squid830: I was going to write a comment saying you're going a bit far, but since the download from the website is STILL 1.0.2... Yeah I don't blame you.
On the other hand GOG updates through Galaxy are only a day or so behind Steam now, so at least that part's improved... Not that I was that impressed I had to install Galaxy just to download a patch...
It'll probably be even better still in a month or two. Apparently they're working on 1.0.4 already, but no details what it contains yet. Hopefully they fix some of the mechanics up so it's no longer possible to craft the best weapons and armour in the game before leaving Denmark.
Two-handed axes could do also do with a bit of a buff - they either need to be way stronger since two-handed builds are way superior in most cases in terms of damage and abilities, plus you still get to keep the individual weapon capabilities with two-handed as well.
Archers could be nerfed slightly. At the very least I don't get how a bow has equivalent damage AND armor piercing to a dane axe. Or how archers from that period are such killing machines, when from what I understand they would only be really effective against lightly armored foes, only harassing the others (so I like the "harried" trait - just the damage and accuracy is a bit crazy).
mystral: I agree that the game has quite a few balance issues.
Bows are mostly OP because of their abilities though. 1 free action for an accuracy boost and removing cover is ridiculous, as is the 2 attacks per turn one. Those 2 are way stronger than any ability from other weapons.
Bows are supposedly balanced through the accuracy mechanic, but that only introduces some randomness, plus dedicated archers can still land their attacks from across the map pretty reliably.
Anyway, I'm not happy about the patching situation either. I was really having fun with the game until a broken quest put me off, and apparently they fixed the problem with 1.0.3.
Yes the bugs have definitely been pretty numerous. At least they're fixing them pretty damn fast - hopefully they'll learn from the experience and improve their testing for future games.
Archers are definitely OP, even though shields effectively negate them since you just need an axe-man to shield hook before firing.
I preferred the ranged combat from Conquistadors. Ranged attacks in Conquistadors didn't increase as you leveled up (unlike melee), so only the equipment affected the damage. Instead experience/level only affected accuracy, and even maxed out they weren't this crazily accurate.
For one thing aimed shot only halved range penalties in Conquistadors - here it totally negates it! Meaning of course that "demoralize" can be totally negated. Also I remember quick shot not being anywhere near as accurate as in this game. Combined with the fact that a maxed out archer wouldn't beat a maxed out melee character, it seemed to make more sense, with the exception of shields (I really like the shield mechanics in Vikings).
This was despite the fact that "low cover" in Conquistadors could still be fired over/into - but you would suffer a massive accuracy penalty instead. Whereas in Vikings you can't even fire into low cover, unless you use the other archer OP action, the "Ranging Shot" which magically negates low cover entirely for anyone the shot AND adds a 25% accuracy bonus to targets on top of that.
I suspect they beefed up archery in Vikings because a lot of people complained about ranged accuracy in Conquistadors. Which is a shame because if you added the Viking shield mechanic to it, the Conquistadors ranged was better IMO. Not to mention that it doesn't make sense for bows to have equivalent damage AND armor piercing to a dane axe.