What happens if Bards have advantage over Fighters in 1v1?

SongRune

Based on something I saw from a Minstrel thread a bit back, the question came up: Who naturally wins in 1v1, in a game where 1v1 isn't automatically balanced? Bards or Fighters?

Fighters specialize in movement and gap closing, but unlike Mages or Rangers, Bards don't need distance to be effective, and in fact, might be better at close range. So does this mean that a Bard, assuming they can, for example, put the Fighter to sleep or something, long enough to get buffs up, has advantage in this 1v1?

Moreso, I'm asking: Would this theoretically bother people enough for them to complain, or is this something I can consider as a possible future for PvP?

Aerlana

the basic paper-rock-scissor is :
Mage > fighter > rogue > mage
If bard is a low damage heavy buff, with little self heal, i can imagine he can win the fighter : more able to make long fight.

But then what happens if fighter take cleric as second archetype and so get some life steal (or kind of shit) augments ? and what about bard adding mage augment to do more damages ?


Now we don't have the skills of half of the class, and what we have on the current class (the 3 in alpha1 right now and ranger) can change a little or a lot for alpha 2. it is nearly impossible to figure who counters what in 1v1 scenario. And thing are wose in "classes" while it adds the augments...


For now, there is only one thing to consider : rock-paper-scissor system, some class will have clear advantage in 1v1 against you, other will be in clear disadvantage. Many people will whine and complain asking for "better game balance" and not being able to admit that while some class kill them most of time, they have easy fight on the other, and some matchup seems even (i read far more post about "nerf [include the class i can't kill]" than a "nerf me" or "up [class i never lose against" ).