Comparison of Melee Fighters and Elementalists
Posted: Sun Oct 10, 2004 9:03 am
I've recently been doing a comparison of melee fighters and elementalists (since these seem to be the most popular branches of their respective skills) - have a read and tell me your thoughts. These are based on level 50 characters, but the same holds true at level 25 - if any higher level characters want to chip in how things change with level, I'd appreciate it.
So situtaion is two level 50 characters are fighting the same mob, both with good quality equipement (the fighter has a high damage 2 handed sword, the mage a magic staff with 97% bonus to elemental speed and power). The mage has approximately half the hit points of the fighter, and using light armour (to keep sap and casting time penalties down) has about 1/8 of the armour protection - so the fighter should be able to last about 16 times as long when 'up close and personal' with the enemy.
When attacking, the mage uses a spell (cold 5 in this example) which the target is vulnerable to, resulting in damage of roughly 250 straight to hit points. The fighter hits using increase damage with a median value (after armour reduction) of 260. With no casting speed penalties in the spell, the mage can churning out hits at about the same rate as the fighter hits with his two handed sword. With full sap and stam for his level the mage can churn out about 5 of these spells, while the fighter can get more than 10 increased damage attacks before his stamina runs out. Once sap/stam has gone, the mage is pretty much useless, either standing around to regen sap, or casting low level spells with sap costs matching his recharge rate, for about 1/10th the above damage. When the fighters stam runs out, he swicthes to default attacks and does 1/2th the above damage, while still regenrating stamina for more increased damage attacks in the future.
Overal, the only advantage I can see the mage as having are (short) ranged attacks. This lets you get in at most two additional attacks before the target reaches you and can attack back.
I've checked this with a few different characters and it all seems to be correct - but am I missing something? Do mages get exponentially more powerful at higher levels (I had thought this at level 25 when the same stats emerged, but it's looking a little less likely now)?
With these stats I am concerned that fighters will start to refuse to group with offensive mages, as they can't pull their own weight in a fight - I have already seen this happening over the last few weeks in fyros lands - and anyone who wants to be a mage will be forced down the healer route (affliction spells are useful when grouped with others, but offer poor experience whenever I have used them).
I, for one, intend to attempt to continue down the elementalist route, but if grouping oppurtunities dry up (and lets be honest, there aren't that many at the moment, at least in Fyros) then it's going to start to get difficult.
Way back in the first open beta there was an imbalance problem with mages and fighters - it was much easier to be a mage. At the time a great many suggestions were made on how to rebalance things effectively - almost any one of which would have worked nicely - but what seems to have happened is that *most* of them have been applied: mage damage reduced, fighter damage increased, armour effectiveness increased, healing reduced, magic costs increased (although this might be fixed in the upcoming patch). In most other games, mages can attack for a similar level of damage to fighters, with a few big nukes for sticky situations - here we have a few big nukes which do as much damage as fighters and nothing as backup except to bludgeon our opponents with our staves...
So, Devs, please lets see a bit of rebalancing sooner rather than later. I'm sure you can think of something, but for suggestions:
1) Cut the sap cost of spells so we can do fighter-equivalent damage for more than 5 hits.
OR
2) Double spell damage - we only get a few hits but they are good ones.
OR
3) Half melee damage - same reason as above.
OR
4) Increase mage staff bonues, while reducing high quality weapon bonuses - this way if we shop around to get a better staff, we might actually be able to do more damage than a fighter, even if we can't with an average staff.
So situtaion is two level 50 characters are fighting the same mob, both with good quality equipement (the fighter has a high damage 2 handed sword, the mage a magic staff with 97% bonus to elemental speed and power). The mage has approximately half the hit points of the fighter, and using light armour (to keep sap and casting time penalties down) has about 1/8 of the armour protection - so the fighter should be able to last about 16 times as long when 'up close and personal' with the enemy.
When attacking, the mage uses a spell (cold 5 in this example) which the target is vulnerable to, resulting in damage of roughly 250 straight to hit points. The fighter hits using increase damage with a median value (after armour reduction) of 260. With no casting speed penalties in the spell, the mage can churning out hits at about the same rate as the fighter hits with his two handed sword. With full sap and stam for his level the mage can churn out about 5 of these spells, while the fighter can get more than 10 increased damage attacks before his stamina runs out. Once sap/stam has gone, the mage is pretty much useless, either standing around to regen sap, or casting low level spells with sap costs matching his recharge rate, for about 1/10th the above damage. When the fighters stam runs out, he swicthes to default attacks and does 1/2th the above damage, while still regenrating stamina for more increased damage attacks in the future.
Overal, the only advantage I can see the mage as having are (short) ranged attacks. This lets you get in at most two additional attacks before the target reaches you and can attack back.
I've checked this with a few different characters and it all seems to be correct - but am I missing something? Do mages get exponentially more powerful at higher levels (I had thought this at level 25 when the same stats emerged, but it's looking a little less likely now)?
With these stats I am concerned that fighters will start to refuse to group with offensive mages, as they can't pull their own weight in a fight - I have already seen this happening over the last few weeks in fyros lands - and anyone who wants to be a mage will be forced down the healer route (affliction spells are useful when grouped with others, but offer poor experience whenever I have used them).
I, for one, intend to attempt to continue down the elementalist route, but if grouping oppurtunities dry up (and lets be honest, there aren't that many at the moment, at least in Fyros) then it's going to start to get difficult.
Way back in the first open beta there was an imbalance problem with mages and fighters - it was much easier to be a mage. At the time a great many suggestions were made on how to rebalance things effectively - almost any one of which would have worked nicely - but what seems to have happened is that *most* of them have been applied: mage damage reduced, fighter damage increased, armour effectiveness increased, healing reduced, magic costs increased (although this might be fixed in the upcoming patch). In most other games, mages can attack for a similar level of damage to fighters, with a few big nukes for sticky situations - here we have a few big nukes which do as much damage as fighters and nothing as backup except to bludgeon our opponents with our staves...
So, Devs, please lets see a bit of rebalancing sooner rather than later. I'm sure you can think of something, but for suggestions:
1) Cut the sap cost of spells so we can do fighter-equivalent damage for more than 5 hits.
OR
2) Double spell damage - we only get a few hits but they are good ones.
OR
3) Half melee damage - same reason as above.
OR
4) Increase mage staff bonues, while reducing high quality weapon bonuses - this way if we shop around to get a better staff, we might actually be able to do more damage than a fighter, even if we can't with an average staff.