I can definitely understand some of the points people are making about melee. I think it's something that has left a sour taste in people's mouths for a long time, if we're talking about the topic of boss mechanics. I think in the past, there have been waaaaaaaaay too many instances where the boss really did do little to challenge the ranged players, and while the melee people are dealing with cleaves, PBAoEs, tail swipes, and everything else, the ranged did their 1234 rotation in relative peace.
However...
This is something that I think has actually improved in MMOs over the last few years, which isn't something I get to say very often. I feel like lately we've seen more mechanics of bosses doing room-wide AoE's that require you to manipulate a mechanic (hiding behind a pillar, or eating a banana or something) that also effects ranged classes. I've also seen a lot more mechanics like bombs being tossed; obviously the boss doesn't want to hit himself (not that friendly fire is a thing in the game I'm referring to) but the bombs were all tossed away from himself, creating a mechanic that had zero impact on melee, and all the impacts on ranged. I do think it's important that there are just as many challenging mechanics to keep the ranged involved as for melee (for every PBAoE, there should be bombs), and I trust VR to recognize this and create their fights accordingly.
Now if we're looking beyond the scope of boss mechanics, I think that the same challenges exist for both ranged and melee, in general. They both have to figure out how to do their rotation to the best of their ability without drawing aggro, while also knowing how to use their utility skills to help smooth the fight over and really shine. In most of the games I've played over the last 15 years, there has been a decent balance of DPS and utility between the ranged and melee classes (obviously some classes are simply designed to offer more utility, like bards in most games, or the witch/enchanter type class, but those aren't considered true DPS classes; we're comparing pure DPS classes like Mage, Rogue, DPS Warrior, etc.) --in a vacuum--
It's been the boss mechanics that have created a lot more risk for the melee, while typically leaving the ranged classes to focus on their rotations.
TL;DR: If VR can create engaging mechanics for both ranged and melee, I don't think there will be an imbalance of risk vs. reward for either type.
Interestingly I have never found the amount of DPS I contribute or amount of "danger" I was in either as a ranged toon or a melee toon to be all the important in how much fun I've had playing the game. I love being a tank, directing my team, controlling mobs, leading through dungeons, etc absolutely thrilling knowing my tank toon only really needs to keep aggro and not die. I love being a rogue, jumping into the fray, positioning myself appropriately, damaging where I can, pausing to allow the tank to keep aggro, etc. I love being a ranged DPS with the ability to actively participate while sitting back and watching the environment, warning of adds or upcoming AoE dangers, and waiting for the tank to say, "burn him now". I love being primarily crowd control, damaging where I can, but focusing on preventing the adds from participating in the major battle, interrupting with spell casts, now and then, etc. The amount of damage I did or the amount of "danger" my toon was in was kind of irrelevant to me as long as I was having fun and contributing to the group.
geatz said:Beefcake said:geatz said:If ranged characters need to rely on positioning then I would be ok if damage output is generally the same, but if an arrow can magically go through player characters and mobs without some sort of tohit penalty, then there should be some sortof damage offset to make up for the fact that range is now just long range melee combat without the consequence of being within actually melee range.
There is already a huge disadvantage when it comes to armor and hps. Ranged classes tend to have a lot less of both. More than makes up for equal DPS.
How does a bow weilding ranger and a sword weilding melee ranger have different hitpoints or armor?
I realize that I'm a bit late to this discussion but I'd like to interject that swords can have +AC, and that AAs can increase surviveability in EQ.
Furthermore, EQ is a terrible game to use when talking about melee vs. ranged because (to my knowlege) EQ didn't have any ranged DPS classes that weren't hybrids or casters and discussing melee vs. caster or melee vs. hybrid is a different topic of conversation.
In most games ranged classes have lower defenses than melee classes, in some games ranged classes need to contend with ammo (which also often eats up inventory space and/or bag slots), and being further from the Boss often means being further from the tanks and closer to the trash mobs. These things mean that ranged classes play a riskier game than their melee counterparts; simply put a ranged class is in general much more likely to die from a mistake than a melee class is. Higher risk means that rewards should be higher, which often in the context of MMOs means higher damage.
Temmi said:I can definitely understand some of the points people are making about melee. I think it's something that has left a sour taste in people's mouths for a long time, if we're talking about the topic of boss mechanics. I think in the past, there have been waaaaaaaaay too many instances where the boss really did do little to challenge the ranged players, and while the melee people are dealing with cleaves, PBAoEs, tail swipes, and everything else, the ranged did their 1234 rotation in relative peace.
However...
This is something that I think has actually improved in MMOs over the last few years, which isn't something I get to say very often. I feel like lately we've seen more mechanics of bosses doing room-wide AoE's that require you to manipulate a mechanic (hiding behind a pillar, or eating a banana or something) that also effects ranged classes. I've also seen a lot more mechanics like bombs being tossed; obviously the boss doesn't want to hit himself (not that friendly fire is a thing in the game I'm referring to) but the bombs were all tossed away from himself, creating a mechanic that had zero impact on melee, and all the impacts on ranged. I do think it's important that there are just as many challenging mechanics to keep the ranged involved as for melee (for every PBAoE, there should be bombs), and I trust VR to recognize this and create their fights accordingly.
Now if we're looking beyond the scope of boss mechanics, I think that the same challenges exist for both ranged and melee, in general. They both have to figure out how to do their rotation to the best of their ability without drawing aggro, while also knowing how to use their utility skills to help smooth the fight over and really shine. In most of the games I've played over the last 15 years, there has been a decent balance of DPS and utility between the ranged and melee classes (obviously some classes are simply designed to offer more utility, like bards in most games, or the witch/enchanter type class, but those aren't considered true DPS classes; we're comparing pure DPS classes like Mage, Rogue, DPS Warrior, etc.) --in a vacuum--
It's been the boss mechanics that have created a lot more risk for the melee, while typically leaving the ranged classes to focus on their rotations.
TL;DR: If VR can create engaging mechanics for both ranged and melee, I don't think there will be an imbalance of risk vs. reward for either type.
Well thought out and stated.
Liav said:Beefcake said:I don't see a higher risk from melee combat, definitely not one that deserves a reward.
Positioning as a ranged DPS is irrelevant usually, and you don't have to worry about jousting AEs.
As it is in EQ, melee are basically worthless, honestly. Ranged DPS has always been king.
point 1: can easily be changed witha greater variety of boss mechanics, if VR is smart enought to do so. there is literally no reason why bosses cant be programmed to endanger melee and ranged classes equally
point 2: what EQ does is irrelevant
werzul said:point 1: can easily be changed witha greater variety of boss mechanics, if VR is smart enought to do so. there is literally no reason why bosses cant be programmed to endanger melee and ranged classes equally
point 2: what EQ does is irrelevant
1. I'm pretty well aware of that. The entire reason for my post is expressing that I hope they are smart enough to do so.
2. Yeah, well, some on these forums are deluded into thinking that Pantheon is EQ with better graphics. When people stop praising EQ like it's a game without any flaws, I'll be happy to stop using its mechanics as an example of what not to do.
Beefcake said:Liav does not appreciate it when people say they enjoyed EQ.
I currently play EQ. I just recognize that it is an old, flawed game in a lot of ways. I can appreciate it and say that I've enjoyed it over the years. I'm not going to say that it's beneath criticism, however.
I don't know if I should create a new threat for this, but I was wondering if abilities were restricted on things like kiting now that people know it can be done.
In Everquest pure melee characters and monsters were easily kited around. I actually enjoyed using the various different tactics like snare->DoT, multi snare->AoE damage, root->DoT, Snare->Fear->DoT, and of course the crazy things Enchanters and Bards did with Charm spells.
I feel the melee was a bit bland in the original EQ. I always played a caster or hybrid and I never played one of the core classes (Warrior, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard, Enchanter). I much preferred versatile classes like Necromancer, Mage, Enchanter, Druid, Bard, Shaman. I liked all their utility spells like Teleport, Spirit of the Wolf, Snares, Roots, Binds (Not for hybrids obviously), heals, illusions, water breathing, levitation, etc. There was a huge array of different utility spells for some classes and this allowed them to be independent from others if needed. They weren't stuck if there was no group. It also allowed for a measure of strategy. Melee characters were often reliant on their skills and equipment. For instance the warrior had the entire melee (dual wield, two handed, one handed, etc.) and defensive (dodge, parry, riposte) skills. If I recall and those skills often had the highest skill caps and the warrior had the highest HP per level. They would often end up spamming taunt, kick, and bash throughout the fight as they had less abilities than other classes. I would hope such classes would receive a little improvement.
One thing I find weird is the Ranger class was fairly weak. I always wanted to play a Ranger in a video game, but they never quite turn out how I would like them to be. In Everquest the Ranger was a really weak warrior who got the most of the worst Druid spells possible. They didn't even get Spirit of the Wolf until level 30 I believe and level 30 was hard to get to in original EQ on a class like this. They would often die easily with aggro so it was weird that they got to have a taunt button. They were easily replaced by other melee classes that had better healing, better utility, better damage, or better off tanking. I really like the concept of having a hybrid Warrior->Druid, but I hope they are a bit more effective in this game. The only nice thing about Rangers was they got any spells at all. This made them automatically more interesting to play then Warriors IMO.
Hopefully we will see a few changes to the melee classes to make them a bit more interesting for people to play as and to counter some of the Ranged classes utility spells.
Liav said:Melee for me. Ranged is too safe. I prefer higher risk gameplay with a higher reward, which melee delivers for me. Hopefully Pantheon does it better than EQ and actually gives melee an advantage if they play well.
Yup but was it years after when they got crafty with new raid ideas.
Everyone had to be close to the boss, AOE outside the ring, then you took splash damage...
Sometimes the ranged had to kite, offtank adds etc.. was fun actually.
I like the ranged hunter, druid style game play too. I just wish it wasnt so much auto attack for everything.
Even melee should be forced to do many different things, like bash, kick, to gain as much argo as possible. Combos etc.. not spell casted abilities at all for a warrior tank.
I wouldnt mind we have mage pets, also with different melee abilities we can press as the caster.
Thanks Beefcake,
I kind of got that idea from watching some of the videos, but in most modern games snares, roots, etc. have a short duration and a lot of diminishing returns. Instead of diminishing returns and short durations I’d rather see melee classes allowed to break CC in some way. It may be at the cost of stamina. Perhaps snaring or rooting would cost more mana so you couldn’t chain cast it. I don’t really know the answer, but I loved kiting/fear kiting. I also realize it allowed casters a huge advantage unless the melee had some kind of ridiculous resistances. This time around I would probably try to group more, but it might be fun to solo kite once in a while. I also realize casters can be a bit boring in group situations, but they often get the most reactionary abilities. For instance heal and mez require good timing even if you are sitting meditating most of the time. I don’t entirely think that a Rogue or Warrior is more fun just because you are standing there auto attacking and spamming bash/kick/backstab or whatever other abilities they have with trying to get behind or in front of a mob.