|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 17, 2009 15:55:17 GMT -5
ARCHER all the way , mages are cowards they hide under the sheild + heels themselves..while archers fight face to face like a real man ..lol um, okay? I think archers are the cooler class and enjoy being them a lot more, my point is mages can shield and heel which makes them better. Also Archers fight face to face? um, since when?
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 17, 2009 16:33:55 GMT -5
grima 1v1 against gandalf would be hard. But grimma in an 8v8 situation is hell for gandalf/legolas packs. He deals massive damage with the bomb and teammates have an easy time cleaning up.
|
|
|
Post by Joppi on Nov 17, 2009 17:26:48 GMT -5
I was talking about a 1v1 scenario because you responded to my post talking about the mage-archer 1v1. The shield allows the mage to choose roughly where and when he wants to fight the archer in a 1v1.
In a real game, it's assumed that the archer is going to be fighting at mid-long range. That's the point of the class. The mage can still keep his shield up as long as he wants as long as someone on his team is watching his ass.
I'm only responding to this (the reason I'm not responding to the others will come after) because I disagree highly.
Yes, the archer rapes the scout, but he has a way more difficult time doing it as opposed to the mage. The archer has little to no way to deal with the roll except waiting for poison to kill the scout or timing their multishot really well (and this will still take 3-4 multishots, less with poison). Most good mages can slip lightnings between rolls and both shockwave and firewall do rape damage even to rolling scouts.
It's not even 50-50. The reason you kept getting killed by it was because I let it off a few inches from your face every single time because you kept walking up the one side and had nowhere to move.
This is exactly what I said.
Anyway, in response to your match-up stuff:
Ultimately, it's largely irrelevant. The archer is the best at killing, I've said this several times. The point I'm trying to make and that you have yet to address is that killing isn't everything. Sure, killing is probably the most "present" thing that most people notice. It makes sense that you'd more easily notice yourself getting killed from the other end of the screen than a mage making a crucial heal that lets another nearly dead teammate make a miraculous comeback, or a mage shielding a few players in a clutch situation to prevent enemy archers from killing his weakened team. But this doesn't mean that it isn't important.
The archer contributes to games in one way, with a few slight exceptions. Generally, the only way the archer is being useful in a game is if he's killing enemy players. Sure, he can play a minor supportive role by knocking off a warrior attacking his teammate with a fire arrow, but warriors and scouts can do it much easier. Also, the archers one purpose can be cock-blocked easily. At long range, the archer is SHUT DOWN by the shield, and don't bullshit me about how the shield can't stay up for very long. Sure, a lone mage is unsafe if he has his shield up too long, but a mage in a group can generally keep it up as long as he wants if his teammates are supportive. One shield can entirely ruin the archer's ability to contribute to the team.
The mage on the other hand, can always contribute to the team in some way. He has unparalleled support function that is essential to all modes of the game. A team without a mage is in deep shit. A team without an archer is in shit, but they're nowhere near as fucked as the no-mage team. The mage also has great killing power, which, while not quite as good as the archer's, is still excellent and most mages have little problem racking good scores in TDM. This combination is incredible, and archers do NOT have enough killing power to override the versatile nature of the mage.
|
|
|
Post by hanzrimer on Nov 17, 2009 19:18:57 GMT -5
I was talking about a 1v1 scenario because you responded to my post talking about the mage-archer 1v1. The shield allows the mage to choose roughly where and when he wants to fight the archer in a 1v1. In a real game, it's assumed that the archer is going to be fighting at mid-long range. That's the point of the class. The mage can still keep his shield up as long as he wants as long as someone on his team is watching his ass. I'm only responding to this (the reason I'm not responding to the others will come after) because I disagree highly. Yes, the archer rapes the scout, but he has a way more difficult time doing it as opposed to the mage. The archer has little to no way to deal with the roll except waiting for poison to kill the scout or timing their multishot really well (and this will still take 3-4 multishots, less with poison). Most good mages can slip lightnings between rolls and both shockwave and firewall do rape damage even to rolling scouts. It's not even 50-50. The reason you kept getting killed by it was because I let it off a few inches from your face every single time because you kept walking up the one side and had nowhere to move. This is exactly what I said. Anyway, in response to your match-up stuff: Ultimately, it's largely irrelevant. The archer is the best at killing, I've said this several times. The point I'm trying to make and that you have yet to address is that killing isn't everything. Sure, killing is probably the most "present" thing that most people notice. It makes sense that you'd more easily notice yourself getting killed from the other end of the screen than a mage making a crucial heal that lets another nearly dead teammate make a miraculous comeback, or a mage shielding a few players in a clutch situation to prevent enemy archers from killing his weakened team. But this doesn't mean that it isn't important. The archer contributes to games in one way, with a few slight exceptions. Generally, the only way the archer is being useful in a game is if he's killing enemy players. Sure, he can play a minor supportive role by knocking off a warrior attacking his teammate with a fire arrow, but warriors and scouts can do it much easier. Also, the archers one purpose can be cock-blocked easily. At long range, the archer is SHUT DOWN by the shield, and don't bullshit me about how the shield can't stay up for very long. Sure, a lone mage is unsafe if he has his shield up too long, but a mage in a group can generally keep it up as long as he wants if his teammates are supportive. One shield can entirely ruin the archer's ability to contribute to the team. The mage on the other hand, can always contribute to the team in some way. He has unparalleled support function that is essential to all modes of the game. A team without a mage is in deep shit. A team without an archer is in shit, but they're nowhere near as fucked as the no-mage team. The mage also has great killing power, which, while not quite as good as the archer's, is still excellent and most mages have little problem racking good scores in TDM. This combination is incredible, and archers do NOT have enough killing power to override the versatile nature of the mage.[/quote 100% right, killing is not everything and archers are only good at killing, mages are good at everything
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 18, 2009 10:48:04 GMT -5
It should be possible to snipe inbetween rolls as well. Maybe you should talk to someone like shadowbadger for tips on how to do it, because I can never seem to roll away from his archer.
I think you severely underestimate the supportive abilities of the archer and what they bring to the team.
Yeah, a mage can come in with a clutch heal to save someone. An archer can do the same thing by killing the attacker. There is, of course, a difference. The mage leaves the teammate with either full health or close to it, thus more ready to fight future threats, and that's pretty huge. But at the same time in order to heal the mage has to get close, which takes time. The archer's arrows don't have that problem. So while the mage might be running to an ally being comboed they might arrive there just late, waste their heal, and be in a bad position against a warrior, for example, while an archer wouldn't even have to move to help, and could help almost instantaneously.
And as for the mages' shields shutting down archers, archers shut down everything else. Remember that mage that was going to heal his ally? Well now he definitely won't make it in time because if he drops his shield he faces getting sniped from three different places. If mages are forced into their shields by enough archers, they can't do anything else. Not to mention if they recently used a heal, shockwave, or firewall, they'll be stuck without it since it can't recharge while they are shielding. So once they are stuck in their shield, not contributing in any other way anymore, they're pretty much sitting ducks for scouts, or they're fucked the moment a warrior or other mage forces their shield down because then the archers will wipe them out. And having several archers also shuts down warriors and (to a lesser extent) scouts, since they can't move without taking damage, and they can't even finish a combo without dying. There's a reason you almost never see warriors on pellenor. Not to mention archers are essential for taking out other archers who are camping at a distance since no one else can easily reach them.
We agree archers are better in tdm and htdm. You say they're worse in ctr, but I don't know that that's true. Yeah, mage's are important to protect and heal the ring bearer, but if they get any distance between them the mage becomes much more limited in their usefulness; if the ring bearer is out of shield and heal range, the mage is stuck fighting anyone nearby (which probably won't be more than one person, since everyone on the opposing team will be concentrating on the ring bearer, so more likely the mage will be doing nothing just trying to get back to the ring bearer), and will have a hard time catching up to the ring bearer. Meanwhile the archer, with his unlimited range arrows, never faces that problem, and can help the ring bearer all the way to the goal.
|
|
|
Post by NexsusX (Fury) on Nov 18, 2009 13:27:59 GMT -5
It should be possible to snipe inbetween rolls as well. Maybe you should talk to someone like shadowbadger for tips on how to do it, because I can never seem to roll away from his archer. I think you severely underestimate the supportive abilities of the archer and what they bring to the team. Yeah, a mage can come in with a clutch heal to save someone. An archer can do the same thing by killing the attacker. There is, of course, a difference. The mage leaves the teammate with either full health or close to it, thus more ready to fight future threats, and that's pretty huge. But at the same time in order to heal the mage has to get close, which takes time. The archer's arrows don't have that problem. So while the mage might be running to an ally being comboed they might arrive there just late, waste their heal, and be in a bad position against a warrior, for example, while an archer wouldn't even have to move to help, and could help almost instantaneously. And as for the mages' shields shutting down archers, archers shut down everything else. Remember that mage that was going to heal his ally? Well now he definitely won't make it in time because if he drops his shield he faces getting sniped from three different places. If mages are forced into their shields by enough archers, they can't do anything else. Not to mention if they recently used a heal, shockwave, or firewall, they'll be stuck without it since it can't recharge while they are shielding. So once they are stuck in their shield, not contributing in any other way anymore, they're pretty much sitting ducks for scouts, or they're fucked the moment a warrior or other mage forces their shield down because then the archers will wipe them out. And having several archers also shuts down warriors and (to a lesser extent) scouts, since they can't move without taking damage, and they can't even finish a combo without dying. There's a reason you almost never see warriors on pellenor. Not to mention archers are essential for taking out other archers who are camping at a distance since no one else can easily reach them. We agree archers are better in tdm and htdm. You say they're worse in ctr, but I don't know that that's true. Yeah, mage's are important to protect and heal the ring bearer, but if they get any distance between them the mage becomes much more limited in their usefulness; if the ring bearer is out of shield and heal range, the mage is stuck fighting anyone nearby (which probably won't be more than one person, since everyone on the opposing team will be concentrating on the ring bearer, so more likely the mage will be doing nothing just trying to get back to the ring bearer), and will have a hard time catching up to the ring bearer. Meanwhile the archer, with his unlimited range arrows, never faces that problem, and can help the ring bearer all the way to the goal. the shire ( and minas morgul sometimes) for ctr is the only exception for that acher < ctr thought. ive seen people like fob joppi, berk, using archers getting 50+ kills (berk once got like 70+ with only 3 deaths which made me call him BOS: Beast Of Shire)
|
|
|
Post by straightcash5 on Nov 18, 2009 14:00:06 GMT -5
Yea why the mage may be shielding the ring bearer, the archer is the one keepin other mages and warriors away, and if any do close enough to force the mage to fight, it's the archer takin out the opposing archers whilst the mages shield is down. So in my eyes the archer is of just as much if not more use than the mage is.
|
|
|
Post by iruleworld on Nov 18, 2009 16:24:23 GMT -5
mages heels themselves , got sheilds , they are the most overpowerd class...mages vs archers cannot be fair fight simply becuase mages can sheild themselves from archers shots + can also heels themselves while archers cannot do anyone of these...i think archers can fight face to face even if they are in a long distance but still face to face becuase they can zoom in and look at the target perfectly , i call this a face to face fight unless until any archer hide behind something and shoots but if it is 1 vs 1 the hiding of archer is a rare possiblity... in my opinion mages simply sucks....i bet if any mage can fight an archer in a short distance without using a heel and a sheild....that would be a fair fight...mage can use lighting, firewall and shockwave...archer will use his arrows and kick.....the fight should be in a close distance ...a good mage can kill archer with his good lighting accuracy while a good archer can KO an archer with just his multishot arrow while he the mage jumps for lightining....
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 18, 2009 16:28:38 GMT -5
ROFLMAO
|
|
|
Post by iruleworld on Nov 18, 2009 16:42:49 GMT -5
well let me correct myself and make something clear english is not my language..what i mean by FACE TO FACE is that not protecting themselves...its simple an archer vs archer in a long range fight will still i call it face to face atleast they cannot protect themselves with a bullshit sheild...unlike mages even if they are in a close distance or long distance they will use sheild hence for an archer its not a fair ( face to face ) fight...i can kill any archer in a long range distance unless untill if he dont hide himself behind something... if i play with an archer in a long range distance i will call it face to face battle... if any archer hides himselfs and shoots i dont call it face to face battle...i think this is soo easy to understand for someone unless untill its a JERK who try to change the meaning of what i am saying ROLFLMAO... haha ...
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 18, 2009 16:46:25 GMT -5
Yeah, they are "face to face" if they are fighting another archer. But you think it's "fair" and "face to face" when they are fighting a warrior or scout? I mean sure, the warrior has an axe, but really?
|
|
|
Post by Joppi on Nov 18, 2009 16:53:54 GMT -5
Yeah, if the scout is a dumbass and is rolling away in one direction. If he mixes it up, it's going to take some godly prediction skills to get it on his head.
Also, quit with the fucking sour tone. I'm debating you, not insulting you. I'd like it if you did the same.
Okay, first off, we're not debating on Pellenor here. In most stages, the archer can NOT just survey the field and attack anything he feels like instantly. Still, you are right: the archer's range does usually give him the chance to support more people than a mage might be able to (depending on their positions).
So, because of that, the main difference between the archer and mage's support (in a lot of cases) is that the archer's support is more flexible, whereas the mage's support is more solid. The archer can support anyone that he can see, but his means of doing are not as consistent, especially if his fire and poison arrow are not charged (which is likely if they were previously killing someone else). Both the arrows take 7 seconds to recharge, and that's long enough for just about any class to kill any other class, especially if the ally is already damaged. Additionally, if the ally is under attack by multiple enemies, one being a mage, the mage can simply put up a shield and cover his ally while your ally is dying. Even if the archer does manage to save his ally (while is perfectly possible, even with normal headshots), the ally is still in a crappy position due to potential life-loss and he has no cover at all from enemy archers or even enemy mages.
On the flip-side, the mage can provide direct in-your-face support in the form of the shockwave and firewall. Both do great damage and help get the enemy off the ally. From there, he can heal the ally and shield him if there are other archers. Of course, the down-side is that the mage has to be relatively close to the ally. Still, in a group setting, the mage should be near his allies and his presence, especially in the company of other mages, makes the group a thousand times stronger.
I feel like we're on hugely different wave-lengths in this debate. From reading this paragraph, I'm conjuring the image of a stranded warrior in the middle of a blank field getting harassed by the enemy team. The mage is alone in his shield being targeted by no less than three archers (which I suppose is enough to have the entire field surveyed at all times), a scout, and a mage/warrior. Well, the first thing wrong with this scene is that the mage is alone. Mages should not be alone, or, even if they are, there are seven other players on the field drawing the attention of the other players on the team. So, those three archers wouldn't be all focused on the shielding mage (staring directly into the mage's shield has been known to have the unfortunate side effect of blindness inflicted by enemy fire arrows in your face), the scout would have a tough time staying invisible with multishots flying in the air or, god forbid, people actually looking for them, and mages and warriors, while more likely to be a present threat, could also be fighting someone else. It's not a realistic scenario. It's an exaggerated nightmare that really only has any possibility of happening in a really lop-sided Pellenor Fields match. In most other stages, archers can NOT maintain an unimpeded line of sight for even most of the stage.
And overall, I think the biggest discrepancy in how we're approaching this debate is that you seem to be thinking (and correct me if I'm wrong) of a single mage (presumably because this seems to be your style) and how he deals with the various things he has to deal with alone, or at least with no other mages. You seem to be thinking of how archers can eliminate single enemies in easy ways or make life hell against groups with only mage. I'm thinking of what a mage brings to a group, especially a group with other mages. I'm thinking of how archers deal with the entire enemy team in general, especially against groups with mages.
The mage's presence in groups is what makes me think he's the best (and he's not slouch solo, either. Much better than the scout and maybe even a bit better than the warrior). The archer is a great asset to any group, but he isn't a necessary one. The mage has the basic building blocks of group support in his heal and shield, and contributes excellent damage with his attacks (which are also much easier to hit with and are affected less by the stage).
Uh, well, you could just take a few mages and warriors and just go up with the cover of a shield. From there, the archers just kinda die and then get spawned camped for the rest of the match.
I mean that, if a mage is supporting the ring bearer, he becomes the most important unit on the team. The archer can support the ring-bearer in more places (if the mage isn't with the ring-bearer in the first place, which he should be unless he died), but he still can't heal or shield him, and, unless he's some sort of deity, he can't eliminate all the enemies around the ring-bearer (also, shields). Again, flexible vs. solid.
|
|
|
Post by iruleworld on Nov 18, 2009 16:58:46 GMT -5
Yeah, they are "face to face" if they are fighting another archer. But you think it's "fair" and "face to face" when they are fighting a warrior or scout? I mean sure, the warrior has an axe, but really? well against scout surely its unfair and not face to face,,, with warrior ... its 50:50 ..if a warrior use an axe its 50:50 and if warrior doesnt use an axe its not face to face ... regarding who is better mage or archer... lets settle this - mage vs archer- CONDITIONS FOR CLASSES-mage can use- shockwave , firewall , lightining archer can use - arrows and kick condition for match- THE FIGHT SHOULD BE IN A CLOSE RANGE... Probablity - 50:50 Proof - 1)a person who is good mage will throw a proper firewall on the archer and just give 1 lightining. 2) a person who is good archer can just kill a mage with his fire arrow if he aims it exactly on the head of a mage , he can kill a mage just with his multishot arrows if he have good timing to shoot them when the mage jumps for lighting. or he can also kill a mage with his just normal ciritical headshot arrow. Result- both are euqal towards each others if the above mentioned conditions are applied.. PERSONAL OPINION-- I will go with archer if i was asked who is better mage or archer with the above mentioned conditions appiled... if we use the above mentioned conditions for mage. and archer ,,, i think archer can have more win over mage,.. this is my personal opinion.
|
|
|
Post by BulgarianMenace on Nov 18, 2009 17:00:45 GMT -5
I knew it would come off as an insult, but I didn't know how to phrase it. No offense. It's just that he always seems to hit me, and trust me, I zigzag roll, so there might be trick to it or something. I mean, you're an expert on the archer, but it might be possible shadow found a way to deal with rolling scouts that's more effective than your method. Again, apologies, but it is hard to tell someone they might be doing something wrong, especially when that someone is arguably the best archer in the game, without sounding a little insulting.
*continues to read your post*
|
|
|
Post by Joppi on Nov 18, 2009 17:06:49 GMT -5
Well, that's understandable, it just seemed rather intentional considering the earlier jab (or what seemed like one) at the fact that I don't have a problem with retreating.
|
|