Post:Whats wrong with melee? - 09/19/2013 - 01:59
|Re: whats wrong with melee? · on 09/19/2013 01:59 AM CDT||4201|
| Heh, comparing a spell to a starting dagger can be problematic. And, it shouldn't be easy/fast to kill things with only a few ranks. What I really care about is if the players can learn well - and they can. I mind locked small edge on 1 rat using 22 ATTACKs, or just over a minute of attacking with a tier 3 dagger.
In any case, 4 fully targeted casts of Strange Arrow still takes 40 seconds. I noticed the spell does a lot of electrical damage and the rats just can't defend as well against it. Its doing about 50% more DPS than the dagger because of the difference in armor.
With a Tier 3 scimitar and 0 ranks it took me about 12-14 ATTACKs. The RT is longer, but the DPS remained about the same and the rat took about a minute to kill.
To show some scaling...
0 ranks - 60 seconds to kill
15 ranks - 50 seconds to kill
20 ranks - 40 seconds to kill
30 ranks - 30 seconds to kill
Of course, this will vary somewhat depending on the random, how the player's stats are distributed (I copied some random Circle 1 Necromancer) and if they start balanced or have to spend some time getting balance first with JAB.
Checking with a Tier 3 claymore, it was taking me about 8 hits to kill a rat using ATTACK and 0 ranks. The RT was a bit excessive due to the lack of strength, but it still only took about 80 seconds. Again, this is not an optimized attack routine... so you can expect to shave a hit or two off if you are smart.
Below 50 ranks of weapons it is expected to take about twice as long to kill an enemy because you aren't very capable with your weapons. The impact from stats is also not being felt, and most people don't have forged weapons or strong buffs.
From my testing nothing seems too out of line? Can folks give some examples of where it breaks down?
|This message was originally posted in Combat - Weapons and Armor \ General Discussions, by DR-KODIUS on the play.net forums.|