Maybe as a penalty for being able to strike from long range while being immune from melee attacks in return?

Certainly a 'green' posted that as a reason for some other ranged attack being less powerful than an "in your face" one.

What I do not understand is heavy attack. If you use any other weapon, you automatically perform heavy attack when it is fully charged. When you are using bow, it will not automatically shoot. It makes impossible to weave heavy attacks the same way as you can with 2H weapon or dualwield.

Like I said, the DPS on the bow is lower (which is fine since its a range weapon) but the stamina use is absurd. DW and Two hand destroy it in DPS, and use far less stamina.

In a raid I generally have to use siphoning strikes to maintain DPS at range, while in melee range, I can weave heavy attacks with rapid strikes and basically never run dry.

Just thought it was odd that something which takes no stamina to perform in real life (i know, its a game) takes the most in the fantasy world

The npc's that use bows are grandmaster's or something. But the player kind of suck with them. I switched my second weapon to 2h instead.

christophercosb16_ESO wrote: »

psufan5 wrote: »

Like I said, the DPS on the bow is lower (which is fine since its a range weapon) but the stamina use is absurd. DW and Two hand destroy it in DPS, and use far less stamina.

In a raid I generally have to use siphoning strikes to maintain DPS at range, while in melee range, I can weave heavy attacks with rapid strikes and basically never run dry.

Just thought it was odd that something which takes no stamina to perform in real life (i know, its a game) takes the most in the fantasy world

Yeah, of course a melee weapon is going to do more damage than a bow, how is this even a concern?
Or would you prefer being able to crush any opponent at range as a melee user would, effectively negating the use of any sword, board, or other melee focused equipment

This ideology baffles me. A melee DD should do more base damage than a range but not more dps. The game mechanics should eventually balance out the two dps. In other words a melee should have more damage than a range but have to move and dodge more effectively reducing dps to balance to the dps of what a range DD (who can stand in one spot more often) with less damage can do.

So yes, a 2h should be more damage than bow, but the avg dps between the two should be balanced. No weapon type should end with more dps than another. This however is not the case atm and 2h dps is much much higher than everything else due to WB. Nor do the mechanics force a good melee player to move or dodge everything with a good healer in the group. So the "melee takes more risk and should have more damage" argument is faulty at best. Its simply not balanced. WB and melee damage should be toned back as long as the game mechanics can be largely ignored.

Cuyler wrote: »

christophercosb16_ESO wrote: »

psufan5 wrote: »

Like I said, the DPS on the bow is lower (which is fine since its a range weapon) but the stamina use is absurd. DW and Two hand destroy it in DPS, and use far less stamina.

In a raid I generally have to use siphoning strikes to maintain DPS at range, while in melee range, I can weave heavy attacks with rapid strikes and basically never run dry.

Just thought it was odd that something which takes no stamina to perform in real life (i know, its a game) takes the most in the fantasy world

Yeah, of course a melee weapon is going to do more damage than a bow, how is this even a concern?
Or would you prefer being able to crush any opponent at range as a melee user would, effectively negating the use of any sword, board, or other melee focused equipment

This ideology baffles me. A melee DD should do more base damage than a range but not more dps. The game mechanics should eventually balance out the two dps. In other words a melee should have more damage than a range but have to move and dodge more effectively reducing dps to balance to the dps of what a range DD (who can stand in one spot more often) with less damage can do.

So yes, a 2h should be more damage than bow, but the avg dps between the two should be balanced. No weapon type should end with more dps than another.

Disagree. Melee should have more DPS because they have to be in range of attacker, thus also have to concern themselves with PBAoE and their opponents Melee attacks. Ranged DPS doesnt have to worry about this, and dont have to stop DPSing just to block/heal/reposition, etc.

Risk vs Reward. Ranged DPS should always have the moderate to high STEADY output, whereas Melee should have higher base but be more choppy/bursty in nature. In this way balance is achieved, by the melee damage being higher from the outset to counter the necessary other elements ranged dps doesnt have to deal with.

I would say it strongly depends on your class and mixture of weapon & class abilities.
I'm using bow on my Nightblade with Reaper's Mark applied and using few specific abilities in proper way I can
pull 7-8k on single target no problem.
That's a really good point about doing less damage bcs your're long range 'safe' dps.
Problem with bow is mostly from player's side. They don't read all passive skills that indicate clearly:
in short: to use bow effectively use it from MAXIMUM RANGE
That's the trick really. Applying all DoTs and debuffs on targets while keeping up the proper rotation gives decent results.
But really Bow Marksman shouldn't focus only on single target dps.
Since you're the one detached from the fight and you've got perfect overview on spawning adds etc use it to interrupt and fast kill casters/healers and in general HELP your team by taking huge part in crowd control.
Bow dps can with ease kite groups of adds, mark critical targets and put them down when needed.
Reduce target's armor/spell resistance, poison, root in place, gather, aoe, kite. It's all up to you how much finesse you will put into your role as bow dps

psufan5 wrote: »

Why does the bow do less damage than all of the other stamina based weapons (save maybe sword and board), but uses far more stamina? Trying to wrap my head around how nocking a bow would drain my stamina more than swinging a 2 handed sword with an impact distance of 12 feet (in this game).

Not to mention you can't proc the ravager set with the bow, you need to use caltrops or something similar to do so...

If the damage of the bow isn't going to be tuned upward, maybe looking into the stamina use would be nice?

You would be surprised how much IRL holding the weight of a bow outstretched and holding back at full draw takes out of you.

Even more strength/stamina/endurance to hold steady, aim accurately, and then repeat multiple times in succession. Tighter the bow is strung, harder it hits, but more it takes out of you.

In Swordplay, much of the motion and damage is maintained through momentum and constant motion of the weapon. You are not holding the greatsword at full arm's length to aim your next attack.

Realize this aren't IRL scenarios, but that should offer some insight as to why. The pro's (IRL) make it look a lot easier than it actually is.

I do agree that the reach of certain weapons is a bit ridiculous.


Edit: Regarding Acid Spray, now nock 5 arrows at once and launch them...suspect it will seem less unusual that it takes so much Stamina to do so.

Rylana wrote: »

Cuyler wrote: »

christophercosb16_ESO wrote: »

psufan5 wrote: »

Like I said, the DPS on the bow is lower (which is fine since its a range weapon) but the stamina use is absurd. DW and Two hand destroy it in DPS, and use far less stamina.

In a raid I generally have to use siphoning strikes to maintain DPS at range, while in melee range, I can weave heavy attacks with rapid strikes and basically never run dry.

Just thought it was odd that something which takes no stamina to perform in real life (i know, its a game) takes the most in the fantasy world

Yeah, of course a melee weapon is going to do more damage than a bow, how is this even a concern?
Or would you prefer being able to crush any opponent at range as a melee user would, effectively negating the use of any sword, board, or other melee focused equipment

This ideology baffles me. A melee DD should do more base damage than a range but not more dps. The game mechanics should eventually balance out the two dps. In other words a melee should have more damage than a range but have to move and dodge more effectively reducing dps to balance to the dps of what a range DD (who can stand in one spot more often) with less damage can do.

So yes, a 2h should be more damage than bow, but the avg dps between the two should be balanced. No weapon type should end with more dps than another.

Disagree. Melee should have more DPS because they have to be in range of attacker, thus also have to concern themselves with PBAoE and their opponents Melee attacks. Ranged DPS doesnt have to worry about this, and dont have to stop DPSing just to block/heal/reposition, etc.

Risk vs Reward. Ranged DPS should always have the moderate to high STEADY output, whereas Melee should have higher base but be more choppy/bursty in nature. In this way balance is achieved, by the melee damage being higher from the outset to counter the necessary other elements ranged dps doesnt have to deal with.

First off, what I've bolded here is basically agreeing with what I said so I'm not sure if maybe I'm misunderstanding you or you've misinterpreted my statement.

Let me start by separating "damage" and "dps" for the sake of clarity.
damage - the actual tooltip # of damage
dps - the avg amount of damage done in a fight.

Having one build/weapon/role/class output more dps than other is not "balance" no matter what your doing.

Damage on the other hand, as you've stated above and I agree, should be higher for melee with more of a "burst" nature. Because of the same reasons you've quoted (block, dodge, aoe). I think we agree here.

At the end of the fight however the dps of both should be balanced.

Example:
Melee - 3k 2h tooltip damage
dps 15k

Range - 1k Staff tooltip damage
dps 15k

Edit: Now with that said, in a short fight (or one with limited mechanics) with a high chance for burst damage, you'll should see the melee dps be higher. But not in every fight.

Gix wrote: »

Anyone remotely experienced with bows will tell you that it requires a good amount of strength to be able to draw an arrow and hold it long enough to aim. This is especially true for long bows (which are practically small artillery).

It is a warrior's weapon after all.

History has taught us that there are some ancient "skirmisher" techniques that are super effective and quick on the reload but, as far as I can tell, there's no data suggesting that it's any less demanding than common techniques.

Unless, that is, we're talking about compound bows...

psufan5 wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

psufan5 wrote: »

Why does the bow do less damage than all of the other stamina based weapons (save maybe sword and board), but uses far more stamina? Trying to wrap my head around how nocking a bow would drain my stamina more than swinging a 2 handed sword with an impact distance of 12 feet (in this game).

Not to mention you can't proc the ravager set with the bow, you need to use caltrops or something similar to do so...

If the damage of the bow isn't going to be tuned upward, maybe looking into the stamina use would be nice?

You would be surprised how much IRL holding the weight of a bow outstretched and holding back at full draw takes out of you.

Even more strength/stamina/endurance to hold steady, aim accurately, and then repeat multiple times in succession. Tighter the bow is strung, harder it hits, but more it takes out of you.

In Swordplay, much of the motion and damage is maintained through momentum and constant motion of the weapon. You are not holding the greatsword at full arm's length to aim your next attack.

Realize this aren't IRL scenarios, but that should offer some insight as to why. The pro's (IRL) make it look a lot easier than it actually is.

I do agree that the reach of certain weapons is a bit ridiculous.

This would be like saying an olympic archer needs to be in relative shape to that of a professional boxer. In essence, a DW user is much like a boxer. The stamina required for a bow to remain stable and properly aimed is in no way as strenuous as attacking furiously with 2 weapons.

You should try it yourself instead of speculating. DW is a very impractical combat style and Florentine is definitely not like boxing.

Impractical has nothing to do with it. I have done archery and bow hunting. I was never done saying "Wow, I am EXHAUSTED". No, im not good at it either.

Robbmrp wrote: »

If Bows were made to cost the least amount of Stamina while doing the most damage then EVERYONE would be using them. Even if the damage was exactly the same for a bow vs 2h, and the bow takes less stamina, would swing most people to the bow. No one would be Sword and Boarding or using melee weapons of any kind. People are always trying to find the best DPS with little resource costs so they can maintain x amount of consistent damage.

The ratio could be off tho, if the stamina costs are say 2:1 for the Bow vs Melee. I could see 1.3:1 but anything higher than that should really be looked at imo.

They don't do the most DPS, and currently, they take a TON of stamina. Acid spray for example.

psufan5 wrote: »

Why does the bow do less damage than all of the other stamina based weapons (save maybe sword and board), but uses far more stamina? Trying to wrap my head around how nocking a bow would drain my stamina more than swinging a 2 handed sword with an impact distance of 12 feet (in this game).

Not to mention you can't proc the ravager set with the bow, you need to use caltrops or something similar to do so...

If the damage of the bow isn't going to be tuned upward, maybe looking into the stamina use would be nice?

Longest range with the highest damage? If anything, bow needs a nerf... and I'm a bow user.