Jump to content

Yet another reason to buff melee


Labradoraki

Recommended Posts

Aside from the 100 million other reasons to buff non-stealth melee heres another reason why they should be buffed....

 

They should be buffed so the universla balance can be better... Currently the teams in warzones are 6 ranged usually with 1-2 melee(thats prett ymuch how 80% of warzones are)*

which means the melee classes are pretty much dead against such odds....

 

Commandos/mercs are fine in 1v1 but in teams they are deadly, ESPECIALLY in the current metagame where the only people that can reach the 4 commando team are the 2 MELEE CLASSES because the 6 ranged classes of your team are busy anihilating the enemy melee classes...

 

Now if the melee were more powerful then there would be more melee classes in game therefore the ranged classes wouldnt be so broken in this game because they would actually have to watch out for melee instead of anihilating melee and playing ranged wars with other ranged classes....

 

 

 

 

*Because bioware are brainless kids and dont want to add any skill in ranged classes so everyone plays ranged because its easy to spam buttons

 

 

In case you dont get it, NO you cant stop 4 commandos shooting grav rounds on you alone... you need 3-4 melee at least... but that never happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you're saying 2 players will get beaten by 4-6 players. Yeah. What does that have to do with anything.

 

sigh i ll try to explain it so you can understand

 

ranged=easy

 

melee=harder than ranged=most players are ranged

 

Meaning warzones teams are 70% ranged and 30% melee... which means melee classes are going to get anihilated and ranged classes like trooper will remain be op because melee cannot stop them in warzones due to the fact that they are outnumbered a lot by ranged... And our team of ranged is busy killing the enemy melee... So what does this mean??? it means that ranged classes are going to anihilate melee since they are more and then proceed to play ranged wars with our ranged classes... Conclusion: Melee=weak in warzone team pvp due to unbalanced ratio of ranged:melee

 

If melee=buffed then

more people play melee

therefore melee:ranged ratio=1:1

therefore ranged classes not overpowered in warzones against melee therefore better gameplay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sigh i ll try to explain it so you can understand

 

ranged=easy

 

melee=harder than ranged=most players are ranged

 

Meaning warzones teams are 70% ranged and 30% melee... which means melee classes are going to get anihilated and ranged classes like trooper will remain be op because melee cannot stop them in warzones due to the fact that they are outnumbered a lot by ranged... And our team of ranged is busy killing the enemy melee... So what does this mean??? it means that ranged classes are going to anihilate melee since they are more and then proceed to play ranged wars with our ranged classes... Conclusion: Melee=weak in warzone team pvp due to unbalanced ratio of ranged:melee

 

If melee=buffed then

more people play melee

therefore melee:ranged ratio=1:1

therefore ranged classes not overpowered in warzones against melee therefore better gameplay

 

 

Yeah I read your clarified explanation.

 

It's still 100% wrong. Your mistaken opinions are the result of you being bad at PVP. Melee are in fact stronger than ranged in PVP.

Edited by Redmarx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Melee dps > ranged dps in PVP.

 

Everything you wrote above is wrong.

 

wake up dude. I haven't seen ops doing 600k dmg ... I've seen a lot of sorcs doing 600k dmg .

 

LE: This is after Surge Nerf !!!

Edited by ntyzor
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I read your clarified explanation.

 

It's still 100% wrong. Your mistaken opinions are the result of you being bad at PVP. Melee are in fact stronger than ranged in PVP.

 

so apparently you cant rea and keep saying the same thing... yes melee are ok in pvp against ranged.... they are not when melee are 1 and ranged are 4 and will remain useless because they are melee and thus always forced to face 4 ranged

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so apparently you cant rea and keep saying the same thing... yes melee are ok in pvp against ranged.... they are not when melee are 1 and ranged are 4 and will remain useless because they are melee and thus always forced to face 4 ranged

 

4 melee > 4 ranged

 

The reason you think ranged are stronger is because it's harder to play melee if you're a keyboard turning, clicking terribad.

 

The game shouldn't be balanced around your lack of ability to play it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hilarious. So, you propose to buff melee, so that more will play them, because right now certain classes (read: ranged) are played more so therefor they are overpowered.

 

So, when this melee buff is complete, more people will play them - making melee overpowered, because ranged will be killed by melee all the time, which means that everyone will play melee.

 

Therefore we must then buff ranged afterwards, so more play them, so they can kill melee. Then when that is done, we can buff melee so more play them...

 

My head hurts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 melee > 4 ranged

 

The reason you think ranged are stronger is because it's harder to play melee if you're a keyboard turning, clicking terribad.

 

The game shouldn't be balanced around your lack of ability to play it.

 

Well you just proved my point that you didnt read my point....

 

yes 4 melee>4 ranged... To bad warzone teams are ALWAYS 80% OF THE TIME 6 ranged and 2 melee.... therefore your 4 melee> 4 ranged is not possible scenario and the only posisble one is 2 melee vs 4 ranged which pretty much means loss

 

Now if they buffed melee more ppl would play melee therefore tTHEN 4 melee> 4 ranged would be a possible scenario

Edited by Labradoraki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

sigh i ll try to explain it so you can understand

 

ranged=easy

 

melee=harder than ranged=most players are ranged....

gameplay

 

Ranged easy? Melee Harder? Can ya pass what ya smoking?!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sigh i ll try to explain it so you can understand

 

ranged=easy

 

melee=harder than ranged=most players are ranged

 

Meaning warzones teams are 70% ranged and 30% melee... which means melee classes are going to get anihilated and ranged classes like trooper will remain be op because melee cannot stop them in warzones due to the fact that they are outnumbered a lot by ranged... And our team of ranged is busy killing the enemy melee... So what does this mean??? it means that ranged classes are going to anihilate melee since they are more and then proceed to play ranged wars with our ranged classes... Conclusion: Melee=weak in warzone team pvp due to unbalanced ratio of ranged:melee

 

If melee=buffed then

more people play melee

therefore melee:ranged ratio=1:1

therefore ranged classes not overpowered in warzones against melee therefore better gameplay

 

I can't even...seriously...this is the worst logic I've seen to buff a class EVER.

 

Half (at least) the melee classes in the game can actually take on the most popular ranged classes with ease at end game, specifically sorcs/sages. There have been so many threads on how to pull a ranged into fire, grapple, etc.

 

Let alone how easy it is to 1x1 a sorc/sage and that effectively takes them out of the fight even if all you make them do is run away.

 

Or, form a premade, problem solved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you just proved my point that you didnt read my point....

 

yes 4 melee>4 ranged... To bad warzone teams are ALWAYS 80% OF THE TIME 6 ranged and 2 melee.... therefore your 4 melee> 4 ranged is not possible scenario and the only posisble one is 2 melee vs 4 ranged which pretty much means loss

 

Now if they buffed melee more ppl would play melee therefore tTHEN 4 melee> 4 ranged would be a possible scenario

 

Yeah, I get what you're saying. It's very, very dumb.

 

You're saying that class balance should be decided by looking at how 2 melee do against 4-6 ranged.

 

That's just utterly ridiculous, stupid nonsense.

Edited by Redmarx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you just proved my point that you didnt read my point....

 

yes 4 melee>4 ranged... To bad warzone teams are ALWAYS 80% OF THE TIME 6 ranged and 2 melee.... therefore your 4 melee> 4 ranged is not possible scenario and the only posisble one is 2 melee vs 4 ranged which pretty much means loss

 

Now if they buffed melee more ppl would play melee therefore tTHEN 4 melee> 4 ranged would be a possible scenario

 

Fallacy is a fallacy. If 4 melee > 4 ranged, and you buff melee so that (magically) there are always a 1:1 ratio. Then those 4 melee will "always" kill the ranged, because now melee is even more stronger than ranged.

 

This will, of course, mean that there will be a shift in what players play. I.e melee will be more prominent than ranged. So we will then have to buff ranged ... and the cycle continues.

 

TL;DR: You cannot balance classes around how many play them.

Edited by jizerai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I get what you're saying. It's very, very dumb.

 

You're saying that class balance should be decided by looking at how 2 melee do against 4-6 ranged.

 

That's just utterly ridiculous, stupid nonsense.

 

um hello, this is a noob team game and not a skilled 1v1 game... therefore you should not look at 1v1 which commandos are balanced to fight against

therefore to make commando teams balanced in team pvp they should buff melee else they are overpowered

Edited by Labradoraki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

um hello, this is a noob team game and not a skilled 1v1 game... therefore you should not look at 1v1 which commandos are balanced to fight against

therefore to make commando teams balanced in team pvp they should buff melee else they are overpowered

 

Nonsense.

Edited by Redmarx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...