Why Ranged Classes Dominate This Game and Why It needs a fix

And here I was thinking that lightsabers deflected ranged attacks in the galaxy. Guess thats not the case?

But tell me one thing, why I have to interrupt your ranged dmg to succeed in close combat. Maybe you played other mmos or rpgs aswell, and you have always to kite warriors. I dont say melees have a disadvantage in a 1v1, but the thing is that it takes a lot of time to take a ranged class down which actually has a similar dps output like the melee class itself, at my lvl I would say it is even higher. This is not understandable for me.

Iam not sure if you actually played a warrior class in this game, but how is your expirience here in group pvp. An assassin is not compareable to a Maurader class, way different.

Someone should start a thread named : Why people QQ and start thread by "why...magical reasons everyone oversighted this but is not me that is ignorant and biased"

Would get my approval at least.

PS. I'm melee, we're fine everywhere EXCEPT in zerg fests 50vs50 which I don't really care about to be honest {and nothing could fix anyways}

In Tor lightsabers deflect white damage.

So they work when say a Mercenary uses Unload to channel damage at you for 3 seconds. They do not however work on any force or tech attack. So if a Sorc decides to channel force lightning at you it ignores your defenses (parry). COMPLETELY IGNORING THAT LIGHTNING IS BLOCKED BY LIGHTSABERS IN MULTIPLE CUT SCENES AND THE MOVIES.

Most Warriors/Maruaders I've spoken to say they don't really shine until the 40s? More abilities to look forward to.

I've only played mine up to 20s, and it's definitely a lot harder to go against ranged in that level. But I'm just buying time until I get to where I need to be.

I think for range classes all they need to do
Is reduce their chance to hit land an attack whilst moving

And an auto swing attack for melee would go along way

most ranged attacks can't be used while moving...

Yeah I hope aswell, lets see . What I need is more dmg currently, hopefully getting better gear at 40.

Anyway, I still would love to know from a commando why a close combat warrior has to interrupt the dmg of a ranged class to succeed in close range. This is not understandable for me and it feels like a missconcept in this game, balancing range and warrior classes.

If melee could simply DOMINATE a fight the second they got in close with a ranged class, ranged classes would have no chance in this game. Melee classes have multiple skills that allow them to get in close and stay there. In order to maintain balance, the ranged classes have to be able to fight (somewhat) effectively up close.

That being said, a melee class that is on the same level gear/skill wise as me will win the portion of the fight that is up close, and I'll win when I can keep them at range. Effective use and timing of CC and CC breaks (with the resolve bar in mind) will determine who wins the battle of positioning. Can I kill a melee class in melee range? Yeah, if they're bad or undergeared. But you aren't considering that the last thing I want to do is be getting hit while I'm channeling or charging an ability, because of pushback. I'm not 100% effective in close with a melee class, but they are operating at 100%, so I avoid being there as much as I can (which isn't much).

On my shadow (tank spec currently) I'm not as deadly as a DPS... which isn't exactly a surprise. Tanks are, in my opinion, not built for killing as much as support. Guard, CC, taunts, debuffs, and just being able to take a beating give your team's DPS more time to do the killing. Sure you can kill some people 1v1, or complete objectives, but your role in combat is centered around increasing the damage/time necessary to defeat your team. Healers provide back-end support, while tanks provide front-end support.

When my shadow was in a DPS build, I had no problem staying close and dropping a lot of damage with backstabs and such. Stealth in and get the edge with your opening attack(s), get knocked back, force speed back in, eat a stun (often filling the resolve bar), CC break and snare and now the fight is in melee where I have the edge. If things turn south, I can force cloak and slip away, coming back when an opportunity presents itself.


The current system seems quite fair to both sides, without the over use of kiting (while still allowing for it). I don't see why you have such an issue with it.

No one should take the OPs post seriously, even if you agree that ranged are better than melee.

If you want to objective and actually compare the two you need to KNOW and list their advantage and disadvatages together. The OP does nothing but list ranged advantages and none of the melee advantages.

I think there are a lot of players who are ignorant to the advantages melee have, they do exsist. Do they make up for the advantages ranged have? thats debateable, but if you actually want to argue one way or the other you should have all of the facts.