Melee nerf reduces player choice

[(XBOX)Graysmog]

I think I'll wait until the update actually comes out, and, you know, test it. Then I'll form my own opinion of it before overreacting.

[Traumtulpe]

On 2021-06-22 at 5:11 AM, wtflag said:

Now let's assume, (1) and (2) remains true after the gun buff and melee nerf, then the level range of Range Optimized Levels shifts to the right for everyone. This is fine but do not really make much change to the existing meta. Players will still use Ranged weapons until they can't.

This is indeed the case, and it is exactly what players asked for; For guns to be able to keep up with melee until higher levels.

[Askell91]

Where did I even show you a lack of knowledge?

Becouse you rebind a button doesen't make you a master of anyting.

(btw if you are just bulletjumping around like a maniac and quick melee and manage to kill high lvl mobs .... they are not high lvl mobs.)

3 hours ago, Mints said:

It's how I derive the most enjoyment out of the game. That's why I'm so concerned about a melee nerf in the first place. If my playstyle gets nerfed into the ground I'm screwed. I'll lose the only game where I can go insanely fast and excel in my own way. I lost the last one when Tribes: Ascend softcapped speed and I'm afraid to lose it again.

If thats the way you play the game. Fine have your fun, but at this point you are just afraid of change.

Why are you so sure a change in the combo system would be bad? Why are you allright when the house is burning around you?

 

[Mints]

4 hours ago, Askell91 said:

Where did I even show you a lack of knowledge?

Becouse you rebind a button doesen't make you a master of anyting.

(btw if you are just bulletjumping around like a maniac and quick melee and manage to kill high lvl mobs .... they are not high lvl mobs.)

If thats the way you play the game. Fine have your fun, but at this point you are just afraid of change.

Why are you so sure a change in the combo system would be bad? Why are you allright when the house is burning around you?

 

First of all, it's not rebinding: It's a checkbox. Second, why shouldn't I be afraid of losing the way I have fun in a videogame I've been playing for over seven years? If this game shifts too far toward guns and melee becomes nonviable then my method of having fun is gone. You have been demonstrating that you don't understand the nuance of the melee system that already exists. If this is the prevalent way of thinking then DE is going to cater to it. If I don't resist this mindset I'm essentially just letting the best part of this game die.

[Cerasium]

On 2021-06-22 at 4:25 PM, Loza03 said:

I don't think anyone would argue that Melee weapons don't need to be stronger than guns. Because they do.

 

However, the problem is not so simple. In Warframe, the modding system works together in such a way that strong weapons get more relative benefit than weaker ones, and this gets more extreme the higher the base stats go.

This means that making melee weapons a reasonable amount stronger to offset their innate weaknesses (which are not as many in Warframe, mind you, due to a propensity for close quarters combat and tight groups of enemies) is a much greater challenge. It's not so easy when every point of change to a weapon's base stats could have an impact of anywhere from several dozen to a hundred or so points of damage more or less.

Also consider that Area of Effect damage, which the majority of melee does, is itself a substantial modifier. A single-target hit, such as a sniper headshot, has an effective damage cap, but every enemy hit by an AoE attack multiplies the actual damage, but may not do so in an obvious or even directly-noticable way. A 200 damage shot against a single enemy with 100 health deals 100 damage. A 50 damage melee swing against three of the same enemies does a total of 150 damage overall, but kills nothing.

 

This isn't a simple fix, and IMO, it's more indicative that there are deeper mechanical issues to Warframe's foundational design that many of the current issues are just symptoms of.

Saw your post a few days ago, and finally got around to writing a reply.

Why do melee weapons NEED to be stronger than guns? This is a genuine question I have. To me it seems like it should be the opposite? You talk about making melee stronger in order to offset their innate weaknesses, but also admit that in WF there really arent any. So wouldnt that rather suggest the contrary? That melee should be made weaker to offset its innate lack of weaknesses? And wouldnt this logic apply to guns as well? Making them stronger to offset their innate weaknesses?

Even stats aside, melee is simply much easier and more convinient to use - doesnt require aiming, reloading, no risk of running out of ammo, allows for spamming without any drawbacks, can hit multiple enemies at once, staggers enemies on hit, can knock enemies down, lifts enemies on heavy attack, allows for unlimited mobility, has auto-parry and in general makes it a lot less likely for the player to sustain damage (basically makes you invincible, the only way you can really get hurt is by status proc or AOE).

Guns on the other hand: Require aim (their effectiveness also depends on accuracy, bodyshots deal less damage than headshots), require reloading and being mindful of your ammo reserve, spamming wastes ammo, can generally only hit 1 enemy at a time (save for AOE/chaining beam weapons), cannot CC (again, save for AOE/beam, but they still do it much less effectively than melee), its use restricts mobility (cannot really do parkour, roll/slide around and accurately shoot at the same time) which puts the player in the enemies line of fire while shooting, no auto-parry (or blocking mechanic in general) which results in the player taking considerably more damage.

Because you said that no one would argue about melee weapons NEEDING to be stronger than guns, Im just really curious as to why that would be. Maybe Im missing something? 

In your example you compare killing an enemy in a single shot, and damaging 3 enemies with melee, but killing none. Though the gun has a higher base damage, it will take 3 shots in order for it to kill 3 enemies, while it will only take melee 2 swings to do the same. So the time to kill is considerably faster in the case of melee. A gun would kill a single enemy faster, they would kill 2 enemies in roughly the same time, but when it comes to killing 3+ enemies, melee would prove to be much more efficient. Though Im not sure what this example was meant to prove, so what I wrote here might be redundant. IDK would love a clarification of that as well XD

One thing that I can definetly agree with you on, is that the imbalance in the arsenal is not a simple fix. Not at all. Though Id be interested to hear some of your ideas on solving the issue.

[Venus-Venera]

vor 14 Minuten schrieb Cerasium:

Why do melee weapons NEED to be stronger than guns? This is a genuine question I have. To me it seems like it should be the opposite?

meant seriously???
for mr30 it can be absolutely irrelevant, because most areas and something like SP can be ignored.
BUT NOT FOR A BEGINNER !!!!!!!!!!!! they have big problems with ammunition and damage AND SURVIVE! the longer the fight lasts, the more frustrating it becomes. besides, not everyone resurrects others in a group and knows how to mod a weapon is not always available.
I can write much longer. just why explain obvious things.

[Mints]

14 minutes ago, Cerasium said:

Why do melee weapons NEED to be stronger than guns? This is a genuine question I have. To me it seems like it should be the opposite? You talk about making melee stronger in order to offset their innate weaknesses, but also admit that in WF there really arent any. So wouldnt that rather suggest the contrary? That melee should be made weaker to offset its innate lack of weaknesses? And wouldnt this logic apply to guns as well? Making them stronger to offset their innate weaknesses?

For one thing you actually need to close distance and expose yourself to enemy fire to use melee. Tell me, what inherent weakness does the Ignis have? Hard mode: Don't say "range" because that applies to melee even more.

[Krankbert]

vor 6 Minuten schrieb Mints:

Tell me, what inherent weakness does the Ignis have?

Low damage. The fact that you’re bringing up the Ignis suggests that you’re thinking of a level where the melee nerf will be completely irrelevant.

[Cerasium]

2 minutes ago, Battle.Mage said:

meant seriously???
for mr30 it can be absolutely irrelevant, because most areas and something like SP can be ignored.
BUT NOT FOR A BEGINNER !!!!!!!!!!!! they have big problems with ammunition and damage AND SURVIVE! the longer the fight lasts, the more frustrating it becomes. besides, not everyone resurrects others in a group and knows how to mod a weapon is not always available.
I can write much longer. just why explain obvious things.

Not sure what youre trying to tell me here? The "melee need to be stronger than guns" isnt my opinion, I was asking the person I quoted why he thought that. My question was: "Shouldnt it be the opposite?" You proceed to talk about ammo? If you read the rest of my post you would see that I listed the reasons as to why I think guns are weaker, were I talk both about AMMO and SURVIVABILITY. 

Why did you only quote the first paragraph of my post?

[SheikaVoid]

Lol, melee is barely getting nerfed, and poorly-modded weapons already delete most content that the average player is going to experience.  Let's suppose that someone just wants to do starchart, they can throw a S#&$load of elemental mods on their Broken War and curbstomp the content.

Players who tackle more challenging content will still be able to.  The nerf has brought melee down from god-tier to 1% under god-tier.

Honestly, people are acting like these small nerfs are going destroy melee, which is barely nerfed by range in a game where you can jump at Mach #*!%-all and teleport.

Melee should, and always will, be more effective at close range than guns.  The current nerfs change none of this.  You can still go into level 9999 missions and delete S#&$.

[Cerasium]

8 minutes ago, Mints said:

For one thing you actually need to close distance and expose yourself to enemy fire to use melee. Tell me, what inherent weakness does the Ignis have? Hard mode: Don't say "range" because that applies to melee even more.

????? Sorry, but why are you only quoting the 1st paragraph of my post? There are 4 more after that in which I talk about the weaknesses that guns have compared to melee, and the strengths that melee has over guns (exactly the thing you ask me about in your reply). 

[Venus-Venera]

vor 11 Minuten schrieb Mints:

For one thing you actually need to close distance and expose yourself to enemy fire to use melee. Tell me, what inherent weakness does the Ignis have? Hard mode: Don't say "range" because that applies to melee even more.

to do this, the player has to constantly hammer the key or use macros so that the finger does not bleed ...
In addition, you have to aim well with certain mele weapons for good heavy attacks and constantly work with delay. it plays absolutely lousy and not as comfortable as with ignis.

what the other boy up there are writing is from some magical world and has nothing to do with reality.

[Cerasium]

32 minutes ago, Mints said:

For one thing you actually need to close distance and expose yourself to enemy fire to use melee. Tell me, what inherent weakness does the Ignis have? Hard mode: Don't say "range" because that applies to melee even more.

Dunno if you went to read my original post in its entirety, but just to say something on the Ignis specifically. You chose an example of a gun that is not only the easiest to use among guns, I would argue its the easiest weapon to use in the entire game. It doesnt have any of the inherent weaknesses of guns (exept for not having a blocking mechanic). It requires no aiming/accuracy which allows you to move around more freely, has massive ammo and magazine capacity, fires a constant stream of fire that covers a pretty good area. Now you tell me, how many other guns like the Ignis are there in the game? It really doesnt seem fair to use it as an agrument against guns as a whole. Just how the guy who replied to you said that some melee requires aim, which we know is true for glaives, but they make up a very small fraction of melee weapons as a whole and are thus not representative.

As for the whole "putting yourself in the line of fire" with melee:

1) You have auto parry, which blocks most gunfire with the exeption of AOE and a few other exeptions (with guns, even if you have a good distance from the mobs, most of them also use guns, so as you shoot at them, they shoot at you, and youre especially vulnerable while reloading)

2) You can use parkour/mobility mechanics without restriction (you can roll, slide, bullet jump and connect most of it to melee attacks, for example: connect slide to slide attack, connect jump/bullet jump to slam/heavy slam, which you wouldnt be able to do while aiming to shoot)

3) You can CC enemies with melee attacks, and because you can hit multiple enemies with a single swing, you can CC a whole group of them (stagger by hitting them, lift them with heavy attacks)

So, you can avoid damage much better than while using guns, and once you get within attack range, even if all else fails, you can always spam heavy slam + heavy attack to completely immobilize enemies. Plus, come on, with parkour as it is, closing a distance shouldnt really be difficult (takes 1-2 bullet jumps and once youre there, the enemies are history).

Also generally when using guns, you cannot be too far from your thargets either because of the damage faloff. (Meaning you have to get somewhat close with a lot of them in order to deal good damage, unless youre using snipers, ect)

(Obviously there are exeptions of course, but this is just for melee in general)

I guess my point is that I dont see a reason why guns shouldnt be compareble to melee in terms of strength. I mean, wasnt that supposed to be the whole point of this update/rework? To try and bring guns to the level of melee? (They failed anyway though, so who cares XD) Plus, isnt the whole idea of having primary/secondary/melee about primary being, well, your primary? And secondary and mele being there to assist?

Also, you seem to take me as someone who hates melee or something? Couldnt be further from the truth. Because of how useless/inconvinient most guns are compared to melee, I didnt use them at all untill like MR12 or something. I like using guns better nowadays, but even with all the formas and all that nonsense, they still cannot compare to melee. 

Anyway, have a good day! 

Cheers :)

 

 

[Loza03]

2 hours ago, Cerasium said:

Saw your post a few days ago, and finally got around to writing a reply.

Why do melee weapons NEED to be stronger than guns? This is a genuine question I have. To me it seems like it should be the opposite? You talk about making melee stronger in order to offset their innate weaknesses, but also admit that in WF there really arent any. So wouldnt that rather suggest the contrary? That melee should be made weaker to offset its innate lack of weaknesses? And wouldnt this logic apply to guns as well? Making them stronger to offset their innate weaknesses?

Even stats aside, melee is simply much easier and more convinient to use - doesnt require aiming, reloading, no risk of running out of ammo, allows for spamming without any drawbacks, can hit multiple enemies at once, staggers enemies on hit, can knock enemies down, lifts enemies on heavy attack, allows for unlimited mobility, has auto-parry and in general makes it a lot less likely for the player to sustain damage (basically makes you invincible, the only way you can really get hurt is by status proc or AOE).

Guns on the other hand: Require aim (their effectiveness also depends on accuracy, bodyshots deal less damage than headshots), require reloading and being mindful of your ammo reserve, spamming wastes ammo, can generally only hit 1 enemy at a time (save for AOE/chaining beam weapons), cannot CC (again, save for AOE/beam, but they still do it much less effectively than melee), its use restricts mobility (cannot really do parkour, roll/slide around and accurately shoot at the same time) which puts the player in the enemies line of fire while shooting, no auto-parry (or blocking mechanic in general) which results in the player taking considerably more damage.

Because you said that no one would argue about melee weapons NEEDING to be stronger than guns, Im just really curious as to why that would be. Maybe Im missing something? 

In your example you compare killing an enemy in a single shot, and damaging 3 enemies with melee, but killing none. Though the gun has a higher base damage, it will take 3 shots in order for it to kill 3 enemies, while it will only take melee 2 swings to do the same. So the time to kill is considerably faster in the case of melee. A gun would kill a single enemy faster, they would kill 2 enemies in roughly the same time, but when it comes to killing 3+ enemies, melee would prove to be much more efficient. Though Im not sure what this example was meant to prove, so what I wrote here might be redundant. IDK would love a clarification of that as well XD

One thing that I can definetly agree with you on, is that the imbalance in the arsenal is not a simple fix. Not at all. Though Id be interested to hear some of your ideas on solving the issue.

Well, bear in mind "melee should be stronger than guns" a very broad understanding that encompasses design wisdom from a heck of a lot of games more than Warframe. Broadly speaking, it's as I said, to offset innate weaknesses. Generally speaking, that is that most melee attacks put you at risk, as not only do you need to cover the distance which adds to the effective time-to-kill but also puts you at a better range for many enemies to kill you, but most melee attacks involve a lengthy enough animation for you to die whilst killing.

However, as you have pointed out, that there's plenty of ways that these imbalances have already been addessed. Melee sports generally more convenience and its threat is offset. In other words, in these respects, melee is stronger than guns. Certainly, it doesn't require as much extra damage as it's already getting.

 

 

As for your understanding of the example, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head. AoE is a multiplier. The more enemies around (i.e. in a horde-fighter game like Warframe), the more powerful any given AoE weapon, including a melee weapon becomes. Which is another good way to offset Melee's weaknesses in a risk/reward fashion. Diving into a swarm of goons is usually a bad idea for a melee weapon, but if you make that the most efficient way to kill a swarm of goons, then things become more interesting.

[Mints]

15 hours ago, Krankbert said:

Low damage. The fact that you’re bringing up the Ignis suggests that you’re thinking of a level where the melee nerf will be completely irrelevant.

Low damage? Buddy, it craps status effects everywhere and synergizes with many AoE warframe abilities. It even has a variant weapon that is even stronger. I've seen it used just as effectively in high tier content and in a similar fashion as ye olde Saryn/Atterax cheese. It's easy to notice when you need to compete with such things.

15 hours ago, Cerasium said:

????? Sorry, but why are you only quoting the 1st paragraph of my post? There are 4 more after that in which I talk about the weaknesses that guns have compared to melee, and the strengths that melee has over guns (exactly the thing you ask me about in your reply). 

4 more, two of which you make statements that are either inaccurate or completely disregard effects that guns and status types have. Several status types function as forms of CC. Many guns don't need to be reloaded or have magazines so huge it doesn't matter much. But the biggest thing you're wrong about is that "aim" is a gun-related weakness. Do you think I don't have to aim my melee weapon? On the contrary, headshots are totally possible with many melee stances. Furthermore, I'm not just aiming my weapon but I'm also aiming every aspect of my position and approach to the enemy in such a way as to avoid being damaged.

 

13 hours ago, Cerasium said:

I guess my point is that I dont see a reason why guns shouldnt be compareble to melee in terms of strength. I mean, wasnt that supposed to be the whole point of this update/rework? To try and bring guns to the level of melee? (They failed anyway though, so who cares XD) Plus, isnt the whole idea of having primary/secondary/melee about primary being, well, your primary? And secondary and mele being there to assist?

Also, you seem to take me as someone who hates melee or something? Couldnt be further from the truth. Because of how useless/inconvinient most guns are compared to melee, I didnt use them at all untill like MR12 or something. I like using guns better nowadays, but even with all the formas and all that nonsense, they still cannot compare to melee.

Let me note this: Just because I only quoted or responded to a small portion of your post doesn't mean I ignored it. It is for brevity's sake. To address some other points you made: There is no autoparry when I play because I don't even equip guns. I have dedicated melee enabled at all times. If I'm parrying it's because I'm holding down the block button. Again, these are things that people who use E to melee believe but is not necessarily true. That is the root of the problem right there: There is a massive disconnect between melee players and people who want melee nerf and I absolutely do not trust this nerf if this is the feedback they're getting.

 

[George_PPS]

On 2021-06-21 at 11:09 PM, Dauggie said:

damn it just give me pre nerfed telos boltace, idgaf about these nerfs

Also MAIMING STRIKE’s flat CC and the old range. That it got nerfed to the ground also killed this class of mechanics and many weapons  ENTIRELY. 

[Cerasium]

33 minutes ago, Mints said:

4 more, two of which you make statements that are either inaccurate or completely disregard effects that guns and status types have. Several status types function as forms of CC. Many guns don't need to be reloaded or have magazines so huge it doesn't matter much. But the biggest thing you're wrong about is that "aim" is a gun-related weakness. Do you think I don't have to aim my melee weapon? On the contrary, headshots are totally possible with many melee stances. Furthermore, I'm not just aiming my weapon but I'm also aiming every aspect of my position and approach to the enemy in such a way as to avoid being damaged.

 

Let me note this: Just because I only quoted or responded to a small portion of your post doesn't mean I ignored it. It is for brevity's sake. To address some other points you made: There is no autoparry when I play because I don't even equip guns. I have dedicated melee enabled at all times. If I'm parrying it's because I'm holding down the block button. Again, these are things that people who use E to melee believe but is not necessarily true. That is the root of the problem right there: There is a massive disconnect between melee players and people who want melee nerf and I absolutely do not trust this nerf if this is the feedback they're getting.

 

Status types arent exclusive to guns though? They depend on elements. You can achive the same type of elemental CC by equiping elemental mods on melee (some melee also has elemental damage by default, just like some guns). So I wouldnt list "status CC" as an advantage guns have over melee, which has CC integrated into its default mechanics.

"Aim" is still a gun weakness I would say, as its damage depends on accuracy. "Aim" also refers to holding RMB to get better accuracy, which reduces your mobility to walking (holding RMB with a melee still allows you to sprint). Though I dont see many instences in which you would need to hold RMB while using melee, unless you want to block manually. Melee also has (depending on its reach) some area of effect, with a single swing damaging multiple targets (not to mention slam/heavy slam, spinning slide), so there isnt really a need to aim at a single enemy (not that it would do anything anyway, it wouldnt change where the hit lands, seeing as it has a predetermined attack animation). With certain stances (as you mentioned) the majority of melee hits end up registering as headshots anyway. Ironically, in this situation, it seems almost easier to get a headshot with melee than with a gun. 

Now let me explain something real quick: my posts were making an asessment of melee and its mechanics in GENERAL (just simply the way they are in the game), and how the majority of average players use it. None of this was directed at your playstyle in particular. I have no idea how you specifically choose to use melee, I just know how the majority of players do it. If youve found a playstyle that makes melee interesting, thats great, even I know that melee is a lot more fun to use on its own. But the games mechanics encourage cheesy, spammy use of melee, and I think thats one of the problems. I mean realistically, how many people will choose manual blocking over auto-parry? Or to not spam E? Not very many.

I also want to add that I still disagree that melee is riskier to use because its close range. Ranged being less risky than melee would be true in every other game Ive played, any RPG, MMO, action combat game, you name it, but thats because most of the enemies in those games use melee just as you do. So they are well equipped do deal serious damage to you at close quarters, just as you are.

The enemies in this game however, are a testament that WF was, once upon a time, supposed to be a shooter game, as the overwhelming majority of them use guns (excluding infested obviously). Not only that, but most of these mobs simply arent programmed to be able to deal with melee attacks. They are incapable at dealing damage at point blank range. They whack you over the head with their gun, but are unable to actually shoot you, even if they fire at you, they either miss, or the hit doesnt register (for some reason, they aim down at your legs/feet?). Sometimes they just stand confused, or try to move away from you in order to gain some range to be able to shoot you. This goes for most if not all common mobs like lancers, crewmen, blue moas ect. Of course, dealing with a group of enemies is different, and this only accounts for common mobs, but the point is that the majority of enemies arent equipped to effectively fight against melee. This game desperately needs some more challenging melee mobs. Its very satisfying to manually block a blow from corrupted heavy gunner and stagger her, but since thats the only attack she can use at point blank, it becomes boring quickly.

Yeah, I get that quoting a whole post can be a pain, but theres also no way for me to know whether youve it read as a result, especially if you only respond to the quoted bits (but thats why I asked you about it). Again, autoparry is a feature that melee has, that gives it a big advantage when it comes to avoiding damage. The fact that you choose not to use it by not equiping guns when you play doesnt negate that. 

Hmm, not sure what that last line is supposed to entail? Nowhere in my posts did I even mention the word "nerf". What I want is for guns to be buffed to a level comparable to melee, and was arguing against the idea that guns HAVE to stay/be weaker. I also want changes that would make melee more interesting, sure you can choose to play melee only, but the game itself doesnt give any incentive for the general playerbase to want to play it in a non spammy way. It shouldnt just be on me to make it interesting for myself, the games design and its mechanics should be the main contributor to that.

Welp, sorry this turned out kinda long. 

Cheers!

[Mints]

24 minutes ago, Cerasium said:

Status types arent exclusive to guns though? They depend on elements. You can achive the same type of elemental CC by equiping elemental mods on melee (some melee also has elemental damage by default, just like some guns). So I wouldnt list "status CC" as an advantage guns have over melee, which has CC integrated into its default mechanics.

"Aim" is still a gun weakness I would say, as its damage depends on accuracy. "Aim" also refers to holding RMB to get better accuracy, which reduces your mobility to walking (holding RMB with a melee still allows you to sprint). Though I dont see many instences in which you would need to hold RMB while using melee, unless you want to block manually. Melee also has (depending on its reach) some area of effect, with a single swing damaging multiple targets (not to mention slam/heavy slam, spinning slide), so there isnt really a need to aim at a single enemy (not that it would do anything anyway, it wouldnt change where the hit lands, seeing as it has a predetermined attack animation). With certain stances (as you mentioned) the majority of melee hits end up registering as headshots anyway. Ironically, in this situation, it seems almost easier to get a headshot with melee than with a gun. 

Now let me explain something real quick: my posts were making an asessment of melee and its mechanics in GENERAL (just simply the way they are in the game), and how the majority of average players use it. None of this was directed at your playstyle in particular. I have no idea how you specifically choose to use melee, I just know how the majority of players do it. If youve found a playstyle that makes melee interesting, thats great, even I know that melee is a lot more fun to use on its own. But the games mechanics encourage cheesy, spammy use of melee, and I think thats one of the problems. I mean realistically, how many people will choose manual blocking over auto-parry? Or to not spam E? Not very many.

I also want to add that I still disagree that melee is riskier to use because its close range. Ranged being less risky than melee would be true in every other game Ive played, any RPG, MMO, action combat game, you name it, but thats because most of the enemies in those games use melee just as you do. So they are well equipped do deal serious damage to you at close quarters, just as you are.

The enemies in this game however, are a testament that WF was, once upon a time, supposed to be a shooter game, as the overwhelming majority of them use guns (excluding infested obviously). Not only that, but most of these mobs simply arent programmed to be able to deal with melee attacks. They are incapable at dealing damage at point blank range. They whack you over the head with their gun, but are unable to actually shoot you, even if they fire at you, they either miss, or the hit doesnt register (for some reason, they aim down at your legs/feet?). Sometimes they just stand confused, or try to move away from you in order to gain some range to be able to shoot you. This goes for most if not all common mobs like lancers, crewmen, blue moas ect. Of course, dealing with a group of enemies is different, and this only accounts for common mobs, but the point is that the majority of enemies arent equipped to effectively fight against melee. This game desperately needs some more challenging melee mobs. Its very satisfying to manually block a blow from corrupted heavy gunner and stagger her, but since thats the only attack she can use at point blank, it becomes boring quickly.

Yeah, I get that quoting a whole post can be a pain, but theres also no way for me to know whether youve it read as a result, especially if you only respond to the quoted bits (but thats why I asked you about it). Again, autoparry is a feature that melee has, that gives it a big advantage when it comes to avoiding damage. The fact that you choose not to use it by not equiping guns when you play doesnt negate that. 

Hmm, not sure what that last line is supposed to entail? Nowhere in my posts did I even mention the word "nerf". What I want is for guns to be buffed to a level comparable to melee, and was arguing against the idea that guns HAVE to stay/be weaker. I also want changes that would make melee more interesting, sure you can choose to play melee only, but the game itself doesnt give any incentive for the general playerbase to want to play it in a non spammy way. It shouldnt just be on me to make it interesting for myself, the games design and its mechanics should be the main contributor to that.

Welp, sorry this turned out kinda long. 

Cheers!

Didn't mean to imply that status CC was exclusive to guns, just that it's a form of CC that just about any gun can have. As far as holding RMB is concerned, that's exactly what I have to do in certain situations to use certain combos. Carrying on with the Blind Justice stuff I was talking about earlier: Holding RMB is necessary to use the more mobile elements of the stance such as Heeding Call. RMB combos can be more or less rapid depending on which stance you're using, but no less useful.  Many stances have some form of dash attack that is absolutely invaluable to maintaining momentum as you proceed to move between enemies.

As far as more challenging melee enemies: Prosecutors, Kuva Guards, and Shield Enemies already prove to be obstacles to melee play although I admit they're not that hard to deal with. Enemies that can create a radial shockwave like Moas, Heavy Gunners, etc. can also be an impediment if not properly managed. Trouble is that a total AI overhaul is quite an undertaking and can also interfere with their ability to engage other targets.

As far as I'm concerned auto-parry can get the axe tomorrow and I won't miss it because it has absolutely no benefit to me. Expanding melee overall and giving enemies better ways to remain interesting? Also fine. Like I said before: What I'm concerned about is all the feedback that is derived from a lack of perspective on the melee playstyle. I wasn't sad to see coptering die back in the day. I won't be sad to see E spam die either assuming they don't completely destroy what makes melee fun to play in the first place in the process.

[nelu_Y3K]

DE official response: "Lol we don't care. Also buy Plat."

[Cerasium]

7 minutes ago, Mints said:

Didn't mean to imply that status CC was exclusive to guns, just that it's a form of CC that just about any gun can have. As far as holding RMB is concerned, that's exactly what I have to do in certain situations to use certain combos. Carrying on with the Blind Justice stuff I was talking about earlier: Holding RMB is necessary to use the more mobile elements of the stance such as Heeding Call. RMB combos can be more or less rapid depending on which stance you're using, but no less useful.  Many stances have some form of dash attack that is absolutely invaluable to maintaining momentum as you proceed to move between enemies.

As far as more challenging melee enemies: Prosecutors, Kuva Guards, and Shield Enemies already prove to be obstacles to melee play although I admit they're not that hard to deal with. Enemies that can create a radial shockwave like Moas, Heavy Gunners, etc. can also be an impediment if not properly managed. Trouble is that a total AI overhaul is quite an undertaking and can also interfere with their ability to engage other targets.

As far as I'm concerned auto-parry can get the axe tomorrow and I won't miss it because it has absolutely no benefit to me. Expanding melee overall and giving enemies better ways to remain interesting? Also fine. Like I said before: What I'm concerned about is all the feedback that is derived from a lack of perspective on the melee playstyle. I wasn't sad to see coptering die back in the day. I won't be sad to see E spam die either assuming they don't completely destroy what makes melee fun to play in the first place in the process.

Whoops, totally forgot that you have to use RMB in certain combos (mostly because I dont like those combos on my sword stance, so I stopped using them). Though you still get the benefit of being able to sprint with RMB while using melee.

I agree with pretty much everything else you said in the rest of your post. Nothing much to add for me here.

My first priority would still be to rework guns and make them stronger/more convinient, before dealing with melee. And just as your preference is to use melee alone, mine would be to be able to use all 3 weapons effectively and in synergy (without one completely blowing the other 2 out of the water, rendering them redundant). Id like this idea of constanly switching up the combat. Thats what I personally want from WFs combat, since when it comes to melee alone (at least in the state its in now), I can find much better elsewhere.

As for fun, since its completely subjective, it unfortunately leads people to want completely opposite things. Meaning that while my idea of "fun melee" is having it be meaningful and challenging, for others "fun melee" would be cheese and being OP, one hit killing everything. So something that would make the game more "fun" for you, or me, might make it less "fun" for someone else. This presents a problem when the Devs have to pick who theyre gonna cater to (obviously cant be both).

[Gervoh]

But aren't glaives getting nerfed, which does next to nothing because it's only the quick throw, which have the range of a firearm and are dealing obscene amounts of damage? Same with gunblades. 

Also, it doesn't reduce "player's choice", don't deal in extremes, when tonkor was nerfed we found the next broken weapon, and after it another. If one class of melee is nerfed you'll move to the next and mow down entire rooms with a spin while high on buffs from volt/wisp.

[MouadSaqui]

On 2021-06-21 at 8:11 PM, wtflag said:

4. When ranged weapon damage is insufficient on steelpath and long endurance runs,, melee takes over. Let's call this "Melee Optimized Levels"

How am I supposed to shoot 20 corpus units in steel path survival while they all shoot you at once ? How am I supposed to use guns ? How the heck am I supposed to take aim and shoot while enemies mindlessly shoot you from all directions ? People use melee for a reason, in steel path you have to be constantly moving so that you relatively dodge enemy bullets, so DE what the heck ????