The problem isn't the skills, it's that enemies hit too high, and have massive AOE damage.
I mostly stopped having a problem with that once I started concentrating on figuring out which hits I could soak with my defenses, and which I had to use an active defense or roll to get away from.
The problem isn't the skills, it's that enemies hit too high, and have massive AOE damage.
I mostly stopped having a problem with that once I started concentrating on figuring out which hits I could soak with my defenses, and which I had to use an active defense or roll to get away from.
I was hammer warrior, I didn't have any attacks like that.
First time I went into WVWVWVWVWVWVWWV with a thief, I was all about getting in the middle of the action. I got my lungs ripped out and exchanged for my kidneys, which the opposing server then proceeded to beat me with.
I obtained a short bow, and all was right again, as it took the opposing server longer to get to me and do the whole lung/kidney deal again.
I don't think it's really about balance, it's about adapting to the situation. Some folks might not like being forced into a melee or ranged playstyle; I'm not one of those people, so it doesn't matter to me really =D
I was hammer warrior, I didn't have any attacks like that.
I mainly spec'd power.
I believe they were talking about sticking a defense on almost every melee weapon. I think there's a utility or two that might help with that. Honestly, even though I ran a warrior up until the early 20s, I can't remember how defensive they were, because I was mostly playing with a friend and using a rifle.
I know Guardian has a ridiculous amount of tools for dealing with attacks. ... and a hammer is full of defenses too. They also have the knockback attack on 4!
I'm pretty sure warrior has at least TWO knockbacks/knockdowns on their hammer though, and those totally count as defense, since they interrupt the current attack.
the game hasn't even been released and people are complaining about class balance. At the moment nobody is even close to using the classes to their maximum potential so there's not much of a point in discussing whats balanced/unbalanced.
It's a beta. Things go wrong such as class balance. That's what beta is for,,,, to vent issues so they get looked into. Why play beta if you don't try to improve the game? You are a waste or beta slot honestly.
I'm just saying don't jump the gun because it IS a beta. You think after playing classes over a beta weekend you can decide whether things are balanced or imbalanced?
I guarantee you right now the way people play classes now will be nothing like what people play their classes like 1 year from now, balance changes or not. So lay off the balance whining for now.
I was hammer warrior, I didn't have any attacks like that.
I mainly spec'd power.
I believe they were talking about sticking a defense on almost every melee weapon. I think there's a utility or two that might help with that. Honestly, even though I ran a warrior up until the early 20s, I can't remember how defensive they were, because I was mostly playing with a friend and using a rifle.
I know Guardian has a ridiculous amount of tools for dealing with attacks. ... and a hammer is full of defenses too. They also have the knockback attack on 4!
I'm pretty sure warrior has at least TWO knockbacks/knockdowns on their hammer though, and those totally count as defense, since they interrupt the current attack.
Hammer isn't a very defensive weapon, but it does have excellent CC (which can't be used in conjunction w/ dodging to play defensively).
On the hammer you can use: Fierce Blow (weakness, reduces inc dmg), Hammer Shock (AoE cripple), Staggering Blow (AoE knockback), Backbreaker (knockdown), and your adrenaline (leap + AoE stun).
Keep in mind that the Warrior is not inherently built as a support class. It's really built around high burst dmg, and pressure melee dps. But if you want to play it as a tanky-support warrior, you absolutely can. However, the Hammer isn't the weapon for that. If you want to be more defensive, Maces, & a shield are a better option.
I played a warrior to 30 in one of the betas. For PvE my most frequent weapon set was sword + shield, and greatsword. Greatsword is one of the best damage weapons in the game, and has some of the best mobility. Most of the skills it offers allows you to choose between high dmg bursts (hundred blades), or gap openers / closers (rush / whirlwind). If I got into trouble, I'd just switch back to sword / shield and either use shield bash, or block while I waited for my heal to come back up.
Hammer is an awesome weapon, but it's more of a damage / CC spam role. It doesn't have the defense or mobility that the other weapons have. It's really quite slow =/.
I've seen a lot of complaints centered around ranged/melee balance in GW2. For example, "ranged can't finish people in downed state, so melee has an advantage" or "ranged rules WvW because anyone trying to melee will get destroyed."
But, to tell you the truth, I really don't think that ranged/melee balance for all situations really matters that much in GW2 as compared to other games. You see, in other games, classes were generally ranged or melee exclusively. So there really couldn't be any scenarios where ranged or melee had the clear advantage. Because if they did, then you were stuck. This often caused problems in large-scale PvP where ranged nearly always had a pretty large advantage...melee classes were stuck as being second rate in several games because of this.
In GW2 however, every class is both potentially ranged or melee (or at least very close to melee). So I really don't think it's that imperative to balance ranged against melee...a savvy player will just treat ranged/melee capability as a situational tool. Using ranged when appropriate, and melee when appropriate.
Thoughts?
Totally agree I love the flexability of the class, in RL if this were RL, people would switch dependant on the situation. It should be no different in games. We should have the option of switching, also, sure ranged has to get up on the enemy to finish them in pvp but how hard is it to switch weapons and use the movement enhancement abilities of said weapon?
I'm just saying don't jump the gun because it IS a beta. You think after playing classes over a beta weekend you can decide whether things are balanced or imbalanced?
I guarantee you right now the way people play classes now will be nothing like what people play their classes like 1 year from now, balance changes or not. So lay off the balance whining for now.
The PvE / PvP balance may be a little funky, but going off what was seen in sPvP, the balance is MUCH closer than I think a lot of people realize.
Nearly every class has people whinning about them being OP, and the classes most people swear are 'broken' or in serious need of a revamp, are some of the MOST used classes in sPvP (engineer / mesmer). Hell, I don't think I've seen a single one of the better guilds going into sPvP without at least one of those, if not both.
And I agree. If this forum is any indication, most of the people here have nowhere near enough of a clue about how all the classes work to begin to talk about balance.
Last BWE I tried a thief, usually not my favorite class in most MMOs, but I had a lot of fun.
Mostly ran with shortbow & dual pistols but tried every weapon combo and liked them all (mh sword was my least favorite). Specced for high toughness, HP and initiative regeneration. Used bleeds and poisons to apply pressure, shadowsteps and bow 3&5 skills for high mobility, dual pistol unload finishers, etc.
Mostly what killed that thief was melee. CC combined with big burst damage and bleeds could take me down before I could regain initiative, where most ranged damage came in slow enough to allow me to escape somehow, or even turn the fight to my favor.
Do you know how crazy fun it is to be an Elementalist running head first into battle with a Fire Axe summoned by a utility spell? Or becoming a Ranger by simply summoning a Frost Longbow? And then there's the Frozen Mallet. Ya, there's no need to balance because there's so much mix and match already.
I've seen a lot of complaints centered around ranged/melee balance in GW2. For example, "ranged can't finish people in downed state, so melee has an advantage" or "ranged rules WvW because anyone trying to melee will get destroyed."
But, to tell you the truth, I really don't think that ranged/melee balance for all situations really matters that much in GW2 as compared to other games. You see, in other games, classes were generally ranged or melee exclusively. So there really couldn't be any scenarios where ranged or melee had the clear advantage. Because if they did, then you were stuck. This often caused problems in large-scale PvP where ranged nearly always had a pretty large advantage...melee classes were stuck as being second rate in several games because of this.
In GW2 however, every class is both potentially ranged or melee (or at least very close to melee). So I really don't think it's that imperative to balance ranged against melee...a savvy player will just treat ranged/melee capability as a situational tool. Using ranged when appropriate, and melee when appropriate.
Thoughts?
My only problem is some people much prefer the playstyle one or the other fosters. I myself have always been a Melee'er at heart so at first I was really bummed out with how hard it is to play melee but after BWE3 I learned 2 things.
1. You can succeed at melee and when you do it is more rewarding
and
2. I actually fell in love with a ranged playstyle of my Melee Warrior. I was really digging the longbow.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
So you want to force everyone to have one melee and one ranged weapon?
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
the game hasn't even been released and people are complaining about class balance. At the moment nobody is even close to using the classes to their maximum potential so there's not much of a point in discussing whats balanced/unbalanced.
People will ALWAYS complain about "balance". Especially if the game has PvP. It has little to do with the game dynamics, and much to do with peoples sense of entitlement, and losing to someone else. Its a never ending phantom chase that once it starts, consumes endless Dev time and talent.
I've seen a lot of complaints centered around ranged/melee balance in GW2. For example, "ranged can't finish people in downed state, so melee has an advantage" or "ranged rules WvW because anyone trying to melee will get destroyed."
But, to tell you the truth, I really don't think that ranged/melee balance for all situations really matters that much in GW2 as compared to other games. You see, in other games, classes were generally ranged or melee exclusively. So there really couldn't be any scenarios where ranged or melee had the clear advantage. Because if they did, then you were stuck. This often caused problems in large-scale PvP where ranged nearly always had a pretty large advantage...melee classes were stuck as being second rate in several games because of this.
In GW2 however, every class is both potentially ranged or melee (or at least very close to melee). So I really don't think it's that imperative to balance ranged against melee...a savvy player will just treat ranged/melee capability as a situational tool. Using ranged when appropriate, and melee when appropriate.
Thoughts?
My only problem is some people much prefer the playstyle one or the other fosters. I myself have always been a Melee'er at heart so at first I was really bummed out with how hard it is to play melee but after BWE3 I learned 2 things.
1. You can succeed at melee and when you do it is more rewarding
and
2. I actually fell in love with a ranged playstyle of my Melee Warrior. I was really digging the longbow.
This is the way to be .
It's really easy to get into the groove of "I like melee" or "I like ranged" from other games, but this just isn't how GW2 works. And once you try to branch out, sometimes you have fun.
Also, like you say, melee does work in GW2, but you need to approach it from a different angle...you can't think "I will be melee all the time."
I've seen a lot of complaints centered around ranged/melee balance in GW2. For example, "ranged can't finish people in downed state, so melee has an advantage" or "ranged rules WvW because anyone trying to melee will get destroyed."
But, to tell you the truth, I really don't think that ranged/melee balance for all situations really matters that much in GW2 as compared to other games. You see, in other games, classes were generally ranged or melee exclusively. So there really couldn't be any scenarios where ranged or melee had the clear advantage. Because if they did, then you were stuck. This often caused problems in large-scale PvP where ranged nearly always had a pretty large advantage...melee classes were stuck as being second rate in several games because of this.
In GW2 however, every class is both potentially ranged or melee (or at least very close to melee). So I really don't think it's that imperative to balance ranged against melee...a savvy player will just treat ranged/melee capability as a situational tool. Using ranged when appropriate, and melee when appropriate.
Thoughts?
My only problem is some people much prefer the playstyle one or the other fosters. I myself have always been a Melee'er at heart so at first I was really bummed out with how hard it is to play melee but after BWE3 I learned 2 things.
1. You can succeed at melee and when you do it is more rewarding
and
2. I actually fell in love with a ranged playstyle of my Melee Warrior. I was really digging the longbow.
This is the way to be .
It's really easy to get into the groove of "I like melee" or "I like ranged" from other games, but this just isn't how GW2 works. And once you try to branch out, sometimes you have fun.
Also, like you say, melee does work in GW2, but you need to approach it from a different angle...you can't think "I will be melee all the time."
Pretty much this. I played warrior almost exclusievely last BWE and I spent most time in WvWvW. Majority of my kills were using melee weapons but whenver it was mexican standoff between two objectives with larger groups trying to push the other back I'd switch to my rifle to snare those that run in too far, then switch back to my Hammer and keep them down.
When I was sieging I'd switch to longbow due to the AoE capabilities, when door were about to break I'd often switch to 1hander/warhorn combo for the Vigor and Swiftness buffs that help getting on the walls to destroy the siege weapons.
Thing is, if you wan to use a class to 100% of it's potential you need to be flexible. Sometimes it even means switching utility/elite between the fights to squeeze the most for given encounter.
That said playing just melee or just ranged is still viable for majority of game, it just won't be as effective.
In theory, ranged needs to be balanced with ranged in any game, if you cry too much about it, what you get is homonigization, which isn't fun, good, or desired.
Originally posted by otinanai123 So you want to force everyone to have one melee and one ranged weapon?
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
That's still forced. Since I would always need a range weapon at hand, since if I get attacked , I am locked from switching weapons. Fighting with two Melee weapons means I can't simply adjust to a situation since I can't freely switch weapons. I have to go into battle with that in mind, which means I NEED a ranged weapon at all times, since Melee weapons aren't always useful. That's Forcing....
So you want to force everyone to have one melee and one ranged weapon?
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
That's still forced. Since I would always need a range weapon at hand, since if I get attacked , I am locked from switching weapons. Fighting with two Melee weapons means I can't simply adjust to a situation since I can't freely switch weapons. I have to go into battle with that in mind, which means I NEED a ranged weapon at all times, since Melee weapons aren't always useful. That's Forcing....
Eh, I don't think it's forced, it's just situational.
I mean, if you are defending a keep in WvW...then you would be a fool to not have a ranged weapon. But in a different situation, this isn't the case.
Imagine that you are in sPvP, and you are planning to lockdown control points. In this case, you may want skills that offer lots of CC so you can stun people and knock them back, and survivability like blocks or skills that grant invincibility like Blurred Frenzy. To get these skills, you may very well have two melee weapons.
So I think the key here is to do like other people said, and not look at weapons as "ranged or melee," instead look at them as a package of skills. And you want to have the best skill package for the scenarios that you are planning to be in.
Meleee vs Melee are to be some kind balanced yea, same goes for range.
But if that is done the armor allso need balance, from attacks and resistens(And that never works).
A mmo are a world where you pic a class you wanner be, and know that you can not be anything at ones, same in the real world. And now that its not a sandbox when it comes to skills, there is no need for balanced skills allover.
You i like / do I find the skill for all classes balanced and right to the class NO WAY. WIll I ever NO.
So you want to force everyone to have one melee and one ranged weapon?
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
That's still forced. Since I would always need a range weapon at hand, since if I get attacked , I am locked from switching weapons. Fighting with two Melee weapons means I can't simply adjust to a situation since I can't freely switch weapons. I have to go into battle with that in mind, which means I NEED a ranged weapon at all times, since Melee weapons aren't always useful. That's Forcing....
Eh, I don't think it's forced, it's just situational.
I mean, if you are defending a keep in WvW...then you would be a fool to not have a ranged weapon. But in a different situation, this isn't the case.
Imagine that you are in sPvP, and you are planning to lockdown control points. In this case, you may want skills that offer lots of CC so you can stun people and knock them back, and survivability like blocks or skills that grant invincibility like Blurred Frenzy. To get these skills, you may very well have two melee weapons.
So I think the key here is to do like other people said, and not look at weapons as "ranged or melee," instead look at them as a package of skills. And you want to have the best skill package for the scenarios that you are planning to be in.
again you are pointing out the flaw of what we are speaking of, since this is Weapon Requirements you keep mentioning.
which is the same as us saying, we are forced to play with these weapons.
So you want to force everyone to have one melee and one ranged weapon?
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
That's still forced. Since I would always need a range weapon at hand, since if I get attacked , I am locked from switching weapons. Fighting with two Melee weapons means I can't simply adjust to a situation since I can't freely switch weapons. I have to go into battle with that in mind, which means I NEED a ranged weapon at all times, since Melee weapons aren't always useful. That's Forcing....
Eh, I don't think it's forced, it's just situational.
I mean, if you are defending a keep in WvW...then you would be a fool to not have a ranged weapon. But in a different situation, this isn't the case.
Imagine that you are in sPvP, and you are planning to lockdown control points. In this case, you may want skills that offer lots of CC so you can stun people and knock them back, and survivability like blocks or skills that grant invincibility like Blurred Frenzy. To get these skills, you may very well have two melee weapons.
So I think the key here is to do like other people said, and not look at weapons as "ranged or melee," instead look at them as a package of skills. And you want to have the best skill package for the scenarios that you are planning to be in.
again you are pointing out the flaw of what we are speaking of, since this is Weapon Requirements you keep mentioning.
which is the same as us saying, we are forced to play with these weapons.
Well, take it however you want, but I think it's much better for a warrior to be "forced" to use a longbow or rifle in a keep siege, rather than having the old style of being "forced" to sit there twiddling his thumbs watching the keep siege with his axe in hand because he has no ranged skills .
Really, in GW2 you are "forced" to use all the options available to your class...which is much better than being "forced" to have only one option.
So you want to force everyone to have one melee and one ranged weapon?
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
That's still forced. Since I would always need a range weapon at hand, since if I get attacked , I am locked from switching weapons. Fighting with two Melee weapons means I can't simply adjust to a situation since I can't freely switch weapons. I have to go into battle with that in mind, which means I NEED a ranged weapon at all times, since Melee weapons aren't always useful. That's Forcing....
If you want the option of switching to a ranged when you're wading into a melee battle, then yes, you'd need to have a ranged weapon as your second weapon set. If you want to lock down with a defensive melee weapon and shield instead, or a set that allows for mobility, cc or stealth, then you can do that too. It's your call how you want to adapt to a certain situation.
It's perfectly viable to not have a ranged weapon as your second equipped set. You don't even need to take a ranged weapon along. You have the option of having a second weapon set ready, you're not even forced to use that option.
For it to be forced, all other options should be either unavailable or really unplayable. I really don't see that as being forced. Maybe you tried all professions and weapon combinations and you have reached the conclusion that there is no other way of playing the game. But since so called melee weapons can have ranged abilities tied to them, I'd like to see you come up with a well thought out reason as to why you'd always need to have a ranged weapon as your second set.
Comments
I mostly stopped having a problem with that once I started concentrating on figuring out which hits I could soak with my defenses, and which I had to use an active defense or roll to get away from.
melee is fine I had a fun time with my elementalist dual daggers
I was hammer warrior, I didn't have any attacks like that.
I mainly spec'd power.
First time I went into WVWVWVWVWVWVWWV with a thief, I was all about getting in the middle of the action. I got my lungs ripped out and exchanged for my kidneys, which the opposing server then proceeded to beat me with.
I obtained a short bow, and all was right again, as it took the opposing server longer to get to me and do the whole lung/kidney deal again.
I don't think it's really about balance, it's about adapting to the situation. Some folks might not like being forced into a melee or ranged playstyle; I'm not one of those people, so it doesn't matter to me really =D
I believe they were talking about sticking a defense on almost every melee weapon. I think there's a utility or two that might help with that. Honestly, even though I ran a warrior up until the early 20s, I can't remember how defensive they were, because I was mostly playing with a friend and using a rifle.
I know Guardian has a ridiculous amount of tools for dealing with attacks. ... and a hammer is full of defenses too.
They also have the knockback attack on 4!
I'm pretty sure warrior has at least TWO knockbacks/knockdowns on their hammer though, and those totally count as defense, since they interrupt the current attack.
I'm just saying don't jump the gun because it IS a beta. You think after playing classes over a beta weekend you can decide whether things are balanced or imbalanced?
I guarantee you right now the way people play classes now will be nothing like what people play their classes like 1 year from now, balance changes or not. So lay off the balance whining for now.
Hammer isn't a very defensive weapon, but it does have excellent CC (which can't be used in conjunction w/ dodging to play defensively).
On the hammer you can use: Fierce Blow (weakness, reduces inc dmg), Hammer Shock (AoE cripple), Staggering Blow (AoE knockback), Backbreaker (knockdown), and your adrenaline (leap + AoE stun).
Keep in mind that the Warrior is not inherently built as a support class. It's really built around high burst dmg, and pressure melee dps. But if you want to play it as a tanky-support warrior, you absolutely can. However, the Hammer isn't the weapon for that. If you want to be more defensive, Maces, & a shield are a better option.
I played a warrior to 30 in one of the betas. For PvE my most frequent weapon set was sword + shield, and greatsword. Greatsword is one of the best damage weapons in the game, and has some of the best mobility. Most of the skills it offers allows you to choose between high dmg bursts (hundred blades), or gap openers / closers (rush / whirlwind). If I got into trouble, I'd just switch back to sword / shield and either use shield bash, or block while I waited for my heal to come back up.
Hammer is an awesome weapon, but it's more of a damage / CC spam role. It doesn't have the defense or mobility that the other weapons have. It's really quite slow =/.
Totally agree I love the flexability of the class, in RL if this were RL, people would switch dependant on the situation. It should be no different in games. We should have the option of switching, also, sure ranged has to get up on the enemy to finish them in pvp but how hard is it to switch weapons and use the movement enhancement abilities of said weapon?
The PvE / PvP balance may be a little funky, but going off what was seen in sPvP, the balance is MUCH closer than I think a lot of people realize.
Nearly every class has people whinning about them being OP, and the classes most people swear are 'broken' or in serious need of a revamp, are some of the MOST used classes in sPvP (engineer / mesmer). Hell, I don't think I've seen a single one of the better guilds going into sPvP without at least one of those, if not both.
And I agree. If this forum is any indication, most of the people here have nowhere near enough of a clue about how all the classes work to begin to talk about balance.
Last BWE I tried a thief, usually not my favorite class in most MMOs, but I had a lot of fun.
Mostly ran with shortbow & dual pistols but tried every weapon combo and liked them all (mh sword was my least favorite). Specced for high toughness, HP and initiative regeneration. Used bleeds and poisons to apply pressure, shadowsteps and bow 3&5 skills for high mobility, dual pistol unload finishers, etc.
Mostly what killed that thief was melee. CC combined with big burst damage and bleeds could take me down before I could regain initiative, where most ranged damage came in slow enough to allow me to escape somehow, or even turn the fight to my favor.
Do you know how crazy fun it is to be an Elementalist running head first into battle with a Fire Axe summoned by a utility spell? Or becoming a Ranger by simply summoning a Frost Longbow? And then there's the Frozen Mallet. Ya, there's no need to balance because there's so much mix and match already.
If they start ballancing to much based on low level unexperienced players wishes, chances are huge that it needs to be undone
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
My only problem is some people much prefer the playstyle one or the other fosters. I myself have always been a Melee'er at heart so at first I was really bummed out with how hard it is to play melee but after BWE3 I learned 2 things.
1. You can succeed at melee and when you do it is more rewarding
and
2. I actually fell in love with a ranged playstyle of my Melee Warrior. I was really digging the longbow.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
"ranged is op" <- every class can play range. GTFO fail players.
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
People will ALWAYS complain about "balance". Especially if the game has PvP. It has little to do with the game dynamics, and much to do with peoples sense of entitlement, and losing to someone else. Its a never ending phantom chase that once it starts, consumes endless Dev time and talent.
This is the way to be
.
It's really easy to get into the groove of "I like melee" or "I like ranged" from other games, but this just isn't how GW2 works. And once you try to branch out, sometimes you have fun.
Also, like you say, melee does work in GW2, but you need to approach it from a different angle...you can't think "I will be melee all the time."
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Pretty much this. I played warrior almost exclusievely last BWE and I spent most time in WvWvW. Majority of my kills were using melee weapons but whenver it was mexican standoff between two objectives with larger groups trying to push the other back I'd switch to my rifle to snare those that run in too far, then switch back to my Hammer and keep them down.
When I was sieging I'd switch to longbow due to the AoE capabilities, when door were about to break I'd often switch to 1hander/warhorn combo for the Vigor and Swiftness buffs that help getting on the walls to destroy the siege weapons.
Thing is, if you wan to use a class to 100% of it's potential you need to be flexible. Sometimes it even means switching utility/elite between the fights to squeeze the most for given encounter.
That said playing just melee or just ranged is still viable for majority of game, it just won't be as effective.
In theory, ranged needs to be balanced with ranged in any game, if you cry too much about it, what you get is homonigization, which isn't fun, good, or desired.
My Thoughts on Content Locust
You're not forced, but it is an option at the very least. You can also have other combinations like AoE and Single Target, but that is your choice. You're not locked into any of these choices either, unless you're locked in combat.
That's still forced. Since I would always need a range weapon at hand, since if I get attacked , I am locked from switching weapons. Fighting with two Melee weapons means I can't simply adjust to a situation since I can't freely switch weapons. I have to go into battle with that in mind, which means I NEED a ranged weapon at all times, since Melee weapons aren't always useful. That's Forcing....Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Eh, I don't think it's forced, it's just situational.
I mean, if you are defending a keep in WvW...then you would be a fool to not have a ranged weapon. But in a different situation, this isn't the case.
Imagine that you are in sPvP, and you are planning to lockdown control points. In this case, you may want skills that offer lots of CC so you can stun people and knock them back, and survivability like blocks or skills that grant invincibility like Blurred Frenzy. To get these skills, you may very well have two melee weapons.
So I think the key here is to do like other people said, and not look at weapons as "ranged or melee," instead look at them as a package of skills. And you want to have the best skill package for the scenarios that you are planning to be in.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
No, that is only in the kids books!!!
Meleee vs Melee are to be some kind balanced yea, same goes for range.
But if that is done the armor allso need balance, from attacks and resistens(And that never works).
A mmo are a world where you pic a class you wanner be, and know that you can not be anything at ones, same in the real world. And now that its not a sandbox when it comes to skills, there is no need for balanced skills allover.
You i like / do I find the skill for all classes balanced and right to the class NO WAY. WIll I ever NO.
again you are pointing out the flaw of what we are speaking of, since this is Weapon Requirements you keep mentioning.
which is the same as us saying, we are forced to play with these weapons.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Well, take it however you want, but I think it's much better for a warrior to be "forced" to use a longbow or rifle in a keep siege, rather than having the old style of being "forced" to sit there twiddling his thumbs watching the keep siege with his axe in hand because he has no ranged skills
.
Really, in GW2 you are "forced" to use all the options available to your class...which is much better than being "forced" to have only one option.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
If you want the option of switching to a ranged when you're wading into a melee battle, then yes, you'd need to have a ranged weapon as your second weapon set. If you want to lock down with a defensive melee weapon and shield instead, or a set that allows for mobility, cc or stealth, then you can do that too. It's your call how you want to adapt to a certain situation.
It's perfectly viable to not have a ranged weapon as your second equipped set. You don't even need to take a ranged weapon along. You have the option of having a second weapon set ready, you're not even forced to use that option.
For it to be forced, all other options should be either unavailable or really unplayable. I really don't see that as being forced. Maybe you tried all professions and weapon combinations and you have reached the conclusion that there is no other way of playing the game. But since so called melee weapons can have ranged abilities tied to them, I'd like to see you come up with a well thought out reason as to why you'd always need to have a ranged weapon as your second set.