Well, there is the old saying of bringing a knife to a gunfight to consider. I think everyone here is just craving some consistency. D.Bash hasn't really worked properly in its truly intended use since implementation, and the hit detection makes melee frustrating.
If you don't want to see melee around the W40k universe, I suggest to try PlanetSide 2. There's a knife for the gunfight, but it's not quite useful, unless you dedicate yourself to it. About EC, if you want the ranged specialists to be invulnerable in CQC, or just as strong as melee specialists with the same assets.... I guess no one will play melee. I mean, if I used covers, flancking and dodging skills (for grenades and plasma balloons) to get up to you, if I finally reach you, I may want a greater reward than being gunned with a long range weapon in CQC because you can fire during and while recovering from a dodgeroll and also parry and deflect each and every of my attacks, which you can basically do if you're good enough at melee. (You didn't ask for fireing during a dodgeroll, but you asked for the faster recovery with primary weapon.)
Agreed, I think Dbash is a cool idea but it almost never works as intended. It doesn't -counter- as the enemy is always able to evade the follow up kick. It just protects you from a fast attack, only to keep you having to dbash again and again to keep protecting yourself. It never seems to give the "opening" it's meant to.
Actually, all I ever really asked for was a functional D.Bash that would show a clear winner in the RPS system. I don't remember saying I wanted ranged to be invulnerable in melee nor did I mention a faster recovery for the roll or the primary weapon. This whole tactical/shooting in melee debate came after I mentioned my personal playstyle as it plays to the strengths of tacticals in EC (and I just see it as more efficient).
The bash is never meant to be spammed. It's not meant to be spammed. It's meant to be used along with rolling, dropping grenades at your feet, fleeing/kiting/vaulting/climbing to help create space and buy time for the ranged class vs a Melee class. Bash is ONLY meant to be used versus an opponent that is spamming fast attacks and that's it. It's one of many tools in our arsenal, not the "go to" option upon which all Melee combat revolves around. It's meant to buy a Tactical fighting a Melee opponent a second or two of time versus a fast attack spammer, possibly creating an opening for a counter attack while they look for an out or until their opponent makes a mistake and they can capitalize, or until an ally shows up. It should never be an "I win" button. But none of that matters if it doesn't work as its intended to work.
Ok, now think your thoughts to their conclusion. If DBash is the trump card for Tacticals then skilled Assaults will no longer use fast attack. They know that any Tactical will be always trying to land that strike, the only strike that gives them a chance. Thus we have effectively eliminated a third of the RPS system, and I am sure I don't have to tell you that a Rock-Paper system won't work. Who will ever choose Rock? In the End Assaults will only use Bash and Heavy attack, either they'll bash your bash into the ground with Force Tier or deal Heavy Damage by interrupting your bash with a Heavy Strike. Losing melee will become simply not knowing the system instead of skill based, new Assaults will get Bashed and gunned down and complain Melee is Underpowered while new Tacticals will not understand Bash is their trump and will complain Melee is Overpowered. Those who know the system will know an Assault will always beat a tactical. It will be a system where using the other attacks is like a cruel joke on the uninitiated... fuck that. We had Stunning Bash before, not sure why you are claiming "its never worked". Also the description of Tactical states "Adaptable Ranged", which is exactly what I said. Balanced warriors, adaptable, can fight melee and ranged equally. But certainly not "Dedicated Melee" like an Assault. "Are they really supposed to do the Melee Waltz until their inevitable death?" Thats exactly my point, if Tacticals do the Melee Waltz and RPS works then it will not be an inevitable death. Skill suddenly matters instead of kit/trump. This is why I suggest repurposing the Bash into the Parry/Riposte that CAN be spammed, is faster and hits harder. Thus giving us a true Rock Paper Scissors. We are almost there right now, just needs that speed and damage. You are completely stating what YOU think and not what is intended. Certainly it was intended in the beginning, but that system was proven to not work so well, hasn't it? You said it worked perfectly Patch 16 yet LOTS of people complained, why?
But that's exactly what we have (or what we are supposed to have), and I still see a ton of light attacks being used. In fact, I only see strong attacks from the very experienced players. It's also a bit disingenuous to completely discredit everything else in the melee system. The bash does not work from behind anymore so baiting a bash and using the evade attack is certainly still one of many options. It's not as fool-proof as you'd think. It has never worked 100%. If it did, we'd have something to point toward. Remember when: the bash didn't affect jump assaults; the bash drained all stamina on hit; the bash was not properly broken by heavy attacks; the bash's kick hitbox was too short so it did not connect; and a bash beat another bash in the RPS system? There have been plenty of problems since its inception. Finding the sweet spot is certainly hard. I'd totally be down for trying the bash as a riposte. We just differ in opinion on the effects of the kick.
Bash should lose vs strong attacks(not tie, not mitigate damage) and should beat fast attacks, or am I missing something? Am I reading [Bash > Strong Attack] wrong in the Melee Combat Rules? Or does it say Bash = Strong Attack? IF it's supposed to work another way, please feel free to enlighten the unwashed masses . Bash hasn't worked so well... because the bash hasn't EVER worked as intended except for about 1 patch, patch 16. The bash at that point failed vs strong attacks as it's intended and was punished accordingly, and it worked vs Fast attacks(most of the time, NOT all of the time). The problem back then, which you certainly know and certainly have to recall, was that a successful bash back then(patch 16) was the very definition of an "I win" button because it stunned so long, which led to another stun, and another, and another until death for the person that was on the receiving end of the bash. That's why nobody was happy with the bash back then because it meant "I win". There's also the fact that occasionally fast attack spam got by the bash, but it's not nearly as prevalent as we see in patch 20. Since then the bash has either failed versus fast attacks regularly, or it gave 100% invulnerability versus both Strong and Fast attacks. Lately the bash vs strong attack have been clanging, which is basically a tie. As of patch 20 hotfix one the bash works about 25% of the time vs fast attacks, and seems to sometimes tie, sometimes clang vs strong attacks. Ideally a successful bash vs a fast attack gives the person executing the bash enough time to either roll away, or counterattack, and that's it. Not time to roll away, aim, and fire a 10 round burst. That's to much. A bash stagger than long will also result in a melee class bashing, then having time to wind up a Strong attack while you stand there stunned. That's too long. I think we'd all be best served by the Bash being resoundingly defeated by strong attacks, causing A stagger that gives the STrong attack player just enough time to have the initiative on the very next action. The losing player on the Bash side should receive full damage, but should NOT be able to get the jump on the person executing the Strong attack because the strong attack animation is still playing out. I've seen that happen time and time and time again the last few weeks when I've actually tried to play on Live. I execute a Strong attack vs a bash spammer, IF i actually "clang" vs the bash or interrupt the bash, my opponent is already rolling away or counterattacking before my strong attack animation winds down and I am starting a follow up action. That's totally broken. The loser of the Strong Attack(fast attack) vs Bash(loser) should NOT be able to beat the winner to the next punch, after losing that roll, so a short stagger is warranted. NOT long enough to allow a follow up Strong attack by the winner, but NOT so short that the loser can counterattack or start shooting prior to the winner even finishing the Strong attack animation. Bash vs fast attack should work in the same way IMO. The basher(winner) interrupts and staggers the loser(fast attack) just long enough so the loser doesn't have the upper hand on the next action. Not long enough for the Basher to wind up a haymaker and land it, but long enough to allow the basher to roll away, run away, or counterattack via fast attack.
Yes and no. Currently the bash has the interrupt but no stun, and thats bad, because it does nothing to win victory. Whether it gets a stun or more damage/speed it will go back to being progress to winning the duel. I am saying that the Bash dealing [more] damage and hitting faster is superior in every way to a Stun. Thats really all I am saying. For all the reasons I listed above. As far as discrediting the rest of the melee system, yes the Bash doesn't work from behind but its easy enough to spin your character around to bash them where they dodged to, even easier if you are locked on. And like I said, I want to make Bash faster. But truly roll-strikes and jink-strikes are a problem overall, but not nearly as much as Death from Above. Since you brought it up, stamina/fuel regen is way too fast. Aye, fair enough. But the bash beating bash one was damn close. Yes that is the primary difference, and I still think not stunning is superior to stunning.
I never said a damn thing about bash not losing against strong attack. Where the hell did you get that from? Read the post I quoted again... Edit: You heavily edited your post... re-reading.
