DeletedUser
Somewhat of a newb question for the veterans regarding melee vs range.
At a glance they seem equal, weapon damage that is, until you take into account skills and attributes they are anything but equal: melee means more strength which means more hitpoints in addition to vigor and toughness, whereas range means more aim and shooting, but less hitpoints. This leads me to believe that melee would do better than range in fort battles whereas range would outperform melee in duels, but there's really only 1 way to find out which is to try both, which takes a lot of time, hence of the purpose this post.
Melee and range are both equal in damage modifier (vigor vs shooting), and equal in that dodge is a non attribute for both, but unequal in that rangers have a higher aim whereas melee has better toughness and hitpoints.
My philosophy has always been however, in war as in love, ‘tis better to give than receive.
My question then is, I read on the forums that a duelist can do 5000 damage easily in fort battles if he is specced right, but they did not specify if this was for a melee duelist or range duelist, so to my simple lizard brain it all boils down to 1 question: WHO IS THE BETTER KILLER, that means who deals out more damage, range, or melee?
I am lead to believe that because melee can TAKE more punishment with toughness which should be more appropriately referred to as melee-resistance as the term toughness is inappropriately indicative of all around toughness which is not the case, and most importantly a melee specialist has higher hitpoints, therefore game balance would dictate that the hitpoint inferior range duelist would have to be able to DISH OUT more punishment to compensate.
In other words, a melee specialist is the better SURVIVOR whereas the range specialist is the better PUNISHER.
Is this correct? If not please clarify.
Further, it is my inexperienced observation that appearance and tactics are more relevant for fort fighting but not quite a decisive factor for duelling. Correct?
As a side note, it seems that at the elite levels of game play, those who do not spend gold nuggets would not be able to compete with those who do. True?
Thanks