Balancing ranged vs melee

MMOs have historically had a tough time balancing ranged and melee dps because of the inherent advantages that ranged have. They can attack sooner, have better target uptime, have to move less, can spread out to minimize directionals, and even use the environment to make themselves difficult to attack.

I thought it would be a fun discussion to hear what some of you would like to see in Ashes in an effort to keep both dps types viable and desirable. These are some of the things I've seen games do to varying degrees of success:

-making melee much tankier than ranged through better armor, better defensive cooldowns, or more health

-making melee so mobile that uptime is rarely interrupted

-giving melee some decent ranged attacks to use when they can't be on target

-giving melee DOT effects to counter the lost uptime

-making melee damage profiles very bursty to lessen the loss from movement

-making melee just do more damage assuming some of the damage will be lost from movement

-giving melee strong party buffs (not likely with a bard class around)

-giving melee a number of status ailments like slows, stuns, etc

-making ranged so immobile that when they do have to move it hurts them a lot

So, what types of things have have y'all seen that did or didn't work? What would you do?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

RocketFarmer

The way to counter ranged advantage over melee is to make armor and shields actually matter against it. Ranged missile attacks were more useful against heavy armor when utilized en masse, but less so with 1-v-1. Also you need to be at a practical range where you maintain distance while staying close enough to maintain power with the missile. Too far out and the defender should receive dodge bonuses with deflection percentage being higher. Too close and Hulk smash.

Other games tend to cheese up ranged classes with abilities and skills that spam mobility action rather than let the player skill dictate things. I think it’s a reason some complain about tab targeting, viewing it as easy mode.

But with their rock-paper-scissors approach you will never have a balanced 1-v-1 against two different roles/archetypes. The math just doesn’t add up.

Depraved

Azherae wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

what is an rpg? what is a roleplaying game?

It's not a MOBA.

Yeah I know you're poking to have a semantic argument, so I'm setting it up so you have it with me to save the poor forum database.

Won't someone please think of the Text Columns?

not semantics. im asking what are the characteristics that make a game an rpg

The character has a choice of a role.

The expression of that choice is through representative values normally referred to as 'stats' that are innate to the character.

Those stats, which are usually not easily changed as they are a representation of the character's strengths and weaknesses, are either not easily reset or are known/limited when changed (often so others can recognize the role if it is an MMORPG).

The expression of that choice affects the game world in some specific way (usually through the interaction of those numbers with opposed numbers).

Some people consider that there is some persistence involved, i.e. that previous choices of role, stats, and expression lead to further specific choices, and that the character is not entirely reset commonly.

All debatable of course, but thankfully we're talking about moving closer or further from an RPG, not 'which games are RPGs or not', so anything that moves away from those is 'less RPG' and anything that enforces them is 'more RPG'.

not at all. but ill let a few more people answer and then ill enlighten you all. plus im going to sleep

Dygz

Depraved wrote: »

not semantics. im asking what are the characteristics that make a game an rpg

Some of the characteristics are that character skill trumps player skill and character knowledge outweighs player knowledge.

Character INT is more important than player intelligence.
A character with high WIS should be be able to Spot things the player cannot.
A character with high Dex should be able to hit a character with low Dex. Even if the player has high dexterity.

Also, RPG are likely to have spells, like Magic Missle. Which auto-locks. We should expect some Ranger Active Skills with auto-lock and move around obstacles. Because it’s a High Fantasy setting.
Tab Target Active Skills will emulate that.

Solvryn

Depraved wrote: »

Azherae wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

what is an rpg? what is a roleplaying game?

It's not a MOBA.

Yeah I know you're poking to have a semantic argument, so I'm setting it up so you have it with me to save the poor forum database.

Won't someone please think of the Text Columns?

not semantics. im asking what are the characteristics that make a game an rpg

I'll never stop laughing at the notion RPGs require output rng and tab target.

Even though something as something as being a leader of a guild is a role.

Expands your definitions yall, you can have an action combat game and it's still an RPG.

Myosotys

Boneshatter wrote: »

-giving melee some decent ranged attacks to use when they can't be on target

On the contrary, I think we should avoid ranged attack spells for melee classes and favor defensive/malus spells. I don't want a melee class that looks like a hybrid that can do anything and everything.

- I would better give them an entangle spell with % of sucess depending on magical block chance, your magical attack damage and magic resistance of the target.

- Melee should be able to wear armors whith high level of magical resistance

- Charge spell, that ignore malus to reach your opponent faster

- Making weapons condondant stunning hard ennemies.

- Higher HP regeneration

- Think about graphic resolution and zooms potential issues to avoid range classes to attack you for the corner of the screen (I don't know if it can still be an issue in 2023, but before it was).

In some MMO I played in the past, melees were stronger than magicians in PvP, but their XP was 2 or 3 times longer and harder (because no zone spells). Magicians use tu be also much better class for farming. But this is sensitive coz not everyone want his class to become a PVE class.

Dygz

Solvryn wrote: »

Expands your definitions yall, you can have an action combat game and it's still an RPG.

Technically, but "action combat RPG" also pushes that "genre" farther away from RPG.

Depraved

Dygz wrote: »

Solvryn wrote: »

Expands your definitions yall, you can have an action combat game and it's still an RPG.

Technically, but "action combat RPG" also pushes that "genre" farther away from RPG.

well, rpg originally were turn based, so by your own logic, any rpg that isnt turn based is pushing the genre farther away from rpg

Depraved

An RPG is a game where the player can pretend and act as if he was the character he is playing. he plays a role, he is an actor in a play and can interact with other actors (players or NPC). imagine a theater play.

Another main characteristic of an RPG is when there is character development and that development affects the character's journey and (possibly) the story of the game.

A skill system, stat system (whether you can reset it or not, it doesn't matter), magic missiles, finding traps, etc, etc, etc aren't really characteristics that define an RPG. those are implementations of the character development concept because the player has the option to develop his character how he wants.

pvp, pve, action, tab, turn-based, real-time, dungeons, those are simply obstacles or modes, but they aren't what defines an RPG at its core. Developers use these modes and obstacles because people like them, target audience, etc, but that doesn't mean you are moving away from the genre. That is just ridiculous.

You can also not have a stat system and you can have an RPG that doesn't have any combat at all, and you progress through the game by simply talking to people and choosing different answers. you can develop your character's personality instead of physical power. for example, your character can be good, evil, neutral, etc, etc.

The two key concepts in an RPG are character development controlled by the player, and the player being an actor in a play and there are many ways to implement those two concepts.

Dygz

Depraved wrote: »

well, rpg originally were turn based, so by your own logic, any rpg that isnt turn based is pushing the genre farther away from rpg

I would, indeed, say that the farther you get from turn-based the farther you get from RPG.

Azherae

Depraved wrote: »

An RPG is a game where the player can pretend and act as if he was the character he is playing. he plays a role, he is an actor in a play and can interact with other actors (players or NPC). imagine a theater play.

Another main characteristic of an RPG is when there is character development and that development affects the character's journey and (possibly) the story of the game.

A skill system, stat system (whether you can reset it or not, it doesn't matter), magic missiles, finding traps, etc, etc, etc aren't really characteristics that define an RPG. those are implementations of the character development concept because the player has the option to develop his character how he wants.

pvp, pve, action, tab, turn-based, real-time, dungeons, those are simply obstacles or modes, but they aren't what defines an RPG at its core. Developers use these modes and obstacles because people like them, target audience, etc, but that doesn't mean you are moving away from the genre. That is just ridiculous.

You can also not have a stat system and you can have an RPG that doesn't have any combat at all, and you progress through the game by simply talking to people and choosing different answers. you can develop your character's personality instead of physical power. for example, your character can be good, evil, neutral, etc, etc.

The two key concepts in an RPG are character development controlled by the player, and the player being an actor in a play and there are many ways to implement those two concepts.

Yes, we agree, that's what I said.

I put 'stats' in quotes because some games track 'number of times you did X' instead of 'My character has X combat power' and then they use that number in their systems as the progression tracker for character development.

Do you want to have a semantics discussion with Dygz about it specifically? Because that's what's going to happen if you keep holding this weird stance. I don't mind, I was joking somewhat about trying to skip it (in the sense that I don't care if you do or not).

I don't actually agree with Dygz at all that 'needing to aim to deal with the Line of Sight for the rock or wall' is in any way moving the game away from being an RPG, I was just poking at you for going straight for the 'definitions' angle when talking to someone who you should know by now will dance with you on it for multiple pages if you keep leading.

Waltz on.

Dolyem

The easiest balance is more or less making melee classes have more survivability than ranged classes. Trade off for being distanced and mobile is you're squishier.

CROW3

Again, I don’t think it’s as simple to define balance between melee classes and ranged classes. Melee classes can use ranged weapons and ranged classes will have melee skills when minimum distances are closed.

I’m hoping for a broad selection of cc to gain distance, mobility skills to close distance, and some thoughtful use of the environment to help in both cases.

Percimes

Usually, range dps also have to stay immobile to cast their most potent spells although CC somewhat nullify this sometime.

oOKingOo

The solution for me depends on the class but whats important for all melee classes is being able to move while you attack. As a melee pvp player theres nothing worse than being locked to your position while attacking. But ashes wont have that problem we already saw that.
For classes : For rouges i like them either squishy or evasion based but still low defense low hp pool and offensive either dots or bursty. I think the way rogues counter ranged dps is by surpriseattacking them bursting them and maybe poison them
for the fighter i think its especially more important to give him different options.
For example a bladedancer. I would like if you could play the bladedancer really mobile doing aoe bursts or dmg retreating etc. as a balance he wouldnt have a huge hp pool and less single target burst. A fighter/tank could instead have a higher hp pool and attack that slow or something like that. But for that the warrior archetype has to be really diverse.

Depraved

Azherae wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

An RPG is a game where the player can pretend and act as if he was the character he is playing. he plays a role, he is an actor in a play and can interact with other actors (players or NPC). imagine a theater play.

Another main characteristic of an RPG is when there is character development and that development affects the character's journey and (possibly) the story of the game.

A skill system, stat system (whether you can reset it or not, it doesn't matter), magic missiles, finding traps, etc, etc, etc aren't really characteristics that define an RPG. those are implementations of the character development concept because the player has the option to develop his character how he wants.

pvp, pve, action, tab, turn-based, real-time, dungeons, those are simply obstacles or modes, but they aren't what defines an RPG at its core. Developers use these modes and obstacles because people like them, target audience, etc, but that doesn't mean you are moving away from the genre. That is just ridiculous.

You can also not have a stat system and you can have an RPG that doesn't have any combat at all, and you progress through the game by simply talking to people and choosing different answers. you can develop your character's personality instead of physical power. for example, your character can be good, evil, neutral, etc, etc.

The two key concepts in an RPG are character development controlled by the player, and the player being an actor in a play and there are many ways to implement those two concepts.

Yes, we agree, that's what I said.

I put 'stats' in quotes because some games track 'number of times you did X' instead of 'My character has X combat power' and then they use that number in their systems as the progression tracker for character development.

Do you want to have a semantics discussion with Dygz about it specifically? Because that's what's going to happen if you keep holding this weird stance. I don't mind, I was joking somewhat about trying to skip it (in the sense that I don't care if you do or not).

I don't actually agree with Dygz at all that 'needing to aim to deal with the Line of Sight for the rock or wall' is in any way moving the game away from being an RPG, I was just poking at you for going straight for the 'definitions' angle when talking to someone who you should know by now will dance with you on it for multiple pages if you keep leading.

Waltz on.

Meztopheles

Solvryn wrote: »

Boneshatter wrote: »

MMOs have historically had a tough time balancing ranged and melee dps because of the inherent advantages that ranged have. They can attack sooner, have better target uptime, have to move less, can spread out to minimize directionals, and even use the environment to make themselves difficult to attack.

I thought it would be a fun discussion to hear what some of you would like to see in Ashes in an effort to keep both dps types viable and desirable. These are some of the things I've seen games do to varying degrees of success:

-making melee much tankier than ranged through better armor, better defensive cooldowns, or more health

-making melee so mobile that uptime is rarely interrupted

-giving melee some decent ranged attacks to use when they can't be on target

-giving melee DOT effects to counter the lost uptime

-making melee damage profiles very bursty to lessen the loss from movement

-making melee just do more damage assuming some of the damage will be lost from movement

-giving melee strong party buffs (not likely with a bard class around)

-giving melee a number of status ailments like slows, stuns, etc

-making ranged so immobile that when they do have to move it hurts them a lot

So, what types of things have have y'all seen that did or didn't work? What would you do?

It's too early to really examine game balance, as the kits aren't done yet.

This is the only legitimate answer. While it may be fun to speculate about how things will and should work, attempting a conversation about balance for a game where the combat and classes barely exist is impossible. Take fighting games for instance, even when kits are revealed and people make their speculations about the balance they're rarely even close to the mark. To posit balance changes when no one has a clue about what is and isn't strong yet is begging for futility. This conversation will be much more interesting come A2.

Meztopheles

Dygz wrote: »

Depraved wrote: »

well, rpg originally were turn based, so by your own logic, any rpg that isnt turn based is pushing the genre farther away from rpg

I would, indeed, say that the farther you get from turn-based the farther you get from RPG.

I can only pray you wouldn't assert that a member of an organization or any individual in the world has less of a role respectively in said organization or life in general because they aren't, directly through their own being or indirectly from some outside mover, taking turns for their actions.

Hopefully, albeit with less horror if I'm wrong than the previous point, you wouldn't claim that playing is less playing if it's not done by taking turns or a game is less of a game if the same can be said.

An RPG is simply a game in which you play a role in the world/being of that game. The more the world is believable and the mechanics of the game give you freedom within that world, the more of an RPG it is. Mechancis only facilitate the believability of the world and the ability and scope of engagement with it to lesser or greater degrees. There are turn-based games that closer reach the idea of an RPG than some action games and vice versa. Implementation wholistically is important, whether or not a particular broad-brushed style is included matters exactly 0.

Child Item