Yah, those high DPS melee players, that if they pull agro they die in one hit, always kinda funny to watch them insta-die and the healer wondering if they should raise them or not.
Lets be honest, they are just as dependent on the tank as the casters are, and when it comes to things like dungeon running, they suck worse than casters do, because not only do they have crap HP and Armor, they also need to be at melee to do damage.
Again.. a Caster has the advantage of Ranged Combat.
I am open to ideas on how to balance that.. but just whining is the not the solution.
1, That's what Healers are for. 2, Tanks are overdone. They should be just a little "tanky." And need those healers too, just less often. 3, Casters are balanced by the fact that the opponents can go after them. (How about a little random AI here.) 4, Casters aren't really different, as far as ranged combat, than Archers.
My point I want to make is that all Classes (or Skills) should use a pool of stats when they use powerful attacks, be that Spells or Special Attack/Defense Moves. That's Mana for Mages and Stamina for Warriors/Archers.
Combat should have the strategies of timing involved in when to use your pool of stats, recovery time, Potions, and all of that...for all Classes.
Putting balanced Limiters on everyone is not a bad plan or idea.
The OP was making a fuss that it was wrong to put a limiter on a caster when they thought the Melee players didn't have any.
That is where the discussion is.
And no, casters are not balanced by mobs going after them, unless they are such bad players that they can't figure out how to move.
I have explained many times before, a melee absolutely needs to get within hit range to do damage, the entire premise of their combat style is trading blows with the mob.
A caster or ranged class does not have this mechanic in place, even if the mob goes after them, they can just keep moving away and doing damage to the mob without taking any damage themselves, or have you never heard of kiting a mob?
I swear, it seems like so many of you never played MMO's.. or were just really.. really.. bad at playing casters/ranged.
Ahh, I forgot the current state of MMORPGs and how everyone is locked in. In UO, and in Paper and Pencil D&D (at least the versions I played, Advanced D&D-1), Casters couldn't move while spending the short time of casting. So running away while casting wasn't a thing.
There should be at least a negative modifier to a spell if the Caster is moving while casting. And that movement should not allow a full run, only walking.
Also, you're assuming one MOB? (Side note: Damn I miss "blocking.") One MOB that has no ranged attacks?
Current State? You mean, for the last 20 some odd years, as Kiting has been a thing since EQ1.
How long is "current"? It means now, but has no definition for how long that's been going on.
I just want to add in, I am fine with casters moving while casting.
In DDO, you can do this, but you take a Concentration Check, meaning you can lose the spell if your concentration is not high enough. So I am all for this tactic, and I think it would a great way to open doors to multi discipline skills and the like.
I am also in full support of mobs casting/shoot back, in DDO, ranged and caster mobs are in fact a thing.
So these are things I support.
But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Ok, so now we're down to just one Player, too. Mano a Mobo. Gotcha.
In a case like that, if I wuz a Warrior, I'd consider all of my options. Do I have any grenade like items or other missile attacks? Any Magical Scrolls? Heal Potions so I can make a run through the missile attacks? Invis Potions? Shields, etc.? Can I run from cover to cover to minimize damage to get to the MOB? Am I able to dodge the attacks?
If some of that is available, but I just don't have it with me, then I'd retreat and return with what I need for such an occasion. If not, I'd ask myself... WTH am I doing trying to Solo in yet another Rock, Paper, Scissors, group based game?
I just want to add in, I am fine with casters moving while casting.
In DDO, you can do this, but you take a Concentration Check, meaning you can lose the spell if your concentration is not high enough. So I am all for this tactic, and I think it would a great way to open doors to multi discipline skills and the like.
I am also in full support of mobs casting/shoot back, in DDO, ranged and caster mobs are in fact a thing.
So these are things I support.
But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Ok, so now we're down to just one Player, too. Mano a Mobo. Gotcha.
Not at all.
I mean, for the most part, Mobs out number the players, so Imagine 50 ranged Archer / caster Mobs set up on a cliffside, or parapet wall, as 10 Melee Players try to get at them?
They might as well pack their bags and go play another game, in that situation, they simply won't have what it takes to win.
Anyone and everyone know this, so not even sure why this is even a discussion at this point.
In a case like that, if I wuz a Warrior, I'd consider all of my options. Do I have any grenade like items or other missile attacks? Any Magical Scrolls? Heal Potions so I can make a run through the missile attacks? Invis Potions? Shields, etc.? Can I run from cover to cover to minimize damage to get to the MOB? Am I able to dodge the attacks?
If some of that is available, but I just don't have it with me, then I'd retreat and return with what I need for such an occasion. If not, I'd ask myself... WTH am I doing trying to Solo in yet another Rock, Paper, Scissors, group based game?
In a lot of MMO's, no you don't. In fact some modern MMO's are so locked you can't even have tits on your barbarian, looking at all those gender locked MMO's.. yah you Lost Ark.
Anyway, a lot of MMO's do lock down classes to be very limited, depending on the MMO, you have Just Melee, where your class uses a great axe, and that is it, that is the only weapon you get, a mage casts spells, that is all they do, the staff is just for show.
So, to players that have to face this, kind system stacked against them, the real question becomes.. why are they even playing that MMO.
It's a good question, not one that the developers want their players to ask, but if they wanted to make the game suck huge ugly balls for everyone that liked to play melee, that would definitely be the way to make it happen.
In fact, that set up also tends to shred ranged players as well, because they suddenly have no front line of defense, IE: No Arrow Stoppers AKA: Tanks, because no one in their right mind would play a melee in a game like that.
So all the casters would instantly become pincushions as well, unless the whole game was built around the idea that everyone could do everything, and in that case, why not have casters with mana bars, after all, they also can wear armor, swing swords, use bows, cast scrolls, and everything else, so they have only themselves to blame if they pigeonhole their playstyle to just casting, and it's their own fault if they don't want to melee or shoot arrows after they run out of mana.
DDO is a prime example of this kind of game, where you can be as diverse in your combat options as you want, they also have ranged & caster mobs, imagine that.
But none of this really pulls away from my point, that melee need engage the mob in a tradeoff of blows, which means any class or build that does not need to the same has a direct advantage over the melee build.
Because of that, there nothing wrong with giving them other limiters like Ammo and Mana limitations.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
For most MMOs targeting individual limbs would not be cool, it would just be too unwieldy for players to control their hit location targets in real time.
Is it really much different from AoC's left up, left down, center, right up, right down, combat strikes? Just change that to left arm, left leg, body, right arm, right leg. Done.
In a mob of 5 opponents, can you hit those specific targets for each mob while being attacked? I "need" tab targeting because I can never click on the correct pixel when faced with multiple targets, unless they are spread out
It would need a system where you select your target, select desired hit location, and select your ability, not necessarily in that order.
If you'd build selecting the body parts you target as some kind of combo system like AoC does, then it might offer fluid gameplay experience.
I'm not saying an MMO couldn't come with system to target body parts. It just needs to adjust rest of the pacing/combat system when you add another selection like that.
I'd like to chime in here, Age of Conan actually ALSO had a directional block system. I don't know how the stats are today, but you could mitigate 30% or more of damage by countering the combo directions (and it didn't interfere with your own offensive combos... you just doubled up on a directional block vs spreading blocks equally, which is the default)... at a cost (makes you more vulnerable to other attacks if you get it wrong).
The system had a massive learning curve because you needed to understand all other classes combos.
However, the animations could allow you to easily block the big finisher of an opponent.
There were godlike players that seemed to never die because of this (I think it worked in PvE too... especially Raids). Again, only elite players truly mastered it.
Age of Conan really tried to innovate MMORPG combat, I get it that it was a turn off for many, but they pushed the boundaries for 2008.
I have to add, the brutality finishes were awesome... would love to see more MMORPGS adopt this (for those who don't know, gruesome Mortal Kombat type finishers that were useful in practice... rogue classes could specc further into it).
...But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Player is normally the first to engage mob - not the other way around unless you screwed up. So melee player having to get to melee range doesn't matter that much since you can pretty much do it without getting attacked.
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
...But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Player is normally the first to engage mob - not the other way around unless you screwed up. So melee player having to get to melee range doesn't matter that much since you can pretty much do it without getting attacked.
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
Read this again slowly.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Again.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Now most games I have played, when you get within Agro range, the mobs will attack you. Not sure what games you play where you need to attack them first, and then once you agro a mob, you tend to agro the whole pack of them, this is often bad for a melee, because if it is a pack of ranged, they step back and shoot you, often when they step back, they ago other mobs, and this can ripple really nicely to deal to a swift death.
So again, I guess survival highly depends on the AI being... I wager... bad.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
...But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Player is normally the first to engage mob - not the other way around unless you screwed up. So melee player having to get to melee range doesn't matter that much since you can pretty much do it without getting attacked.
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
Read this again slowly.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Again.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Now most games I have played, when you get within Agro range, the mobs will attack you. Not sure what games you play where you need to attack them first, and then once you agro a mob, you tend to agro the whole pack of them, this is often bad for a melee, because if it is a pack of ranged, they step back and shoot you, often when they step back, they ago other mobs, and this can ripple really nicely to deal to a swift death.
So again, I guess survival highly depends on the AI being... I wager... bad.
Melee player never had that ability to begin with, so he has other means to survive instead.
Most games I have played, aggro range is much less than max. attack range of the mob so the mob loses much of his range before you even enter aggro range. Most games I have played also include some way for melee player to close that distance, or occasionally use line of sight to make ranged mob close the distance. So that in the end, because you decide which mob to attack you also have tools to mostly negate the range.
Getting extra adds because you've had to go to the mob, whereas a ranged player won't get any, is different issue. It's usually part of melee player's greater potential to screw up when closing range.
...But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Player is normally the first to engage mob - not the other way around unless you screwed up. So melee player having to get to melee range doesn't matter that much since you can pretty much do it without getting attacked.
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
Read this again slowly.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Again.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Now most games I have played, when you get within Agro range, the mobs will attack you. Not sure what games you play where you need to attack them first, and then once you agro a mob, you tend to agro the whole pack of them, this is often bad for a melee, because if it is a pack of ranged, they step back and shoot you, often when they step back, they ago other mobs, and this can ripple really nicely to deal to a swift death.
So again, I guess survival highly depends on the AI being... I wager... bad.
Melee player never had that ability to begin with, so he has other means to survive instead.
What other means?
Every game I have played, you either charge and take the hits, and hope you can kill them before they kill you, run away, or die.
However, as I said, in cases were there are blocks, or obstructions, like say a ranged mob in a jump puzzle, you are flat out SOL as a melee.
And nothing you have said, address that casters and ranged should not have restrictions placed upon them.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
...But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Player is normally the first to engage mob - not the other way around unless you screwed up. So melee player having to get to melee range doesn't matter that much since you can pretty much do it without getting attacked.
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
Read this again slowly.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Again.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Now most games I have played, when you get within Agro range, the mobs will attack you. Not sure what games you play where you need to attack them first, and then once you agro a mob, you tend to agro the whole pack of them, this is often bad for a melee, because if it is a pack of ranged, they step back and shoot you, often when they step back, they ago other mobs, and this can ripple really nicely to deal to a swift death.
So again, I guess survival highly depends on the AI being... I wager... bad.
Melee player never had that ability to begin with, so he has other means to survive instead.
What other means?
Every game I have played, you either charge and take the hits, and hope you can kill them before they kill you, run away, or die.
However, as I said, in cases were there are blocks, or obstructions, like say a ranged mob in a jump puzzle, you are flat out SOL as a melee.
And nothing you have said, address that casters and ranged should not have restrictions placed upon them.
Yeah I think your play is just real limited. In fact I would say most games have mana regen that is fast enough where mages can regen in battle, and there is barely any games where mages run out of spells during battle permanently. Saying MMO's cant do it, when they have been for decades is a strange comment. You really need to crawl out from under your rock and see what's out there.
Do you really believe no MMO's have figured out how to make melee balanced with casters unless casters run out of mana completely?
Melee can do just fine against casters even if mana is not limited at all. I have seen games where melee flat out destroy casters. Melee has so many tools to close on a caster that range isn't even a thing.
In regards to AI, all that needs to happen is have mechanics that hurt casters that don't move. There are games that do this just fine. Some games don't even limit mana or spells like ESO, how is this a problem in ESO?
Running out of mana permanently in a battle is just so 1980's. Very bad design.
I get you think melee has all these disadvantages, but I would say play a mage/healer in PVP as see how that works for you. I have played melee classes that I purposely target casters due to their light armor as free kills.
Its all up to the game to balance the classes properly is all. However having classes just stand around after they do a few attacks is just lazy and very unimaginative design.
...But keep in mind a ranged mob is also a harder challenge on a Melee player, as the melee is now getting hit while tying to advance on the Mob, this means, it does not balance out the game between ranged and melee, it just makes it harder on the Melee, as that limiter need to trade blows is there, just now the advantage is given to the ranged mob to kite the melee player, or hit the melee player across obstacles, like chasms, or being up on cliffs able to shoot down on players, and the melee having no clear access to them.
So this is not in any way a balancing act of melee vs ranged, as depending on the AI and game set up, it legit could just make the whole game exponentially harder on the melee player, to the point that they my as well not exist.
Player is normally the first to engage mob - not the other way around unless you screwed up. So melee player having to get to melee range doesn't matter that much since you can pretty much do it without getting attacked.
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
Read this again slowly.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Again.
A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
Now most games I have played, when you get within Agro range, the mobs will attack you. Not sure what games you play where you need to attack them first, and then once you agro a mob, you tend to agro the whole pack of them, this is often bad for a melee, because if it is a pack of ranged, they step back and shoot you, often when they step back, they ago other mobs, and this can ripple really nicely to deal to a swift death.
So again, I guess survival highly depends on the AI being... I wager... bad.
Melee player never had that ability to begin with, so he has other means to survive instead.
What other means?
Every game I have played, you either charge and take the hits, and hope you can kill them before they kill you, run away, or die.
However, as I said, in cases were there are blocks, or obstructions, like say a ranged mob in a jump puzzle, you are flat out SOL as a melee.
And nothing you have said, address that casters and ranged should not have restrictions placed upon them.
Yeah I think your play is just real limited. In fact I would say most games have mana regen that is fast enough where mages can regen in battle, and there is barely any games where mages run out of spells during battle permanently. Saying MMO's cant do it, when they have been for decades is a strange comment. You really need to crawl out from under your rock and see what's out there.
Do you really believe no MMO's have figured out how to make melee balanced with casters unless casters run out of mana completely?
The style needs to fit the game. You are confusing game designs at this point.
Case in point, in Games like GW2 Core, which are not resource management games, has everyone run on CD's, with only some special traits having a resource use, like dodge rolls, but even in those cases, they recover quickly, so they are still not resource management, also, in that game, everyone is designed to highly self sufficient, they can self heal, and heal out of combat very quickly. So, in essence they also have endless HP as well as endless mana, and endless everything else.
IMHO, GW2 core, was a damn near perfect example just tossing out any kind of resource limiting system, or role system, and in doing so, this allowed for a whole of just being able to group with anyone for a dungeon/fractal runs, never had to wait on a healer, or some special class to void fill, first 5 and go, and that was how things could roll.
Honestly, great mechanic, and game system, or it was till HoT, which fucked shit up, with bullshit like roles and crap, not sure how the classes fare these days, I heard some nerfs got tossed around that made people unhappy, but for the life of me I stopped giving a shit.
Moving on.
In a game like EQ1, everyone was very myopic, which is what built that interdependency, but, mana could be recovered, and players healed slowly out of combat, so it was not a resource management game, but it was a tactics game of having a well designed group, and knowing how to judge your encounters as you could become overwhelmed very quickly. However in EQ1, ranged, especially solo classes like Druid and Necro, were so much more OP than melee it was not even funny. So that is not a good game to show balance, but it was a good example of interdependency, as a Healer class lacked the ability to do sufficient DPS to solo before they ran out of mana, just like warrior lacked sufficient DPS to kill a mob before they ran out of HP, but combine them, and you could do some serious level grinding.
Then you have games like DDO, which are Resource Management Games. You don't recover HP, Mana, or anything else, outside specific rest shrines, which are set against the difficulty and length of the dungeon, so basically you needed to be good enough to survive long enough to get to each rest shrine, recover, and keep going.
So if you want limitless mana, the trade off would be, you do less damage and the melee gets self healing to allow for potentially limitless life, à la GW2 Core.
Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.
I dont think its a good idea to limit the options for game design with obviously extremely static and restrictive rules such as "spells should be free to cast".
Plus of course a realistic combat system would have warriors run out of the ability to fight, too. Many games already have this in some form of stamina system.
In reallife, you have this for sure, big time. In reallife, if a person is exhausted enough, they even might drop dead.
Comments
Once upon a time....
In a case like that, if I wuz a Warrior, I'd consider all of my options.
Do I have any grenade like items or other missile attacks?
Any Magical Scrolls? Heal Potions so I can make a run through the missile attacks?
Invis Potions? Shields, etc.?
Can I run from cover to cover to minimize damage to get to the MOB?
Am I able to dodge the attacks?
If some of that is available, but I just don't have it with me, then I'd retreat and return with what I need for such an occasion.
If not, I'd ask myself...
WTH am I doing trying to Solo in yet another Rock, Paper, Scissors, group based game?
Once upon a time....
I mean, for the most part, Mobs out number the players, so Imagine 50 ranged Archer / caster Mobs set up on a cliffside, or parapet wall, as 10 Melee Players try to get at them?
They might as well pack their bags and go play another game, in that situation, they simply won't have what it takes to win.
Anyone and everyone know this, so not even sure why this is even a discussion at this point.
In a lot of MMO's, no you don't. In fact some modern MMO's are so locked you can't even have tits on your barbarian, looking at all those gender locked MMO's.. yah you Lost Ark.
Anyway, a lot of MMO's do lock down classes to be very limited, depending on the MMO, you have Just Melee, where your class uses a great axe, and that is it, that is the only weapon you get, a mage casts spells, that is all they do, the staff is just for show.
So, to players that have to face this, kind system stacked against them, the real question becomes.. why are they even playing that MMO.
It's a good question, not one that the developers want their players to ask, but if they wanted to make the game suck huge ugly balls for everyone that liked to play melee, that would definitely be the way to make it happen.
In fact, that set up also tends to shred ranged players as well, because they suddenly have no front line of defense, IE: No Arrow Stoppers AKA: Tanks, because no one in their right mind would play a melee in a game like that.
So all the casters would instantly become pincushions as well, unless the whole game was built around the idea that everyone could do everything, and in that case, why not have casters with mana bars, after all, they also can wear armor, swing swords, use bows, cast scrolls, and everything else, so they have only themselves to blame if they pigeonhole their playstyle to just casting, and it's their own fault if they don't want to melee or shoot arrows after they run out of mana.
DDO is a prime example of this kind of game, where you can be as diverse in your combat options as you want, they also have ranged & caster mobs, imagine that.
But none of this really pulls away from my point, that melee need engage the mob in a tradeoff of blows, which means any class or build that does not need to the same has a direct advantage over the melee build.
Because of that, there nothing wrong with giving them other limiters like Ammo and Mana limitations.
The system had a massive learning curve because you needed to understand all other classes combos.
However, the animations could allow you to easily block the big finisher of an opponent.
There were godlike players that seemed to never die because of this (I think it worked in PvE too... especially Raids). Again, only elite players truly mastered it.
Age of Conan really tried to innovate MMORPG combat, I get it that it was a turn off for many, but they pushed the boundaries for 2008.
I have to add, the brutality finishes were awesome... would love to see more MMORPGS adopt this (for those who don't know, gruesome Mortal Kombat type finishers that were useful in practice... rogue classes could specc further into it).
After that melee player has advantage over ranged mobs: A ranged player engaging ranged mob loses his ability to survive by staying out of range. Whereas a melee player never had that ability to begin with.
The melee player has more opportunities to screw up getting to the range, but as long as melee doesn't make a mistake the advantage is his.
Again.
Now most games I have played, when you get within Agro range, the mobs will attack you. Not sure what games you play where you need to attack them first, and then once you agro a mob, you tend to agro the whole pack of them, this is often bad for a melee, because if it is a pack of ranged, they step back and shoot you, often when they step back, they ago other mobs, and this can ripple really nicely to deal to a swift death.
So again, I guess survival highly depends on the AI being... I wager... bad.
Most games I have played, aggro range is much less than max. attack range of the mob so the mob loses much of his range before you even enter aggro range. Most games I have played also include some way for melee player to close that distance, or occasionally use line of sight to make ranged mob close the distance. So that in the end, because you decide which mob to attack you also have tools to mostly negate the range.
Getting extra adds because you've had to go to the mob, whereas a ranged player won't get any, is different issue. It's usually part of melee player's greater potential to screw up when closing range.
Every game I have played, you either charge and take the hits, and hope you can kill them before they kill you, run away, or die.
However, as I said, in cases were there are blocks, or obstructions, like say a ranged mob in a jump puzzle, you are flat out SOL as a melee.
And nothing you have said, address that casters and ranged should not have restrictions placed upon them.
Do you really believe no MMO's have figured out how to make melee balanced with casters unless casters run out of mana completely?
Melee can do just fine against casters even if mana is not limited at all. I have seen games where melee flat out destroy casters. Melee has so many tools to close on a caster that range isn't even a thing.
In regards to AI, all that needs to happen is have mechanics that hurt casters that don't move. There are games that do this just fine. Some games don't even limit mana or spells like ESO, how is this a problem in ESO?
Running out of mana permanently in a battle is just so 1980's. Very bad design.
I get you think melee has all these disadvantages, but I would say play a mage/healer in PVP as see how that works for you. I have played melee classes that I purposely target casters due to their light armor as free kills.
Its all up to the game to balance the classes properly is all. However having classes just stand around after they do a few attacks is just lazy and very unimaginative design.
Case in point, in Games like GW2 Core, which are not resource management games, has everyone run on CD's, with only some special traits having a resource use, like dodge rolls, but even in those cases, they recover quickly, so they are still not resource management, also, in that game, everyone is designed to highly self sufficient, they can self heal, and heal out of combat very quickly. So, in essence they also have endless HP as well as endless mana, and endless everything else.
IMHO, GW2 core, was a damn near perfect example just tossing out any kind of resource limiting system, or role system, and in doing so, this allowed for a whole of just being able to group with anyone for a dungeon/fractal runs, never had to wait on a healer, or some special class to void fill, first 5 and go, and that was how things could roll.
Honestly, great mechanic, and game system, or it was till HoT, which fucked shit up, with bullshit like roles and crap, not sure how the classes fare these days, I heard some nerfs got tossed around that made people unhappy, but for the life of me I stopped giving a shit.
Moving on.
In a game like EQ1, everyone was very myopic, which is what built that interdependency, but, mana could be recovered, and players healed slowly out of combat, so it was not a resource management game, but it was a tactics game of having a well designed group, and knowing how to judge your encounters as you could become overwhelmed very quickly. However in EQ1, ranged, especially solo classes like Druid and Necro, were so much more OP than melee it was not even funny. So that is not a good game to show balance, but it was a good example of interdependency, as a Healer class lacked the ability to do sufficient DPS to solo before they ran out of mana, just like warrior lacked sufficient DPS to kill a mob before they ran out of HP, but combine them, and you could do some serious level grinding.
Then you have games like DDO, which are Resource Management Games. You don't recover HP, Mana, or anything else, outside specific rest shrines, which are set against the difficulty and length of the dungeon, so basically you needed to be good enough to survive long enough to get to each rest shrine, recover, and keep going.
So if you want limitless mana, the trade off would be, you do less damage and the melee gets self healing to allow for potentially limitless life, à la GW2 Core.