Pistoleer Archive

---

TheSillyOne wrote:

The response I recieved from the rifleman community regarding my long range options was "pull a rifle". It makes sense. The response I would give to the rifleman community regarding thier short range options would be "pull a pistol". It also makes sense.

---

A minimum range cap for riflemen will never happen. It will be too hard to explain why a rifleman cannot attack a target that is directly in front of him--it just makes no sense. As for how to better balance rifleman with pistoleer, the things that I would be in favor of would be (1) Stopping Shot ability only granted at Master Pistoleer, (2) pistol range extended to 65m, perhaps with a range penalty at 35-65m, (3)rifle accuracy reduced ranges less than 35m. If accuracy vs. range is indeed too hard to re-code at this point, then I see #1 as making the most sense and being the easiest to implement, or else returning the range of all ranged weapons back to 64-65m.

---

BadgerSmaker wrote:

---

TheSillyOne wrote:

The response I recieved from the rifleman community regarding my long range options was "pull a rifle". It makes sense. The response I would give to the rifleman community regarding thier short range options would be "pull a pistol". It also makes sense.

---

I think a lot of the problem comes down to ranged fighters that fight at 0m. Although it may seem crazy to us, a lot of Riflemen tank mobs apparently. With all the professions you can chose from to get roots and snares, a lot of them spend most of their time with a mob right in their face.

Personally for me, if a mob gets within 10m of me and hits me I have failed dismally and deserve to be shot. In fact to drum this concept home I have recently taken to kiting Gorax and Krayts solo unarmoured.

So maybe this is why a range cap on rifles is so scary? They are so used to tanking mobs due to all the hate they pull?

---

If I end up tanking a mob while using a rifle its generally not because I *want* to tank, its usually because the hate system is so messed up that I'll have managed to pull agro from the tanks in my group.

I've got to the point that in group PvE I'll usually use a pistol ahead of a rifle now just to make sure that my group's tanks can actually tank and to stay in the tank's range to throw heals on them when needed.

---

DomMantell wrote:

I've got to the point that in group PvE I'll usually use a pistol ahead of a rifle now just to make sure that my group's tanks can actually tank and to stay in the tank's range to throw heals on them when needed.

---

---

Aeneas_Menosos wrote:

2) reduce our encumbrance for carrying a pistol (I mean, a pistol slowing me down? That's sad) This will let us close the gap quicker. Speaking of closing the gap....

---

I love that one, I wish I thought of it. Your right a pistol should not cause encumbrance, push for this one badger

Adding a cap on min range for weapons would be horrible.

If this is so much of an issue just change it so that Pistoleer specials can only be used with a pistol. Carbineer specials ony with a carbine. Riflemen specials only with a rifle. TK specials with unarmed... etc...

Ehon - Radiant

Got to say I don't like the idea of minimum ranges, it's going to annoy too many people to be a workable and constructive suggestion. Let's not be the ones to rain on someone else's parade.

Besides it's overkill just because the other solution isn't so easy. It doesn't matter if linking accuracy to range is tricky, what we really should be looking for is a longterm solution that makes sense to everyone. Rifles will fire at close range they just won't be a very sensible weapon to use in that situation. Let's have punative accuracy penalties for using weaponsoutside of their specified range.

Gift.

---

Nifty wrote:

So on point 3, should the ranged professions even be balanced for range limitations considering melee isn't trulybalanced against ranged?

---

---

Nifty wrote:

My thoughts.

1) minimum ranges are not user friendly. The "why can't I shoot this thing right in front of me???" argument is a valid one from a new user standpoint (and even a veteran user standpoint.)

2) minimum ranges are just as fair as maximum ranges.Even withnot being user friendly, minimum ranges are just as fair as maximum ranges.

3) Aren't we being hypocritical? How are the melee profs balanced against ranged? Not very well, they can just run faster than we can, and we tell them that's how it is and how it should be. Well, we run faster than rifles (or we will once they get slowed down again) so what is the difference between the range disparity between us and rifles and between us and melee? None, except in the rifles case, we're on the wrong side of the disparity.

/agree although I believe they are supposed to deal more damage and have CoB to help mitigate damage while rooted. Range doesn't/shouldn't come into it however, rifles+ some pistols will have high damage androot while other range profs have no CoB to mitigate, this may be a balance issue. Otherwise I do agree, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

So on point 3, should the ranged professions even be balanced for range limitations considering melee isn't trulybalanced against ranged?

Well I'm not sure from a pistols POV I don't think the gap is that great (but feel free to correct me),Comparatively, I don't damage for lots, CoB limits that damage further and armour breaking means that when melee does close in I'm in plenty of trouble. Rifles or Carbs with stopping shot though is another matter...

Personally, I think the ranges should be thrown out the window and all 3 profs returned to 65m max. Then they should re-introduce the accuracy mods based on range. The accuracy mods would have a better effect now since accuracy is part of the damage calculation. Our pistol would hit harder close than it would at range. Rifles would have the edge at range. Up close, and we outdamage the rifle. That's how it should be.

Gets my vote.

Gift.

---

Message Edited by Giftmacher on 06-21-2005 10:45 AM

---

Nifty wrote:

...

Personally, I think the ranges should be thrown out the window and all 3 profs returned to 65m max. Then they should re-introduce the accuracy mods based on range. The accuracy mods would have a better effect now since accuracy is part of the damage calculation. Our pistol would hit harder close than it would at range. Rifles would have the edge at range. Up close, and we outdamage the rifle. That's how it should be.

---

Minimum range is just as reasonable as a maximum range. I can go outside with a pistol and shoot at the moon, even if I'm not going to hit it (very often, lol).

Once again, people are trying to combine physics and star wars. A pistol could shoot beyond 35m, but it would be terribly inaccurate (we'll pretend). A minimum/maximum range should represent the areas in which a ranged person should even attempt to fire before it becomes stupid to continue to do so.

I think the current system is favorable to a give-everyone-a-65m-range-and-make-them-suck-at-X-ranges theory, simply because you know they'll do it wrong, and just say they did it and not provide details. In addition, PvP battles are fun and extended because only some people can effectively hit at good range. This means that battles develop enemy and friendly battle lines which have to be pushed forward with tact. I like it.

I used to carry 8 pistols. I now carry a kinetic pistol, an energy pistol and a laser rifle. Everyone carries a laser rife. Is that a bad thing? I can't say I mind. I don't have much trouble catching up to riflemen in small scale battles.

Long story short, give riflemen a greater movement penalty. If they want to kite and shoot they can use a pistol. A short range penalty while using certain weapons would be alright but THE DEVS MUST EXPLAIN EXACTLY HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS OR WE WILL HAVE CONSTANT CONFUSION FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS UNTIL ITS FIXED. I don't trust their capacity to do this, so I wouldnt suggest it.

---

BadgerSmaker wrote:

---

TheSillyOne wrote:

The response I recieved from the rifleman community regarding my long range options was "pull a rifle". It makes sense. The response I would give to the rifleman community regarding thier short range options would be "pull a pistol". It also makes sense.

---

I think a lot of the problem comes down to ranged fighters that fight at 0m. Although it may seem crazy to us, a lot of Riflemen tank mobs apparently. With all the professions you can chose from to get roots and snares, a lot of them spend most of their time with a mob right in their face.

Personally for me, if a mob gets within 10m of me and hits me I have failed dismally and deserve to be shot. In fact to drum this concept home I have recently taken to kiting Gorax and Krayts solounarmoured.

So maybe this is why a range cap on rifles is so scary? They are so used to tanking mobs due to all the hate they pull?

---

Pistoleers were given defenses for a reason... If they want to get in the face of their enemy and fight/tank them... rifleman is the wrong profession for them. ATM there is no reason not to just dabble pistoleer with a rifleman master... 0-35 meters lower damage weapons... 0 - 64 meters higher damage weapons... lets be honest.. they fire at almost the same speed... where is the balance there?

Rifleman are meant to be glass canons.. meaning they deal high damage but cant take damage... they are MEANT to be fighting from 60 meters away... not up in the enemies face.