So, Why Shouldn't Melee Weapons Be (Close To) Equal With Range?

[ArmoredDrake80]

Let me just clarify a few things:

 

* I do not mean that melee should surpass/make inferior range options, only that they be near the same level in effectiveness.

* I am not suggesting that Warframe should become some sort of full fledged beat 'em up, hack n' slash, "character action" (strange genre name) game, though I may speak about such games based on game mechanics and ideas alone.
*This not necessarily about whether it's possible for the weapons to be balanced in such a way.

 

I ask this because I'm under the assumption that there may be players that don't want melee to be anything much beyond silly tools to mess around with, that shooting should be the only viable playstyle to progress past level 30 missions, and I want to know if that's true or not.
And no, I'm not talking about people criticising Melee 2.0 (which to me makes sense), but those who feel that any balance to give swords and such a proper edge to compete with guns will severely threaten their gameplay style for whatever reason.

 

I understand that currently that warframe abilities, guns like Soma and Penta, and enemy lvl scaling make most cqc redundant or almost impossible without certain frames like Loki and Ash. I also understand why real-life guns replaced medieval weaponry as standard modern weaponry.
Yet, this is still a game and with all the other crazy things going on in it, I don't see why tenno in any frame shouldn't have a strong, similarly effective alternative to gunplay through martial arts.

[Trouvo]

I dont see any real question, all I see are points that I agree with

[zebar1313]

I dont see any real question, all I see are points that I agree with

agreed with your agreement

[Grulos]

OP, ever heard of Melee 2.0?

[BrotherIcarus]

In my opinion melee should be more strong that ranged for the sole reason that getting to melee combat is a rather big risk and if it is only on equal with ranged combat then it will not be viable still because with ranged combat you do not have to worry about the risks of melee.

 

 

OP, ever heard of Melee 2.0?

Ever read the OP.

[Grulos]

Ever read the OP.

Melee 2.0 is not only shiny new animations. It will buff and balance melee weapons to be viable.

[Hyunsai]

For melee to be viable, it needs to vastly outperform range weapons and powers due the higher risk of being up close with the enemy and the loss of time getting to them.

 

If DE is not doing that, it will still be useless and mostly for fooling around.

Edited March 25, 2014 by Hyunsai

[Sebastianx]

Melee 2.0 is not only shiny new animations. It will buff and balance melee weapons to be viable.

Imagine that they'd buff every weapon to the point that it can 1 shot a level 9999 mob...and I'll bet you my account it still won't make melee viable, wanna know why? Because by the time you even SAW the level 9999 grineer, you'd be dead. So ya, unless they make it worth engaging in melee range over long range...it won't happen and I'm not buying the "melee 2.0 is better" crap.

[Mickey1779]

In my opinion melee should be more strong that ranged for the sole reason that getting to melee combat is a rather big risk and if it is only on equal with ranged combat then it will not be viable still because with ranged combat you do not have to worry about the risks of melee.

 

 

Totally agree.

 

If Melee 2.0 brings melee weapons on par with ranged weapons then it is a flop since for most frames ranged and ability powers will always down enemies before you can close the gap to actually melee them and thus there is no need to risk getting into melee in the first place.

 

For Melee 2.0 to succeed, Melee damage needs to far surpass ranged DPS in order to compensate for the risk and give melee players the time it takes to close the gap before your squad mates kill everything from range.

 

The other issue is the "Hit Counter Damage Multiplier",  how can you maintain a hit counter when your squad mates have guns and ability powers that will kill enemies before you can get into melee to refresh your hit counter?

 

I suspect Melee 2.0 will be strictly for Solo / Clan play where the squad agrees ahead of time to not use ults and nukes.

 

I predict a Warframe Prime Time where in order to show off Melee 2.0 they do strictly melee only missions because of the hit counter issue.

[-CM-Tiffany]

Tile hazards that impair your ranged weapons, like clutter, swamp or water messing with your gun barrels. Or similar hazards that impair your Frame's systems and limit your abilities for a small amount of time (20-60 seconds.)

 

New NIghtmare mode that forces you to use only melee?

[ServareVitas]

In keeping with any semblance of realism - melee weapons should all have a different reach. To suggest something like a Heat Dagger and a Orthos (a damn polearm) having the same attack range is simply $&*&*#(%&. Weapons are supposed to be different. If you don't like the short reach on your sword then get a longer sword. 

[Ritchel]

mellee should be stronger.

 

but all enemies fall down with 2 bullets with a good gun.

 

why do i even want to go close with really strong enemy when i can gun him down in less than 5 sec.

 

all i can see is, mellee 2.0 will bring added features when you switch in mellee mode like sprint speed, blocking bullets.

 

so yeah, ffrom that mellee is good to use to lessen/avoid damage. 

 

its still up with the player if he wants to go mellee or in gunning mode

 

as for weapon range, example - using knuckles which has very annoying range i suppose they should add new animations  wherein every hit should make the tenno approach closer like 3meters while attacking, i hope you got my point -thats what i think is the best solution for ultra close range weapons

[Gunmetall]

Imagine that they'd buff every weapon to the point that it can 1 shot a level 9999 mob...and I'll bet you my account it still won't make melee viable, wanna know why? Because by the time you even SAW the level 9999 grineer, you'd be dead. So ya, unless they make it worth engaging in melee range over long range...it won't happen and I'm not buying the "melee 2.0 is better" crap.

+1 agree with all

[mpastor]

For melee to be viable, it needs to vastly outperform range weapons and powers due the higher risk of being up close with the enemy and the loss of time getting to them.

 

If DE is not doing that, it will still be useless and mostly for fooling around.

 

This.

 

Plus, with range you can hit targets all over the map almost instantly and switch to new targets at different distances and elevations just as fast. Even with vast out performance, melee also needs to give people super human speed or reach to compete.  

 

So, I say why even bother.  You either make melee ridiculously (even comically) tough.  or just face reality and admit it's a naive pipe dream.  Why muck the game up with additional animations or actions that ultimately will lose their luster or God forbid add lag to the game.

 

I have seen this push for better melee in other MMO's.  Right now it seems to be following the typical timeline.  When melee 2.0 comes up lacking (as surely it will since I doubt they will make it over the top uber) then step two will commence.  Grab the pitchforks and demand that other aspects of the game be nerfed.  Yes, the vocal melee tail will attempt to wag the dog and everyone else's fun.

[DocHolliday13]

I don't think melee needs to vastly outperform ranged weapons to be useful... and this is coming from a player who initially just melee'd everything because it was more fun. No, I'd say on average about 10% more dps (or at least equivalent dps) compared to ranged weapons would be sufficient. No, you're not going to get as many kills with melee if you're in a group. But at least you could melee most everything when you were solo, and it would make melee a good option for melee enemies that close to melee range. There's enough mobility in this game compared to others that melee can do well enough.

[Tulzscha]

Moved to the proper section.

[MechaTails]

I dont see a strait question to be answered, but if I had to respond it would be similar to this

 

In keeping with any semblance of realism - melee weapons should all have a different reach. To suggest something like a Heat Dagger and a Orthos (a damn polearm) having the same attack range is simply $&*&*#(%&. Weapons are supposed to be different. If you don't like the short reach on your sword then get a longer sword. 

[RMark12]

So I have a ranged weapon that reloads relatively slow. Often, before I learned the ropes of the game that is, I couldn't be bothered with reloading, at least while there were enemies close. I whipped out the current melee I fancied at the time, and got to swinging.

What a mistake! Currently, the best strategy is to just back off and patiently reload, then continue spraying your bullets, rockets, blobs of acid or whatever comes out of the gun's muzzle.

 

As long as that is changed around - that is, to make swinging your melee weapon worthwhile and a better option than running backwards, busy reloading - it will be a buff good enough for me.

 

The perfect way of making melee usage truly a part of the game is not necessary an insane buff, but to give it unique properties, or even better - combine the two playstyles. Swinging your sword may benefit your gun, shooting your gun may benefit your sword. Being able to grab an enemy and use him as a meat shield - the added "health boost" makes it more comfortable to shoot. Getting the aggro of a Grineer Napalm/Bombard, forcing him to resort to melee while you have your sword drawn - that can easily benefit the team as a whole. Being able to shoot with your secondary, even with reduced accuracy, while closing in with melee weapon drawn - that could make enemies scramble for cover (or cower, if infested), making it easier to slice them to pieces. There are just so many ways to promote using melee weapons, even without an insane damage buff.

[-CM-Crazy]

I am confused how to respond...