[dev1032] PUG skills singled out.

[Arcell]

I've played Pugilist as well as Archer, although not all the way to 50, so I may not understand the full extent of the problem. But while archers do seem like premium damage dealers, they can't take a hit worth a darn. At least Pugilists have evasive abilities and strong natural health bars. They could potentially be great at evasion tanking with the right kind of support (if that is indeed the design philosophy behind them).

However aside from soloing Archers should never actually take a hit. Archers have the longest range in the game, they should use it. Pugilist is forced to be up front 100% of the time and does nowhere near the amount of damage an Archer does. From a balance standpoint, why use anything but Archer? I mean when you can do max damage at max range, there's no point in having other damage classes. They're out of harm's reach while doing more damage than all other melee classes.

[AmyRae]

However aside from soloing Archers should never actually take a hit. Archers have the longest range in the game, they should use it. Pugilist is forced to be up front 100% of the time and does nowhere near the amount of damage an Archer does. From a balance standpoint, why use anything but Archer? I mean when you can do max damage at max range, there's no point in having other damage classes. They're out of harm's reach while doing more damage than all other melee classes.

My answer might not fit the actual situation, but I'd expect the reason to be that while archers could breeze through short fights, they might not do too well in long ones (as in not living long enough to do much damage... the "glass cannon" problem).

I would expect (but it might not be the case) that Pugilists could either "warm up" to even higher damage than archers could dream of by increasing their offensive stance, or, if the case warrants it, become increasingly evasive instead if they take a defensive stance so as to tank (or help tank) a hit-like-a-truck mob. So while they might not be so great at sniping, you would want them around for tough, long fights because they can go the distance.

But I'm only reading the pamphlet as to what Pugilist should have been. I realize it may not actually be working out to be that anymore.

[Arcell]

My answer might not fit the actual situation, but I'd expect the reason to be that while archers could breeze through short fights, they might not do too well in long ones (as in not living long enough to do much damage... the "glass cannon" problem).

I would expect (but it might not be the case) that Pugilists could either "warm up" to even higher damage than archers could dream of by increasing their offensive stance, or, if the case warrants it, become increasingly evasive instead if they take a defensive stance so as to tank (or help tank) a hit-like-a-truck mob. So while they might not be so great at sniping, you would want them around for tough, long fights because they can go the distance.

But I'm only reading the pamphlet as to what Pugilist should have been. I realize it may not actually be working out to be that anymore.

Unfortunately, that isn't what's happening. The only "evasive" stance Pugilists can take is Featherfoot + Light Strike (which costs MP) and that only lasts for a single hit every 30 seconds or so. Aside from that it's all offensive and a poor job of it at that.