I'm definitely pro real archery, I just hope this improves peoples opinions on padded archery. 
http://epictoysonline.com/shop/images/a ... -green.jpg
http://epictoysonline.com/shop/images/a ... -green.jpg
Ducal Tournament Archery
- Thread starter Khorwyn Brey
- Start date
Khorwyn Brey
Adept
One of the things that might cut down on the "boredom" of the event, if real bows are utilized, is not having all of the competitors go through multiple rounds of shooting. You get one shot at everything else, with the exception of the bracketed elimination structure of the 3-Man Combat, so why not reduce the Archery competition to one round? Each archer gets to do his best with a certain number of arrows, say 5 to 10? That would certainly expedite the event.
Combat Archery could be interesting, but I think I would have the same complaint about it as I have with the Spell Caster's Battle: wide open space. When I think of combat archery, I think of a fire fight. Using cover, getting creative, etc. I think the idea of HORSE is cool when using packets, but my real interest would be in seeing an all new target shooting experience, such as having to hit a moving target, having to make an arcing shot over a distance, shooting through small gaps/space, aiming while put off balance or blindfolded, or having to knock over differently sized objects like bottles. All of this forces the players to rely on accuracy, could be points-based, and would take "damage" out of it all together.
Thank you everyone for keeping this discussion going!
- Dave
Combat Archery could be interesting, but I think I would have the same complaint about it as I have with the Spell Caster's Battle: wide open space. When I think of combat archery, I think of a fire fight. Using cover, getting creative, etc. I think the idea of HORSE is cool when using packets, but my real interest would be in seeing an all new target shooting experience, such as having to hit a moving target, having to make an arcing shot over a distance, shooting through small gaps/space, aiming while put off balance or blindfolded, or having to knock over differently sized objects like bottles. All of this forces the players to rely on accuracy, could be points-based, and would take "damage" out of it all together.
Thank you everyone for keeping this discussion going!
- Dave
I'll agree with Mike 100% on these 2 being the most boring to watch.
mikestrauss said:Toddo said:
I considered having PCs compete on being the first to bring down a golem or whatever. It would be fun to watch but not really fair to participants since each golem (each NPC in other words) would have a different level of speed / evasiveness.
Doing the archery comabt in a designated spot in the woods would be sweet however. I wouldn't do it for spellcasters but arrows are cheap enough that if I waste one on a tree I won't have to start crying. Just have to make sure that the area isn't too big or too dense with trees so people can still watch. There's the safety thing too with trips and branches in the eye and whatnot to consider though.
The problem I have with those other ideas about shooting through small spaces and shooting bottles is that it sounds like there would be a lot of downtime. If we could avoid that so the archery is all action then I could be a supporter.
Khorwyn Brey said:One of the things that might cut down on the "boredom" of the event, if real bows are utilized, is not having all of the competitors go through multiple rounds of shooting. You get one shot at everything else, with the exception of the bracketed elimination structure of the 3-Man Combat, so why not reduce the Archery competition to one round? Each archer gets to do his best with a certain number of arrows, say 5 to 10? That would certainly expedite the event.
Combat Archery could be interesting, but I think I would have the same complaint about it as I have with the Spell Caster's Battle: wide open space. When I think of combat archery, I think of a fire fight. Using cover, getting creative, etc. I think the idea of HORSE is cool when using packets, but my real interest would be in seeing an all new target shooting experience, such as having to hit a moving target, having to make an arcing shot over a distance, shooting through small gaps/space, aiming while put off balance or blindfolded, or having to knock over differently sized objects like bottles. All of this forces the players to rely on accuracy, could be points-based, and would take "damage" out of it all together.
Thank you everyone for keeping this discussion going!
- Dave
Ezri
Virtuoso
It's sounding to me (from the responses here) that most of us who usually participate in archery prefer real bows, while those who usually watch just want it to hurry the heck up or somehow make it more entertaining.
I still like Kevin's idea of getting a few bales of hay and keeping the traditional archery, just making it go faster. Alternately an elimination-style of rounds would speed it up:
Round 1 everybody shoots. Scores are added up. Only the top 50% move to round two.
Round 2 the first cut shoots. Scores are added up, cut the group in half again.
Final round - remaining participants shoot.
Total scores tablated, places declared, tournament points awarded.
The way the groups are divided (halves, thirds or whatever) could be determined by the number of teams participating, but either way you cut down on the length of the event by having fewer people shoot each round.
As for the hunt taking a long time, *shrug* it's up to each team how much effort they want to put into the hunt, so it doesn't need to consume your weekend. And the time at the end on Sunday can be minimized by simply reducing the number of things that need to be performed or otherwise turned in at that point.
I still like Kevin's idea of getting a few bales of hay and keeping the traditional archery, just making it go faster. Alternately an elimination-style of rounds would speed it up:
Round 1 everybody shoots. Scores are added up. Only the top 50% move to round two.
Round 2 the first cut shoots. Scores are added up, cut the group in half again.
Final round - remaining participants shoot.
Total scores tablated, places declared, tournament points awarded.
The way the groups are divided (halves, thirds or whatever) could be determined by the number of teams participating, but either way you cut down on the length of the event by having fewer people shoot each round.
As for the hunt taking a long time, *shrug* it's up to each team how much effort they want to put into the hunt, so it doesn't need to consume your weekend. And the time at the end on Sunday can be minimized by simply reducing the number of things that need to be performed or otherwise turned in at that point.
mikestrauss
Virtuous
Ezri said:
I have a curious chicken and egg question on that fact. Are there people who would have been participating or who would prefer to participate, but don't/haven't because the format is real archery? Similarly, are there people who participate because it is real archery who would not participate if it was packet archery (I honestly didn't get a chance to compare participants between this year's packet and the previous year's real archery)?
I really wish I had paid closer attention to who participated in this year's packet competition and compared it to normal participants. I also wish I had found time to ask the new participants (those who hadn't previously participated in archery) why they chose to participate this year and whether the format impacted that decision. Hindsight... 20/20...
-MS
Gunnar
Virtuous
I was disappointed that Archery wasn't real this year. I participated anyway, but if packet archery continues, I will not participate further. This previous year was the first time I was PCing tournament and had a character who could feasibly participate (one year playing sarr, other year no lefty bows).
Hope this helps,
-Ali
Hope this helps,
-Ali
I'm guessing there are people who would be more likely to do archery if it were packet (just as there are people who would only do real archery). One possible reason is character concept - if my character always uses a crossbow, using a real bow in archery might not seem like something my character would do.
A second reason is that even though real archery is fun there are often problems with the competition. I did the archery part of the tourney back in 99 or 2000 and I remember we were using a crappy bow. It wasn't fun and I actually enjoy real archery. Then at the last team tourney I remember there was some issue where the arrows didn't match the bow or something. At least the archer on our team didn't have much fun in the competition as a result.
My point is that a lot can go wrong using real bows and even people who enjoy them end up not enjoying the competition sometimes. Plus real archery is boring to watch. I dislike packet archery but I still recommend it for the tourney.
What it were a combination with round 1 being real archery and round 2 being packet combat archery?
A second reason is that even though real archery is fun there are often problems with the competition. I did the archery part of the tourney back in 99 or 2000 and I remember we were using a crappy bow. It wasn't fun and I actually enjoy real archery. Then at the last team tourney I remember there was some issue where the arrows didn't match the bow or something. At least the archer on our team didn't have much fun in the competition as a result.
My point is that a lot can go wrong using real bows and even people who enjoy them end up not enjoying the competition sometimes. Plus real archery is boring to watch. I dislike packet archery but I still recommend it for the tourney.
mikestrauss said:
What it were a combination with round 1 being real archery and round 2 being packet combat archery?
zehnyu said:
Dreamingfurther
Exemplar
I guess I'm in the minority here, but the thing I think packet archery has going for it, is that it retains the continuity. You don't have to explain/do anything different. Everyone can just show up with all the stuff they normally have, and you have a competition. Whether or not you include the damage each archer does is also optional. But like others have said often the actually damage dealt with an arrow is less of what is being tested in an archery competition as opposed to the actual marksmanship.
Combat archery would be fun, varied "trick" archery is also fun in my experience. However it goes I'll participate if I'm there, and I think it will be fun regardless.
Combat archery would be fun, varied "trick" archery is also fun in my experience. However it goes I'll participate if I'm there, and I think it will be fun regardless.
I voted for real archery. I actually think it is entertaining. I love competition. I think it should stay this way but maybe have (if we can get a few of the same bows and targets) people shooting at one time. It would go faster that way.
I feel that if we changed to packets, the people that enjoyed using the real bows would lose that entertainment that they have when competing in the archery competition. Think of it, what other time in Alliance do players get a chance to use real bows?
I feel that if we changed to packets, the people that enjoyed using the real bows would lose that entertainment that they have when competing in the archery competition. Think of it, what other time in Alliance do players get a chance to use real bows?
Mike Ventrella
Paragon
Money is always an object, though.
Now if someone were to donate a bunch of bows and targets for goblin stamps...
Now if someone were to donate a bunch of bows and targets for goblin stamps...
that's happened a few years ago at another site where we had 3 targets.... and only 1 or 2 working bows. it's great that people say "lets shoot 3 at a time".. ok.. then we need like 5 bows (gotta have spares in case they break) and a bunch of arrows donated... not to mention targets.
Maxondaerth
Virtuoso
I grew up bow hunting and target shooting with my dad and love it as a hobby and as an exercise. One of the things we used to do is there was a club which had an archery course which was basically a trail through the woods with shooting stations set up and targets set up at various distances/elevations/cover with different target types on them (deer, turkeys, quail, boars, etc). I don't know what kind if site you guys have not having been there yet, but if you had some sort of wooded trail you could set up such a course and have each participant run the course with a marshal to score the targets as they complete them. You could even incorporate a strategy component in that if you had say 15 target stations each archer is only allowed to carry 20 arrows with them, they are allowed to shoot as many times at any given target until they either made a scoring hit on it or until they conceded the target and moved on to the next one. Bonus points for remaining arrows in the quiver at the end. This way, if you have some people with really good accuracy at short distance but suck beyond 20 ft they might elect to skip the one at 30 feet altogether and concentrate on some of the other ones. Heck, could even set it up with viewing stations along the route like a PGA course if people were so inclined to go watch their favorite target. Maybe even put in a time element to encourage quick decision on whether or not to take shots and move things along so as not to bog down the event. Have one or two of the marshals "run the course" and come up with a good average time to complete it and then bonus points or penalties assessed for intervals of X seconds under/over that target time.
*this would be a packet archery event since 15 sets of actual targets wouldn't be feasable.
*this would be a packet archery event since 15 sets of actual targets wouldn't be feasable.
Khorwyn Brey
Adept
Maxondaerth,
I think your idea of a strategy/challenge course with different kinds of shots is fantastic! Man, I'm really starting to shift to the packet party. :shock:
I think your idea of a strategy/challenge course with different kinds of shots is fantastic! Man, I'm really starting to shift to the packet party. :shock:
Dreamingfurther
Exemplar
Wow yea that would be a really cool idea! You could have a viewing station for some of the final targets, or harder shots and then if you had enough IG rules marshals you could have even 2 or 3 people on the course at once to keep things moving.
Mike Ventrella
Paragon
I like that idea, but perhaps as a stand alone competition and not part of the Tourney, where things are done for the spectators as much as the participants.
Someone running a competition on a regular weekend that all the archers can participate in is sort of like the thieves' competitions we have run in the past, or the waylay competition!
Someone running a competition on a regular weekend that all the archers can participate in is sort of like the thieves' competitions we have run in the past, or the waylay competition!
Khorwyn Brey
Adept
W-w-w-waylay Competition?!?! By the Dark Lord Jesus tell me more! 
mikestrauss
Virtuous
Khorwyn Brey said:W-w-w-waylay Competition?!?! By the Dark Lord Jesus tell me more!
We'll send some kobolds to "explain the rules" to you next event.
-MS
Pantzike
Expert
As a participant I prefer packet archery.
Why? Because its what I do. i don't practice and hone real archery, I practice and hone throwing little packets of birdseed with tails. I'm good at it too. To suddenly take it from packet to real archery, you will have some people who IG are amazing shots suddenly become crappy, simply because they can't use real archery well. On the flip side there are people who have the OOG skill in real archery but not the packet throwing skill suddenly become amazing archers even though they can't normally hit the broad side of a barn.
I like to have tournament events showcase the skill for the participants who are good at it. Packet tossing is a skill, and it's fun to be recognized as being good at it.
Is shooting actual archery fun? Sure it is. But I feel using it is the same as if I walked into a spellcasters battle and was given a paintball gun instead of packets. Sure it may be more fun to do and watch. But is it really showcasing what the players actually do the other 99% of the game? I don't think so.
As far as profs/backstabs vs. just having the skill... that's another debate entirely. I was 1 point behind the 3 way tie for first in CT last year when it was more "accuracy/speed based"... But I chose not to participate in HQ's archery tourney when it was damage based. I'm a scholar, I didn't really have a chance to be competitive in HQ as it was tied to damage so I didn't compete.
I personally prefer accuracy challenges instead of damage based ones. Yes the fighter may be able to kill a troll faster then I can with a bow. But if I can shoot a tighter grouping who's really better? Draw weight of your bow is how I've had the profs explained IG, so I would think that the "better" archer is the one who can shoot faster/more accurately, not "harder". I have the bias of being a scholar in this argument. However I also think it takes the "levels advantage" out of the picture. That way a low level archer has the same chance of placing as a high level one. The only place where stat cards should REALLY have an effect are in the combat competitions, and I don't feel that target archery is combat.
I am also a fan of a massive archer melee as a new separate competition. Profs can count all you want in that one. It will allow both the "target shooters" and "hard hitters" to have their chance to shine in archery.
My two cents.
-Craig Fiske
Why? Because its what I do. i don't practice and hone real archery, I practice and hone throwing little packets of birdseed with tails. I'm good at it too. To suddenly take it from packet to real archery, you will have some people who IG are amazing shots suddenly become crappy, simply because they can't use real archery well. On the flip side there are people who have the OOG skill in real archery but not the packet throwing skill suddenly become amazing archers even though they can't normally hit the broad side of a barn.
I like to have tournament events showcase the skill for the participants who are good at it. Packet tossing is a skill, and it's fun to be recognized as being good at it.
Is shooting actual archery fun? Sure it is. But I feel using it is the same as if I walked into a spellcasters battle and was given a paintball gun instead of packets. Sure it may be more fun to do and watch. But is it really showcasing what the players actually do the other 99% of the game? I don't think so.
As far as profs/backstabs vs. just having the skill... that's another debate entirely. I was 1 point behind the 3 way tie for first in CT last year when it was more "accuracy/speed based"... But I chose not to participate in HQ's archery tourney when it was damage based. I'm a scholar, I didn't really have a chance to be competitive in HQ as it was tied to damage so I didn't compete.
I personally prefer accuracy challenges instead of damage based ones. Yes the fighter may be able to kill a troll faster then I can with a bow. But if I can shoot a tighter grouping who's really better? Draw weight of your bow is how I've had the profs explained IG, so I would think that the "better" archer is the one who can shoot faster/more accurately, not "harder". I have the bias of being a scholar in this argument. However I also think it takes the "levels advantage" out of the picture. That way a low level archer has the same chance of placing as a high level one. The only place where stat cards should REALLY have an effect are in the combat competitions, and I don't feel that target archery is combat.
I am also a fan of a massive archer melee as a new separate competition. Profs can count all you want in that one. It will allow both the "target shooters" and "hard hitters" to have their chance to shine in archery.
My two cents.
-Craig Fiske