Bows and Archers

[arvilino]

Flyers need a nerf anyways, but wind already presented this threat and it didnt nerf them, why would this?

Bows should have 2-5 range, no close range yet near the same ridiculousness of FE2s

Ballista can be annoying by themselves when they show up, wouldn't it be a bad idea for every bow wielding enemy to be a mini ballista having Ranger/Bow Knight attack radius be up to 13 squares(8 move and 5 attack range)?

Edited February 4, 2015 by arvilino

[Magical Glace]

If you have non-flying units as escorts then sure but I can think of plenty of situations where flying units will be sent ahead because of their superior movement and need to take out enemy archers before they can attack. Archers are enough of a threat to fliers when they can't counter-attack, let alone if they could.

...Paladins.

Unless it's the DESERT

[Jedi]

Ballista can be annoying by themselves when they show up, wouldn't it be a bad idea for every bow wielding enemy to be a mini ballista having Ranger/Bow Knight attack radius be up to 13 squares(8 move and 5 attack range)?

Well realistically, mounted cavalry was very dominating back when it was initially established.

[NekoKnight]

Flyers need a nerf anyways, but wind already presented this threat and it didnt nerf them, why would this?

Bows should have 2-5 range, no close range yet near the same ridiculousness of FE2s

Wind was a bad idea for a flying counter because 1. Pegasus already have high resistance, which makes Wind magic only useful against the Wyvern line and 2. Wind tomes have such pitifully low Might that even effective damage is negligible. I think bow users could use a buff but their range shouldn't be THAT good.

If they had 2-3 range on normal bows and 2-4 with a longbow, they could outclass mages on their turn but still be vulnerable for the counterattack.

[Jedi]

Wind was a bad idea for a flying counter because 1. Pegasus already have high resistance, which makes Wind magic only useful against the Wyvern line and 2. Wind tomes have such pitifully low Might that even effective damage is negligible. I think bow users could use a buff but their range shouldn't be THAT good.

If they had 2-3 range on normal bows and 2-4 with a longbow, they could outclass mages on their turn but still be vulnerable for the counterattack.

Well when Archers/Snipers have only been a good class in like.. what 4 games? There needs to be a serious overhaul.

[iavasechui]

Wind was a bad idea for a flying counter because 1. Pegasus already have high resistance, which makes Wind magic only useful against the Wyvern line and 2. Wind tomes have such pitifully low Might that even effective damage is negligible. I think bow users could use a buff but their range shouldn't be THAT good.

If they had 2-3 range on normal bows and 2-4 with a longbow, they could outclass mages on their turn but still be vulnerable for the counterattack.

I've had several instances of my pegknights attacking a wind tome mage who could do a whole whopping 0 damage to them, 3 times 0 is still 0....

XD Pity bows aren't very good in rpgs, they are quite deadly in real life.

[Fei Mao]

I think it would be cool if they give archers something unique, because currently for two range attacks mages outclass them and can heal on promotion, and hand axe and javelin users can do the same.

There needs to be major changes but I would like to see the archer class as an offensive support unit.

-More range (Like most of you said)

-Ability to move after attacking

-Better base stats

-Support Attacking from the Super Robot War series, Not like they didn't borrow some for Awakening already in short when a unit adjacent to the archer initiates an attack the archer joins in after the initater finishes. Participating archer should get maybe 10-20 exp per support and get 1/4th or half of the exp if the enemy dies.

Other things (requires mechanics rehaul)

-Allow archers to create a barricade which blocks enemy movement and grants 10 exp. (Allow an archer to place 2 per turn when promoted to sniper)

-Different types of arrows to use:

-Fire: Adds +2 or 3 to final damage dealt and lowers enemy speed by 2 or 3, but uses up two durabilty. (Increases to 5 after promotion)

-Poison: Reduce inflicted enemy's strength, skill, and res by 2 or 3, but uses up two durability. (Increases to 5 after promotion.)

-Armor Piercing: Inflicts 1.5x damage to Wyverns and Knights, but uses up three durability. (Increases to 2x after promotion)

[Bobobarrel]

- Increase range for foot archers

- Bring back ballistae

- Give horse archers the ability to shoot and then move a limited distance away

[Jedi]

- Give horse archers the ability to shoot and then move a limited distance away

This has been done in the past via a skill called Canto.

[Philranger]

This has been done in the past via a skill called Canto.

Of course Canto applied to all mounted units instead of just horseback archers. Even fliers IIRC.

[Jedi]

Of course Canto applied to all mounted units instead of just horseback archers. Even fliers IIRC.

Yes, All mounts got Canto in the games it was present in, as well as it being given to an item in FE4 where if you held onto it any unit who held it got more mov and canto.

[Roflolxp54]

Considering that East vs. West seems to be the theme based on what's see in the trailer, it wouldn't be much of a stretch to consider the possibility of bows being capable of AoE attacks by having certain bows carry explosive arrows (gunpowder is commonly seen as a Chinese invention). It could create a gimmick for explosive effects by following up an arrow carrying gunpowder with a flaming arrow to ignite the gunpowder.

Just my thoughts.

[iavasechui]

Yes, All mounts got Canto in the games it was present in, as well as it being given to an item in FE4 where if you held onto it any unit who held it got more mov and canto.

Nope the knight ring only gives canto, if you want more move you have to hold on to the leg ring as well.

[Light Master]

30% Critical ?????

[Jedi]

Nope the knight ring only gives canto, if you want more move you have to hold on to the leg ring as well.

Whoooops, thats right. I was merging two rings haha.

[IGdood]

Hmm....

How would this sound?

Branching Promotion for archers.

Snipers would have extended range but otherwise would not be that different from what we have now.

Samurai (just to play on the Eastern themes) were supposed to have bow and sword in accord. Of course, samurai actually used spears in combat historically so bow + lance for this class? Perhaps grant an ability to instantly switch to a 1-range weapon to counterattack if attacked while using a bow?

[Jedi]

Hmm....

How would this sound?

Branching Promotion for archers.

Snipers would have extended range but otherwise would not be that different from what we have now.

Samurai (just to play on the Eastern themes) were supposed to have bow and sword in accord. Of course, samurai actually used spears in combat historically so bow + lance for this class? Perhaps grant an ability to instantly switch to a 1-range weapon to counterattack if attacked while using a bow?

I could accept this.

[DomesticHausCat]

Definitely they should make bows like Gaiden. A range of 5 squares or so makes perfect sense to me seeing as real bows have ranges significantly longer than 30ft or so. Also it would be nice if Archers could use knives or something when they are attacked. Similar to how Bishops can heal, but still defend themselves with magic. As opposed to how it was in Radiant Dawn where your Bishops/Sages could only equip staves or tomes.

Edit: Also, crossbows should come back. Those were great.

Edited February 9, 2015 by DomesticHausCat

[IGdood]

Definitely they should make bows like Gaiden. A range of 5 squares or so makes perfect sense to me seeing as real bows have ranges significantly longer than 30ft or so. Also it would be nice if Archers could use knives or something when they are attacked. Similar to how Bishops can heal, but still defend themselves with magic. As opposed to how it was in Radiant Dawn where your Bishops/Sages could only equip staves or tomes.

Edit: Also, crossbows should come back. Those were great.

Crossbows were great, though they could use some better scaling. Since better strength wouldn't improve a crossbow's damage, perhaps make it be affected by Skill? Then again one can then argue that bow damage should also be based on skill and strength since draw strength and location of body an arrow hits both contribute to damage. Hmm...how to make it so that an archer/warrior can use a crossbow and still be effective?

[DomesticHausCat]

I think it would be cool if crossbows ignored half of a unit's defense or something. Historically, crossbows were powerful enough to pierce through armor easily. Knights back then called crossbows a dishonorable weapon for that very reason. Also, a higher crit chance for them would be fitting too I think because those things are brutal as all hell.

Edited February 9, 2015 by DomesticHausCat

[Knight Falchion]

I think it would be cool if crossbows ignored half of a unit's defense or something. Historically, crossbows were powerful enough to pierce through armor easily. Knights back then called crossbows a dishonorable weapon for that very reason. Also, a higher crit chance for them would be fitting too I think because those things are brutal as all hell.

I think this would be awesome if they could implement it in a balanced way. I'm all for realism, but it has to be fair. Obviously we can't use weight anymore to compensate for speed (crossbows were slow as shit), so maybe reduced uses? I do like the idea, though. I'm slightly less inclined to support going back to Gaiden's archer range exactly; I'm okay with 5 squares so long as they can't use the bow to hit adjacent enemy units.

Though crossbows could attack adjacent units and I'd be fine.

Edited February 10, 2015 by The Legendary Falchion

[Jotari]

Just give crossbows a weapon rank and let damage scale to that like the Laguz weapons. Then they can still be useful in endgame without being broken in early game.

[Knight Falchion]

Just give crossbows a weapon rank and let damage scale to that like the Laguz weapons. Then they can still be useful in endgame without being broken in early game.

That's a good point. I'm also thinking there should be a class restriction for crossbows for historical reasons- crossbowmen received different training than archers IIRC- but that might be going too far.

[Dunal]

I believe people are over-thinking things.

Archers tend to suck because IS gives them bad stats. What early game archer in the series has had decent base stats? Absolutely none. Leonardo/Tania's aren't terrible I suppose but they have other issues.

Evidently, Snipers tend to be decent if their stats are good. That's all they need. It's not really the class that's the main issue.

Edited February 10, 2015 by DLuna

[NekoKnight]

I believe people are over-thinking things.

Archers tend to suck because IS gives them bad stats. What early game archer in the series has had decent base stats? Absolutely none. Leonardo/Tania's aren't terrible I suppose but they have other issues.

Evidently, Snipers tend to be decent if their stats are good. That's all they need. It's not really the class that's the main issue.

I would prefer improved base stats rather than greatly changing the core mechanics of how archers work. Archers having the range limitations makes them what they are in Fire Emblem. That said, I wouldn't mind the rare crossbow (1-2 range) as a special weapon for them to use, just as Levin Swords are to the normally melee exclusive sword users.