Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    I enjoy the a good game on island it does not happen that much any more. I admit I do it as well at times, but the server is a Deathmatch server now.

    Now on to topic at question. Ill give you a couple ideas for counter measures as each class.

    1.) Skirmisher - Learn how to use their run + jump speed to your advantage while still keeping numbers of enemies at hand in your mind. 1-2 Archers can be slaughtered by a trained Skirmisher. Cat and mouse skill, sneak attacks, knowing how to use the flintlock pistol, using undercharged attacks to your advantage, and knowing when someone is vulnerable are things a "trained Skirmisher" should know.

    2.) Captain - The most underplayed pirate class, but do not underestimate these beasts of armed combat. The captains cutlass is a seriously STRONG weapon. Train your self in using mostly fully charged hits as this cutlass is best used as such. When fighting 1-2 Archers use your bird as arrow bait, and try to antagonize the archers with the bird. By that I mean send it out and send it back very quickly to the effect of the movie "Birds". As mentioned by Denshin this raises special bar as well as acts as distraction and shield against a archer. While the archers are busy with the bird filling your special bar you can choose to hook or punch these men if they are trying to do this with a bow still, or use the cutlass if they've chosen to wield their buttery blade. You will slaughter them with fully charged swings and timed perfect parries. When they they start running for fear of their hides, pack your special if you have it and blow them to all hell. With out special quickly blunderbuss them in the ass and if your close enough and their damaged enough to retreat you will surely have killed him with that ass shot. :captain: :parrot: :archer:

    3.) Sharpshooter - The harder of the two "Designated" ranged classes IMO. Often a new player plays the SS as they are stuck in some other colonial shooter going renegade with a super charged OP class. This often gets them ripped to shreds (I know I make short work of them). With the Sharpshooter you want to keep those archers at a range and use the Pistol as your main offense. With the faster fire rate + the higher accuracy and overall damage of shot will ANNOY the piss out of any archer. Always fight with a skirmisher or captain in front of you. Use your rifle to pick off low health targets and its one hell of a kill shot. IF for what ever reason you are forced to use that dagger, ONLY use the backstab attack. I know some people wont agree with me here but I find the charge rate + damage of backstab gives me much HIGHER sustainable speed and level of damage. Often get a kill because of someone with daises thinking i've blown the pooch by pulling the dagger out. Think again! :ss:
  • simiussimius Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    bERt0r wrote:

    The map is designed in a way that there should always be 2 teams ganging up on one.


    Whilst I really hate those sneaky attacks draining those hard earned chests I bring home from the winning team, I have to say that is a valid move in certain situations.
    Imho the main objective and optimal approach should not be stomping the winning team but bringing victory to your own team. If a pirate thinks his team might be inferior to the other team in a face to face battle, he should switch to those sneaky moves. Obviously you should attack a winning team when they're too close to winning in any case.
    The main proplem is though many people neither play to win nor attack the winning team.

    Sharpieman wrote:

    ONLY use the backstab attack. I know some people wont agree with me here but I find the charge rate + damage of backstab gives me much HIGHER sustainable speed and level of damageout.

    I won't directly disagree with you. In most situations that backstab is saver (meaning you are loosing less hp during melee) and easier to hit than a corresponding number of normal attacks. However the normal autoattacks with the dagger have higher dps. If you can hit all those attacks savely, better do it that way. The most dmg you could get is possibly a fully charged stab followed of uncharged ones
  • bERt0rbERt0r Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    Imho the main objective and optimal approach should not be stomping the winning team but bringing victory to your own team.

    Any common sense? If you dont take the booty from the winning team, you CANNOT win yourself. You should not play booty maps.
    Changes in Latitudes, Changes in Attitudes, somthing to something, Yaarrrrrgh!
    I be pro grammar!
  • SharpiemanSharpieman Senior
    edited June 2013
    simius wrote:

    I won't directly disagree with you. In most situations that backstab is saver (meaning you are loosing less hp during melee) and easier to hit than a corresponding number of normal attacks. However the normal autoattacks with the dagger have higher dps. If you can hit all those attacks savely, better do it that way. The most dmg you could get is possibly a fully charged stab followed of uncharged ones


    Good note, havent tested this as I find it harder to hit with the uncharged attacked than with the charged backstab, but I may just be well trained in that aspect. None the less ill have to give it a try.
  • SharpiemanSharpieman Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    bERt0r wrote:

    Any common sense? If you dont take the booty from the winning team, you CANNOT win yourself. You should not play booty maps.


    You do know there IS a strategy behind staggering the 2nd in line of chest holders. If a team is working together they can effectively distract enough of the other teams players with only 2-3 team members participating in the deed. Whilst these members distract and reduce the number of targets at the winning teams base the other 5-6 members of your team can take chests much easier from the winning team. But, sadly this is often not the case (mostly on island) and the server is turned into a traditional Deathmatch.
  • DenshinDenshin Beta Tester, Authorized Creator
    edited June 2013
    bERt0r wrote:

    Any common sense? If you dont take the booty from the winning team, you CANNOT win yourself. You should not play booty maps.


    What team to attack is greatly depending on how many tickets they have left. If my team's ticket count is way less than the currently winning team's tickets, it can actually be beneficial in the long run to try to go for the third team if they have any chests because say example:

    Knights: 300 w. 3 chests
    Vikings: 250 w. 2 chests
    Pirates: 200 w. 1 chest

    Both pirates and vikings know the knights are winning and nearly everyone in both teams will storm the knights, however if one or two pirates decide to attack the vikings which is most likely going to be undefended, they can potentially bring home 2 chests. Knights team will still face a greater opposition in terms of numbers when a full Viking team and half a Pirate team attack their base, and the outcome is almost inevitably going to be: the knights will lose at least 1 chest.

    This would bring the count to:

    Knights: 2
    Vikings: 1
    Pirates: 3

    And Pirates are suddenly in the lead.
    But of course if the winning team has the least amounts of tickets, it would be very unwise to attack anyone else.

    It's not an entirely bad strategy, just frowned upon.

    Aaaaaaalsoooo
    Enough off-topicing, this is pirates vs archers thread :D Do the pirates desperately need a direct defense against archers or are they more than capable of countering them and it's just a matter of skill?

    QUOTE (Trojan•Clinique @ Nov 8 2011, 08:06 PM)
    Denshin is a rather overpowered class.

    QUOTE (Lucas =) @ Jan 12 2012, 08:16 AM)
    We're currently working on making Denshin less OP.
    signatureopaquesmall.png

  • SharpiemanSharpieman Senior
    edited June 2013
    Denshin wrote:

    What team to attack is greatly depending on how many tickets they have left. If my team's ticket count is way less than the currently winning team's tickets, it can actually be beneficial in the long run to try to go for the third team if they have any chests because say example:

    Knights: 300 w. 3 chests
    Vikings: 250 w. 2 chests
    Pirates: 200 w. 1 chest

    Both pirates and vikings know the knights are winning and nearly everyone in both teams will storm the knights, however if one or two pirates decide to attack the vikings which is most likely going to be undefended, they can potentially bring home 2 chests. Knights team will still face a greater opposition in terms of numbers when a full Viking team and half a Pirate team attack their base, and the outcome is almost inevitably going to be: the knights will lose at least 1 chest.

    This would bring the count to:

    Knights: 2
    Vikings: 1
    Pirates: 3

    And Pirates are suddenly in the lead.
    But of course if the winning team has the least amounts of tickets, it would be very unwise to attack anyone else.

    It's not an entirely bad strategy, just frowned upon.

    Aaaaaaalsoooo
    Enough off-topicing, this is pirates vs archers thread :D Do the pirates desperately need a direct defense against archers or are they more than capable of countering them and *it's just a matter of skill?*


    BRAVO!

    citizen-kane-clapping.gif

    You summed it up quite well Densh! Perfectly said in the undlerlined bolded asterisked text.
  • bERt0rbERt0r Senior
    edited June 2013
    What will happen next? The pirates are now winning. The Vikings basically have no chance to win now, and most likely they are pissed at the Pirates. If they have some brain, they go all out on the Pirate base and if the Knights are not totally braindead either the Pirates will get owned (like it should be in a 2 vs 1 scenario).
    You can make up a fictional scenario for everything to twist a statement around, what I said was more of a general rule how to have a fun/challenging game. The point is that every team has to be trying to win. As long as you go for the team with the lowest points diveded by booty value (=the team which is winning) you will earn the rage of the losers who are now not playing to win, instead they play to make you lose and then you will lose, that's the nature of the 3 team battle.
    Most of the time, island turns into a spawnkill-deathmatch anyway. I regularly see Pirates/Vikings attack the Knights when the Vikings/Pirates hold all 6 chests.
    Changes in Latitudes, Changes in Attitudes, somthing to something, Yaarrrrrgh!
    I be pro grammar!
  • simiussimius Senior
    edited 1:48AM
    simius wrote:

    Imho the main objective and optimal approach should not be stomping the winning team but bringing victory to your own team.

    bERt0r wrote:

    Any common sense? If you dont take the booty from the winning team, you CANNOT win yourself. You should not play booty maps.

    bERt0r wrote:

    The point is that every team has to be trying to win.



    Our opinions are actually quite similar, aren't they?
    As you pointed out the main problem is anger. So what do you do when your chests get stolen by the other loosing team? You don't get mad and attack that team blindly but you accept what they did and you understand that they thought it was clever to do that sneaky move or maybe didn't think at all. You do whatever is most effective to put your team into lead. Depending on the situation the best bet could be attacking either team.
    I try to think of my opponents as mature people, as you should do, I reckon. However some guys don't quite get the game yet - explaining might help - others like to troll. We have to deal with it
Sign In or Register to comment.