armor is worthless like it was in warband

[Outplaynation]

full face plate armor is defeated by single arrow from lowly forest bandit.
i can't use two handed weapons without carrying a shield just because of ranged weapons.
pls fix ranged being safe to use and high damage.

[Zugs]

you mean like it was really? Arrows could and would pierce heavy armor. If anything this is one of the better improvements of the game.

[Eldrin]

Originally posted by Zugs:

you mean like it was really? Arrows could and would pierce heavy armor. If anything this is one of the better improvements of the game.

Crossbows could pierce plate.
Normal bows just bounce off plate armor

[Replicant Six]

Originally posted by Eldrin:

Originally posted by Zugs:

you mean like it was really? Arrows could and would pierce heavy armor. If anything this is one of the better improvements of the game.

Crossbows could pierce plate.
Normal bows just bounce off plate armor

Bodkin arrows can potentially punch through plate, but you'd need a powerful bow to pull it off. Maybe more elite archers can do it but woodland bandits shouldn't. But op is right, armor effectiveness needs to double or something. There's a reason why heavily armored troops were such a terror.

[Whitecrow]

Ranged weapons became dangerous to full plate only when humans invented guns and even early guns did not always pierce armor.

[Outplaynation]

i think that the more you get closer to plate armor the less damage low tier bows should do.

given that the downside of full plate is its super expensive and thus not available to most soldiers.
its a very expensive option compared to just wearing 2 shields but it offers better protection in general.

irl,by late medieval period knights in full plate stopped carrying shields because they didn't need them.

so if you're wearing full top of the line plate you only have to worry about heavy crossbows(with some damage), a few special bows(with heavy damage reduced ), rocks, siege weapons, horsemen,and other infantry.

not guys throwing point sticks or shooting bottom tier bows.

[Urek]

will be fixed with mods later on just like in warband

[DemonicSquid]

*cough* *cough* Battle of Agincourt...

[Free Luigi M.]

Originally posted by Zugs:

you mean like it was really? Arrows could and would pierce heavy armor. If anything this is one of the better improvements of the game.

That's not even remotely true. Arrows have never been able to pierce heavy armor at any point in history. Especially not arrows shot from short bows.

Originally posted by DemonicSquid:

*cough* *cough* Battle of Agincourt...

Great example. At Agincourt even the English warbows were unable to pierce plate armor.

Even though it would be more appropriate to make a comparison with early crusades, when saracens used bows on crusaders clad in mail gambesons.

[Outplaynation]

they could just give ranged weapons a armor pen stat of how much armor they can go through before their damage starts decreasing.

[Bananaedmonkey]

Originally posted by DemonicSquid:

*cough* *cough* Battle of Agincourt...

this man knows whats up

[Ireheart]

Originally posted by Joe Chip:

Originally posted by Zugs:

you mean like it was really? Arrows could and would pierce heavy armor. If anything this is one of the better improvements of the game.

That's not even remotely true. Arrows have never been able to pierce heavy armor at any point in history. Especially not arrows shot from short bows.

This is untrue too, the british long bow could pierce plate if it hit right. Thats why later on plate was design with curves.

Edit: I am very wrong

[Voelkar]

Originally posted by Outplaynation:

they could just give ranged weapons a armor pen stat of how much armor they can go through before their damage starts decreasing.

Isnt this already in the game? I am wearing a full plate armor and all my armor absorbs like 90% of the damage from arrows (eg 20 base damage and only 3 inflicted damage)

[Free Luigi M.]

Originally posted by Feral Man:

Originally posted by Joe Chip:

That's not even remotely true. Arrows have never been able to pierce heavy armor at any point in history. Especially not arrows shot from short bows.

This is untrue too, the british long bow could pierce plate if it hit right. Thats why later on plate was design with curves.

Any plate was designed with curves. And unless by "hit right" you mean a bang on hit in some unarmored spot, then no.

Originally posted by Voelkar:

Originally posted by Outplaynation:

they could just give ranged weapons a armor pen stat of how much armor they can go through before their damage starts decreasing.

Isnt this already in the game? I am wearing a full plate armor and all my armor absorbs like 90% of the damage from arrows (eg 20 base damage and only 3 inflicted damage)

It is, but the effect is somewhat underwhelming. You can still get oneshotted by an arrow hitting your full-helm in the back.

[Şeyma]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBxdTkddHaE judging by this video longbow arrows get deflected off armor but if it hits a weak point or shrapnel then it could kill you, they use 200 pound draw weight longbow and agincourt historical armor and fletched arrows

[Free Luigi M.]

Originally posted by Templar:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBxdTkddHaE judging by this video longbow arrows get deflected off armor but if it hits a weak point or shrapnel then it could kill you

That's also a more advanced bow than what is currently in the game, versus a more advanced armor.