So what exactly do people have against the idea of bows in a

>>54217191
because "muh gunz", it's hard to balance the damage values when mixing archaic and modern/futuristic weapons, and/or because we archeryfags can be annoying fucks sometimes.

>>54217191
Mostly because videogames, movies, and pop culture tend to portray bows as these instant kill death weapons you can silently and immediately slay anyone with, or portray them with rediculous strength effect that can pin people to walls.

While bows and guns DID coexist for a long long long time, putting them beside modern weapons is dumb

>>54217191
Draw time, low capacity, and much harder to conceal than most guns. Generally most modern/sci fi fighting takes place in close range to mid range, where pretty much any gun will beat a bow.

They do have advantages though. Id play up the fact that they are much easier to get than a suppressor, and even guns in general. Also having a bow is much more inconspicuous than any gun. Also arrows are not only reusable, but different arrow types can be switched out on the fly, Green Arrow style

>>54217571
>>54217632
>>54217729

Frankly if I'm using bows in such a setting I'm throwing all pretenses of typical human capacity and going straight into MGR territory. Special built combat monsters are the ones jumping around and using blades as their primary form of fighting even though you might have spec ops dudes with essentially short swords on their persons.

Similarly, a person with augmented muscles/cyber body and Hawkeye/Green Arrow style arrows will be the order of the day.

It's overdone.

>hey, we need weapon variety and all these guns look the same to me

File: Hawkeye Gough.jpg (58KB, 1152x720px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1152x720px

>>54217928

I know this is more Shadowrun's wheel house but I would love to see some kind of futuristic/cyberpunk version of Gough

The main issue is there is often little reason for there to be enough use of the bow outside of hobby use in most modern settings.

In combat, a gun is easier to use, have higher capacity, have a longer effective range, can easily carry more ammo more conveniently, extra ammo is far more likely to be found while looting, and is far from decently concealable.

However, it is easier to get one, is practically silent without specialist equipment, and far less likely to be considered a threat, allowing for it to be carried more places, is extremely simple and the ammo can be reused.

This makes it a very specialist weapon, with roles that can be fit by other weapons

People are far more irritated with its use in combat, where the use of guns are far more practical. Placing bows in this environment makes it feel forced and out of place, and a player using one where most are not screams someone who wants to be super unique or has more concern of what looks cool

tl,dr it makes far more sense for guns to be mainly used in combat, and feels forced when placed in it regularly

>>54217191
Guns are faster and easier to conceal, which is important in a low-combat/high-law/deadly-combat game.

Plus they're longer ranged, and do a bit more damage, which makes them the choice for high-combat games too.

>>54218160

Agreed. Depending on the tone it would be out of place for someone trying to fight exclusively with one.

That said, I feel in situations like that I make certain weapons even more dangerous because to me doing high damage isn't the only way to make a weapon deadly.

Taking a page from Eclipse Phase shit like Wasp Knives would be common. And if you can do it reliably with knives having a one time injection of "nope" into a futuristic arrow doesn't seem that far of a stretch. That said, it would still only be good in specific applications but it should be an available option non the less.

File: 1464959767139.png (579KB, 720x514px) Image search: [Google]

579KB, 720x514px

>>54217191
Because archers are always faggots.

>>54217191

Generally not justified, and the ending application is weird.

Lets think about your OP as an example. Hanzo, a dude with a bow, can insta-kill most characters with one lucky shot he likely didn't even aim very well (the best way to play hanzo is to just randomly pluck arrows in the direction of where you think enemies are across the map. If you can actually see what you are shooting at, you are too close) and he essentially has infinite ammo because there is never any time where his rate of fire dips because he had to stop to reload.

Compare that to Widowmaker, a woman with a sniper rifle that cant fucking kill anything unless you score a headshot with it. He has a scope, but the scope actually makes her a worse shot because you have to go for very precise shooting in a game where half the characters can run up walls or have rocket powers, and every so often you have to stop and reload which leaves you defenseless.

Hell, Reaper can walk up to you and has to unload double shotguns 3-4 times at point blank range to equal the destructive power of Hanzo 'I guess that arrow hit you?' Shimada.

In order to make Hanzo relevant, his bow is weirdly more powerful than every GUN in the game, up to and including doing more damage than actual rocket launchers.

>>54218331
>Hell, Reaper can walk up to you and has to unload double shotguns 3-4 times at point blank range to equal the destructive power of Hanzo 'I guess that arrow hit you?' Shimada.
>In order to make Hanzo relevant, his bow is weirdly more powerful than every GUN in the game, up to and including doing more damage than actual rocket launchers.

Right, so how about you justify it in game?

The arrowheads are this weird floaty things, what if on contact it bypasses whatever personal shield the characters use that stops them from getting killed by double future uzi fire?

>>54218661

The obvious one is to simply have the bow be a kind of grenade launcher. The arrow doesn't do a ton of damage, but the explosive on the end of it is no joke.

The same could be done with poison arrows. An okay amount of initial damage, but with an annoying damage over time effect as well.

If I have a more unique setting to work with, Id make the arrows be something either very rare or harm to make that is uniquely suited for the enemy we are facing. Like, a werewolf game where the guy uses silver tipped arrows instead of silverbullets. Not because the gun isn't more powerful, but because silver arrows are easier to retrieve and he can't just keep dumping money into another dozen silver bullets.

Knights of Sidionia did a similar thing with their alien Kabi metal, the only thing that could kill the Gauna, as a justification for giant robots. The Kabi metal is irreplaceable, so they cant just put it in bullets, so they make Kabi-tipped spears instead. The Robots carry and use the spears.

>>54217191
I think it's a cool idea, but in general mechanical torsion isn't going to be the best energy storage mechanism in a sci-fi setting. Not a terrible one, but if you can make a bow material capable of storing that much energy, and some sort of artificial muscles able to provide that much energy, you could probably also just make a raulgun and be done with it.

File: Rambo-bow3[1].jpg (24KB, 499x216px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 499x216px

>>54218327
Well, fuck you.