Guild Wars 2

jcbroe.4329:

Azure.8670:

Yoh.8469:

While I like the idea of having more ritualist elements In the game, it was my main in gw1, I can’t help but feel suggeations such as these are just plain silly bones. Development is about resources, time, money and manpower.
If they don’t have the resources to fix AI and animation delay, there is no way in hell they have the resources to overhaul the ranger. Be realistic.

I hope once the CDI on this profession gets going that we can focus in on ideas that are actually practical to implement and actually fix or work around the problems.
I love a good pie in the sky idea as much as the next bloke, but we need sensible propositions.

I bet you its easier to rebuild this class from the ground up than it is to reconstruct AI

Unless they decide to integrate any sort of AI whatsoever, than not entirely, it would still be easier to leave the spirit AI (which in itself is a fairly simplistic AI compared to others in the game) than to start from the ground up.

I think that ANet in the long run would benefit from rebuilding pieces of their code anyhow, since after witnessing how updates “break” things across the game, it becomes obvious that there is so much code inheriting from different sources that it makes it very difficult to make even the most minor of balance changes, like adding a trait that gives fury on crit to a Greatsword, without “breaking” other things.

Not to say that how they wrote the code with the use of inheritance isn’t useful or beneficial, but it seems like, with the amount of changes that a balance team or skill team typically makes over the lifespan of an MMO (at least, the amount of changes a good company makes to work towards the ever elusive balance equilibrium), that over time it would actually be less work to just rewrite the necessary code so that making changes has less overall impact on other codes, or creates less “ripples.”

Specifically how that relates to ranger balance, if the devs could spend less time rewriting code and didn’t have to put as much necessary QA into changes because those changes aren’t affecting as many things, it would open up more opportunity to work on completing balance changes in the pipeline so that valuable changes or “big” changes happen more often.

It would also give the devs more time to work on improving things like pet AI in the long run. I just hope that is somebody’s job to be going through the code and rewriting anything that is inherited and in a way that makes huge problems when only making slight changes.

Idk what any of that is based on besides wishful thinking.
You don’t know how programming might break in the future, for all you know even if they were to spend time ‘fixing’ their code that it wouldn’t create more problems down the line, or worse still be inefficient for our needs as players.
Programmers are tremendously expensive, and you can’t go around fixing every little problem or possible problem for a minority of players. Sure, future proof where you can, but you’ve got to keep your expectations to a minimum.

Esp when there are ways to fix the problem that don’t require recoding parts of the game.
I do get your point, but there are realities to consider.

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

@Yoh;

Of course it’s wishful thinking, the reality is that it probably shouldn’t have ever been programmed like that to begin with lol.

When we end up with situations where making changes to Two-Handed Training affects Eagle Eye though, the truth is that it at least needs to be considered that over time, it wouldn’t hurt for the code to be restructured, especially if it is something that is already being worked on.

You basically said that though when you stated “future proof where you can,” so it’s probably best we don’t let our discussion about programming bleed into the topic at hand.

Without actually seeing any of the games code, we can only speculate anyhow haha, who knows, I could be wrong and their use of inheritance as a solution to almost everything that shares a similar function might actually not be excessive in the slightest in the grand scheme of how they developed the game.

And honestly it’s something that regardless of how the code is written should probably be handled be a QA team or a test team before it ever reaches the players.

So yeah, it’s a good discussion and we could talk forever about it because I have no doubt you are more experienced than me and the learning experience alone would be fascinating, I just want to try to get back to the topic at hand as this is about rangers and not the games code, and it’s my fault for straying to begin with hahaha.

spirit active skills being instant would help too

Atherakhia.4086:

Criminal.5627:

Also I guess something should be mentioned about leaning rangers to more successful power specs? right now rangers don’t have any competent power builds in anything out side of PvE. this could possibly be fixed by allowing pet stats to scale with ranger power gear or by readjusting the damage multipliers to skills and weapons that are not condition based, such as the great sword, spear, longbow, axe offhand and war horn abilities. And as everyone has previously mentioned having our utilities be more useful without heavily investing trait points to make them affect us as well as our pets or allow them to be thrown, etc.

It’s the lack of AE and burst holding back Ranger power builds.

it is also that we don’t have any real punch with our attacks, there is no burst, our high crits are less than 1/2 that of a power war, thief or ele

Substance E.4852:

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

Can you source that?
I’ve never heard anyone from Anet say that, because then they are just shooting themselves in their collective feet if that is indeed the case.
It’s a stance that would have to change if this problem is to ever be fixed, and they can be made to change on occasion.

Yoh.8469:

Substance E.4852:

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

Can you source that?
I’ve never heard anyone from Anet say that, because then they are just shooting themselves in their collective feet if that is indeed the case.
It’s a stance that would have to change if this problem is to ever be fixed, and they can be made to change on occasion.

that was the official response when we originaly asked if we could change F2 attacks to other abilities or if we could have control over the other pet abilities, the response was " it would make it too complicated to pick up ranger" would be more entertaining though.

And does anyone else want “rare” or “hard to get” pet skins? things that you have to really work for and make yourself look unique, even if it is not new skills. if it just affects looks? much like the moss spider, black widow, rainbow phoenix, jingle bear, and jingle moa in gw1.. where you had to do things to get those pets and not just walk out and find them with ease every time.

Criminal.5627:

Yoh.8469:

Substance E.4852:

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

Can you source that?
I’ve never heard anyone from Anet say that, because then they are just shooting themselves in their collective feet if that is indeed the case.
It’s a stance that would have to change if this problem is to ever be fixed, and they can be made to change on occasion.

that was the official response when we originaly asked if we could change F2 attacks to other abilities or if we could have control over the other pet abilities, the response was " it would make it too complicated to pick up ranger" would be more entertaining though.

Hmmm, I’m gonna have to get confirmation fro Allie on that one once the CDI kicks up.
Because that is just a mental position to have on something so basic, and widely applicable to mmos, including gw1, as pet commands.

Yoh.8469:

Criminal.5627:

Yoh.8469:

Substance E.4852:

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

Can you source that?
I’ve never heard anyone from Anet say that, because then they are just shooting themselves in their collective feet if that is indeed the case.
It’s a stance that would have to change if this problem is to ever be fixed, and they can be made to change on occasion.

that was the official response when we originaly asked if we could change F2 attacks to other abilities or if we could have control over the other pet abilities, the response was " it would make it too complicated to pick up ranger" would be more entertaining though.

Hmmm, I’m gonna have to get confirmation fro Allie on that one once the CDI kicks up.
Because that is just a mental position to have on something so basic, and widely applicable to mmos, including gw1, as pet commands.

This is true. a lot of rangers have been asking for that change ever since beta. Colin Johanson was the one who address these pet ai and for players having or might have difficulties if they add more access to pet skills via F# keys.

You have to dig deeeeppp into the forums, worth more than a year old even. I remember it being near topics such as : why no devs responses to rangers forum. Bunch of hate post after dec 10 2012 patch, 16 bullet point of ranger improvements, that turned out to be water skills and nerfs after short bow nerfs. Then another nerf on february 2013 for pets being OP. Happy new year for sure for rangers.

Yoh.8469:

Criminal.5627:

Yoh.8469:

Substance E.4852:

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

Can you source that?
I’ve never heard anyone from Anet say that, because then they are just shooting themselves in their collective feet if that is indeed the case.
It’s a stance that would have to change if this problem is to ever be fixed, and they can be made to change on occasion.

that was the official response when we originaly asked if we could change F2 attacks to other abilities or if we could have control over the other pet abilities, the response was " it would make it too complicated to pick up ranger" would be more entertaining though.

Hmmm, I’m gonna have to get confirmation fro Allie on that one once the CDI kicks up.
Because that is just a mental position to have on something so basic, and widely applicable to mmos, including gw1, as pet commands.

Found it: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2guru/b/457365711

53:40 in — when asked about adding a skill or two to existing pets and overall complexity of the class.

Posts popped up after: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Rangers-can-t-handle-more-pet-control/first

I will let you decide your opinion on the words spoken, but it came off very condescending and greater-than-thou to me personally. Complexity is something to be ever mastering, not an artificially low ceiling.

I personally think that the first work should be in utility and traiting though. Switching of some pet AI and server thinking states for player control might be beneficial for both if done correctly. Also, power ranger love please (bows especially).

I think 90 of you are pve or pvp players. Pve and pvp are 1v1 or 1v2. Powering the pet and upgrading the AI ae not sollutions in WvW. Pets cant listen TS, keep up with the dudes, save skills and use them in time. Pets select a single target and attack that. In large fights we not fight against single targets but whole servers. Pets will never work in wvw. Pets must be optional.

McWolfy.5924:

I think 90 of you are pve or pvp players. Pve and pvp are 1v1 or 1v2. Powering the pet and upgrading the AI ae not sollutions in WvW. Pets cant listen TS, keep up with the dudes, save skills and use them in time. Pets select a single target and attack that. In large fights we not fight against single targets but whole servers. Pets will never work in wvw. Pets must be optional.

Which won’t happen, ever. It sucks, I know, but that is the reality that we have to work with.
Changing the ratio of damage between the Player:Pet, altering useless/underwhelming utilities and traits, improving team support, increasing strength/access to AoE’s, and giving power builds viable sustain will go a long way to making us better in zergs without having to remove the pet entirely.

I have very little faith that they will do any of this, but those are the ways to make the ranger a better zergling without getting rid of the pet entirely.

Miflett.3472:

Yoh.8469:

Criminal.5627:

Yoh.8469:

Substance E.4852:

Yoh.8469:

Atherakhia.4086:

This is why when the CDI does start it’s important for ANet to tell us what kind of feedback we should be giving. If they aren’t going to be able to resolve the pet AI problems, they need to tell us so we can propose alternative solutions or start discussing how to phase pets out.

From Day 1 we should know if we’re simply wasting our time discussing the pet issues this class has.

Exactly. Thou I would rephase that to “discussing fixing AI for pets” is a waste of time, because it’s not the only way to solve the problem with pets.
There is more then one way to skin a cat.

There are, but most of them seem as equally improbable as a fix to pet AI. When Anet comes out and deliberately says they won’t increase our control over the pet so as to not overwhelm new players (keep ridding that casual gravy train) it really hurts the possibility of real fixes to a system that needs heavy work.

Can you source that?
I’ve never heard anyone from Anet say that, because then they are just shooting themselves in their collective feet if that is indeed the case.
It’s a stance that would have to change if this problem is to ever be fixed, and they can be made to change on occasion.

that was the official response when we originaly asked if we could change F2 attacks to other abilities or if we could have control over the other pet abilities, the response was " it would make it too complicated to pick up ranger" would be more entertaining though.

Hmmm, I’m gonna have to get confirmation fro Allie on that one once the CDI kicks up.
Because that is just a mental position to have on something so basic, and widely applicable to mmos, including gw1, as pet commands.

Found it: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2guru/b/457365711

53:40 in — when asked about adding a skill or two to existing pets and overall complexity of the class.

Posts popped up after: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Rangers-can-t-handle-more-pet-control/first

I will let you decide your opinion on the words spoken, but it came off very condescending and greater-than-thou to me personally. Complexity is something to be ever mastering, not an artificially low ceiling.

I personally think that the first work should be in utility and traiting though. Switching of some pet AI and server thinking states for player control might be beneficial for both if done correctly. Also, power ranger love please (bows especially).

Thanks for that, thou I had to bring it up on youtube, because the twitch app is a useless waste of space.

But based on what was said by the developers, and rightly pointed out in the thread you linked, they were not talking about additional commands, but rather additional pet skills, like the engys F1-F4, or the eles attunements.
Which they rightly said that would make the ranger more complicated to play.

Its apples and oranges.

Furthermore they never said it was off the table, just that they wanted to try fixing AI first if at all possible.

McWolfy.5924:

I think 90 of you are pve or pvp players. Pve and pvp are 1v1 or 1v2. Powering the pet and upgrading the AI ae not sollutions in WvW. Pets cant listen TS, keep up with the dudes, save skills and use them in time. Pets select a single target and attack that. In large fights we not fight against single targets but whole servers. Pets will never work in wvw. Pets must be optional.

Well, that’s just a lack of imagination on your part mate.

My own patch-note – part4a: traits (mark&skirm)

Markmanship

Adept
- Beastmaster’s bond: add X sec of quickness, tweak CD
- Predator instinct: revamp – add 0.25sec stun and 3 sec of immo if the target is crippled/chilled/dazed/knockdowned – 30 sec ICD

Master
- Beastmaster’s might: also grants 1,5 sec of immunity to conditions when activating a signet
- Piercing arrows & eagle eye merged and named ‘unparalleled archers’ :p also improve shortbow dmg by 5%
- Signet of the beasmaster: Active effect of signet also affects the pet, activating a signet will cure all conditions from the pet

Grandmaster
-Remorseless: also, opening strikes are now unblockable – and since we have new ways to use camouflage (signet of the hunt, Search&Rescue) add ICD of X sec.
-New trait: Silent & vigilant: you can now move when under camouflage, improve duration of stealth & camouflage by 1 sec – auto-camouflage when under 25% health (90 icd on this part)

Skirmishing

Adept
-Agility training: also, evade skills (not dodge) grants might for X seconds
-Trapper defense: also, create a spike trap on dodge – XXsec ICD

Master
-Carnivorous appetite: also, master get xx hps on pet criticals
-Honed axes: also, increase dmg against bleeding targets by X % when wielding an axe.

Grandmaster:
-Moment of clarity – also, cure confusion/torment on interrupting a foe and remove ICD.

90=90%
Stove your pet for bonuses or make pet as a utility skill. Maybe attument style class mechanic.
F1: good old pet
F2: stove pet for bonuses
F3: a kit of trap (engis have granade and bomb kits for 1 utility slot)
F4: team bonus based of your stoved pet (the spirit of the pet helps you)

Nothing what not existed befor but ranger could be a must have in every wvw team

Hello! There is too much post so sorry if someone mentioned this before me.

Ranger alredy have a shouts but there are bad comaperd to guardian/warrior shouts.

[“Brace Yourself!”]
• Cooldown 35 seconds.
• Give you and your allies 3 stacks of might for 8 seconds to allies and restore 50% endurance
• Radius: 600
• Breaks stun

[“Halt!”]
• Cooldown 40 seconds.
• Give you and your allies 10 seconds of fury and Nature’s Rage Buff
• Nature’s Rage Buff – first attack will knockdown your enemy for 1 seconds. (one target can be knocked down 2-3 times – something to prevent stunlock)
• Radius: 600

[“Hit Me!”]
• Cooldown 45 seconds.
• Give you and your allies 7 seconds of Protection and Retaliation.
• Radius: 600

[“For the Nature!”]
• Cooldown 50 seconds.
• Give you and your allies 9 seconds of stability and vigor.
• Radius: 600

The old shouts could remain the same but i think they are more commands than shouts.
They could be in new group with new traits.

Some new trap what remove boons/conditions will be nice.
I just want every class in organised WvW groups not only heavy + some eles and necros + veilbot(mesmer).

For the pets, I see that people are citing examples which all are examples of either:

• reliability
• damage output
• survivability

Truthfully, for the purposes of balance, a pet AI can’t have an equal output of these three things combined, because in PvP and WvW, it would make the pet an autopilot damage option which could be much too powerful. These issues are created from things like:

• only allowing the pet to be a tacked on DPS option
• balancing for small scale combat and expecting it to translate to large scale combat

Some good fixes, whether they are band aid fixes or not, would be to:

• Reduce AoE damage taken by pets in WvW specifically, if possible (I believe the devs mentioned that they tried this and it broke dungeons to a degree, which is why it would have to be specific to WvW)
• Make pet attacks hit more reliability by increasing the range of their no cooldown attacks, and adjust damage as necessary
• Create more boon and/or effect options that trigger off of pet swap, which allows players to keep the pet on passive so that it isn’t dying in group fights or to AoE in big zergs or just melee range in general, and allows the pet swap to act as the mechanic, which can then be used for additional damage effects and support options.

Assuming for a second that all of these changes are implemented, would there be any concerns left regarding pet performance? Or would it simply be a matter of updating traits and weapons from there?

LarzoSk.5412:

Hello! There is too much post so sorry if someone mentioned this before me.

[…]

The old shouts could remain the same but i think they are more commands than shouts.
They could be in new group with new traits.

Some new trap what remove boons/conditions will be nice.
I just want every class in organised WvW groups not only heavy + some eles and necros + veilbot(mesmer).

I’ve made some suggstions to shouts myself (see here), but I do like yours too. They would give the ranger some offensive buff potential (beside passive or pet reliant buffs).

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

jcbroe.4329:

Kain Francois.4328:

Hmm… I would like to see the Ranger borrow more from the Ritualist. Afterall, it’s not like we can’t already call down lightning bolts upon our foes.

I would absolutely love to see this, especially after such amazing builds like R/Rt spirit spammer and splinter barrage. Just letting you know I agree and +1

Hell, I don’t know…
I feel like the devs had spend lots of time before release working out a concept for the ranger. While some ideas (maybe lots of them) haven’t worked out as intended, I still think that the underlaying concept is fine. Your suggestions, despite them beeing good ones, would change the whole class mechanic and turn the ranger into another class, which he wasn’t intended to be in the first place.

Hell I don’t know……..

The Ranger was commercialized as the Master of Bows which he is’int by now.
I want my Master of Bows Ranger. I want a Longbow 2 skill equal to the Warrior with his GS 2 (100Blades).
That would be a point to start at.
I want a pet that fears the shi……… out of stealth’ed Thievs who say: “hell no every other class i go all in but not a ranger. The pet will smell my stinky feet and attack me right before i can attack the ranger”
But as we know the pet’s will never work as intended so i want my dmg back on me, because the pets are broken.
Hell, for the beginning that’s all i want. Of course there is more i would love to see happening.

My own patch-note – part4b: traits (wild,nature,bm)

Wilderness Survival

Adept
-Soften the fall: Also creates muddy terrain when KDd/KBd, add ICD X sec
-Healer’s celerity: Also increase revive speed for the pet, grants quickness for X seconds to your ally once revived
-Shared Anguish: Also decrease stun duration by 25% when your pet is hard CCd
-Vigorous Renewal: Also removes bleed when using a healing skill
-Expertise training: Also, F2 skills apply X stack of torment – XX sec icd

Grandmaster
-Empathic bond: revamp, transfer 3 condi to your pet when using a pet command (attack,return to me, pet swap – must be instant w/out any range issue) – 10+ sec ICD.
-Bark skin: also, master and pet gain vitaly based on thougness, X %

Nature Magic

Adept
-Circle of life: Also apply when your pet die – increase icd to 60+sec.
-Concentration training: need fixes, doesn’t work at the moment – also reduce cast time of buff skills by XX %
-Nature’s bounty: Also, add 1-2 extra ticks to troll unguent.
-Nature protection: gives pet 1.5sec of invuln. when it takes dmg greater than 10% hps – separated ICD 30sec

Master
-Evasive purity: also removes 1 extra condi if under regen / troll unguent
-Two-handed training: Also removes 1 boon to nearby foes when proc.
-Enlargment: Also apply signet of the wild to nearby allies.

Grandmaster:
-Nature’s voice: ICD much needed since shouts are improved

Beastmastery

Adept
-Speed training: improve %
-Master’s bond: also grants nearby allies 10% of the bonus
-Compassion training: fine if we get control on a 2nd pet skill (see pet part) but also F2 skills heal nearby allies for a small amount – XX sec ICD

Master:
-Rending attack and stability training are now merged
-Intimidation training: also, F2 for birds now daze for 1 sec – icd 20
-New trait, Massive shouts: shouts have unique aoe effects (see utility part)

Almost done, only need to revisit hybrid/condi weapons.

Signets for ranger are pretty similar to Grenades for Engineer – both are pretty much useless and garbage without going 30 points in power just to pick up a trait for them. This cripples build variety, and essentially locks out those skills unless you’re willing to build specifically around those skills.

For class flavor, I’d love if the skill-development team could take a look at some GW1 Ranger playstyles that were really interesting to play. There was interrupter, condition spam, beastmaster and ranged spike.

Beastmaster is hard to utilize because pets are garbage, even if they can potentially do a lot of damage when specced for.

Ranged spike doesn’t exist because we have no spike to speak of.

Interrupter doesn’t work because we have so few interrupts. I truly, truly want to make a build centered around the “Moment of Clarity” trait, but it only benefits one skill on the greatsword and one skill on the shortbow. The trait is grandmaster and yet it only really brings up the daze/stun durations of those skills up to baseline level of other classes. You could compare it to Magic Bullet on the mesmer, which provides a baseline 2 second stun, without needing to be behind your opponent. And it also bounces and hits other targets too. That’s just one example.

Condition spam builds are pretty much centered solely around our traps. We just don’t have enough condition application without them.

Finally, I’d just like to posit that mobility in this game is too strong. Ranger has a ton of outdated skills like Barrage, which in theory should function as a powerful area denial ability…In reality, a warrior will just whirlwind strike through it, an engineer with his perma swift can just run around it, and even just regularly dodging through it avoids a huge chunk of the damage (which isn’t much to begin with), and this seems ridiculously counter intuitive. While you’re casting you’re also very vulnerable to counterattacks. If cripple were as powerful as it was in GW1, then it’d be a very powerful skill. As it is now, it does laughable damage, takes a huge amount of time to stationary channel it, and doesn’t provide much control or area denial. My idea would be to lessen the damage and cast time but provide an RNG interrupt like on Chaos Storm for the mesmer.

jcbroe.4329:

For the pets, I see that people are citing examples which all are examples of either:

• reliability
• damage output
• survivability

Truthfully, for the purposes of balance, a pet AI can’t have an equal output of these three things combined, because in PvP and WvW, it would make the pet an autopilot damage option which could be much too powerful.

Then I’d like it if we could pick what we wanted when we were choosing from a pet. Right now it’s really rare to have any of those.

Aegael.6938:

jcbroe.4329:

For the pets, I see that people are citing examples which all are examples of either:

• reliability
• damage output
• survivability

Truthfully, for the purposes of balance, a pet AI can’t have an equal output of these three things combined, because in PvP and WvW, it would make the pet an autopilot damage option which could be much too powerful.

Then I’d like it if we could pick what we wanted when we were choosing from a pet. Right now it’s really rare to have any of those.

I’m in total agreement. I think the ideal system would be to allow ranger to choose whether their pets function as heavy damage dealers and then range to as far as zero damage boon tanks or damage/aggro soakers.

jcbroe.4329:

Aegael.6938:

jcbroe.4329:

For the pets, I see that people are citing examples which all are examples of either:

• reliability
• damage output
• survivability

Truthfully, for the purposes of balance, a pet AI can’t have an equal output of these three things combined, because in PvP and WvW, it would make the pet an autopilot damage option which could be much too powerful.

Then I’d like it if we could pick what we wanted when we were choosing from a pet. Right now it’s really rare to have any of those.

I’m in total agreement. I think the ideal system would be to allow ranger to choose whether their pets function as heavy damage dealers and then range to as far as zero damage boon tanks or damage/aggro soakers.

Don’t we have them already? Thinking of bears vs. cats/birds. They’re just not very successful until now in what they do.

drazhen.9307:

You should re-read what I suggest – by giving up on gs evade on #1, you’re getting evades on both #3 and #4(counter-attack is more of a self-stun when it happens right now). Also, you still get the same duration on block, I think you didnt really read/understand and stopped at what you dislike, see the full picture.

Spamming #1 for random evades is not what I consider a good design, however 2 evades on demand would be very welcome, and I feel it is the direction the game have to go for every mode, less random, spammy and passive stuff, dont you agree?

(I edited my post to mention your opinion about GS#1)

Switch to sword if you want “on demand” evade. GS is one of the best ranger weapons right now…

Fenrir.6183:

drazhen.9307:

You should re-read what I suggest – by giving up on gs evade on #1, you’re getting evades on both #3 and #4(counter-attack is more of a self-stun when it happens right now). Also, you still get the same duration on block, I think you didnt really read/understand and stopped at what you dislike, see the full picture.

Spamming #1 for random evades is not what I consider a good design, however 2 evades on demand would be very welcome, and I feel it is the direction the game have to go for every mode, less random, spammy and passive stuff, dont you agree?

(I edited my post to mention your opinion about GS#1)

Switch to sword if you want “on demand” evade. GS is one of the best ranger weapons right now…

Sword evade isn’t on-demand for most times simply because either the autoattack chain or the clunky animation on Serpent’s Strike hinders you to evade properly.

Fenrir.6183:

drazhen.9307:

You should re-read what I suggest – by giving up on gs evade on #1, you’re getting evades on both #3 and #4(counter-attack is more of a self-stun when it happens right now). Also, you still get the same duration on block, I think you didnt really read/understand and stopped at what you dislike, see the full picture.

Spamming #1 for random evades is not what I consider a good design, however 2 evades on demand would be very welcome, and I feel it is the direction the game have to go for every mode, less random, spammy and passive stuff, dont you agree?

(I edited my post to mention your opinion about GS#1)

Switch to sword if you want “on demand” evade. GS is one of the best ranger weapons right now…

Because melee is always going to be better than ranged and our only other melee weapon makes combining raw DPS and dodging/kiting impossible because it roots you on the autoattack. GS looks good because we have no other alternatives, not because it actually is good. Try the GS on the warrior or Guardian and you’ll see what a “good” GS feels like.

Ranger gs is one of the lowest dps weapon

Can we just rename this thread to be the CDI thread?

thefantasticg.3984:

Can we just rename this thread to be the CDI thread?

Or we just all gonna copy paste this thread into the new CDI.

That’s what is going to happen… which is why I suggested renaming this thread…

thefantasticg.3984:

That’s what is going to happen… which is why I suggested renaming this thread…

True dat. I bet we will hit the first 100 posts within the first hour and minimum 5 will be from me.

As a dedicated Ranger player, I want to say that I agree 100% with all the people saying we need a ‘stow pet’ option.

The problem we have right now is that our character can’t be ‘on par’ with others for damage output because when you add the pet we would be way over the top. This is only true for open world PVE, the pet is a liability in literally every other facet of the game including dungeon PVE.

What I want from my Ranger.. I want to be the BEST with a bow. Right now, we’re not.. Long Bow Warriors can easily out damage us and they have more utility to boot. If we could opt to put the pet away and bring our ranged damage up to par with Ranged Warriors that alone would open up so much content to us that right now we’re not welcome to join.

I’m not asking to be overpowered, I just want to be up to par. I want the Ranger to be ‘the best’ at something. Right now, there is nothing we do better then any other class. That has to change.

Substance E.4852:

Because melee is always going to be better than ranged and our only other melee weapon makes combining raw DPS and dodging/kiting impossible because it roots you on the autoattack. GS looks good because we have no other alternatives, not because it actually is good. Try the GS on the warrior or Guardian and you’ll see what a “good” GS feels like.

Guardian GS isn’t as good as ranger GS imo.
I also agree on the stow pet thing…it would give us a chance to be more useful in situations where the pet dies too easily. Maybe put a timer on it so we can’t switch too often ?

Tis an opinion indeed because , IMO, I like the GS on my Guardian a lot more than I do on my Ranger.

but iif we remove the pet we would end up not having any class mechanic -.- and that would srsly suck

Easily replacable but a ton of varying options which have been spelled out in the previous 10 pages. Feel free to take your time to read through those pages, Blackrose.1247…

Personally, I like the idea of preparations from GW1 Ranger.

k sry didnt follow all the posts of this thread just got a little big for me^^

BlackRose.1247:

but iif we remove the pet we would end up not having any class mechanic -.- and that would srsly suck

Not really. Since you get the choice to either have the pet or get a stat boost, it’s a class mechanic.
Either have a pet that does damage, provides utility and can tank (in pve, ofc, not wvw or pvp) or get a stat boost. Not every class needs to be able to switch to different weapon skills sets like the elementalist.

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

thefantasticg.3984:

Can we just rename this thread to be the CDI thread?

Or we just all gonna copy paste this thread into the new CDI.

What new CDI ? That thread is nowhere to be found…

He meant when it is created.

Supposed to be created monday…then today and still not up.

Fenrir.6183:

Supposed to be created monday…then today and still not up.

Read:

CDI collaboration got delayed guys and got moved on wednesday.

It’s soon to be 11am in Seattle so be patient.

Yeah, it’s 9pm here.
Also, i said “then today” but maybe you can’t read more than 5 words…

Fenrir.6183:

Yeah, it’s 9pm here.
Also, i said “then today” but maybe you can’t read more than 5 words…

It’s 9pm for me too, but still just 11am for them. Unlikely that they will start within the next hour.

Make pets optional, that’s the best solution IMO. Base the ranger on the GW1’s ranger.
I loved to play ranger back in GW1… especially the fact that you increased the range of your bow by standing on a hill or something.

Things I’d -LOVE- to see summed up:

-Pets being optional!!!!!
-Preparations like the ones of GW1
- More range once you’re on a higher spot than your target (Physics?)
-More focus on bows ( We’re a RANGEr afterall, aren’t we)
- The old favorable winds spirit which made your arrows fly twice as fast.
- The variety of bows in GW1 made the game alot more unique. Might be a good idea to return the hornbow or recurve bow?
- Redo the traits, as said earlier in like every ranger topic. We just have to sacrifice too much to make our skills usefull.
- Pets which are hard to obtain. ( Rainbow phoenix, black widow spider, black moa etc.)

I’d love to see some -decent- changes in the near future. Not those weak ones we had in the past.