How to Balance Ranged vs Melee

[crattey]

That was my point, that no matter how accurate and and how much experience I put forth and say "These stats are not working" would not matter. Then someone comes along and says, "I disagree" and suddenly my entire post means nothing.

I went along with what you wanted crattey, and you just proved my point. My experience is greater than your empty replies. Prove me wrong in the same manner you made me prove there was a problem, or you are nothing but the hypocrit I figured you to be.

The fact that you think you did sort of proves my point about any arguement between us being pointless.

You make such basic mistakes in reasoning that I'd have to piece apart every claim you make and point out why your reasoning is flawed. I really have better things to do.

I got this far before I got bored:

- Ranged has a basic advantage over melee, in that ranged has opportunities to hit melee when melee cannot fight back. This is fair as long as melee is given equal opportunities to hit ranged players.

- At lower levels, CC tools are over-effective because nano resist is not effective, CC resistance and removal is limited, the CC nanos are chain-castable, and runspeed is too low for professions to get close to CC profs in most cases. (insert comment of experiences with my 30 agent in battlestation again)

No.

You operating under the false assumption that every fight starts out by the ranged profession initiating combat from a distance.
Lower levels do not indicate a general discrepancy in melee versus ranged across all titlelevels.
CC profession is not the same as ranged profession.
Melee professions are not the only ones subjected to CC.
Ranged professions are not the only ones who can run out of range of their opponent's attack range.

Also, (insert comment)? Really? Wow, I wish everyone would argue like that. Global warming is real because (insert comments about, like, thermometers and stuff). Life evolved by means of natural selection because (insert comments about birds and ****).

And that's just your first two points.... It got worse as you carried on..

[Gatester]

The fact that you think you did sort of proves my point about any arguement between us being pointless.

You make such basic mistakes in reasoning that I'd have to piece apart every claim you make and point out why your reasoning is flawed. I really have better things to do.

I got this far before I got bored:



No.

You operating under the false assumption that every fight starts out by the ranged profession initiating combat from a distance.
Lower levels do not indicate a general discrepancy in melee versus ranged across all titlelevels.
CC profession is not the same as ranged profession.
Melee professions are not the only ones subjected to CC.
Ranged professions are not the only ones who can run out of range of their opponent's attack range.

Also, (insert comment)? Really? Wow, I wish everyone would argue like that. Global warming is real because (insert comments about, like, thermometers and stuff). Life evolved by means of natural selection because (insert comments about birds and ****).

And that's just your first two points.... It got worse as you carried on..

I disagree

[crattey]

I disagree

:thumbsup:

Good thing I didn't bother with your entire post. Could have saved me the trouble altogether though, but just mentioning beforehand you're unwilling to educated. Ah well, at least I tried.

[Gatester]

:thumbsup:

Good thing I didn't bother with your entire post. Could have saved me the trouble altogether though, but just mentioning beforehand you're unwilling to educated. Ah well, at least I tried.

You disagreed with the statement that ranged has an advantage, you also tried to argue that CC professions does not mean ranged professions....Considering Means himself has said there is a difference between ranged and melee he is trying to fix, and that there are no melee CC profs, your entire credibility is at question.

You even call me out and ask for me to prove my point and then discredit the validity of what I offered, but what other way can I do that in anyway other than using my own experiences and opinions? How many times do I have to quote stories of my ranged characters dominating melee or non-capped ranged players in pvp? I have given the best I can for any thread that relies on nothing more than a sense of fairness, my honest judgement based on first-hand knowledge. The changes I propose are not based on a psychotic self-sacrificing need to make the professions I play gimp, but a drive to see a balance between all aspects of AO's pvp and pvm. Regardless of whether I am right or wrong my intentions are aimed at what is best for everyone.

Then there is you crattey. What have you offered to any thread? You believe you have some value that just because you deny something it cannot be true? You have a chance now, offer even a few points that prove there is no disadvantage between melee and ranged professions. Do something beyond pretending to be so self-important that no one's opinion matters if it differs from your own, and the problems any profession you do not play is only because of the choices players make and not flaws in the game's design. Maybe then I can remove the stupidity you plastered onto the forums from my signature.

[crattey]

Then there is you crattey. What have you offered to any thread?

I withhold from posting in many of them, thereby not cluttering up the forums to a point where the devs can no longer find anything meaningful in them.
This thread is meaningless anyway, since it went into real life comparisons straight off the bat, and further descended,... into this..

You have a chance now, offer even a few points that prove there is no disadvantage between melee and ranged professions.

Which would be equally dumb. The issue is more complex than your black and white views, which is what I've been trying to point out. As much as you've failed to present your case, any attempt to do the opposite is also almost certain to fail.
Also, I do find it striking that all that you got from my posts is the idea that I somehow think that melee > ranged.

But, because you are asking for my advice again, I'll offer you some more.


From the big post of improper arguments you made above.

You assert that all ranged have an unfair advantage over all melee. You offer the following as, I assume what you consider to be, proof.

- Examples of tools that can cripple players or significantly damage them and are useable at a 40m range:
Doctor init-debuffs
NSD
Trader Drains
Aimed Shot
Full Auto
Burst
LE nukes
Malpractice

- All of these affect ranged professions as well as melee professions. I'm actually fairly certain that say, my crat, suffers far worse from some of these than say, your enforcer. LE nukes, for example. The fact that they are ranged is not what is the problem with them. The problem is that on many professions, they can knock off up to 90% of their health and nano-resistance is not a proper defense against them. Crats suffer more from this than most every other professions as they have no absorbs, no heals and natural low health. The fact that they are ranged is irrelevant, as a 5m range on them would still leave the root cause.

- The tools listed above are not available to all and every ranged profession. So, as far as the premise goes: ranged > melee, your 'proof' is entirely meaningless because it doesn't apply to your premise. Instead, address these on their individual terms, e.g.

AS is bollocks,
GTH needs a nerf,
tripples need adjusting,
BR needs fixing.

Those are defensible opinions. Yours isn't.

[Moonbolt]

your circumventing the point in melee vs ranged there crattey.. ofcourse a AS from 40 affects crats and melee professions both.
the problem with being melee is that we gotta close the range gap before we can respon in action.
that is the melee dissadventage...
noone can argue with u that crats is alot more affected by a tripple then an enf are.
but tripples is getting removed / changed.
what melee are pushing for is the issue that ranged has an adventage of being just.... ranged.
melee needs some way of closing that gap between the chars to be able to fight back.
and the fact that alot of ranged people dont see the issue with melee not being able to actually fight back at all is somewhat dissturbing when trying to look at the big picture of balance.

[Gatester]

Also, I do find it striking that all that you got from my posts is the idea that I somehow think that melee > ranged.

Mind quoting me on that, or would the lack of fact in your statement leave you unwilling to clutter this thread?

From the big post of improper arguments you made above.

You assert that all ranged have an unfair advantage over all melee. You offer the following as, I assume what you consider to be, proof.

Those are defensible opinions. Yours isn't.

You pretend to be so clear-headed and impartial, yet you fail to understand a single point I made. Not only have you been incorrect on every assumption but I now must clarify your points of disagreement even further.

[- Ranged has a basic advantage over melee, in that ranged has opportunities to hit melee when melee cannot fight back. This is fair as long as melee is given equal opportunities to hit ranged players.]

This is a fact. This does not say Ranged > Melee in any aspect of it, the correct interpetation is simply this: Attacking when someone cannot attack you is an advantage. If one group has one advantage, then the opposing group needs an equivalent advantage to become balanced. Advantages can be anything that the opposing group does not make equal use of.

If you want to change "hit" to a more appropriate term then you may see a clearer picture of what the statement means. Let us try "effect positively for the attacker against" since I need to be scientific journal accurate in what I thought was a game and not a court case.

[- Examples of tools that can cripple players or significantly damage them and are useable at a 40m range:]

A drain cast on my NT at 40m range is as damaging as it is for my enforcer. I never said anything to the contrary and never even mentioned melee in that post yet you assert that my point was aimed only at melee professions. You ever stop to think that I am arguing that these tools in their current states are too strong against any profession at a 40m range? Remember I made a thread arguing entirely against drains, UBT, and similar tools having the same capped range as all other tools and even argued for a limit on MELEE range...your contribution to the thread was the ignorance stapled to my signature.

[- At lower levels, CC tools are over-effective because nano resist is not effective, CC resistance and removal is limited, the CC nanos are chain-castable, and runspeed is too low for professions to get close to CC profs in most cases.]

Can I root Notum Repulsor perked professions at low levels? Yes.
Is there enough CC resistance to make resisting repeated roots or snares frequent? No.
Are there many effective tools to remove snares or roots at low levels? No and pets are less aided.
Are roots and snares currently chain-castable? Yes.
Is runspeed too low to get close to CC profs in most cases (enforcers were the exception)? Yes.

There is nothing for you to argue against here, so instead you claim that it does not relate to melee vs range discrepencies at all title levels. So must an issue be at every level for every pvp range and encounter to be important, or does it make sense to include every FACT that pertains to issues concerning ranged toolsets?

CC profession is not the same as ranged profession.

Post a single 5m range root, snare, stun or mezz used by CC professions.

Melee professions are not the only ones subjected to CC.

Only an idiot would think so, and a bigger idiot would assume that is what I said. Are soldiers not the easiest profession to root at any level? I even commented how I chain-rooted a soldier (ranged profession?) and killed them.

Ranged professions are not the only ones who can run out of range of their opponent's attack range.

Who has an easier time getting out of range, someone who has to go from 41m to 5m to 41m, or someone who goes from 41m to 40m to 41m? Mass pvp is a good example of the dangers melee professions can face. It is a fact that a player at capped distance from an oposing team of players is safer than a player 5m away from a group of opposing players. It is not only easier to get outside of the opposing groups range, but easier to get back in range. Traveling 2m compared to 70m is a massive difference.

I have done melee and ranged adventurers in pvp, and despite the gear advantages melee has at tl5, my ranged advy performs better in mass pvp. My survival is far greater because I am able to avoid more damage than melee can while actively pvping. Every advantage ranged advy has over melee advy at tl5 is almost entirely dependant on the fact that my toolset has a large distance and the small final portion is based upon AS.



Stop thinking in Crat vs Enforcer, and NT vs Shade. You are whining with the professions themselves in mind and I am only arguing about the basic ideas of ranged, melee and CC. In AO being ranged is an advantage, having CC tools is an advantage, being melee is not. That you can quote me on because in AO's current system this is a fact. Melee needs an advantage unless with all your wisdom crattey you can name a single working Melee advantage. Even your valid, yes valid point that not all encounters with ranged professions take place at 40m does not change the fact that you are arguing for the advantage of first-strike, not being melee.

There is a reason games have Charges and Leaps for melee professions, can you guess what it was or will there be arguements that AO is the only one doing it correctly? Not only do you "assert" that melee is not entitled to ever hit any player in pvp, but you even "disagreed" with everything that FC has already stated they are working to fix.

[McKnuckleSamwich]

yea, crattey, you have apoint, but it applies to a different argument.

you can say that what needs nerfing is GTH, triples and whatever else, but, what you're missing is that if it's a ranged prof being hit form 40m, the ranged prof can still blow his alpha off at the opponent, melee have to close the gap, as moonbolt astutely mentioned, before they can respond.

The response is however 2 fold. I will concede this point, because, many melee profs DO have defences they can activate while attempting to close the gap, WHICH brings me back to my original post:

Melee (and ranged) need MORE defences while being out of range! woot crattey, despite your frolicking charm and good looks you managed to outwit yourself and bolster my argument! gz bro! you made my day!

[n3oheals]

Finally we are getting somewhere. Gatesters post has a lot of good points in in but also makes clear that discussion is not melee vs ranged but melee vs cc.
If melee is given a higher rs cap as is often mentioned then the non cc ranged professions will have no way but to try to keep out of range from the start. If they do let the melee come into range then there is no way to flee. The other way around will be easy, if a melee profession sees a ranged player they know they cannot fight they can just run away unless the ranged profession is in range of cc.

[Gatester]

Finally we are getting somewhere. Gatesters post has a lot of good points in in but also makes clear that discussion is not melee vs ranged but melee vs cc.
If melee is given a higher rs cap as is often mentioned then the non cc ranged professions will have no way but to try to keep out of range from the start. If they do let the melee come into range then there is no way to flee. The other way around will be easy, if a melee profession sees a ranged player they know they cannot fight they can just run away unless the ranged profession is in range of cc.

That would be a melee advantage, summarizing my desires though for the past several years is very easy.

Runspeed:
Pets > Melee > Ranged > CC profs

Range:
CC profs > Ranged > Melee > Pets

It is very simple. The runspeed should be easy enough to understand so I will explain the range issue I have been fighting for. CC tools, once adjusted, should be easier to land but shorter in duration. Hopefully we can ditch a lot of the static resistances melee professions have and just give them removal tools. The issue though, is that ranged tools and CC tools are almost all at a 40m range, which means an NT that was rooting a trader at 35-40m away was not gaining an advantage but only giving the trader a chance to fire a GTH right back at them at an equal range. CC tools have almost no use on ranged professions except for running away, and they should be used more for a momentary advantage in time for the CC professions. Short duration CC tools mean that after the root or snare is cast on an opponent, they have time to get a distance they are comfortable with and perhaps make use of one more tool before the CC tool is over.

[n3oheals]

That would be a melee advantage, summarizing my desires though for the past several years is very easy.

Runspeed:
Pets > Melee > Ranged > CC profs

Range:
CC profs > Ranged > Melee > Pets

This looks promising but will nerf the non cc ranged profession hard i believe. Unable to run away from melee and unable to get in range of the cc profession because of the smaller range. The general idea looks good though.
Now lets change the topic title from melee vs ranged to cc vs melee vs ranged :P

[McKnuckleSamwich]

I agree there has to be a distinction between ranged and CC profs based on Gatesters arguments.

I support gatesters discussions in this regard. He seems to have it sorted, but I still think that there nees to be range penalties on AR, and moving penalties on attacking while moving.

[Obtena]

You know what I don't get about these arguments? How does anyone come to the conclusion that 'THING X' is broken? If some balance was needed, wouldn't it be safe to say that the unbalanced THING X would be pwning absolutely everyone? I have to say, when I read someone suggesting that melee or ranged profs are broken I laugh, because it's simply untrue. Melee toons kill and die about as much as ranged ones ... that seems balanced to me. If you are going to talk about these very broad distinctions, how ridiculous is it to use very specific examples of prof. vs. prof as some examples of proving your very braod general point? Silly.

You guys really like to complicate stuff by focusing on the absolute minutea which is unfortunately completely irrelevant because that's not appropriate problem solving or identification technique.

[Gatester]

This looks promising but will nerf the non cc ranged profession hard i believe. Unable to run away from melee and unable to get in range of the cc profession because of the smaller range. The general idea looks good though.
Now lets change the topic title from melee vs ranged to cc vs melee vs ranged :P

My basic goal would not work for the current state of AO, it would be purely post balance. As it is currently, if an NT was among the slowest professions and had only 5-10 seconds on their roots, I'm not sure how balanced that would be. Then we have to decide what to do about fixers and agents, CC profs that favor ranged the most, ranged and melee adventurers, what would doctors be, etc.

Ignoring crattey's ass backwards misinterpretations of what I am saying (something he must have realized since he isn't bothering with a response), you can pick out specific things that must happen for balance to occur.

Melee professions must be able to hit you.
CC professions must be able to have control over you.
Ranged professions must be able to hit you at a distance.
Pets must have a speed or ability to hit you that makes up for the lack of human control.

By this reasoning:
Melee profs either need to stop kiters or be able to catch kiters and people at range. Melee professions should not entirely ignore CC tools and I do not believe after balancing they will need any counters for them period.

CC professions shouldn't be facing so much root or snare resistance, their tools should be reliable for a change. CC professions should be able to use their "controlling tools" outside the range of someones "killing tools". If this means increasing the range cap on CC tools then so be it, but neither CC profs nor ranged profs will be alphaing each other at 40m, but instead the CC prof has a moment of control outside the threat range.

Ranged professions should have powerful offenses and debuffs at good distance that is both safer than melee professions and equally effective. Ranged professions should not be easily kiting melee but still able to do so and should not be able to outrun a melee profession but they should be given the "first strike" in most situations.

Pets take far too much baby-sitting and have so many flaws, but they should not only be the fastest part of pvp, they should be an actual threat. Kiting a pet should not be the first choice, but a last resort.

Now you can quote me as I do not think anyone can misunderstand me this time.

He seems to have it sorted, but I still think that there nees to be range penalties on AR, and moving penalties on attacking while moving.

We cannot do this. Ranged professions already have difficulties just like melee involving AR and trying to kite and everything else. Sometimes these professions MUST kite, they most move, and they must avoid other professions, pets, etc. Penalizing an aspect would cause imbalance or at least remove an aspect that makes AO pvp what it is. There was a point where my only toons were melee that I would have agreed with this, but as someone with entirely ranged pvpers I cannot support a change in this manner.

In fact, any penalty to the kiter themselves rather than tools to counter kiting seem unfair to me. Locking out recharges as ranged profs are moving, reducing their attack range while moving, or nerfing their evades while moving is not what I would like AO to be based around. Ranged is an advantage by the nature of what it is, we simply lack the working melee advantage and the profession balancing itself.

[McKnuckleSamwich]

I don't care what happens, as long as it reduces the ranged damage spam.

You run around in BS these days and there's maybe 1-2 melee opponents and 10-20 ranged.

Which means you turn a corner and are alphaed by 5 AS's and bursts and FA's before you're even half way to the mob.

How about NT's? WTF OP'd too, even if you DO get in range of them, they just pop some TMS type crap and you can't do any damage on em until you've been killed two times over....

naw, obtenna, you're dead wrong, ranged vs melee is not balanced at all. It's wayyyyy out of balance.

Melee and range balance WOULD be balanced except that theres so many ranged profs that melee profs are unable to even begin to register as threats. Because melee are no longer threats, ranged is OP'd until melee once again gain some advantage that gives us some threat. When melee is a threat, you will see it because melee will be rolled.

If the benefits of being ranged change, more melee will be setup/rolled, and balance will return. As it stands? No, you're wrong, melee is vastly underpowered, and stands little chance to inflict harm/death, or impose a threat.

The proof is in the setups that you see. Look around, there are so few melee's that it's incredibly obvious that melee is vastly underpowered. <-- this is fact, it's not arguable. Almost every single person who PVP's opts for a ranged setup. Why? because melee is underpowered and is subject to more inate or systemic problems than ranged. Period.

I'm asking for change so that melee recovers SOME of the ability to survive to impose a threat, or, more power to impose a threat; or remove some of the power of ranged such that the discrepancy between systemic issues is less.

[Saetos]

So all those clan 1hb/1he Enforcers I keep seeing in BS and Borealis count as Ranged professions?

[Dollcet]

So all those clan 1hb/1he Enforcers I keep seeing in BS and Borealis count as Ranged professions?

Nah you got that wrong they are Targetpractice

j/k

Enfo just happens to be a popular Proff and with Rage , Fear Stunperks & Snareperk from 1hb and SA from 1he they are still a about the only melees that can counter CC Tools without going Notum Repulsor or wasting several perks in Spatial Displacement , has the Speed to catch many Kiters plus the Ability to hold them in Place to finish the Job .

Got a pure 1hb Enfo for Raids and went grinding the finally VP for my Ofab Backpiece and at the very least 2/3 rd of the People i saw on BS were Ranged Toons . Most Melees i saw were Enfos , a handfull Shades and Adv and very rarely the odd Keeper or MA .

Now next time you head to the BS look around and do a rough Count of those that are present ...

If Melee and Ranged Toons would really be equal good in PvP wouldnt we see a more even Spread between Ranged / Melee and also a bigger variety of Proffesions ??

This is for me the biggest Indicator that Melees could use some help AFTER Funcom finally fixes the Server-Sync ( see my post earlier in this Thread ) .

[Obtena]

You don't see more melee toons PVP for numerous reasons, the primary one that comes to mind being that there are LESS melee profs than ranged ones. It's got little to do with some disparity you think exists between melee and ranged. The problems that do show some disparity are lower ranking ones related to professions, not some general melee/ranged consideration. Each has strengths and weaknesses and every prof takes advantage of those in their unique ways. If there is some gap that needs to be filled, it's simply addressed by profession tools, assuming that gap isn't intended to be there in the first place.

[Notcrattey]

Melee profs are the most annoying thing to play in mass pvp.


Unless you're a freak and like to be bound to a single point a lot, you kinky people you.

[-Klod-]

Melee profs are the most annoying thing to play in mass pvp.


Unless you're a freak and like to be bound to a single point a lot, you kinky people you.

Put on that bow and show us the mass PvP beauty by poping a special every 11 sec.

FC just can't make mass PvP right and that's it. It doesn't really matter if you are ranged or not, it's annoying for both.