Melee Game Design Path Forward?

[tarsus]

These are just some random thoughts since you asked but things like:

Strengthen or build fortifications like walls and moats, build bridges, or repair vehicles like boats and carts.

Analyze an opponent to get certain information from them like immunities, resists, and hp.

A training skill where half an hour of exercise gives you +1 damage to your basic attacks during the next logistics period, capped of course.

A forensics skill that lets you figure out how things died after spending some time at the scene with the body.

 

[James Trotta]

I'm going to assume that the lateness of your reply is largely feeding into the tone I'm reading. The chart, and every note within it that you're noting, is from Gemini.

I am equally not looking to justify why people play Scouts, Scholars, or other classes, as noted in the original post.

The question is -- What is the plan, what is the intent long term, for the path of the Fighter class?
If:

• Increased in core skill cost (Weapon Proficiency with 2.0)
• Diminished in efficacy (Weapons in general in 2.1 being susceptible to Shatter etc.)
• Minimal support in Ritual Magic (2.1 New Ritual thread)
• Skills are going to be removed (Eviscerating Blow)

The Classes Played by Bracket data is used to reference -- over time -- the class is less desirable. If it is less desirable, then regardless of other classes being more desirable, it still means just that -- Fighters become less desirable over time. The question as to why that is, and where those players go is what typical game design would seek to answer.

This is not saying the class is unplayable. This is not saying the class has no worth. It is asking, with respect to the last several years of moves, what the plan is.

I think it's an interesting question: What is the long term plan for fighters and other melee?

The owner vote summary tells us what may be the role of the fighter: "members voting for disagreed that Fighter is in a fragile space as their build occupies a space of continuous passive damage-dealing and survivability." So fighters should be tanky and have good passive damage.

But that's not all for melee. Rogues are now the melee burst damage class instead of fighters. Presumably they should be tanky too, because they are. Scouts surging at high levels makes perfect sense. Once a fighter gets 8 profs, max parries, max mettles, and maybe a few other skills, it makes a lot of sense to pick up counteract, evade, and dodge - these three skills may keep you up longer than hardy. And then there are spellswords, which can have several roles in combat.

For what it's worth, I do think fighters should have some burst - maybe just not 500 body burst. And I really feel for the fighters under level 20 who lose eviscerate - much harder for them to have feel awesome moments IMO. My suggestion, which I put in the suggestion box, is to make slays something like 100 or 200 by default. Forget improved slay because you have to stack a bunch of them to get a cool sounding number, which makes it harder for low level fighters to feel cool.

 

[Xanian]

I think you have mode a very good point in that the low level game is rough. In my opinion, fighters have it best at low level, but that doesn't mean they have it good. I would like to see more things that empower new players, but that is very hard to balance without forbidding high level players from using it to exacerbate the issue.

One thing I think is being missed in this is that people are talking about fighters being melee focused, which is untrue. They are Martial focused, not melee focused. Fighters are among the very best ranged damage in the game for the same reason they have the best melee (and give practically nothing build wise to be able to switch back and forth). Archers can be VERY strong.

 

[James Trotta]

Sure. This thread title specified melee but fighters used to be the best ranged damage in the game by far. With eviscerate gone, rogues can do better ranged burst damage with assassinates. Fighters should have better repetitive damage. If I were making an archer, I would have gone fighter before. Now I would go rogue. Scout, as usual, is great at higher levels.

 

[Darkcrescent]

You get 1.5x Prof with a 2h bow or Xbow and the Slay scaling is much higher(3 with bow or 4 HCB) on top of that. The amount of static damage as a Fighter is pretty nice.

Yes you get Assassinates as a Rogue for big numbers but Ranged Fighters absolutely tear through NPCs.

While overall Bows are amazing in this game, they really only work while the Sun is up.