Development Discussion: Current Topic, combat damage

[NaoWhut]

lol, no xD you just don't think out of the
box enough to see that the ranger should
never touch you unless you're nub

[DatOneGuy]

Rangers need to stop fitting outside the combat system so much.

As for the combat system, everytime I've suggested new weapons or asked why certain weapons are NOT combat weapons (Sledgehammer), it was said that implementing them into the current system could fuck everything up and would require rebalancing the whole thing, so it'll happen when the combat system changes, way down the line, way in the future.

[novaalpha]

nvm

[DatOneGuy]

lol, no xD you just don't think out of the
box enough to see that the ranger should
never touch you unless you're nub

You said nothing concrete.

If you need to be spoonfed, there's a problem here.

[NaoWhut]

I said the solution to fighting someone
that's wielding a ranger's bow is so
simple and obvious you'd feel like a nub
if i were to tell you how to do it untouched.

i'm not gonna shout it out on the forum,
then every little noob is safe from even
the highest ql ranger bow and highest
level of MM. Then being an archer might
get a little rougher =p

PS, i take it you know what i'm talking
about datwo

[burgingham]

It is fairly obvious.

[NaoWhut]

Just fairly =p

now lets stop talking, i'd like to put an arrow
through people's skulls still without having to
go more all out

[novaalpha]

nvm

[trondaron]

I'm going to guess because I have no vested interest in archers being strong.

The aiming bar is negatively affected when the target moves, so if the target continually moves back and forth than the aim bar will potentially stay below 20-30%. Maybe in a melee vs an archer fight the melee should spend the time of their cooldown moving around so the aim bar is reduced.

My only other thought at the moment is to use 2v1 on archers, but I'd think that applies to melee fighters too, and I think the 'strategy' being hinted at is for 1v1.

[novaalpha]

nvm