classes and speed

[lala110593]

I was thinking about speed today, and how many targets (including mages) have gotten away from my barb because i cant chase em to the door fast enough. Anyway heres my point, since warriors spend all their time chasing after people in close range combat, shouldn't they be FASTER than archers who are supposed to be in long range combat and dnt have to do much running to get their target (not including running away) ?



-glulose

[PT_DaAr_PT]

You have a good point there.

-Archers and Mages don't need to move alot to hit their targets(specially now that moving cancels casting and ranged attacks);

-Warriors, however, always need to be in movement to be able to hit a ranged player(It's also not easy with the horrible positional bugs around, you are sooo lucky because of that ).

[VandaMan]

The way I see it, warriors are already faster in combat situations. In order to attack all mages and archers must stop, and their powers have cast times, while warriors can move while attacking, and have instant-cast abilities. An archer can move faster while running away, but when "in long range combat" as you say, the archer isn't fast at all, in fact he's stationary. Even when chasing someone who is running away, warriors have an advantage. You can just run along behind them while hitting, and never slow down. An archer or a mage will lose ground on a target if they try to attack them as they run away, unless they use some kind of CC to slow/knock/immobilize.

[Mattdoesrock]

Actually no, you do incur a speed malnus for every hit while chasing someone as a warrior.

[Pwnography]

i was attacked by a alsius hunter not long ago(a week or so) and he was able to strafe away from me,stop,attack and i couldnt catch him. luckily meni was near!

[lala110593]

Originally Posted by VandaMan

The way I see it, warriors are already faster in combat situations. In order to attack all mages and archers must stop, and their powers have cast times, while warriors can move while attacking, and have instant-cast abilities. An archer can move faster while running away, but when "in long range combat" as you say, the archer isn't fast at all, in fact he's stationary. Even when chasing someone who is running away, warriors have an advantage. You can just run along behind them while hitting, and never slow down. An archer or a mage will lose ground on a target if they try to attack them as they run away, unless they use some kind of CC to slow/knock/immobilize.

you just made my point, the archer doesn't need to be fast because it is stationary while shooting, it only needs speed to RUN AWAY, and if the archer loses ground while chasing, they can make up with it by their speed and range. So I'm still thinking, why archers have more speed than the warrior?? I mean from my understanding knights where in much better shape than archers in the battlefield, archers were peasants.

-glulose

[_dracus_]

I can sum up quite easily: failure in class design.

I'm not a pro with MMO's but I know a bit WoW and GW, and in thoses two games warriors generally have short speed skill to get to a target, thoses skills have really low cooldown it's like: 5s duration / 20s cooldown.

In my humble opinion, hunter should be the fastest class on long haul, but on short chase (less than 1 minutes) it should be barbarian.

I'd suggest some skill named "charged" that would get you speed boost if you are running toward an ennemy for X seconds, and have a low cooldown.

[sdjin]

Originally Posted by mattdoesrock

actually no, you do incur a speed malnus for every hit while chasing someone as a warrior.

这游戏怎么玩的阿？？不会阿 ，教教

[Mattdoesrock]

Originally Posted by sdjin

这游戏怎么玩的阿？？不会阿 ，教教

Translation: Chinese (automatically detected) » English
这游戏怎么玩的阿？？不会阿 ，教教

Ah how to play this game? ? Not A, teach

?????

[Arafails]

Need five more seconds of spring. That's all I'm saying.