Blizzards current stance on melee vs ranged

85 Tauren Warrior
5010
I am not posting this in warrior QQ or a particular dps class or spec. The following is nothing more then a mere observation that occurred to me and I am seeking others opinions and standpoints on this potential issue.

Not too long ago I came across a post made by Ghostcrawler that really got me thinking. The statement is the following.
"We also nerfed Arms and Fury damage across the board because they were doing too much damage in both PvP and PvE. While we are sensitive to casters outperforming melee on several raid encounters, having warriors handily outperform all other melee isn’t the solution to that problem."

This post baffled me. When I read this it came to my mind that Blizzard is saying "We know ranged are more favorable in raids so we nerfed the only melee dps that can compete with ranged classes rather then give melee either A, a easier time in encounters or B, buff them across the board.

A friend of mine in particular actually ended up rerolling a hunter. His reasoning behind that was because he felt melee dps as a ret paladin became frustrating due to encounters requiring movement and sharper awareness. He concluded that being a ranged dps is easier and more favorable to PUG groups and come to think of it, I cant remenber an encounter in tier 11 that supported a heavy melee group. Sure it's doable but a lot harder.

My overall question is, do you believe that ranged dps have unfair advantages over melee dps?

85 Night Elf Hunter
6910
Over rogues, yes.

Warriors, you're supposed to be hybrids.

Also note that there are 3 Ranged pures and only 1 melee pure.
85 Tauren Warrior
5010
Over rogues, yes.

Warriors, you're supposed to be hybrids.

Also note that there are 3 Ranged pures and only 1 melee pure.


So you are saying that ranged dps only have this advantage over one melee dps class and not the others?

Expand on that statement
85 Worgen Warlock
1670
My first toon was a pally, and after discovering I was not a good tank I went ret. Soon after I went to healing. I have to agree that melee do seem to get a little screwed, it is a very rare thing for me to see a melee dps in the top 3 of a 10 man, and usually they are DK's (haven't done much raiding with dps warriors so idk about where they would stand, especially if they got nerfed this patch. But I'd say even worse then their lack of ability to compete for top DPS in a raid (and lets face it if the boss is going to die, we all want to be top DPS) is that the encounters do make it much easier to DPS as a range, thus why I rolled a lock and didn't just learn to play my pally. But I can see how this becomes a challenge for blizzard. I have read some posts and other things released by blizz about how they have tried to make it a little more melee friendly this patch, but I'm not sure yet if it worked. My best wishes go to the future of melee, it seems like it is getting harder and harder to find melee for raid teams, and almost impossible in pugs. (although I'm on a really low pop server so it can be hard to find anything right now lol.)
90 Blood Elf Death Knight
11450
Range have had an advantage in cataclysm, due to target switching (admitted every class suffers from it but most range are better suited for it), movement in fights, melee range aoe and sheer damage.

Not one fight this tier has forced you to bring melee, but you have to bring range to be more successful.

The interrupt argument just doesn't work anymore with tanks being able to land every interrupt, the only fight where 3 10 sec cd interrupts are needed is the nefarion fight, which can be handled by a resto/ele shaman or a holy pally and the two tanks.
85 Dwarf Warlock
9295
Not one fight this tier has forced you to bring melee, but you have to bring range to be more successful.


Imagine Nef with all melee, lol.

On the other hand we took an alt group into bwd that didnt have a single melee and it went very well.
85 Tauren Warrior
5010
what truly bothers me about this subject is that if you notice in my first post they acknowledge that they don't want ranged dps outperforming melee dps and yet nerf the only class that apparently came close to competing with it. The statement i bolded seems to completely contradict Blizzards current approach to the situation. It just makes no sense to me
Edited by Bigzo on 7/1/2011 3:21 PM PDT
90 Human Mage
10895
07/01/2011 10:55 AMPosted by Zerref
Not one fight this tier has forced you to bring melee, but you have to bring range to be more successful.


Imagine Nef with all melee, lol.

On the other hand we took an alt group into bwd that didnt have a single melee and it went very well.


Actually, Nef is probably the only boss in all of T11 where all melee would work fine. You don't have anything you need to hit from range, no aoe abilities (except ones that hit everyone anyway), very little target switching, the extra interrupts would be nice for P2, and you have a much easier time rotating with the boss in P3.
Community Manager
This post baffled me. When I read this it came to my mind that Blizzard is saying "We know ranged are more favorable in raids so we nerfed the only melee dps that can compete with ranged classes rather then give melee either A, a easier time in encounters or B, buff them across the board.


Your reinterpretation seems to suggest that we're ignoring the issue when that's not the case. The take away from the quote should be that we were aware of the issues regarding ranged vs. melee, but that didn't mean that warriors got to outclass the other melee dps while we addressed them.

We're certainly aware that encounter design in the previous tier ended up feeling melee unfriendly. As a result, we were careful to include more melee friendly fights in the Firelands raid. We'll also make adjustments if things feel off in this tier of content (though that doesn't necessarily mean that melee and ranged will be tied for the top spot on every boss fight).
Edited by Daxxarri on 7/1/2011 4:44 PM PDT
90 Orc Warrior
8565
07/01/2011 04:43 PMPosted by Daxxarri
This post baffled me. When I read this it came to my mind that Blizzard is saying "We know ranged are more favorable in raids so we nerfed the only melee dps that can compete with ranged classes rather then give melee either A, a easier time in encounters or B, buff them across the board.


Your reinterpretation seems to suggest that we're ignoring the issue when that's not the case. The take away from the quote should be that we were aware of the issues regarding ranged vs. melee, but that didn't mean that warriors got to outclass the other melee dps while we addressed them.

We're certainly aware that encounter design in the previous tier ended up feeling melee unfriendly. As a result, we were careful to include more melee friendly fights in the Firelands raid. We'll also make adjustments if things feel off in this tier of content (though that doesn't necessarily mean that melee and ranged will be tied for the top spot on every boss fight).


So ranged DPS were outclassing melee all over the last tier, and you nerfed the only melee who was able to keep up instead of nerfing ranged/changing encounter mechanics/buffing melee overall+lesser nerf to warriors?

Just seems weird.
85 Night Elf Hunter
6910
Over rogues, yes.

Warriors, you're supposed to be hybrids.

Also note that there are 3 Ranged pures and only 1 melee pure.


So you are saying that ranged dps only have this advantage over one melee dps class and not the others?

Expand on that statement
I mean that Rogues should be able to compete with the ranged pures, which are likely the ranged classes that you're complaining about.

Melee hybrids should be competing with ranged hybrids.
90 Human Paladin
9670
07/01/2011 02:21 AMPosted by Jurgrady
My first toon was a pally, and after discovering I was not a good tank I went ret. Soon after I went to healing. I have to agree that melee do seem to get a little screwed, it is a very rare thing for me to see a melee dps in the top 3 of a 10 man, and usually they are DK's (haven't done much raiding with dps warriors so idk about where they would stand, especially if they got nerfed this patch. But I'd say even worse then their lack of ability to compete for top DPS in a raid (and lets face it if the boss is going to die, we all want to be top DPS) is that the encounters do make it much easier to DPS as a range, thus why I rolled a lock and didn't just learn to play my pally. But I can see how this becomes a challenge for blizzard. I have read some posts and other things released by blizz about how they have tried to make it a little more melee friendly this patch, but I'm not sure yet if it worked. My best wishes go to the future of melee, it seems like it is getting harder and harder to find melee for raid teams, and almost impossible in pugs. (although I'm on a really low pop server so it can be hard to find anything right now lol.)


Its not a matter of being able to find melee. Its a matter of you have 1 melee and no PuG wants more than that. 2 at the most. Most PuG's will take one melee any OS and one melee with a tank spec for the 2 tank encounters.

On my realm, you have to pretty much beg to get into a PuG raid. The guild I just joined also is limiting how many melee they take. I can't believe that blizz is surprised that melee are getting shafted with this expansion.
85 Blood Elf Mage
11570
Having worked on 4 bosses so far in firelands, the only fight I would say that is even slightly favorable to melee is Baleroc.

Now in this it might be favorable to melee if you only have 1 melee in the raid, as soon as you start having more than one, that dissapears and once again becomes a liability.

Rhyolith:
-it is much easier to keep ranged dps who are working on legs within range of heals, (to even this out the range of his stomp could be reduced so that healers are not treading the line of being out of range of melee or too close to the boss, however i think a more interesting solution might be to let stomp only hit the 3 closest targets within 20 yards, this would actually make it favor melee)
-against the legs ranged dps are much more likely to lose dps uptime against the legs due to crater eruptions
-against the large add melee are an enormous liability

Shannox:
-going with the strat we used of all dps nuking rageface at the start, melee are forced to chase the dog much more
-melee are capable of getting imprisoned by a trap that is triggered by a dog, not sure if this is a bug, but last night there was only one trap on the ground and both our rogue and riplimb were trapped by it while riplimb was the only one directly above it

Beth'tilac
-can't say I have an opinion on any favortism here, but maybe I just haven't had enough time on it


I really think that rhyolith, a boss that feels like it should be great for melee is in fact easier if you bring no melee dps at all except for possibly a feral druid who could off tank the small clumps of adds and fill in as cat dps for phase 2, which makes the fight much easier.
90 Blood Elf Mage
7450
More melee classes should keep up with the damage from other DPS classes, but in fine-tuning melee DPS class mechanics, they had to even out the warrior damage, lest warriors outrank the majority of melee DPS-users. It doesn't seem weird to me. It just means they are currently trying to figure out how best to do things, and while doing that, don't want to be unfair to anyone.
90 Troll Druid
11445
I mean that Rogues should be able to compete with the ranged pures, which are likely the ranged classes that you're complaining about.

Melee hybrids should be competing with ranged hybrids.
That's a bit of an outdated comment since ranged hybrids(balance and spriest) can compete and outperform ranged pures. Hybrids don't exist anymore.

As to the OP, raids have generally been ranged friendly. Its how they work. But dps-wise in a pure standstill fight the dps from a warrior is equal to that of a hunter. They can't buff warrior damage or other melees damage because that isn't the issue. They just need to work on better encounter design, something I believe they accomplished in Firelands as it seems more melee friendly.

Oh and look how many fights have melee in the top 10 world: http://www.worldoflogs.com/rankings/players/Firelands/dps/
Not really conclusive but it does show that melee can top dps this tier.
88 Human Rogue
16050

We're certainly aware that encounter design in the previous tier ended up feeling melee unfriendly. As a result, we were careful to include more melee friendly fights in the Firelands raid. We'll also make adjustments if things feel off in this tier of content (though that doesn't necessarily mean that melee and ranged will be tied for the top spot on every boss fight).

Really what fights might those be? And pls don't say rag again lol. If anything firelands looks to be worse on melee than t11. Whats with all the melee range only knockback fights? Or dogs we have to chase around or bosses we have to get parried by.

How is firelands better in anyway and not worse? In t11 you had fights that sucked for everyone in t12 you have fights that suck just for melee thanks for the step up there...
90 Draenei Paladin
7490
I mean that Rogues should be able to compete with the ranged pures, which are likely the ranged classes that you're complaining about.

Melee hybrids should be competing with ranged hybrids.


Why do people still insist on this "Pure vs Hybrid" crap? Blizzard has stated many times that there is no "Hybrid tax" and that all DPS specs are treated equally.
Edited by Täñk on 7/1/2011 5:50 PM PDT
This topic has reached its post limit. You may no longer post or reply to posts for this topic.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]