Why GGG hate melee?

Diablo 3 fixed this problem by giving melee an inherit damage reduction. D4 melee is far nicer as well.
GGG could easily fix melee, mostly warrior, but doing the same thing and as someone else suggested adding a tag to ensure the incomming damage reduction is only truned on when using actual melee skills normally.

Another idea is to actually make armor not suck and very small bits of damage redection in melee based nodes in the passive tree. So monks and warriors that get +melee damage are given +damage reduction. You can full on code it in someway so the melee are properly tanky in melee without ranged being able to take advantage of it.

Otherwise just remove the melee classes. Why even bother putting in time and effort for creation and balance for meleee if you don't want them to be fun, good or on par with ranged.

"

SonicTMP#5394 wrote:

Another idea is to actually make armor not suck and very small bits of damage redection in melee based nodes in the passive tree. So monks and warriors that get +melee damage are given +damage reduction. You can full on code it in someway so the melee are properly tanky in melee without ranged being able to take advantage of it.

Otherwise just remove the melee classes. Why even bother putting in time and effort for creation and balance for meleee if you don't want them to be fun, good or on par with ranged.

Something should be done with the melee foundation for sure. I've only played Monk and I'm still somewhat enjoying my discovery progression and utilizing certain unique items well but Monk is actually a good class...because its simply powerful...at range! Empowered Staff buff is just perma range spam (your Monk is now playing Ranger ye!) and mostly all the main damage and cc skills from Monk are more or less nukes, its a "mage" essentially, without the super mass projectile spamming.

I really do feel the games foundation is great and there's obviously patching that will improve things but I honestly think GGG have hard failed to solidify any kind of difference between melee and ranged and I'm actually scared of them focusing on many more additional classes when there's no clear mechanical melee, ranged or even support differences (you know...the supportive passives and uniques for "team play").

Because they are completely Out of Touch with the Community... Another overhyped Game which cannot deliver Devs promises.
How can you screw Up such an Essential Stat Like Armor?
If Armor shows 50% physical DMG reduction in The tooltip it should give me 50% DMG reduction... And Not a completely screwed Up Formular nobody understands at all...

It all comes from the stupidity of the shared passive and gems. You can't give the damage reduction melee needs or other buffs, because ranged will also try to take it. If you give it to melee ascendancies, then melee ascendancies will become better ranged characters as well and people will just use ranged on them.

You get very little value out of all of these shared things between classes but many downsides.

+1, Agreed overall for now. Also, again, as aforementioned, they have a past history track record -- and no, I don't believe that's the case ("melee < ranged" for decade+ perhaps).

To re-iterate (TLDR): post-interview, (personally) my current (until more data arrives from the community/YT/forums/Reddit/etc) bet will side on past history, i.e. "melee < ranged" and "zoom zoom 1-shot" -- so, no real changes from PoE1, essentially (with the main outlier of the campaign for the 1st ~60 lvls or so...lol --- and new melee classes like Druid/Templar/Marauder...lol [bye Warrior...lol {I don't count Monk...lol -- nor minion/Witch...lol}]) -- and timing-wise, I'll just say 2026+ (so, guessing 1 more year of gamedev until full Release post-this EA).

(Post this interview w/ the 2 GGG reps, I just decided to bite the bullet and re-rolled Monk [finally?] for SSF [felt the additional handicap of SSF would help Balance it out...lol. {Merc lvl ~64, Witch lvl 21, Warrior lvl 66 -- considering trying out the Quarterstaff for my Merc -- Re-spec Again...lol -- and yes, will still be on the lookout for future Druid/Templar/Marauder...lol}])

"

Acemac79#4053 wrote:

Its not just GGG most ARPGs struggle with this. if they make the melee classes like they should be they become insanely OP and everyone complains.

Yet a Near 30 year old game D II got it right....

"

b_ko#7756 wrote:

It all comes from the stupidity of the shared passive and gems. You can't give the damage reduction melee needs or other buffs, because ranged will also try to take it. If you give it to melee ascendancies, then melee ascendancies will become better ranged characters as well and people will just use ranged on them.

You get very little value out of all of these shared things between classes but many downsides.

And, ranged can already use everything we have and do better (seriously you can scale prog harder with warrior ascendancies than you can melee).

Because after years of the forums saying "Stop adding melee and phys tags to ranged" They still do it.

When DM said, "So, you agree melee has the worst of everything", and they had to agree, that said a lot about what GGG thinks of the most popular and most played arch type in ARPG's (when close to being balanced).

"

lupasvasile#5385 wrote:

It's more like they do not know how to balance it. From a logical pov, ranged (magic included) will always be superior, and for obvious reasons.

To balance that with melee you'd need to give them certain buffs to compensate; here comes the problem: this being POE and the insane amount of options you can make, those buffs can also be used by the ranged classes, making them even more strong; widening the gap even more.

So, to play it safe, they prefer to keep melee under powered, because ranged is already OP. And if they nerf ranged to close the gap, people cry like toddlers.
I see no solution yet.

They need something to tie tankyness or damage with RANGE.

Some keystone where you gain tankyness/dmg but do less damage to enemies that aren't like... 4m near you.

Range is the key to balance this.

"

Gordyne#2944 wrote:

"

lupasvasile#5385 wrote:

It's more like they do not know how to balance it. From a logical pov, ranged (magic included) will always be superior, and for obvious reasons.

To balance that with melee you'd need to give them certain buffs to compensate; here comes the problem: this being POE and the insane amount of options you can make, those buffs can also be used by the ranged classes, making them even more strong; widening the gap even more.

So, to play it safe, they prefer to keep melee under powered, because ranged is already OP. And if they nerf ranged to close the gap, people cry like toddlers.
I see no solution yet.

They need something to tie tankyness or damage with RANGE.

Some keystone where you gain tankyness/dmg but do less damage to enemies that aren't like... 4m near you.

Range is the key to balance this.

Keep in mind this would completely gut skills like Sunder and Stampede AE builds. I don't think that's a solution, simply adjusting defensive values is a step forward.

I think for mace skills GGG should look at what Lost Ark has made for Destroyer. That Class is also a hard and slow hitting type, so whenever you use a skill you gain an temporary shield, that absorves a good chunck of damage and normally makes you immune to a lots of cc (not all). I played the class and i think it was great. Whenever you put a class that have to be almost 2sec in one place to use a skill and you dont offer any protection, you are Dead.