Jump to content

Groups LFM only ask for ranged


Recommended Posts

I've noticed a lot when people are LFM in flashpoints that they're asking for ranged people only. Which is kinda disturbing seeing as its becoming apparent that being melee really has no benefit at all accept for epic storylines and maybe some pvp.

 

Whats the deal? Are melee really all the useless in flashpoints?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Having melee makes some encounters harder and most of the time is a nightmare for the healer. The only reason to ever bring melee dps is for interrupts, and even that can be handled by tank+ranged (other than BH/Trooper at least).

 

It's even worse in Ops, with bosses having aoe damage which only hits melee, Bonetrasher roflstomping them by random target switching..

 

In this game, there is no "bring the player not a class". It's "bring ranged not melee if at all possible". Sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I come across a group that won't take me because I'm a marauder who easily outgears the entire pug, I take it as a sign that it's not a group I would want to be in anyway.

 

HMs are not worth the trouble of grabbing specific roles classes. Tank, heals, 2 dps. You can clear any HM with competent players regardless of AC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I come across a group that won't take me because I'm a marauder who easily outgears the entire pug, I take it as a sign that it's not a group I would want to be in anyway.

 

HMs are not worth the trouble of grabbing specific roles classes. Tank, heals, 2 dps. You can clear any HM with competent players regardless of AC.

 

While I agree with everything you said, the bolded can become a problem. If I'm doing a true PUG -- so I do not know the people coming into the group -- I will favour either 2 ranged or 1 ranged and 1 melee. Is this because I feel the 2 melee combination will not work? No, of course not. I've seen it work multiple times. In true PUGs, however, you really don't know how competent these players are. If I'm dealing with less competent players, I'd much rather have the safety net that at least 1 ranged player provides.

 

That's the issue with our current content in either FPs or OPs. Are ranged favoured? Yes. Can melee overcome the difficulties presented? Yes. Can the vast majority of melee overcome it? No. There just aren't enough competent or good players out there. Sadly, most PUGs are bad and this creates the problem.

Edited by Mavery
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. Having melee makes some encounters harder and most of the time is a nightmare for the healer. The only reason to ever bring melee dps is for interrupts, and even that can be handled by tank+ranged (other than BH/Trooper at least).

 

It's even worse in Ops, with bosses having aoe damage which only hits melee, Bonetrasher roflstomping them by random target switching..

 

In this game, there is no "bring the player not a class". It's "bring ranged not melee if at all possible". Sad.

 

Not at all true. Bonethrasher has never "roflstomped me by random target switching", a decent player in a half decent group manages threat, uses CDs and medpacs etc, and survives. Any boss AoE in this game is easily avoidable for melee players. My 16m NM op currently brings two marauders (we are 5/5 EV, 3/5 KP in our first week of NM raiding).

 

If you bring a melee who thinks that it's ok to simply tunnel vision the boss and pays no attention to the fight, that will bring the raid down. It's easier to get around that by bringing more ranged, but to suggest the mere presence of melee players is already hurting the raid is presumptuous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the issue with our current content in either FPs or OPs. Are ranged favoured? Yes. Can melee overcome the difficulties presented? Yes. Can the vast majority of melee overcome it? No. There just aren't enough competent or good players out there. Sadly, most PUGs are bad and this creates the problem.

 

I think this is the core of the issue; I strongly agree. Melee are perfectly viable for all encounters, the issue is that most players who rolled melee found it to be more challenging than a faceroll and rerolled sorc/merc or whatever. I personally like the challenge of it and enjoy my marauder a great deal. There are, I readily admit, a LOT of melee players who tend to stand in the fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did BT HM with 3 assassin scrubs the other day. Tank had 13k hp and the other two had 15k. I'm decked out in T2-3 gear with 17k hp. I don't even think the tank was spec to tank. We wiped 3 times on the way to the first boss and once on the first boss before I ditched the group.

 

Tank died in 3 hits so I had to spam heal him with my big heals every fight. Other 2 useless assassins would try to pick up the adds that were attacking me and dies in 2-3 hits as well. I tanked that **** for longer than all of them but in the end it was impossible to keep everyone alive.

 

Not really related about the topic but just wanted to say how bad the casuals are in this game and thanks to BW for bringing in so many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You manage thread on bone thrasher? do tell... :p

In your defensive fervor however I think you're missing the point. Are melee viable? Sure. Do they bring more dps to the table to warrant the increased risk, healing and player competence level to play them? Nope. DPS is on par, so why would I ever want a dps assassin instead of a bounty hunter if we otherwise have interrupts covered?

 

Bone thrasher is acually a good example, you get a competent player, keeping behind him, avoid attacks. He'll still definitely get hit by the jump, and will occasionally get hit with swipes while BEHIND bonethrasher simply because of latency/net code issues. You add in multiple melees having this issue and it becomes a huge problem for the healers who could otherwise be topping people off and contributing some dps.

 

Let's face it, there are some fights that are just unmelee friend and for no damn good reason other than shoddy design. Yes they can still be done, but it's simply easier to bring the ranged to them which is why they are favored. If you have to move out and stop dpsing in multiple fights, BW needs to recognize that and give those melee some reason for that loss of dps (IE increased dps via a melee only buff, or a fight mechanic the melee need to deal with, or some mechanic that casuse the ranged players to deal wtih the same types of issues).

 

Equality in the expected level of player skill is what's missing. And that will remain true for now no matter how Pro you are at your given melee class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You manage thread on bone thrasher? do tell... :p

In your defensive fervor however I think you're missing the point. Are melee viable? Sure. Do they bring more dps to the table to warrant the increased risk, healing and player competence level to play them? Nope. DPS is on par, so why would I ever want a dps assassin instead of a bounty hunter if we otherwise have interrupts covered?

 

Bone thrasher is acually a good example, you get a competent player, keeping behind him, avoid attacks. He'll still definitely get hit by the jump, and will occasionally get hit with swipes while BEHIND bonethrasher simply because of latency/net code issues. You add in multiple melees having this issue and it becomes a huge problem for the healers who could otherwise be topping people off and contributing some dps.

 

Let's face it, there are some fights that are just unmelee friend and for no damn good reason other than shoddy design. Yes they can still be done, but it's simply easier to bring the ranged to them which is why they are favored. If you have to move out and stop dpsing in multiple fights, BW needs to recognize that and give those melee some reason for that loss of dps (IE increased dps via a melee only buff, or a fight mechanic the melee need to deal with, or some mechanic that casuse the ranged players to deal wtih the same types of issues).

 

Equality in the expected level of player skill is what's missing. And that will remain true for now no matter how Pro you are at your given melee class.

 

When I say manage threat I mean I use force camo when he comes to whack me (it drops threat but also reduces my damage taken to zero, I call it threat reduction out of habit).

 

I find I can outperform most of the dps in my raid. It's hard to really go on anything without a combat log, other than that on council in EV I am typically the first or second person done with my mob, and on most other fights, I'm usually the one who has to deal with threat issues most often. Crude barometers, but I'll take what I can get.

 

Regardless, we are talking about ops right now, and the OP was talking about HM FPs. My original point was that for a HM FP, you can bring whatever you want as long as the roles are filled, and you'll be fine. Bad players can show up as any class, any role; it's part of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say manage threat I mean I use force camo when he comes to whack me (it drops threat but also reduces my damage taken to zero, I call it threat reduction out of habit).

 

I find I can outperform most of the dps in my raid. It's hard to really go on anything without a combat log, other than that on council in EV I am typically the first or second person done with my mob, and on most other fights, I'm usually the one who has to deal with threat issues most often. Crude barometers, but I'll take what I can get.

 

Regardless, we are talking about ops right now, and the OP was talking about HM FPs. My original point was that for a HM FP, you can bring whatever you want as long as the roles are filled, and you'll be fine. Bad players can show up as any class, any role; it's part of the game.

 

Your range dps suck if you are getting top dps. Being first to kill your mob in council doesn't mean you do the most dps lol. If by your logic, as a healer, I beat some of our new recruits who play a dps class during council, does that mean I do moar dps than them?

 

And if you have to deal with threat issues in most fight than your tanks are bad. BW brought too many scrubs to this game. I see players in WZ with less hp and dps than my companion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your range dps suck if you are getting top dps. Being first to kill your mob in council doesn't mean you do the most dps lol. If by your logic, as a healer, I beat some of our new recruits who play a dps class during council, does that mean I do moar dps than them?

 

And if you have to deal with threat issues in most fight than your tanks are bad. BW brought too many scrubs to this game. I see players in WZ with less hp and dps than my companion.

 

I didn't say it meant I do the most DPS. My post said, a crude barometer. This means it's not something really worth relying on, simply as close as we get to seeing where we stack up against other players in the group. As pointed out, no one knows who the top DPS in a raid is without a combat log. Maybe I'm first, maybe I'm last, I'm doing the best I can to draw conclusions from what I see in fights.

 

I don't know why you would have a healer on a mob meant for a dps class for council, but I suppose if that's what your raid likes to do and it works for you, that's fine.

 

I try not to use players in WZ or numbers from WZ when I figure out where I stack up in PvE, it's apples and oranges. But I think doing on average between 350-400k as a marauder means I'm doing good enough damage.

 

I'm sure regardless of what I post, there will be more responses that I suck, my raid sucks, melee sucks, healers suck, etc. That, unfortunately, has become the nature of these forums and the game on the whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

have to agree, lots of scrubs in this game. I would rather take my companion on a HM FP than most players, because unlike them, I bother to gear them and myself, and learn my class.

 

I disagree with you scrub, dealing with threat issues does not necessarily mean bad tank. It means that HE is the guy who initially steals aggro from the tank, no one else. It doesn't mean the tank doesn't immediately taunt it back.

 

Too any superiority complexes on forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say manage threat I mean I use force camo when he comes to whack me (it drops threat but also reduces my damage taken to zero, I call it threat reduction out of habit).

 

I find I can outperform most of the dps in my raid. It's hard to really go on anything without a combat log, other than that on council in EV I am typically the first or second person done with my mob, and on most other fights, I'm usually the one who has to deal with threat issues most often. Crude barometers, but I'll take what I can get.

 

Regardless, we are talking about ops right now, and the OP was talking about HM FPs. My original point was that for a HM FP, you can bring whatever you want as long as the roles are filled, and you'll be fine. Bad players can show up as any class, any role; it's part of the game.

 

You make it sound like melees aren't at a disadvantage....which they are.

 

Sure it still might be possible to beat HM flashpoints with pure melees but it does make things a lot harder compared to ranged groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A properly run group can make melee not only viable, but an advantage in HM flashpoints. proper spacing to mitigate AOE hitting more than one player while having the dps and tank in a triangle around the target allows a sorc healer to catch all players with their aoe heal while allowing them to not reduce dps by running around to stay in it.

 

While we're talking about BH, I think you should clarify to mercenaries, and specifically arsenal mercenaries, as those are really the only purely ranged dps class for bounty hunters. pyro specs in both cases are medium range, moving into melee for rocket punch and staying at medium to pop flame burst and rail shot. Advanced prototypes are also melee range to medium range, depending on how hybridized their build is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget how easy it is to bunch up all of your ranged deeps and drop an AOE heal.

 

Ranged > Melee right now in honestly every circumstance I can think of. I'm not saying don't bring any melee dps, because you can get by just fine with them, but having all ranged DPS just makes fights easier.

Edited by Kamikaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You people act like this is the first mmo with aoe's and anti-melee dps mobs. Plenty of other mmo's have similar setups and melee have never had a problem doing much more dps. It's like the idiots from back in the day in FFXI before parsers were around. They would pick rangers over monks because rangers had higher spike damage. Yet parsers came out and showed that monks raw dps (even when fighting bosses that required to disengage occasionally due to aoe spams) simply out shined all the spike fever groups.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are all in agreement. I'll make a serious case for melee dps simply because I play one, but I'm not naive. If a raid is forming, and one dps spot is left for either a marauder or a sorc, we all know what's going in that spot 9 times out of 10.

 

I just want to try and keep away from the "bring the class" mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all true. Bonethrasher has never "roflstomped me by random target switching", a decent player in a half decent group manages threat, uses CDs and medpacs etc, and survives. Any boss AoE in this game is easily avoidable for melee players. My 16m NM op currently brings two marauders (we are 5/5 EV, 3/5 KP in our first week of NM raiding).

 

If you bring a melee who thinks that it's ok to simply tunnel vision the boss and pays no attention to the fight, that will bring the raid down. It's easier to get around that by bringing more ranged, but to suggest the mere presence of melee players is already hurting the raid is presumptuous.

 

Funny cuz a player who "uses cd's and medpacs" is, in my book, the top 10% of players in this game. You overestimate this game's playerbase. From a healer's POV I normally ask for ranged in PUGs cuz I'm normally with my melee guildy. If the player is a random I'd rather have a random ranged 10 times out of 10.

 

Also, I prefer to bring all 4 classes if possible. Having all 4 buffs can make up for dumb PUGs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You people act like this is the first mmo with aoe's and anti-melee dps mobs. Plenty of other mmo's have similar setups and melee have never had a problem doing much more dps. It's like the idiots from back in the day in FFXI before parsers were around. They would pick rangers over monks because rangers had higher spike damage. Yet parsers came out and showed that monks raw dps (even when fighting bosses that required to disengage occasionally due to aoe spams) simply out shined all the spike fever groups.

 

Yes some games like FFXI and WoW gave melee higher dps because of the fact that they are melee and will be taking more dmg. This game is not the case. Melee dps < Range dps in this game while taking more dmg.

 

BW already failed unless they give melee a huge dps buff which won't happen cause we all know they can't design boss fights without some kind of aoe, enrage, and buggy *** mechanics that favor range over melee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes some games like FFXI and WoW gave melee higher dps because of the fact that they are melee and will be taking more dmg. This game is not the case. Melee dps < Range dps in this game while taking more dmg.

 

BW already failed unless they give melee a huge dps buff which won't happen cause we all know they can't design boss fights without some kind of aoe, enrage, and buggy *** mechanics that favor range over melee.

 

Apparently you missed the part of my post where I told the story of rangers and parsers and how a biased mindset can be...well...wrong...You can't claim that range dps>melee dps without any solid numbers, which is exactly why I brought up the whole parser example from FFXI to begin with.

 

Before parsers everyone laughed at monks because our damage from weapon skills were not that impressive. While yes the rangers were doing amazing spike damage with their weapon skills, their overall sustained dps was not all that great, and their speed of attacks were not that fast. So while yes, monks spike damage sucked, but when you count the fact that they hit much faster, build tech points much quicker, and can use weapon skills at a more steady pace showed they were the king of dps.

 

Now I'm not saying melee dps is the king of dps or anything, and I understand the combat systems are two very very different systems, but my point is, you can't really make wild claims like that without proper numbers. And the only real numbers we get is the crude damage chart from pvp...which doesnt really mean anything as I can top the charts every round with my sentinel just by jumping in the middle of a mob and hitting force sweep, popping my cd's and getting probably 1 or 2 more force sweeps before I die. So ya, I think people jumping on the whole ranged dps only bandwagon are just bad players in bad groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well we don't have numbers but we have the following to go on:

BW said that all dps spec should be within 5% of each other, fact is, atm there is way way more **** for melee dps to have to deal with when it comes to aoe dmg, boss abilities etc

with players of an equal skill and gear level the ranged dps will always do better since a) they don't have to care about aoe as much giving them more time to take care of their rotation and b) they can continue to dps in situations where the melee can't

 

yes, you can do all the HM content with melee dps, but it would be easier with ranged dps for the above mentioned points, you simply have more room for errors

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...