There is no recordable difference in where you stand. The damage is the same. The hit % is virtually the same. A few % tells me nothing other than that particular arrow decided to miss this time. As for damage it was zero difference. Where did you get this information?
The Archer class description specifically states archers are 'weak at close range'. I assume SE wrote that to let players know from the beginning what to expect. In addition there are several prominent references to archers' adherence to distanced attacks within the game itself, from NPCs at the archer's guild and within the class' storyline.
There's also the ever-present balance issue to consider. As a developer, would YOU allow a high burst ranged class to be as effective from melee? Wouldn't that recreate the same issues that we saw in FFXI? If an archer could be equally effective in melee and at range, why bring or play any other class? This has not been implicitly stated but from Square's past history of balance changes I think we can anticipate a similar mechanic in XIV.
I don't think enough testing has been done by anyone to fully prove either way but a simple test tells me enough. Any other pattern where I thought I was on to something faded shortly and never returned. I think simply the game isn't complex enough to have that as a feature.
So you ignore the stated, documented description of class focus, deferring instead to your own cursory tests - then go on to say that not enough testing has been done for a definitive answer? I'm confused, if adequate testing on the effects of range have not been done, from what basis are you making your argument?
I challenge you to provide data to substantiate your claim that range has no effect on archers. Until then, the class description - written and released by the company that developed the game - simply holds more weight.
Also please remember that we are dealing with a game that is rough and unfinished; its quite possible that the ranged mechanics that SE has told us are in effect are NOT as of yet - but that fact should be a clear-cut indication that what we are dealing with here are design issues and potentially broken game functions. Until XIV is in a more finished state I think it would be prudent to withhold judgement, rather than castigating everyone who plays the archer class as 'a ********* Edited, Nov 21st 2010 9:33pm by Timorith
I'll start by attacking your reading comprehension. It is terrible. You can't interpret SE's statements correctly or mine. Your knowledge of FFXI is again, terrible. You see, I can't melee. So there goes your whole argument on that portion of the issue. Where I stand because I cannot melee is irrelevant. I can't whip up free damage and quick TP standing in melee range hitting with my daggers AND do great ranged damage from the same spot. See where you are missing the bus yet? So you expect a similar change on a whole different issue that isn't related.. Maybe when I can swing up my dagger at melee and tear it up while Sluggoing the **** out of the mob it'll be an issue again. d(o_o)b
Weak at close range. You pretty much wear cloth and have a low health modifier. What else did you need to know? You're trying to read things that aren't there.This is pretty cookie cutter hunter, ranger, scout, etc description. If I didn't know better I'd think they stole it from a certain other game that isn't theirs(yeah, its pretty much the same. Bad SE) You aren't tank-like is all that says. You are definitely new to mmos or ranged classes if you can't spot that right off. lol
Here's my response to your challenge. You go test it. You'll see. Stand away from a mob. wail away on it. Write your damage and hits down. Run before it dies. Repeat 10 times only counting shots at range then again in melee range. You'll see some different numbers for accuracy but nothing wacked out or indicative of anything. Your damage... will be the same. I have done this several times. Why would I wish to do this for you as well? You want me to come over there and show you how I kill reds too? Play your own game.
You want to try to twist my admission that I could be proven wrong around to mean what it doesn't mean. See, if you READ it, it was simply my admission that i haven't repeated the test for thousands of iterations.( See the simple test tells me enough part. Yeah, go ahead and facepalm) See the word fully there? Yeah, that word means something. A full test would include an examination of every factor and a mathematical truth table for thousands and thousands of attempts against a very known test source. I am working on these things for myself. Not complete yet. See WoW damage math equations if you want to see how this works and why it's so difficult to prove down to an exact predictable number or extract the equation used to figure your damage and accuracy. That is what fully is. Noone has done it AND published it. I won't be the first. Trade secrets ^^
I have simply tested this and found it to be the way I said it was. How easy is that? I don't even need complex tests to prove the basics. If I'm off it's luck based by a small number or by a small number due to some abstract factor.
Does range matter with accuracy or damage? All i need is a yes or a no. The simple test gives me a no. Why should i waste more time trying to figure out to what degree of no? All further tests do is see if the answer changes. If it changes to yes in a pattern, guess what, it's complex test time. This is not the case so far.
I do indeed ignore descriptions of an incomplete (even moreso when it was written) game. I live in the world of what exists. I don't care if they turn me into a giant cactus that 1k needles down bosses next patch. It makes no difference now. I can wish for archer to be the ultimate stand at range all the time for a good purpose class all I want in one hand and crap in the other. Guess which one fills up first. You can continue living in the world of what isn't but stay away from me with your badness. On a related note.... I know you're new to mmos already but every games class descriptions are always messed up. If you played paladin in WOW at release you probably have the best example for those others reading.
If you are doing things that hurt your party for no good reason you earn the right to be called ******** Plain and simple. You are standing at range for the sake of standing at range and defending it to the end for nothing. You just need to bite the bullet and face it. There are times where standing at range may be a huge plus. Those times are sparse tho.
About your precious picture. It was made when the battles were large scale group on group. Do you see a lot of large group on group? Me either. It's not even the same game as when that picture was made. Here. I'll draw you a more realistic picture of how things ACTUALLY are.
I'm a Freakin crab.-------I'm getting heals----Magics.---------I'm a healer-----Bad archer---------Aggros
(=====O)<<---------------(o_O) (o_o) (O_O)-!$%$%#%^= = =--(^>^)----------- (X_X)-------- \"\(o,,,O)/"/
================================================ <<< Healing LOS XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX<< Death zone
U C wut I did thar? That's what everyone but you sees too.