Hazelnut wrote: Reaper + sword spec is just the best cleanup tool IMO. Should give the Shinobis a mop rather than sword!
100% agree. I still take Shadowstep and Conceal so they can function as a scout, but when you get that big pull, you sow the field with AoE and then Reap
With Reaper on cooldown, Implacable still makes them a deadly hunter of a a high priority target and then they just go back out of LoS.
I think what most people ( and ideally Johnny ) are fantasizing their class as Snake Eyes from G.I. Joe
( since LW2 is basically a culmination of all the Guerilla cliches in popular entertainment, like Gunner having a knife because of a character in the movie Predator ).
And when people think of Snake Eyes ....they don't remember a US military Ninja using a sword seldomly, and with little effect.
And from a Xcom gameplay viewoint, they don't want a class that specializes in melee combat to be better off using a gun in most scenarios.
Why would you run into melee range if you have to "game the system" to do as much damage as a standard class does with their gun? It just seems counterproductive. You're already putting yourself into harms way getting close to the enemy group ( because it's not just your intended target you have to worry about ) to be effective ( or use your specialty at all ), there should be a equal and opposite benefit to that in your offensive capability for that risk.
And then what happens if you are outside of your intended "effective design" ( stealthing )? If what you bring to a group / your comparable class strength is a temporary condition once per mission ...it means at all other times you are weaker than you'd be if you were a different class outside of stealth. This is historically problematic for gimmick classes ( like stealthers in MMOs ) ..where your usefulness is tied to that gimmick ..and once its done you're dead weight. A melee class is only as good as they are in melee range, and if getting into melee range is problematic you are handicapping your effective role. And if being in melee range is putting you at more risk than the benefit of you being there, then you are handicapping your groups ability to win.
This is the eternal struggle between melee and ranged combat.
In particular to the shinobi class, using a ranged weapon should be considered their sub weapon ( like the knife is for a gunner, or a pistol is for a sniper ). That is not to say that the sub weapon should be used as a Ying Yang philosophy, but as a last resort. Just because a gunner or a sniper has a minimum deadzone that prevents them from properly utilizing their main weapon at close range, doesn't mean that their sub weapon is suppose to be used during that time, as that would just mean the sub weapon itself was a gimmick ( which would mean it would do the same damage as their primary weapon anyway ).
A shinobi's melee capability should be their primary mechanic, not a "fun alternative" to shooting. It should be proportionate to their gameplay design and risk, as would a sniper rifle be for different class or a shotgun for another; and not a rocket launcher with a 1 time use / cooldown or that's amazing at a very specific time in the game / mission and a detriment at all other.
It's not easy balancing melee, when there's also ( and compared to ) ranged combat, but it needs to be done properly and with finesse.
On a personal note, I like the 'idea' of doing more damage the longer distance you travel, as that works proportionate to risk you take by being further from your support ( in theory ) and closer to a group of enemies ( in theory ); but with that comes concern over effectiveness outside of that..where you can't reasonably or regularly achieve large distances between targets to get that benefit. I like the 'idea' of doing more damage / effect if you make an action against a target while still concealed, as that too is proportionate, but also worrisome about effectiveness outside of it. I like the 'idea' of being a primary infiltration choice, but that creates a broad concern about whether that makes both itself, and other classes, ineffective depending on whether they are or are not in that role.
Niche specialization is always interesting in theory, but seldom enjoyable in practice; as it is a very tricky thing to balance and design around, which leads to the cliche term of "Gimmicky Design" being used often to describe game features and content. I feel that Rangers in vanilla "felt less" hindered by their ability to melee effectively, because it was often used as a gimmick ...something you could do in the right situation to shine, but seldom used often ( unless you really tried to push it ); but in that same regard it didn't feel as rewarding or iconic at all either. It seems to reflect a polar opposite of the shinobi class, which feels more rewarding or iconic ( gameplay wise, and because there's more specific choices in their trees, however fruitless they may end up being )...but a hindrance in practical sense ( because they're just not designed to be effective with melee combat compared to the other classes with ranged benefits ).
It could be something as simple as just having Advent increasing in armor value is causing all sorts of disparity in gameplay enjoyment ( echo'd in other threads ). Or that constantly needing to run around ( zig zagging between drop pods for example ) is tedious and dangerous compared to standard ranged counterparts. Or that melee in general is rather binary in execution and "Pizazz", as it doesn't have flashy upgrades like guns do, or modifications, or means of doing interesting things with melee other than damage ( like suppression, environmental alterations, hollow targeting, forcing targets out of cover, etc. ).
That's a bit off topic and more extensive than just "Sword Attack Strength" as mentioned by the OP and others ...but I feel that the general design of shinobi's and melee in general is so uninteresting ( other than as a byproduct gimmick like stealthing ) that the overall strength of those things is in need of improving, not just weapon damage.
@JoeShmo: Very good post and very interesting to read.
I think closing the gap between stealth and non-stealth characters would be possible if every character has two class specific perk trees and one general perk tree with perks like covert, because stealth is an amazing and important part of LW2 and every character should have the chance to use it.
Or that melee in general is rather binary in execution and "Pizazz", as it doesn't have flashy upgrades like guns do, or modifications, or means of doing interesting things with melee other than damage ( like suppression, environmental alterations, hollow targeting, forcing targets out of cover, etc. ).
I think this is a really important point. Imagine the tactical difference between flush and demolition, two ranged abilities that deal with cover in divergent ways. Having these two options adds color and utility. Faceless mele does lots of aoe cover destruction. But knives and swords just damage via skill. The upgraded weapons can burn or disorient but that's not a perk like ranged attacks get.
At the same end, Shinobi are already the top performers because of how critical stealth is and how no one else can do it effectively. Also giving them a powerful attack, without addressing their current dominant role in campaigns, risks making other classes obsolete.
