Brawler Archive
Thread: Brawlers vs. Marksmen: Compare & Contrast
It occurred to me the other day that as Brawlers, we're really not getting any serious defensive skills. If we are, I don't know if they're doing what they're intended to do. Let's compare and contrast the two basic combat classes.
~~~~~
BRAWLER --
Brawlers get "Toughness +20"for their weapon types during levels 3 and 4 of each of their tracks. The Unarmed track, at level 4, gets "Melee Defense +2." At Master Brawler, they receive "Melee Defense +5" and "Ranged Defense +5." That's a grand total of "Melee Defense 7" and "Ranged Defense 5" and some sort of "Toughness 20" if you go all-out and become a Master Brawler.
No Brawler can target a specific HAM pool until they achievean elite class. Until they, their damage is randomly distributed between Health, Action, and Mind.
Brawlers must close with their target to attack it. Brawlers get no increased landspeed to do so and run the risk of being kited. Additionally, when they kill something, they may have to spend the time attempting to close with another target to attack it.
Brawlers do more damage to PCs and NPCs wielding carbines and even more damage to those wielding rifles.
Brawlers do not get a second level attack (e.g.: "UnarmedHit2") until their elite class and do not get any sort of DoT effect.
The Brawler profession uses 4 kinds of XP, none of which can be gained simultaneously.
MARKSMAN --
Marksmen, on the other hand, get "Ranged Defense +2" for all three tracks of the particular weaponsas well asduring levels 1, 2, and 4 of Ranged Weapon Support...and another "Ranged Defense +5" upon achieving Master. At Ranged Weapon Support 3, they get "Melee Defense +2." That's a grand total of "Melee Defense 2" and "Ranged Defense 17" for Master Marksman.
Marksmen can, upon achieving the first level of any weapon, target a specific HAM pool.
A marksman can attack anything within 64 meters, switching targets with a single keystroke and not having to move from where they stand. They can force a mob to run away from them with special moves, making them effectively invulnerable to a melee mob for a short time.
Marksmen all gain a second-level attack on their third tier (e.g.: "HeadShot2") and a DoT attack upon their fourth tier.
The Marksman profession uses 4 kinds of XP, one of which (Combat) is automatically earned simultaneously with the other three (specific weapon) types.
~~~~~
CONCLUSIONS --
I can only assume that "Toughness" is supposed to balance out the glaring difference in defensive skill levels. What does Toughness do, though? Does it simply subtract from the melee damage when you're using that particular weapon (if so, isn't itnear-useless at the higher levels)? More to the point, does Brawler's Toughness make up for the fact that ranged characters have multiple methods of fighting without significant risk of coming under attack themselves?
Since Brawlers are forced to attack random HAM pools -- even at the Master level -- then a fight can last roughly three times longer than even an intermediate-level Marksman. That fact, coupled with the fact that Brawlersmustfight at ground zero (or "ground -5," or whatever their reach penalty is), means that a Brawler is likely to take roughlythree times the damage of a Marksman and therefore have three times the downtime. I equate this to "one-third as much fun."
The above paragraph also assumes that the combatants are standing next to each other. I fully support the concept that Marksmen should havethe advantage over a Brawler until the Brawler closes within melee range. Then the tables should turn.
However, thecurrentreality is thata Brawler actually closing with a Marksman is a rare thing. All the Marksman need do is continue moving away from the Brawler ("kite") and suffer the -50 or so penalty to hit. I submit that the Marksman is not suffering at all; in fact, that penalty to hit is a wholly unfair trade-off for being completely invulnerable to the Brawler. Please note the grumpiness associated with far too much bold text within one paragraph.
My next point is related, and quite simple: a Marksman can potentiallyhit a target with a bleeding effect from 64 meters away (then maybefollow up witha 2nd-level high-damage shot)and run off, thereby doing a remarkable amount of damage with almost zero risk to the gunman. The Brawler, meanwhile, is viewed as the primary XP farm of Medics.
Lastly, I have to say that I'm actually comfortable with Marksmen being able to level their Ranged Support Track simultaneously with their specific weapon tracks. It's fundamentally easier to sit back and shoot at something rather than successfullybust out some Kung-Fu (hence the evolution of real-life weaponry). So it's just fine by me that it potentially takes longer to earn all the Brawler XP than the Marksman XP.
However, I submit that if someone is determined enough to train themselves to the level where they should be able to compete with firearms, then by gosh please give them the game-balanced ability to do so. I humbly submit that they are not, in fact, game-balanced correctly. I believe my spam above and the overall consensus of the forum-dwellers agree.
THEREQUEST --
I'm not asking anyone to make Brawlers tougher than Marksman overall. I'm not even asking for anyone to necessarily make Brawlers tougher nor Marksmen weaker.
I'm asking that Brawlers be made as well suited for brawling as Marksmen are for shooting.
Thanks.
Hi there,
I'm a master marksman and honestly not trying to be an 'a$$ or anything but to quote a developer on almost this exact same issue, 'don't bring a knife to a gun fight. Guns are the superior weapon.'
I personally have another char on another server working the brawler skill and yeah, its somewhat tedious. Honestly tho', the dev's want this to be as realistic as possible, trying to compare the two is somewhat ridiculous. I don't care how much kung-fu action you bust out, any sniper/rilfe can tag you at about 1/2 a mile. You lose.
As far as the whole -50 thing, yeah its -50 and i miss a hell of alot with that, esp when running. When something con's red and i try to 'burst run' and kill, i die. Everytime, no excpetions yet. And really, is it a big suprise that you can't walk up to a rogue Fambaa, kick it in the shins and come out ok? ummm NO.
Targeting specific HAMs, i couldn't agree with you more. Brawlers should be able to target and i dont' understand why they are not allowed to.
I too and curious how the toughness factors in. I would imagine that it is a def rating against all attacks but not sure. Seems to me the tougher someone is the less damage they would take, regardless of weapon type. Until this is clarified, no complaints allowed on the defensive skills, we simply don't understand them. Brawlers may yet come out on top with that one.
As far as being 'invulnerable' to a melee mob? Well, it does take them longer to find us but again simulating real life, wouldn't more difficult to figure out who is shooting you from 64m away then who just b-slapped your face? And the whole firing and running away doesn't really work all that well as mentioned above. I have explore IV and can't out run a ticked off Gnort w/o burst running. And speaking of that, melee fighters, including creatures, hit with physical attacks BEFORE they reach their targets. With melee char, i'm able to 'pick a fight' from 15m out as long as i'm running toward the target, creatures have this same strange ability.
Conclusion...if you don't want to brawl, i.e. run up to things and punch them and get punched in return, don't be a brawler. Don't complain that guns can fire further than you can throw a punch. These classes were not intended to be 'equal'. Guns are better, thats why we use them, straight from the developers salivating mandibles.
FLAME ON!
Merjear Kirage - Lowca
suck it up, or go home. 
Azralon,
your observations were right on target. I also support your suggestions.
Thanks for the support, Willynh. I appreciate the intellectual backup.
JoeBob -- I appreciate what support you offered, too. Regarding your "knife to a gun fight" remark (by the way, the original quote is from "The Untouchables" as uttered by Sean Connery's character): if you reread my post, I wholly agree that a gun is an inherently superior weapon to any melee weapon (save lightsabers).
My point regarding game balance between the melee and ranged classes is that if I have 4 ranks in a weapon and you have 4 ranks in a weapon, then we should be roughlyof the same levelin devastation potential. I'm not suggesting we should be equal; I'm saying we should be as effective as each other in our respective fields.
That's the key difference that I think many people are overlooking.
Good points made of boths sides,
Guns on the whole have the advantage because of their range, and it should remain that way. Where this game suffers is, that once a skilled melee fighter gets within fighting range, that should be his domain, and the shooter should be at a disadvantage. I think the game should be tweaked also in the respect that, once a shooters surrenders his advantage by allowing a brawler to get within the brawlers optimal range, it should not be so easy re-aquire that advantage just by kiting. If you turn tail and run from any of the NPC's in the game once you've squared off with them,the'll mess you up, while chasing you. how come the rest of the brawler class can't have this ability?
No, I wouldn't bring a knife to a gunfight, but you had better believe, that if they guy I'm facing puts the gun right in my face, he won't be shooting me!
ok a quick point, me and my brother both have this game and play all the time, he is ranged and im a melee and quiet often get pissed about pvp. he always comes up with the "its a gun it should be better" agrument.
But its a game....if they wanted to make it real...of course guns would win...but what would be the point of the game then...its a game they need to make it fair...enough said
Very good points, both brawler and marksman. Myself, I have played both a novice rifleman, and a novice pikeman... here is my two bits.
Here is my idea to even it out. Its simple.
If you are running and attacking at the same time, your speed should slow down if you are attacking BEHIND yourself, but remain unaffected if you are attacking AHEAD of yourself. Either you are concentrating on running, or you are concentrating on firing.
If a person is trying to flee, then they aren't attacking: they are running flat out. If a person is trying to attack, while adding distance between his/her target, then the speed should decrease. The more the speed decreases, the more the aim improves. The more the speed increases, the less aim you get. And it should be scored on a curve ... ie. Running 'fast' should have a 0-3% accuracy, 'medium' should be 3%-10%, 'walking' should be 10%-50%. Standing should be 50% to 100% accuracy. That curve should be steep for rifle / carbine users, and shallow for pistols.
The goal of the marksman when fighting a brawler, should be to incapacitate the player BEFORE the player gets there.
The goal of the brawler when fighting a marksman, should be surviving the assault on the way to melee range. A brawler, whenfighting a marksman of equal skill, should have 1/4 health when he arrives at the marksman (minus first shot).
I'd say this makes for a 'realistic' balance
There is a problem currently with the brawler and any of the secondary melee classes (fencer, pikemen, swordsmen, unarmed) for that matter.
1) Running to the ranged target to attack-- They can kite you---running at the same speed and firing off their pistol/rifle while they run, albeit at a penalty, we never catch up and end up getting killed in the process of closing the distance.
2) Running AWAY from the Ranged Target--Being that they(the ranged user)can run the same speed as us(the brawler),they can continue to attack, while we attempt to evade. Yes, we can use the burst run, but in PvP, they also have burst run and the same ammount of time as we do. Hence, we are at a severe disadvantage either way.
It is my sincere hope that somethingwill be done toaffect ranged attackers from running us down in PvP.
Intriguing suggestion, Yesurb!
Considering how awkward (or at least, remarkably uncomfortable) the "fire while shooting behind you" animations can be, I can definitely see adding in a game-balancing effect of reduced speed when firing while running. Such a thing would still allow a Marksman to rain death upon a melee target, but it would give the melee target a chance to actually close and engage with a Lunge effect (i.e.: tackling).
I'm not saying that it even needs to be a huge speed decrease; just 20% or so might make it a "fair" fight. Whatever the speed reduction, it should allow a Marksman to get off a few shots from 64m away before the target closes, givinga sufficiently skilled and equippedgunman a chance to drop the melee combatant before close combat is achieved and the advantage switches completely over.
Of course, a Marksman could take the Scout track of Exploration (and later the Ranger's Wayfaring) to compensate for the speed reduction. A Brawler could as well, keeping the scales balanced between properly trained combatants.
Yeah, I like that idea, Yesurb. Good job.
Oh, by the way -- I'm thinking that no one should be able to attack while in Burst Run mode. Either you'redodging around and fighting, or you're running your rear off at the expense of all else.
That should prevent A) Brawlers from continually streaking up and closing with ranged combatants, not giving the gunmen a chance, and B) Marksmen firing (particularly bleeding attacks) at melee targets from extreme range then Burst Running in circles around the hapless foe.
This also applies for creatures, who shouldn't always be able to outrun PCs all day every day (since they always have a Burst Run prepared and we get one every few minutes) and still get to attack us. Heck, even the glacially-slow mountain worrts have been known to blaze their way up to PCs and run them down with melee attacks.
This would be a necessary element to the "slower running while shooting" suggestion above.
Okay.....I will fix every thing.
Ark's Big Patch v1.0
Hence Fourth
Marksman vs Marksman- 25% damage
Marksman vs Melee- 25% damage
Melee vs Pistol Weilder- 85% damage
Melee vs Carbine weilder- 150% damage
Melee Vs Rifle Weilder- 225% damage
also....
Berserk shall work so that you get +75 generally. Upon gaining Expert in any of the four classes you get +20 to berserk and you get +20 upon master brawler.
This can work one of two ways. For Each +1 torwards Berserk you get a +1% to the damage done to your attack before the +75 is tacked on. Thus....a 1000 attack would do 1075 untill you got the first +20. Then it would do 1275, wich is 1000+75+200(20%of 1000)...all the way up until master brawler when you have +100 to berserk and the same attack would do 2075, wich is 1000+75+1000(100% of 1000)
or you could simply do the same thing, but for each +1 to berserk, you get a +75 to your damage....so that at master brawler your +75 would give +750 damage to each attac....i do not like this though becous eit is easily manipulateable and favors whoever can swing fastest.
Berserk 2 shall be abolished
and another thing.....
A fourth Health bar shall be Implimented. A 'stamina' bar. This is where HAM costs will be drawn from. No longer will specials tax your actual HAM bars. your maximum Stamina pool will be directly effected by your battle fatuige and will regenerate at the same rate as your other bars. This can not be buffed as much as your other stats.
Traps are the only thing wich can reduse the 'stamina' bar. And you can only be affected by one trap at a time. You can not be hit with a second trap for 1 minute after the initial hit of the first. Damage varies depending on traps.
Apoun compleate depleation of stamina bar, you will not be incappacitated, simply unable to preform special moves..
Maybe a small HAM cost will penalize the higher skills.
I had more but i forgot it.
Ark