Better Bows?

Feedback and Suggestions
1

This is my first post on here, and if this topic has already been brought up somewhere else I apologize, but I wanted to put my thoughts out there and see if anyone else shares them.

For the setup, I’ve been bringing up an alt, my first Rogue, and trying out playing ranged. I’ve been playing it as close to a starter as I could, not using my stashed items and with minimal crafting. Now on to the problem.

Is it just me, or does playing a ranged rogue feel dull to anyone else? and I don’t mean in the “I don’t like the playstyle” kind of way, I enjoy the playstyle, it’s much more dynamic than my main (A warpath sentinel), it’s just that it ends up feeling weirdly flat after a short time playing in a way I couldn’t describe for a while.

I took the past few days to try and figure out what the problem was, and I think I’ve good idea of what’s not landing. Gear. Specifically weapons. Bows feel like there’s a linear progression from one to the next, with little to no deviation, once you find a good bow of a type you’re not going to find one that’s much better till you get the next type, same with quivers, you find a good one then have to wait till the next type. meanwhile all the other classes get a much larger variety of weapons, Melee characters get three base styles, with both one and two hand variants of each, and even casters have three options, but bow users get a single item path.

The part that really gets to me is that it doesn’t have to be that way (Unless there’s a coding issue that I’m unaware of, since I’m not a CS person.) there are options for interesting ranged weapon types. For example.
Heavy Bow: More base damage, with an intrinsic pierce, but without the ability to use a quiver with it. basically a true two hander for ranged characters.
Crossbow: low attack speed, but in exchange you can fire without stopping moving. allowing for a much more mobile playstyle.
Hand Crossbow: Lower base damage, but a true one handed weapon that you can use a shield with.

I don’t know if those could all be properly balanced, they only took me a day and a half to come up with, but I think that the space for interesting ranged weapons should be explored, as the lack of variety is, at least for me, making the ranged playstyle, interesting as it should be, fall flat.

2

I see where you’re coming from with the gear & I kinda agree.

I’d probably change that so the crossbow has the current stutterstep style (because reloading them is a ballache) & higher damage with shorter range. Then the current bows would be able to fire while moving (because reloading isn’t really an issue compared to a crossbow).

1 Like
3

That was a very long way to say “Please add crossbows and greatbows” :smiley:

I agree. Melee characters choose from 11 weapon types, spellcasters from 4+ (other weapon types sometimes fit spellcasters too), meanwhile bow characters only have 1 weapon type - bows.

However, there are other issues that prevent EHG from expanding the ranged weapon types:

  • In the current game Bows are already very sparsely used weapon category. Only Rogue can use them, so first this should be amended.

Bow Sorceress with Kuko Shakaku was a thing in Diablo 2. And leveling alts of any class with bows after a high level Enchant Sorceress gave you a long-lasting fire damage buff in multiplayer was also common thing. Give it here!

  • Second issue is that there needs to be support for the new weapon types. Skills need to be changed, and very likely new nodes created to boost specific weapon types, at least for certain skills.

Without that, you wouldn’t really be choosing from options, you would be using yet another bow that has a “crossbow” sticker slapped on it :smiley:

4

Mike has said on stream, regarding new masteries, that one of the first he would like to see added is a sort of primalist that can use companions and a bow. That would help fill the gap a little.

And yeah, I agree that bows should have more variety as well, even though I don’t enjoy Rogue that much. But having at least bow/longbow/crossbow (which is also the base in D2) would help with having more choices and not feeling as flat.

5

I could definitely see a few more bows with different implicit, but what you suggest here with the different weapon types would require new animations and skills that thematically fit a crossbow instead of a bow. This would most like be a entire new class and not the rogue/marksman.

Regarding quiver I disagree I think they are all very good and even some low level ones are very good for specific builds.

6

That doesn’t make it better, it actually makes it worse, since if you’re playing one of those builds you’re reasonably likely to find a version pretty early that will see you through till empowered monos, meaning that there’s no point to looking for something that’s better or more interesting because you’re not going to find it. whereas for other weapon or offhand types there are multiple sidegrade options that mean you can usually find something that’s at least an interesting option within a few levels.

It would need new models and animations, yes, but that’s not a reason to not make the game better. it wouldn’t need new skills though, as any bow ability would work fine with a crossbow, sure they don’t technically fire “Arrows” irl but you also can’t cause an arrow to curve back onto someone it’s already hit irl, and a culture calling bolts arrows isn’t a stretch.

Like I put earlier in this reply, skills wouldn’t need to change, just like you don’t need to change skills when you’re using different melee weapons, you can just add “or crossbow” to anything that relates to bows and it would still be a huge improvement, giving you actual choice in how the weapon you’re using plays beyond “This one deals more damage”. Even without putting any points in to anything that differentiates them, using an axe is different than using a sword, the same would apply to the different bow types.

That’s fair, I was thinking that since general aiming takes less coordination with a crossbow, and strength isn’t something that limits the weapon you can wield, you reloading the crossbow without a winch mechanism and on the move would be an easy handwave, while aiming a longbow takes more coordination, and doing so while moving is harder. that being said, I think your interpretation is also valid, and wouldn’t be disappointed in either variation.

7

Assuming it uses a winch or similar to reset (or whatever it’s called) the string, yes. Otherwise it’d need quite a lot of strength. Though this is also in a universe where drawing a bow requires dexterity rather than strength.

8

I was more meaning in LE strength isn’t a factor, you can use weapons like the eber head, radiant axe, and leviathan carver, with no difference in attack speed whether you have 0 or 100 strength. there are one handers that would also be incredibly hard to wield irl without significant strength, but the two handers really emphasize it. so it wouldn’t be out of keeping with that kind of strength requirement waving to say you can draw the string using your hand without a problem.

1 Like
9

Yeah, nobody would use it if your character effectively stunlocked itself for a second or so everytime they used a skill. It just annoys me a teensy bit that bow skills in RPGs of any flavour tend to use dex instead of strength as the attribute requirement.

10

That would be because for most bows irl dexterity is more important than strength. The smaller bows don’t usuall require much strength, unless you’re trying to pull on the string as hard as you can to get a little extra range.
For the most part, it’s not hard to pull and release. Dexterity to aim your target, though, is a very important stat.
It’s only for longbows that you also need strength. And even for these, you still need both.

As for crossbows, it’s basically the same thing. If it has a winch you only need dexterity, if it doesn’t you need both.

But in neither case will you succeed using a bow (and actually hitting targets) using strength alone.

11

Or trying to penetrate armour/hide.

So, war bows then. One that you might want to use to kill stuff with.

Yup. Medieval archers were highly trained & built like brick shit houses.

1 Like
12

If we were to expand on that, melee weapons actually suffer from the same thing. A longsword is a pure strength weapon. So is a morning star.
A flail, on the other hand, requires more dexterity. So do most swords/katanas. And obviously daggers.

But all melee weapons tend to get the strength stat and all ranged ones (including stuff like slings) tend to get the dexterity stat.

1 Like
13

Only European war bows, and they get outclassed by things like the Mongol composite bows, which require significantly less strength to draw, but still fire arrows farther than most longbows. But I do agree that having bows only scale off of dex is annoying from a historical perspective, as even with the lighter composite bows you still needed more strength than the average person.

14

Fair, but how did they do against the heavy armour that European knights wore (I’d assume this would be the reason the European war bows were heavier)? I’ve no idea what kind of defences that kind of bow would have had to penetrate.

15

Neither will do much/anything against plate, and against lighter armor they’ll both do more than well enough to be lethal. The youtube channel Tod’s Workshop did a pretty great set of videos a few years ago on arrows against armor where they used a 160lb English longbow (generally what would be the strongest you’d really see on the battlefield), with period accurate arrows, against some period plate armor, the best they got was a small dent.

16

So presumably the French knights weren’t wearing plate at Agincourt/Crecy then, 'cause they got their arses handed to them by the English/Welsh archers.

17

According to many historian accounts, the biggest devastation the archers caused on the french was by killing their horses during the cavalry charge, not so much the knights.
Historians remain divided on the efficacy of the archers vs the men-at-arms, as well as the actual quality of the armour they were using, whether it was really plate armour or a cheaper and shoddier materaial.
At least that was the case when I happened to research this battle about 10 years ago (because of a book scene).

But yeah, plate armour can’t be pierced by bows or longbows to such an extent that they didn’t even use shields to protect against them.

1 Like
18

The vast majority of the French forces at Agincourt were men at arms, who would have, likely, been wearing brigandine or chain, not plate, same with Crecy. Agincourt in particular was less a triumph for the English longbow, and more a failing of the French tactics, charging through mud is never a great plan. Plate also doesn’t fully protect you, there are necessary gaps so that you can move and see, any of which a lucky arrow can hit and effectively take you out of the battle. The videos I referenced above were actually specifically using evidence we have for what was used in Agincourt as the basis for what would have been period appropriate.

2 Likes