[BG/RBG] Melee vs Distant : what should be done ? Ideas ?

[Strear]

Hi,

From what I understand, I always read here and there, that good RBG comps should mostly include distant dps, and the " reserved " slot for a DK is only due to his grip, if DKs didn't have it, most comps would work efficiently without any melee. Of course, some things are debatable, a good player is worth it, no matter if he's melee or distant, but what I typed seems to be a generally admitted thing.

What I'm wondering, is what went wrong years after years, I honestly didn't feel it coming that way. Some years ago, and I don't remember the enchant name, I remember that when I ran on a " robe ", it ignored most of his armour, and it was a really deadly thing. Now it's harder, caster and distants have more ways to simply escape/move away, have, I think, much more health, and armour doesn't count for as much as it did.

From your point of view, when did things really get a turn in the melee/distant balance ? What makes distant a superior investment for your team configuration and how could it be different ? Did distant become too strong (health, resistance ...) and melee didn't follow, or is it a matter of utility ? Is the " melee " component still fearsome for a distant in terms of " Oh, he's on me, I'm going to die !!! Quick escape !!! " or not that much ?

Please share your ideas and opinions on what should be done (or even if you think everything's alright). Mostly, I'd like to clearly understand what slowly changed in the game that drove to this actual situation (were distant very weak at some time, I don't remember, even if I reming they weren't not so hard to kill once you reached contact).

As simple as it might seem, I have it hard to understand, even the game is a fictional game, how when one rushes someone in robe with an axe, and successfully hits him, it can have so little impact.

[inboundpaper]

I really like Arena net's design about melee vs ranged, melee his harder, but ranged is well ranged. I can't really think of a way for it to be applied to WoW's class balancing act though.

[Moinaldo]

I really like Arena net's design about melee vs ranged, melee his harder, but ranged is well ranged. I can't really think of a way for it to be applied to WoW's class balancing act though.

ArenaNet's design is pretty nice, but that's because they care about PVP... WoW was born as a PVE game, and it will continue that way until the day they close the servers... sad thing, because I think one aspect should not exclude the other... it's just about developers caring about both aspects (in GW2 you have many skills that work different on PVP and PVE) I think if WoW cared more about PVP, maybe it would keep more subs because of eSports impact.

[Nyaldee]

Nothing can be done atm. Only rogue and dk have enough utility to be a nice asset to their team (exept fc) - smoke bomb for bursting somebody and grip for dispositioning focus target. Only thing that may change situation somehow is indeed placing some sort of dmg debuff on ranged to promote melees as better dmg dealers in RBG setting, but this won't happen. Otherwise Blizz have to invent some new powerfull utility ability for every melee spec that would carry them in RBGs but judging by MoP new abilities and talents Blizz is out of ideas.

[Biggety]

50 pillars to hump in every rated map.

But that really only helps healers.

[Tyrean]

My take on this is the flag carrier debuff they recently implemented is actually the first effort to make changes to the class makeup. Think about how normal games go, you meet in mid and fight 9v9 while the flag carriers go get flags and come back to their group. Then you fight in mid until stacks build up enough that you feel you can push through their group and land a kill. Now think about how most random games go, small team of people escorting the flag while hte rest of the team is either stopping people pushing through mid (forward defense) or directly assaulting enemy flag. Also, flags go down sometimes before reaching support.

I think they wanted to change the flag playstyle to be more fluid and based on game play rather than who wins the 10v10 in mid every time. That indirectly helps melee because the reason melee suck is because in the large 1010 clashes whoever sticks their neck out loses so why take people that are by definition required to stick their neck out to do anything.

Think about Temple and how it plays. You could bring 7 warm bodies and some healers in there and it does not matter. The thing that matters most on that map is communicating future orb drops and positioning. Any class, no matter what your skills or defensives can be soloed on that map (I rambo orbs all the time solo on my frost DK in rated play) so it comes down to positioning and communication. It really is the best RBG if we are talking raw the best team wins.

[Yvaelle]

In RBGs, the problem is that in every BG people are encouraged to clump up into a ball, generally.

In a ball formation, ranged classes can project the influence of their ball by an additional 40 yard radius - while the melee ball is necessarily smaller due to their lesser attack range.

It's not that melee are at a disadvantage in 1v1, or 2v2, or 3v3, or even 5v5 - but in 10v10 and 15v15 - the solo positioning of lower brackets shifts to become a group formation behaviour. The way to address this isn't to make melee hit so hard that for the few seconds they connect they deal the sum total of all the damage they do while peeled - that's really bad game design: insofar as arena.net exemplifies this, arena.net is not good pvp.

The way to address this would be to encourage BGs and RBGs to stop roaming in packs of 10 or 15, and encourage a series of small, simultaneous skirmishes. If you look at a BG like Eye of the Storm, where you and a friend charge a poorly defended node - encounter 1-3 enemies and do battle: that's fun. The opposite is Twin Peaks or Warsong Gulch, where you end up 9v9 in mid - in a situation like this - where ranged can poke while melee can't, and ranged can swap to kill targets ~instantly when melee can't - ranged are at a distinct advantage in that environment.

The other important thing is, most of the BGs range excel at are wide open fields (TP and WSG in particular) - that's a map advantage. If they were to give us more claustrophobic indoor battlegrounds - like battling inside a palace or something - melee would begin most fights in melee range and have an upper hand if anything. It just happens that they often make these battlegrounds that occur on big fields: where an Archer has an advantage over a Swordsman.

[Strear]

A nice thing would be more " Strictly unpenetrable " background. Trees, rocks, ... there are many things behind which you can't really hide or use as a barrier because spells or bolts/arrows go through. An idea would be that when you hide behind some tree, the caster/distant loses his target ingame, and has to retarget the enemy as soon as he leaves his protection.

[Deleted]

It's a fine balance for sure, ask anyone who do pvp - all the current bg's favors certain classes at certain spots. Just figure out what your strengths and weaknesses are in regard to your class and place yourself accordingly.

[GareBear]

If I were in charge I would be tempted to experiment as follows; 1)remove all snares (running slow sucks and everyone snares so what is the point?) 2) allow all casts to be performed while moving (but canceled immediately on LoS) 3) make roots attackable, with just enough health to absorb a couple hits