Cataclysm Rated BGs... Ranged vs. Melee

There's another great thread going on about refining a great melee team comp for Cataclysm. First and foremost, do people feel that melee teams are superior to ranged teams for BG encounters (on the whole)?

I know a lot of us that are running melee teams (esp. DK+4xRet) have also run multi shammies or other ranged teams. If you're actively playing both right now, I'd love your feedback and speculation on what will work best for rated BGs in Cataclysm.

I have my own opinion, but it is admittedly based off an unfair comparison between my nicely geared melee team and my poor old shamans who dinged 80 and then got shelved as I focused on raiding. I'm gearing them up now with arena/honor points, but they are WAY behind and the comparison will be unfair for quite some time.

As a sideline, one thing I will admit is that I've always thought quad-boxing was better than a full five-box setup for the smaller BGs. 4xShamans was always enough for me to take or defend an AB node, and it left more room on the team for other people to cover other areas. I also liked that I could drag a guildie along and queue as a party for some extra fun. (I rarely PvPed with my tank in the mix, just wasn't needed).

Anyhow, ranged or melee for serious rated BGs in Cataclysm?

In general i prefer ranged, since ranged increases your kill radius by 30 yards. As simple as that. examples: Flagcarriers, defending a node and being able to kill people before they come close. Kill people in towers from lower ground etc.

BUT. a melee swarming around my shaman can really be annoying, which a melee time counters very well, since you can just spam IWT and finish them off :)

I like the idea of being able to do DPS at range, but my opinion is that it's just far too easy for people to close the distance gap on you. So many classes have skills that will allow them to quickly swarm you, and everyone has the ability to ride a mount into your team.

Most ranged also has to be somewhat stationary to do DPS, and shamans are even more rooted in place by the need to be in range of totems. I think the lack of mobility plus the totem farm spam make the team vulnerable to people wanting to just gang up and tear you apart. I feel far more mobile and deadly on the melee team... plenty of people will just turn tail and run when they see me coming. That never seemed to happen with the shamans.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boylston

I like the idea of being able to do DPS at range, but my opinion is that it's just far too easy for people to close the distance gap on you. So many classes have skills that will allow them to quickly swarm you, and everyone has the ability to ride a mount into your team.

Most ranged also has to be somewhat stationary to do DPS, and shamans are even more rooted in place by the need to be in range of totems. I think the lack of mobility plus the totem farm spam make the team vulnerable to people wanting to just gang up and tear you apart. I feel far more mobile and deadly on the melee team... plenty of people will just turn tail and run when they see me coming. That never seemed to happen with the shamans.

---

You got a point on the mobilty thing, i have yet to level a melee team. I'm trying to work on it but i hate leveling/boosting....

As I posted in the other thread I think melee have the edge, no questions. Ranged have a larger threat bubble once you breach it and you're in melee with them they're blowing cooldowns and GCD's defensively rather than being on the offensive. So, the caster team gets a few seconds of free casts before melee are on them.

On the other side of the house the melee team just mounts on top of you and then violates you while you try and escape.

well we have to wait for more cata infos.

melee works fine in arena and vs other melee players,
but if you face a lot of range enemies you are doomed.

the old shm combo works wonders in bgs!

(popping 4 elements and doing a thunderstorm rota is a real kicker ;-)


.

Well lets see with Shaman x4 boxer vs melee x5 boxer:

The melee run in while the casters open up (granted, probly only one cast will get off).

Melee start chewing- 1st TSTORM!!

Melee re-gather, shaman get another 2 casts off;

Fire nova+ TSTORM!!!!! and now melee is also hindered by earthbind

Melee regather (slower) while shaman cast

fire nova+tstorm!!!!

Me thinks the dk+4ret or 5 pally teams would just get their butt kicked by 4 shaman teams

How many will get their pvp primarily from arena, and how many from battlegrounds?

Arena is a straight 5 vs 5.
Battlegrounds are mutable, with 5 vs 2, 5 vs 5, 5 vs 11, etc.

Sure we can compare one team vs another, in a straight 5 vs 5.
Which is more akin to arena.
Ideally, a team would be good at that level of play.

But how does each team do, at say Blacksmith in Arathi defending (or assaulting) against 10 random players as a 5-man unit without support from the rest of the BG?
Which composition is better in that situation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrothelMeister

Well lets see with Shaman x4 boxer vs melee x5 boxer:

The melee run in while the casters open up (granted, probly only one cast will get off).

Melee start chewing- 1st TSTORM!!

Melee re-gather, shaman get another 2 casts off;

Fire nova+ TSTORM!!!!! and now melee is also hindered by earthbind

Melee regather (slower) while shaman cast

fire nova+tstorm!!!!

Me thinks the dk+4ret or 5 pally teams would just get their butt kicked by 4 shaman teams

---

ORRR.... melee teams mounts and runs in, bubbles as lava burst cast goes off, takes no damage for 10 seconds and pwns the shit out of your team. Oh wait, then they rotate silences for the next 4 or 5 seconds while you stand there getting beat to death, or the dk drops the spell shield and pwns your ass while you do no damage and watch absorb spam, or they rotate divine sacrifices and you barely manage to kill 1 melee after they kill 3 or 4 of yours.

I just think unless your hiding behind a tree or in a bush casting and not readily seen found, your gonna get whack a moled.

regardless, i'll be playing both my teams and it'll be a blast to see how things turnout!

I had a boxer friend with a pally team not be able to do half the damage done by the shammy team. yeah, not scientific, but still. honestly, one of your melee team members will be dead by the time they close the gap imo, 10 sec? 4box chain heal cheal,eb totem your mom, gw run away, KEYBOARD TURN, another instant kill your team. at this point, you don't have the dps vs pally heal to kill anything red to you arena.

even if I am smoking crack arena side since my arena skillz aren't there, you can't overlook what the ranged shammy team will do to you while you are wailing on some poor soul in the bg's Then again, I have always been a lover of "killed from afar"

18000 armor + shield + 1200 res + ts in stun + 30% less dmg in stun/silence + etc
shms do ok against melees.

if i face a lot of enemies (10+) the biggest problems are antiheal debuffs
and the unbelievable HIGH range-aoe and other aoe crap some classes put out!!

My 2 cents come from 722 AV games. It's the only pvp i've done so far (next so wg), and I usually come out on top. Moreover so far I've done this in pve gear (finally finished my pvp suit today) with a pally tank / 3 ele + 1 rest shaman.

- most annoying class: priest & rogue
- melee class that can kill my team very fast: warrior
- ranged class that can kill my team very fast: mage & boomkin. When I'm facing a pack of targets, i find it hard to spot the mage, whereas a boomkin is rather easy to spot.
- annoying to some extend: deathgrip.
- classes i'm happy to take on: shaman, rets, dk's, hunters, locks

The only times i've had trouble was when i met a high arena rated, premade german group (the germans have their own queue on our bg), who would come zerg me and basically gave me a ticket to a graveyard. But against 90% of the teams i've met, i never really have had trouble.

When i have my 5th shaman up, and with the announced changes for cata (casting on the run, AV reduced to 25 players per team) and instant ghost wolf, thunderstorm on different keys and talented earthbind, ... i really don't forsee much trouble. For me the key is to always have a healer, that makes such a big difference.

There are 3 dk/rets boxers i've met in my bg so far. And usually i can heal through anything and i'm able to take them out with max 1-2 losses myself. A melee team really needs to surprise me like the rogues can do.

I'm really looking forward to play the rated bg's with 5 shammies.

Sorry I didn't read all of the thread, but this is my opinion on the matter...

-Melee teams are best in close combat like inside of buildings and towers and killing while moving.
-Ranged are best out in the open or places where you can remain stationary while constanly nuking the crap out of the opponents.

Of course that doesn't mean that either team couldn't do well in either enviroment, just that imo that is where they do their best at.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrothelMeister

Well lets see with Shaman x4 boxer vs melee x5 boxer:

The melee run in while the casters open up (granted, probly only one cast will get off).

Melee start chewing- 1st TSTORM!!

Melee re-gather, shaman get another 2 casts off;

Fire nova+ TSTORM!!!!! and now melee is also hindered by earthbind

Melee regather (slower) while shaman cast

fire nova+tstorm!!!!

Me thinks the dk+4ret or 5 pally teams would just get their butt kicked by 4 shaman teams

---

Paladins run in bubbled and take no damage, then chain arcane scream thing(silence) and kill shamans while they stand there.
FIXED