Q:
(edited by Lace.9472)
Clarification from AN (Ranger)
Everything is viable in all content, don’t be ignorant. The ranger has plenty of viable bow builds, and we do in fact have the highest single-target ranged DPS in the game. Unless you’re doing speed clears in PvE and have a bear out while you stand completely still at 1500 range from every boss, you shouldn’t have any issues in PvE, PvP, or WvW. Simply moving around while attacking will make you look like a better player, and taking drakes or spiders rather than a bear will also make you appear a more skilled player. In PvE just be sure to slot Spotter and Frost Spirit for your team and nobody will ever complain, even if you’re purely ranged.
As far as WvW and PvP go, there used to be a fairly popular ‘Catsassin’ build which involved the use of both shortbow and longbow while your Jaguar did massive burst and you built as tanky as possible. Bow builds are fine. They’re far from optimal, but if you want to play them I say go for it. Nobody’s stopping you, and if your friends tell you that you need to play some other way, perhaps you need new friends. The forums are a cesspool of self-described professionals on the subject who will force their elitist values down your throat until you can no longer breathe.
In the end, the ranger is plenty viable as just that: ranged DPS.
Everything is viable in all content, don’t be ignorant. The ranger has plenty of viable bow builds, and we do in fact have the highest single-target ranged DPS in the game. Unless you’re doing speed clears in PvE and have a bear out while you stand completely still at 1500 range from every boss, you shouldn’t have any issues in PvE, PvP, or WvW. Simply moving around while attacking will make you look like a better player, and taking drakes or spiders rather than a bear will also make you appear a more skilled player. In PvE just be sure to slot Spotter and Frost Spirit for your team and nobody will ever complain, even if you’re purely ranged.
As far as WvW and PvP go, there used to be a fairly popular ‘Catsassin’ build which involved the use of both shortbow and longbow while your Jaguar did massive burst and you built as tanky as possible. Bow builds are fine. They’re far from optimal, but if you want to play them I say go for it. Nobody’s stopping you, and if your friends tell you that you need to play some other way, perhaps you need new friends. The forums are a cesspool of self-described professionals on the subject who will force their elitist values down your throat until you can no longer breathe.
In the end, the ranger is plenty viable as just that: ranged DPS.
I think he’s talking more about it being competitive. Sitting back and only letting a bear killing things is technically “viable”, but its not efficient or competitive.
As for the longbow being competitive in all areas, I don’t see it happening any time soon. Ranged weapons in general can’t compete in dungeons and this is especially true for one that expects you to stay at 1,000+ distance for maximum effect. In WvW rangers don’t bring much to the group and their pets are close to useless. Addressing both of these thing would take some major reworks.
Regardless, the ranger class was voted for the CDI. I’m not here to argue if the ranger is viable or not, but you just can’t put a CDI up and then never mention it again. It leaves a very bad impression on whats going to happen to future CDIs.
Look:
27 pages of votes – (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Vote-for-the-Profession-Collaborative-Development/first)
67 pages of ranger discussion – (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/first)
I want to emphasize this: 27 pages of votes and 67 pages of discussion. Thrown out the window. The issue here is really bigger than a ranger discussion. Will you participate in future CDIs knowing that it might be put aside and forgotten forever?
Title needs to be changed to: CDIs – Is it really worth the effort?
Regardless, the ranger class was voted for the CDI. I’m not here to argue if the ranger is viable or not, but you just can’t put a CDI up and then never mention it again. It leaves a very bad impression on whats going to happen to future CDIs.
Look:
27 pages of votes – (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Vote-for-the-Profession-Collaborative-Development/first)
67 pages of ranger discussion – (https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/first)I want to emphasize this: 27 pages of votes and 67 pages of discussion. Thrown out the window. The issue here is really bigger than a ranger discussion. Will you participate in future CDIs knowing that it might be put aside and forgotten forever?
Title needs to be changed to: CDIs – Is it really worth the effort?
How naive. Balance changes alone take 6 months with minor fixes every 3 months. Ranger pets have already experienced sweeping changes since the CDI, positioning themselves behind enemies and becoming more responsive. The fact that you think the game industry will cater to needy players who want things done now shows how ignorant you are to the process and shouldn’t be demanding changes if you don’t know a thing about iteration and polish. ArenaNet hasn’t forgotten about the ranger, so don’t pull that bullkitten.
Changes will come, you’ve just got to be patient. I’d rather have it done right than rushed for the sake of players like you who think that you’re entitled to your demands right this minute.
Viking Jorun.5413
I’m a little overwhelmed.
It seems like you’re attaching about 3-4 different arguments – somehow with what I’ve written.
To just respond to with that I deem relevant to my thread: – you claim all builds are viable in all content and that CDI changes have already manifested.
The first point is obviously a difference in semantics on what we both mean by viable. I’m absolutely happy to not address your point here and we can leave it at that.
For the second point, I think it’s fairly obvious (given that the CDI’s were supposed to include all issues and feedback) that any changes since then, would very likely be in areas mentioned by the CDI.
Therefore, if you’re suggesting a change being made matching an issue bought up in the CDI is proof of a reasonable “response” to the CDI and that wanting anything more is to…
… cater to needy players who want things done now shows how ignorant you are to the process and shouldn’t be demanding changes if you don’t know a thing about …
..etc. Then I would have to disagree with you.
On another note I don’t see myself having much progressive discussion with someone of your discussion style. Therefore I apologize in advance if I don’t respond to any future posts by you.
(edited by Lace.9472)
Viking Jorun.5413
I’m a little overwhelmed.
It seems like you’re attaching about 3-4 different arguments – somehow with what I’ve written.To just respond to with that I deem relevant to my thread: – you claim all builds are viable in all content and that CDI changes have already manifested.
The first point is obviously a difference in semantics on what we both mean by viable. I’m absolutely happy to not address your point here and we can leave it at that.
For the second point, I think it’s fairly obvious (given that the CDI’s were supposed to include all issues and feedback) that any changes since then, would very likely be in areas mentioned by the CDI.
Therefore, if you’re suggesting a change being made matching an issue bought up in the CDI is proof of a reasonable “response” to the CDI and that wanting anything more is to…
… cater to needy players who want things done now shows how ignorant you are to the process and shouldn’t be demanding changes if you don’t know a thing about …
Then I would have to disagree with you. On another note I don’t see myself having much progressive discussion with someone of your discussion style. Therefore I apologize in advance if I don’t respond to any future posts by you.
I apologize if I get a little bit overwhelmed with randoms who put ANet on the stake for not taking much action on a thought from 4 months ago. It’s not enough time in the development process to have any definitive, wide-sweeping changes.
If you’re looking for the utmost viability of playing ranged in any format, you won’t find it in Guild Wars 2. Sorry. The ranger isn’t the only class that suffers from a lack of ranged DPS, but all classes. The risk/reward doesn’t match that of melee, and thus your highest DPS will always come from melee, no matter how hard you try to build for ranged. It’s just not ever going to be a viable option in any game mode, for any class.
- PvE: Stacking is key to gaining the highest damage possible. Ranged does not compute.
- PvP: Small points lead to melee-centric environments where ranged has little place in a competitive format.
- WvW: The closest you’re going to get to ranged as a viable option, unless you’re zerging and up against hammer trains, which is all you’ll face in t1. Ranged can work in roaming, but in a format where killing your opponent before being killed is key, you’ll want your main source of damage to come from melee when not behind the safety of the zerg.
Not everyones familiar with the time it takes to implement these things, and I didn’t mean Anet “had to” make changes. What I wanted to point out was that its been 4 months and there has been no posts from Anet about it. Wasn’t a CDI supposed to be a “collaborative development initiative”? Pardon me if I misunderstood how it works, but one at that scale you’d think it’d be appropriate to comment/communicate on whats going to happen regarding the CDI. A “we decided we’re not going make changes because of such and such” or “we have planned this and this out, but it’ll take more time” post would have been understandable. I may have been too hostile on my previous post, but the long wait can be frustrating when you have no idea where they’re taking the ranger class after such a big CDI.