Please give archer a dagger.

[Eekiki]

Maybe they should just remove chakrams and tomahawks from melee classes right?.

Would it make a difference if they did? I don't think I've ever seen anyone throw a tomahawk in this game.

Archers absolutely need to have something to get the benefits of auto-attack. I simply think a punch is inappropriate given the mechanics of their weapon.

[Raistlin]

FFXI style?... in FFXI u HAVE NOT your bow in your hand all the time... CANT u see it? there u had daggers and only show your bow every time you shoots.

in FFXIV u have your bow in your hand ALL THE TIME (non passive mode) SO HOW u want to use daggers? every auto-attack to hide your bow like FFXI use dagger and come back to your bow? really..

archer = bow if u want more weapons, go another class.

"archers have knives on movies" and gladiators can use all kind of weapons...

If u want an auto-attack with bow go and ask it, but how u plan to move around if u have AA from distance? If u want to change from your position to another, u will be moving and stoping to use AA, moving and stoping.. until u arrive to your position. Melees can have it, coz AA only activate when u are enough close to the mob, but how will u handle it if u can use it on range too? to swap pasive every time u want to move?

[Capita]

I honestly don't think people understand the concept of having both ranged AA and melee AA. Is it really that difficult to imagine?

[Demacia]

Read my post again, child. Or go back to playing LoL. Either one works.

UH OH, big man calling me a child because it gives your argument that extra UMPH and makes you seem oh so mature and superior right? Yeah I'm done with you, kid. Go back to watching anime.

See what I did there? Totally didn't make an ass of myself because this is how adults actually talk to each other. I was never talking about ranged AA to begin with as I don't really give a shit, just against the thought of archers being unable to melee PERIOD.

[Amas]

When you're a higher level archer you'll understand. Same reason they don't have ranged auto attack in ffxi; their damage and hate is too high. You let an archer spam arrows in a party and they'll pull hate plain and simple. Mix in high damage hate building abilities, you need to be able to control your arrow shots after doing massive damage or you're asking to die. Id rather this then having to disengage every time I wanted to watch my hate.
They'd basically have to rebuild the archer class from the ground up.

no auto attack ranged please.

This was already answered, but I want to tag on as well.

It is smarter, from a game design perspective, to re-design or re-balance the class to take advantage of better underlying game mechanics (auto attack), than it is to preserve the way a class currently operates at the cost of making clunkier to play.

I do not know a single 75+ (since a lot of people played for years but quit before cap raises) RNG from FFXI who thought hitting a /ra macro for every arrow was a good idea. They tolerated it because they had to, but that doesn't mean it's good game design, or excuse making the same mistake twice.

There are tons of easy ways of reworking how certain abilities function to accommodate auto attack. For example, there's no reason Heavy Shot (or an equivalent, if SE does what it ought and removes all of the other "basic" attacks learned via the first quest or bought with guild marks) couldn't be used together with Multishot and Trifurcate. Balancing DPS is as easy as adjusting the recasts for each.

Removing limited ammo makes it even easier to balance ARC against other classes. One thing I've heard brought up which I think is actually a great idea is that all the damage should be shifted to the bow, with arrow used to determine attack effects (e.g. elemental damage, status damage, etc., potentially coupled with a negative per-hit damage adjustment if necessary). It almost certainly won't happen because it would mean more changes than they seem willing to make to the armory system (see also: why ARC AA will be a bare-fisted punch).

With such a system, then it's a heck of a lot easier to balance the class than having to account for how one balances a pay-to-play class, or to deal with all the different weapon/ammo combinations.

On that note, pay-to-play classes are stupid in MMOs, because they are impossible to balance properly. They have to be stronger to justify paying for your damage. But they can't be stronger, or they're the ideal choice assuming one can afford to play it. That is the central point of why I think ammo should be removed as a limited resource. In FFXI, for example, when NIN and RNG were the strongest classes but most expensive to play, people complained. Then they were nerfed, and there was little reason to use either because you were spending more money to get average-at-best results (why keep paying out the butt for Demon or Kabura arrows when every other DD class could keep up for free?).

you want a good excuse, here is a good excuse:
Archer is the ONLY class that is dependant on a limited amount of ammunition, once it runs out, you are down to a crappy stone throw that will maybe critical for 3 dmg. It is also one of the few classes where your damage and accuracy is affected by positioning. Auto Attack would burn through your ammunition at a fast pace, and would leave you no time to re-position if needed. Also, AA would cancel out the bind status caused by Shadowbind and close shot, meaning that the class would lose it's ability to solo.

There, THREE good reasons why ranged attacks should never be AA, don't like it, stick with your pointy stick thing. As for the unlimited quivers argument, FFXI had the same system, and I have yet to hear people whine about how it was unfair for rng to be one of the best dds and have a dependancy on ammunition to balance out that capability. Again, you don't like it, don't play it.

What a stupid argument, sorry.

So you want to implement a crappier system for basic attacks to preserve the current class design, despite the fact that the end result, after redesigning the class, could be much better?

Limited ammo is a terrible argument. I just explained why above. It should never, EVER be used to justify poor game design in an MMO, and is an instant rathole that will permanently mar game balance.

I don't depend on Shadowbind to solo (holy recast batman), so I don't see how a ranged AA would ruin things. All it would do is change the tactics people use. Just because what currently semi-works would no longer be viable doesn't mean that another, better tactic may not become available.

RNG was one of the best DDs until about 2004 when they nerfed its pants off. It then spent about the next 5 years slowly creeping back to parity (even in 2009 with all of its reworked buffs and abilities, it was on par, at best, with other DDs). There were some fights where RNG was useful due to its ability to avoid AOE, but it was never head-and-shoulders better than another DD. What you ended up paying for was the ability to be less of an MP sink, not the ability to be a better DD. It would've been a much better class (and much easier to bring into balance with melee DDs) had it not been a pay-to-play class.

what I really don't get is.....

Why are Archers complaining about close range auto attack, when they should not even be in melee range to begin with -.-

If you play it right Archers are the top DD class, but are controlled by no AA and ammunition. I think what WoW did (taking away limited ammunition) was a very stupid idea.

Like others have said, if there was ranged AA, there would be no control when it comes to damage output, or consumption, and that would ruin Archer.

Complaining about a close-range AA because a ranged AA would make more sense. Given that other classes' AAs are their basic "light" attack, it would not be a cause for concern for damage output, arrow consumption, and would not ruin ARC.

Of course, the real answer is to do away with limited ammo, because it's a moronic concept in an MMO (there are better ways to get money flowing in the economy), and then all the complaints about ammo management vanish.

The better answer, rather than making ARC a frustratingly spammy class to play, is to rebalance it for a ranged AA and unlimited ammo. As I've said repeatedly, the basic play of a class should not be a cause for frustration. Hitting a button to fire every arrow is frustrating, especially when other classes can perform at least basic attacks without doing so. It was annoying as heck in FFXI, and it's annoying as heck (for all classes) in FFXIV.

Heaven forbid you ever need to communicate important information mid-battle while playing RNG or ARC, since taking the time to type out a reasonable-length chat message has just temporarily dropped your DPS to zero.

STILL HAVEN'T GIVEN ME A GOOD REASON WHY ARCHERS SHOULDN'T MELEE WHY DO I EVEN BOTHER POSTING HERE JESUS.

Because they shouldn't need to. If they removed limited ammunition and changed AA to be ranged, it would be irrelevant.

Or if they don't remove limited ammunition and ARC runs out, it could also switch to rock throw AA instead of punching. I would not be surprised if an ARC's bare-fisted punch is about as effective as a rock throw in any case.

[Jennestia]

UH OH, big man calling me a child because it gives your argument that extra UMPH and makes you seem oh so mature and superior right?.

Said the one that can post:

And i'm not mad bro mr. hurr durr memes, I'm just shocked that people can be this adamant over something so ridiculous. Then again I have to remember where I'm posting.

Also...you should really think about yourself with this line:

I'm just shocked that people can be this adamant over something so ridiculous.

[Capita]

UH OH, big man calling me a child because it gives your argument that extra UMPH and makes you seem oh so mature and superior right? Yeah I'm done with you, kid. Go back to watching anime.

See what I did there? Totally didn't make an ass of myself because this is how adults actually talk to each other.

You could, you know, make a decent argument outside of "OMG ammo I'm right you're wrong rage rage rage". Hence the LoL reference, because it's quite obvious to me that you belong there with all the other kiddie ragers.

Now, please, give me a good reason why we shouldn't be able to ranged AA when the mob is at range and melee AA when the mob is in melee.

CC? Please. Many other games with ranged AA dealt with "break on hit" CC all the time. Other classes with AA in this game are no different.

Ammo? Again, other games have dealt with the ammo system just fine. Hell, the early days of WoW had arrows only stacking up to 200. That's not very much for a class whose DPS was a good amount of AA.

Endgame? You're telling me it's a good idea for us, assuming AA DPS is significant enough, to have to go into melee to match melee DPS? As a ranged class? And risk getting hit by an AOE?

[Demacia]

You could, you know, make a decent argument outside of "OMG ammo I'm right you're wrong rage rage rage". Hence the LoL reference, because it's quite obvious to me that you belong there with all the other kiddie ragers.

Now, please, give me a good reason why we shouldn't be able to ranged AA when the mob is at range and melee AA when the mob is in melee.

CC? Please. Many other games with ranged AA dealt with "break on hit" CC all the time. Other classes with AA in this game are no different.

Ammo? Again, other games have dealt with the ammo system just fine.

Endgame? You're telling me it's a good idea for us, assuming AA DPS is significant enough, to have to go into melee to match melee DPS? As a ranged class? And risk getting hit by an AOE?

When did I ever say you shouldn't be able to ranged AA? I'm only saying Archer should have the option to melee regardless of whether it's a ranged class or not.

Do you really think I'm suggesting that Archers should spend their time meleeing for damage?

Who are you arguing with?

But you're right, I should go back to LoL with all the kiddie ragers, because dealing with the scum that makes up the majority of LoL players would probably be better than arguing with a guy who not only misunderstands my view completely but acts like a complete ass in general.

[Capita]

When did I ever say you shouldn't be able to ranged AA? I'm only saying Archer should have the option to melee regardless of whether it's a ranged class or not.

Do you really think I'm suggesting that Archers should spend their time meleeing for damage?

Who are you arguing with?

But you're right, I should go back to LoL with all the kiddie ragers, because dealing with the scum that makes up the majority of LoL players would probably be better than arguing with a guy who not only misunderstands my view completely but acts like a complete ass in general.

I entered the conversation saying we should have ranged AA and you raged asking why we shouldn't be able to melee. I didn't even mention anything about not being able to melee. You're the one who misunderstood first and raged about it with AMGAH CAPS. I merely followed suit.

[SniperRifle]

Honestly I enjoy reading alot of these threads, even the troll ones are entertaining. And I will admit an Archer using fists for a weapon sounds different. But for petes sake, they just announced this yesterday can we wait to try it out before we tell them to fix what could be better then daggers?

And I'm sure this has already been said but I'll +1 it... Archers will be ranged attacking. And only ranged attacking (I think that was the point of using bare fists as the alternative means of damage dealing). So people wouldn't be shooting arrows from point blank like in 11. Not that people ever did that in this game, but we didn't have auto-attack in this game either. Devs see potential OP class prior to patch, so devs attempt to balance class ahead of time.