Guild Wars 2

@AlphaK
Excellent integration of more positional play and useability that would also be low impact development-wise.

I’d even go so far as to make this the case for Forage, and even Conal attacks.
And I’d do that by making good use of an already existing feature.

Currently, a pet who has received the ‘Return’ command will spin in place to orient itself in the same direction the Master is facing. This functionality is often overwritten by the fact if the Master gets 100-ish away it will cause the pet to move and reset it’s orientation.

I would propose that Conal-based F2 would be a chain.

• Chain 1: Ground-target, pet moves to location, orients to your current target, and uses F2
• Chain 2: Available while the pet is in transit and while charging their attack. Holds off the F2 and when pet reaches destination it allows you to reorient the pet the way the ‘return’ feature works now but locking the pet’s position so your movement can’t mess it up.
• Chain 3: Executes F2.
  
  Sort of like, continuing down the chain allows for a higher level of micromanagement.

@Vox Hollow

That’s a nice idea, especially for drakes. It would greatly increase our mindgame potential and help prevent f2 misfires.

It’s a little more complex but the ranger could definitely use some more complexity in gameplay as it stands. The depth it provides would be a nice start to ranger improvements.

Atherakhia.4086:

Another day without responses…. as if the Ranger community didn’t already feel alienated enough.

Lets have a goal tomorrow guys. No more pet posts until ANet comes back asking for more. We’ve gone in circles enough. Lets cover some new ground!

another option would be to continually spam the profession balance sub-forum (possibly the spvp sub-forum) with new titled threads along the lines of “Please don’t ignore the ranger CDI” or “is the ranger CDI suppose to be a discussion amongst our self’s” etc

Another thing that should be addressed, is the way pets keep you in combat. It’s annoying to any class that relies on pets really. The player disengages combat, but the pet stays behind to fight some random baddy, thus making it impossible for the player to regenerate health, or to use a waypoint.

What is wrong with the in-combat system? Why won’t it properly disengage? And why do pets keep you in-combat to begin with? Can’t this be switched off some how?

swap pets, press f3. this will solve you probelm

Eggyokeo.9705:

Atherakhia.4086:

Another day without responses…. as if the Ranger community didn’t already feel alienated enough.

Lets have a goal tomorrow guys. No more pet posts until ANet comes back asking for more. We’ve gone in circles enough. Lets cover some new ground!

another option would be to continually spam the profession balance sub-forum (possibly the spvp sub-forum) with new titled threads along the lines of “Please don’t ignore the ranger CDI” or “is the ranger CDI suppose to be a discussion amongst our self’s” etc

(little offtopic) Not that I like spamming in another forum sections but really, this CDI is the most if not the only one that had at best less than 4 responses of any Dev. around.. It’s really disheartening.. There are really good ideas floating around here.. What this CDI needs is more participation from the Devs, and i mean, a lot more, currently Ranger is one of the most controversial professions due the tons of bugs and problematic mechanics (the F2 issue, unresponsive pet, useless shouts, and so on).

In conclusion, this CDI needs a lot of attention and dialogue with more Devs if we really want to reach some true improvements for the profession.

my 2 cents.

At this stage i’m believing it was never about fixing rangers it was a case of the devs band-aid box being empty so they wanted to see if the community had a spare.

khorne.8592:

At this stage i’m believing it was never about fixing rangers it was a case of the devs band-aid box being empty so they wanted to see if the community had a spare.

I think it started about fixing rangers, then the board exploded. People wanted the pet removed, and they said no. People said “well fix the pet AI then” and got back “that’s a tall order of work, we’re not sure we could realisitically do it”.

The board exploded again. Allie got sick (if you believe that) and the thread didn’t get a secondary contributor from ANet taking point.

At this point there’s no value left here until some direction is given to the discussion from ANet. In my opinion?

Top three things needing to be addressed.

1. Pets need to have tweaks done to make them more responsive and less likely to die in massive AOE attacks. A full overhaul of their behavior may not be a good application of time, but we do need some more control and/or usefulness added.

2. Some damage outputs in our skills need to be looked at. We’re supposed to do “sustained, long-term, reliable” damage, but as pointed out Longbow #2 (Rapid Fire) does not achieve this. Other weapons are less about damage and more about particular skirmishing options. This in and of itself is not an issue, but with these options we are decently survivable alone but not as useful in a group.

3. We lack a good means of keeping an opponent in range if they decide to run (nearly everyone who starts losing to a ranger opts to run then double back to fight when the distance closes), and we really have bad options against competent thieves. It was said we could in theory have our utility tweaked to beat stealth and thus be desirable as anti-thief options. I like this idea.

We can speak about overhaul when this mutch thing needs to be changed…
As anyone can see a lot of times in the past 40 pages and the upcommings,
we mostly agree with the non-hunter supporting conditions we can apply,
and our traits which are half+ rubbish.

I wasn’t going to say it but I will: I think we should go with a 4 pet rotation instead of the two we get now with no cool down on death. It’s either that or give us a robust set of controls for our pet. The frustration at the lack of “collaboration” is setting in. I will come back later

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Aioros.4862:

The problem with that is it’ll will make rangers better than other classes.
Rangers shouldn’t be better, we should be even.

We wouldn’t. Ofcourse, the pet-damage has to be toned down in order to get our full damage back, but as McWolfy has already pointed out, the warrior gets around +15% damage through his classmechanic. So the pet could still deal 10%, which would lead to ultimately 110% damage. Also, if you invest points into beastmastery, your damage will go down since you can’t invest points into your own damage but the damage of your pet will increase. IMO beastmaster ranger should deal slightly more absolute damage than a zerker ranger (115%?) since you should get rewarded for actively using the pet.
Furthermore, to make the pet annoying enough, so that enemies have to care about them, pets could apply vulnerability on hit.

If ANET decided againsts Aspects/stow ultimately, I’d like to see this approach instead. I fail to see how a pet that can barely hit would be overpowered when wielded by a charater with 100% of it’s damage out put intact. Given the lack of dodge mechanics for the pet, the transition time involved in keeping them safe from damage, the sheer downtime the pet has in most situations, I can’t believe that this would be in anyway OP.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

khorne.8592:

At this stage i’m believing it was never about fixing rangers it was a case of the devs band-aid box being empty so they wanted to see if the community had a spare.

I think it started about fixing rangers, then the board exploded. People wanted the pet removed, and they said no. People said “well fix the pet AI then” and got back “that’s a tall order of work, we’re not sure we could realisitically do it”.

The board exploded again. Allie got sick (if you believe that) and the thread didn’t get a secondary contributor from ANet taking point.

At this point there’s no value left here until some direction is given to the discussion from ANet. In my opinion?

Top three things needing to be addressed.

1. Pets need to have tweaks done to make them more responsive and less likely to die in massive AOE attacks. A full overhaul of their behavior may not be a good application of time, but we do need some more control and/or usefulness added.

2. Some damage outputs in our skills need to be looked at. We’re supposed to do “sustained, long-term, reliable” damage, but as pointed out Longbow #2 (Rapid Fire) does not achieve this. Other weapons are less about damage and more about particular skirmishing options. This in and of itself is not an issue, but with these options we are decently survivable alone but not as useful in a group.

3. We lack a good means of keeping an opponent in range if they decide to run (nearly everyone who starts losing to a ranger opts to run then double back to fight when the distance closes), and we really have bad options against competent thieves. It was said we could in theory have our utility tweaked to beat stealth and thus be desirable as anti-thief options. I like this idea.

All good points except 3, I feel, goes a bit off base. Developing ranger as anti-thief would only ever aid PvP and WvW, it’s also a bit spiteful methinks. Alot of the Agro at thieves comes from people who PvP but can’t be bother to learn how to counter thieves. Making one class a Thief Hunter is just adding to that agro for no good reason I can see. It’s essentially bullying of one class.

Now Better control against all classes I can get behind. Our lack of control is pretty embarrassing given our mechanics.
Engineer, for example, has more control than us on a single weapon than we have on several and our pets, combined together. They also have the likes of net-turret available. Even those who use pistol can have glue shot, then there’s the kits which add glue bomb, frost grenade and box of nails into the equation, along with the other skills on those kits at the same time AND Tool-belt skills. An engi can have any combination of these without hindering their playstyle options or damage ouput. We have to go trapper-Bow-spider at the expense of everything else, to get anything near what they have in terms of CC.
Then of course there just keeping things in range by speed and travel time. Again, rifle has this covered already they also have Rocket Boots and Slick Shoes-super Speed into the mix as well as magnet pull and magnet bomb.. We have Greatsword 3.

Taken at face value this seems fair and it seems a bit strange to compare Ranger with Engineer, ’til you consider that our role is suppose to be about “sustained damage” and working with our pet, which means locking down targets so that the pet can actually hit them.

Atherakhia.4086:

Another day without responses…. as if the Ranger community didn’t already feel alienated enough.

Lets have a goal tomorrow guys. No more pet posts until ANet comes back asking for more. We’ve gone in circles enough. Lets cover some new ground!

Silence speaks louder than words. In the case of this particular thread, it got too long to read. I couldn’t be paid enough to muddle through walls of texts written in mostly broken-English. Collaboration should have happened 1 hour over Skype with top member of the ranger community. This 41 page monstrosity here is a rotting and foul mess that is not fit for human consumption.

Specific Game Mode
PVE

Proposal Overview
Restore Hunter’s Shot to what it was. In PvE, opening a fight with 10 stacks of Vulnerability allows some decent burst damage (when used with pets like Jaguars). In PvE, Stealth is useless on the longbow.

Goal of Proposal
I’m sure PvP and WvW rangers love the Stealth provided by Hunter’s Shot, but it’s nothing but a dead space on the weapon skill bar of a PvE Ranger. With a longbow, we’ve got long range, a pet, a knockback, and utility snares/roots to keep my enemies away. By changing Hunter’s Shot, you not only lowered my dps, you also gave me a skill that I have will never use in PvE.

Associated Risks
WvW and PvP Rangers would lose the Stealth, but as far as I know you guys still intend to add new skills to the game. Perhaps adding a Utility Skill that provides the Stealth would be the better way to handle it. They’d get their Stealth, and PvE players wouldn’t be saddled with a useless weapon skill.

GameMode
Overall, weapon suggestion

Proposal Overview
change Longbow to AoE-control ranged weapon
introduce rifle as ranged single-target weapon
change axe (mainhand) to melee (or <=600 range) condition weapon

Goal of the Proposal
right now, ranger lacks AoE damage especially in WvW, with the longbow as “new” aoe-weapon this would be fixed.
Then he has no melee condition weapon. I think the axe could fit into this hole with a change auto-attack.
With the longbow change the ranger would lack an single-target ranged direct damage weapon, which a rifle could be used for.

Proposal Functionality
longbow:

• #1: stays as it is, probably some number tweaking
• #2: change to cone attack which shoots 5 arrows that cripples enemies (900range) same as shortbow #2 but with cripple.
• #3: AoE vulnearablity, works the same as barrage.
• #4-5 stays the same.

These changes would synergise with the range penalty of LB#1 and allow the ranger to play a control/support build.

rifle:

• #1: slow attackspeed, high damage singletarget attack with 1200 range, nothing special
• #2: Marks your target for 3seconds and your pet will deal 30% more damage to this target 10seconds CD.
• #3: Shoots your target into his knee, apply cripple for 4seconds with a 12-15seconds CD
• #4: Hunter’s shot, moved from LB, but it shoots bullets instead of arrows.
• #5: A snipe, that can be charged 1-3 seconds and deals more damage, the longer it is charged, but the enemy will be marked with a crosshair above his head, something like caitlyns ulti in League of Legends. With minimum 30seconds CD.
• traits: there has to be some trait work done, add rifle to eagle eye and quickdraw. or add new traits for rifle, I think we all agree, that the whole trait system of the ranger needs some love.

I think this could be a cool weapon, this is only a suggestion, but it should be a single target weapon, with low CC and pet synergy.

axe-mainhand:

• #1: as said above reduce range to 450-600. Reduce the direct damage of the weapon and add a bleeding effect, 3seconds to the first target, 2s to the second and 1s to the last.
• traits: Honed axes should be changed from crit damage to crit chance.

Associated Risks
I dont see any, only the usual number tweaking with new skills.

Toby.2357:

Fozzik.1742:

I think what I’ve learned after reading all 39 pages of this discussion…

When ArenaNet asked the community which profession they would like to see fixed/impoved, ArenaNet was really hoping the community would pick an easier one than ranger.

Why couldn’t the community have picked warrior? Anet would have loved to talk about tweaking warrior. Ranger’s too hard.

ArenaNet knows perfectly well (as do we) which profession is the most broken. They were just hoping they could look like they cared without actually having to fix it. If we’d picked a different profession, they could have blamed the next year of continued broken ranger on the community. Too bad we didn’t play along.

Man this… this so hard my head hurts. I thought they really cared at the beginning but after page 20+ it seemed like they just pretended to care

I really sincerly had high hopes for this CDI and the beginning of this CDI felt like there was hope at the end of the tunnel and finnaly the ranger class would get some positive attention and be on par with other classes. But then as i kept reading towards page 20+ i realized the fixes and aditions most wanted for the ranger are now being ignored and will not be discussed. Now there are talks about fixing the pets which will probably not work instead of permastowing. There are so many good ideas here that are not even being consider probably. The issues are so simple yet the struggle is so hard. Time to level that warrior i guess.

Well because thats the way it is. Always was and will be. You see at start, every company tries to satisfy customer, but once it gets big, strategy changes from satisfying customer to getting biggest profit possible. So then starts things as cutting corners, skipping plans that would not give enough profit etc. Why do you think Ranger didn’t see any real changes/fixes since like what, release? Because they can get away with it. They are fixing / implementing changes that are most critical to their profits, like gem store and living story (this is closely related with gem store if you looked closely). That’s why we get living story every two weeks and gem store is being updated constantly with useless crap – this is where the money is.

And where is the money in fixing Ranger? In Anet eyes it just costs lots of effort and time to fix it, and that is a lot of money, but it is most likely would not give profit in return Anet would like to get from such effort put, so they put all their effort in things like I written above.

I’m actually surprised why they even make such threads, because they really don’t care or have time / resources to do what people actually really want. Maybe just to make an illusion that they are fixing something like they were “fixing” for the past two years.

P.S. I remember I written about this problem of big companies when GW2 was still in beta with a concern that Anet might become like most big companies, sadly I was right..

gawker.8340:

Atherakhia.4086:

Another day without responses…. as if the Ranger community didn’t already feel alienated enough.

Lets have a goal tomorrow guys. No more pet posts until ANet comes back asking for more. We’ve gone in circles enough. Lets cover some new ground!

Silence speaks louder than words. In the case of this particular thread, it got too long to read. I couldn’t be paid enough to muddle through walls of texts written in mostly broken-English. Collaboration should have happened 1 hour over Skype with top member of the ranger community. This 41 page monstrosity here is a rotting and foul mess that is not fit for human consumption.

Agree 100%

1. Community decides on 4 people to represent their class …the Ranger.
2. Internal CDI with the Ranger community and the 4 reps monitoring the debate.
3. The 4 reps talk to Anet to better understand what Anet is able to, and willing to do for the class …IE what is their vision
4. The 4 reps produce a well thought out, legible, accurate report to present to Anet that reflects both the Ranger communities ideas that correspond with Anets parameters.

It’s not like the above format is a ground breaking new idea. It’s tried and true. Strange how it’s not being used.

Game Mode

PVX

Overview of Proposal

Balance the ranger profession’s Non-pet damage with other classes. A ranger in berzerker gear and traited for DPS should be capable of the exact same damage as any other class as this game has no class roles.

Proposed Changes

Ranger pets currently draw their damage from the ranger, which means we’re only capable of 70% of warrior damage on our own. In addition, a warriors class mechanic adds to warrior damage, where ours if the pet stays alive and hits with every strike (good luck) just equals a warriors base non class mechanic damage. This means that rangers are not capable of equal damage output with the other classes in GW2 because only our class mechanic subtracts from our DPS.

The Fix
Give rangers 100% of the damage currently split between the ranger and the pet. The pet damage must be an addition to ranger power and no longer a drain on our damage. The ranger pets should add as much damage to our class as they are traited for. A beast master’s pets do more, and an archer’s do less obviously, but that pet damage must no longer be drawn out of the ranger if you care at all about balance.

Potential Issues

Rangers would hit 30% harder on their own plus whatever hits the AI managed to land which is a nice buff, but this just gets us up to level footing.

Forzani.2584:

Agree 100%

1. Community decides on 4 people to represent their class …the Ranger.
2. Internal CDI with the Ranger community and the 4 reps monitoring the debate.
3. The 4 reps talk to Anet to better understand what Anet is able to, and willing to do for the class …IE what is their vision
4. The 4 reps produce a well thought out, legible, accurate report to present to Anet that reflects both the Ranger communities ideas that correspond with Anets parameters.

It’s not like the above format is a ground breaking new idea. It’s tried and true. Strange how it’s not being used.

No.

I don’t want “the best four rangers” to determine how to run my class the best, I don’t want ANet to only listen to “the people who know the class”, because that immediately pushes me out of the focus because I don’t do as much WvW or PvP. And I don’t sit there crunching numbers and stats and agonizing over what to change with the Ranger. I’ve learned how to use what’s there which works for me.

And I have this . . . not unfounded suspicion . . . those people who the community would elect? Wouldn’t care what I thought, wouldn’t care how I want to play, and would put forth a design paradigm which wouldn’t be the ranger I like to play or want to play.

I did this once before where I went looking on PvX Wiki for a ranger build in GW1. Four builds, and I couldn’t handle any of them because of the sheer amount of micro two required, one was gimmicky as all heck, and the fourth was purely PvP focused. I can’t play a class exactly like another person says I should be playing it.

The longer this thread gets, the more I just see if the “top community” gets to work on this, then I won’t be able to play my ranger and I’ll have to make the decision to jump to another class and start learning them . . . or just leave.

gawker.8340:

Atherakhia.4086:

Another day without responses…. as if the Ranger community didn’t already feel alienated enough.

Lets have a goal tomorrow guys. No more pet posts until ANet comes back asking for more. We’ve gone in circles enough. Lets cover some new ground!

Silence speaks louder than words. In the case of this particular thread, it got too long to read. I couldn’t be paid enough to muddle through walls of texts written in mostly broken-English. Collaboration should have happened 1 hour over Skype with top member of the ranger community. This 41 page monstrosity here is a rotting and foul mess that is not fit for human consumption.

Yeah….you guys reading this thread don’t want to read my response to that, but someone needs to say it, so here it is :::

This 41 page rotting and foul mess not fit for human consumption is almost entirely the fault of the people who posted on this thread, and the vitriol that keeps getting sprayed in Anet’s direction by some of the posters in this thread has reached pretty insane levels. The expectations of many coming into this were way too high to start with, and the fact that people are getting worked up over the fact that there is no dev posting,…for a day or two, proves that.

You guys need to take a few deeps breaths, and show a little patience. And don’t give me this “I’ve been patient for over a year” crap! If you’ve been waiting all patient like for over a year, then you can be patient for an extra week or two until this CDI Thread ends.

wolfyrik.2017:

All good points except 3, I feel, goes a bit off base. Developing ranger as anti-thief would only ever aid PvP and WvW, it’s also a bit spiteful methinks. Alot of the Agro at thieves comes from people who PvP but can’t be bother to learn how to counter thieves. Making one class a Thief Hunter is just adding to that agro for no good reason I can see. It’s essentially bullying of one class.

It’s just the point I grasped on, having seen nothing on a more general “control” basis which I really liked.

Now Better control against all classes I can get behind. Our lack of control is pretty embarrassing given our mechanics.

It’s something I reflected on but really, our control is just off-tune. It could work, except there’s again nothing really to help us pursue a runner or catch a target as evasive as us. (We do have decent evasion, let’s recognize that.)

Engineer, for example, has more control than us on a single weapon than we have on several and our pets, combined together. They also have the likes of net-turret available. Even those who use pistol can have glue shot, then there’s the kits which add glue bomb, frost grenade and box of nails into the equation, along with the other skills on those kits at the same time AND Tool-belt skills. An engi can have any combination of these without hindering their playstyle options or damage ouput. We have to go trapper-Bow-spider at the expense of everything else, to get anything near what they have in terms of CC.

Engineer also has a small weapon selection and those toys of theirs are all they have. Compared to us, I think we have a broader answer without needing to spill a lot of effort into our pets the way an engineer needs to pack turrets/kits.

Taken at face value this seems fair and it seems a bit strange to compare Ranger with Engineer, ’til you consider that our role is suppose to be about “sustained damage” and working with our pet, which means locking down targets so that the pet can actually hit them.

Or helping the pet catch up to them. I find “Signet of the Hunt” with the passive speed boost helps us keep up with most people until the difference between it and Swiftness (25% vs 33%) lets the gap widen out some more. It definitely helps the pet stick to targets which aren’t running directly away.

Of course, the pet isn’t big on damage short of the two out there which are almost insane. I saw mentioned in here the “stealth kitty” which can get almost ludicrous.

Chrispy.5641:

gawker.8340:

Atherakhia.4086:

Another day without responses…. as if the Ranger community didn’t already feel alienated enough.

Lets have a goal tomorrow guys. No more pet posts until ANet comes back asking for more. We’ve gone in circles enough. Lets cover some new ground!

Silence speaks louder than words. In the case of this particular thread, it got too long to read. I couldn’t be paid enough to muddle through walls of texts written in mostly broken-English. Collaboration should have happened 1 hour over Skype with top member of the ranger community. This 41 page monstrosity here is a rotting and foul mess that is not fit for human consumption.

Yeah….you guys reading this thread don’t want to read my response to that, but someone needs to say it, so here it is :::

This 41 page rotting and foul mess not fit for human consumption is almost entirely the fault of the people who posted on this thread, and the vitriol that keeps getting sprayed in Anet’s direction by some of the posters in this thread has reached pretty insane levels. The expectations of many coming into this were way too high to start with, and the fact that people are getting worked up over the fact that there is no dev posting,…for a day or two, proves that.

You guys need to take a few deeps breaths, and show a little patience. And don’t give me this “I’ve been patient for over a year” crap! If you’ve been waiting all patient like for over a year, then you can be patient for an extra week or two until this CDI Thread ends.

The lack of collaboration which is the C in CDI on Anet’s part has nothing at all to do with us. People for the most part have been surprisingly calm and constructive and I like more than a few of the ideas put forward.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Forzani.2584:

Agree 100%

1. Community decides on 4 people to represent their class …the Ranger.
2. Internal CDI with the Ranger community and the 4 reps monitoring the debate.
3. The 4 reps talk to Anet to better understand what Anet is able to, and willing to do for the class …IE what is their vision
4. The 4 reps produce a well thought out, legible, accurate report to present to Anet that reflects both the Ranger communities ideas that correspond with Anets parameters.

It’s not like the above format is a ground breaking new idea. It’s tried and true. Strange how it’s not being used.

No.

I don’t want “the best four rangers” to determine how to run my class the best, I don’t want ANet to only listen to “the people who know the class”, because that immediately pushes me out of the focus because I don’t do as much WvW or PvP. And I don’t sit there crunching numbers and stats and agonizing over what to change with the Ranger. I’ve learned how to use what’s there which works for me.

And I have this . . . not unfounded suspicion . . . those people who the community would elect? Wouldn’t care what I thought, wouldn’t care how I want to play, and would put forth a design paradigm which wouldn’t be the ranger I like to play or want to play.

I did this once before where I went looking on PvX Wiki for a ranger build in GW1. Four builds, and I couldn’t handle any of them because of the sheer amount of micro two required, one was gimmicky as all heck, and the fourth was purely PvP focused. I can’t play a class exactly like another person says I should be playing it.

The longer this thread gets, the more I just see if the “top community” gets to work on this, then I won’t be able to play my ranger and I’ll have to make the decision to jump to another class and start learning them . . . or just leave.

Apparently you didn’t read what I posted. Just like the Devs haven’t read the million stupid ideas from non Rangers in this thread. The way it’s set up now..won’t work. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. This is a simple PR stunt that is doomed for failure.

I didn’t say 4 people would decide the fate of Rangers. I said 4 people would be chosen by the community. Those 4 would likely be well respected posters that have shown great knowledge of the class…and also have the credibility to know what is over powered or under powered.

The community would then spam their ideas. Same as they are doing now. The difference is the 4 reps, along with the community, would filter out all the BS spam. They would throw the crap out and put together a package for the devs that was readable and reasonable…that fit Anets vision.

So many posts that have completely redesigned the class is laughable. The bad news is that spam has covered up the actual good ideas. Ideas that are simple tweaks that have an actual chance to be used and would help the class.

whyme.3281:

GameMode
Overall, weapon suggestion

Proposal Overview
change Longbow to AoE-control ranged weapon
introduce rifle as ranged single-target weapon
change axe (mainhand) to melee (or <=600 range) condition weapon
….

Yes please

Forzani.2584:

Apparently you didn’t read what I posted.

Yes I did, and I still don’t like it no matter how you spin it.

Just like the Devs haven’t read the million stupid ideas from non Rangers in this thread. The way it’s set up now..won’t work. It’s a waste of everyone’s time. This is a simple PR stunt that is doomed for failure.

The whole game is doomed for failure, inevitably it’s going to be shut down due to lack of funding. So chew on that too.

I didn’t say 4 people would decide the fate of Rangers. I said 4 people would be chosen by the community. Those 4 would likely be well respected posters that have shown great knowledge of the class…and also have the credibility to know what is over powered or under powered.

No. No, you didn’t read what I posted either. It’s the same difference. These four people aren’t going to care what I think about the class, and they’re not going to bother listening to some “noob ranger” if they’re already supposedly the most knowledgeable. And to be fair, I care more about what they think should be done for the class than they would care about what problems I’d have about their solutions. They’d only care if I liked an idea.

The community would then spam their ideas. Same as they are doing now. The difference is the 4 reps, along with the community, would filter out all the BS spam. They would throw the crap out and put together a package for the devs that was readable and reasonable…that fit Anets vision.

Nope. You grossly underestimate what’d get put forth. It wouldn’t fit ANet’s vision at all, it’d fit their distillation of everything they think is sane and possible while discarding anything outside of that. So what they’d put forth is more “this is what we think should be done”, and given the tone of this topic? It wouldn’t be ANet’s vision, though it may possibly respect it.

I doubt that.

So many posts that have completely redesigned the class is laughable. The bad news is that spam has covered up the actual good ideas. Ideas that are simple tweaks that have an actual chance to be used and would help the class.

That’s why this topic should probably stop for a bit until we see a red post outlining what they see here and where they’d like to take this.

whyme.3281:

GameMode
Overall, weapon suggestion

Proposal Overview
change Longbow to AoE-control ranged weapon
introduce rifle as ranged single-target weapon
change axe (mainhand) to melee (or <=600 range) condition weapon

Your proposal would give the LB a niche he could fill but I don’t like direction you’re going. The warrior LB is also a AoE-control weapon. Yet I want to use the ranger LB to kill people, not to CC the to death. I don’t want a counterpart to the warrior LB.

A thing they could have done to avoid the CDI getting out of had would have been to make a main CDI thread linking to sub-CDI threads on different issues (eg: pet, traits, utilities, weapons), all with different thread owners…

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Forzani.2584:

Apparently you didn’t read what I posted.

That’s why this topic should probably stop for a bit until we see a red post outlining what they see here and where they’d like to take this.

^ This, these CDI’s can be productive it just needs guidance, look at all the CDI’s that Chris Whiteside runs, they are awesome, he is constantly involved and helps guide the conversation and seems to take a lot of pride with the topic at hand. But it could be worse, WvW CDI is now what 6 or 7 days since last post? Spvp was so dead in responses its now buried pages deep in forum topics. I think they need to only do 1 CDI topic at a time, I appreciate the ambition of trying to tackle multiple topics but the rest of the staff seems to be spread to thin to have a productive conversation with.

Edit: Waste of time responding.

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

whyme.3281:

GameMode
Overall, weapon suggestion

Proposal Overview
change Longbow to AoE-control ranged weapon
introduce rifle as ranged single-target weapon
change axe (mainhand) to melee (or <=600 range) condition weapon

Your proposal would give the LB a niche he could fill but I don’t like direction you’re going. The warrior LB is also a AoE-control weapon. Yet I want to use the ranger LB to kill people, not to CC the to death. I don’t want a counterpart to the warrior LB.

Try this:

Longbow skills:

1. Long-Range Shot. Gets increasing damage the further it travels to the target. Starts lower and gets higher than it is currently, so you will want to use it at range and so people will not want to be at maximum range against a ranger.

2. Rapid Fire. Needs to be no longer a net loss of DPS. So make it a stacking ability with 0.5 sec recharge; each hit adds a stack which makes the next shot of Rapid Fire stronger to a value something on par with a full Might stack. Any other skill than Rapid Fire will have the bonus but set Rapid Fire’s cooldown ticking. A shot after Rapid Fire reaches full stack will also reset it. No matter what, if you keep this skill it has to be stronger instead of a net loss of damage vs auto-attack.

3. Hunter’s Shot. Leave it alone for the most part, maybe increase Stealth duration a little and let the pet inflict Vulnerability on its next attack if it hits.

4. Point Blank Shot. Knockback and Interrupt in case of Stability. This doesn’t need changing, really since it’s supposed to help keep an enemy out of your face where LB is weakest.

5. Barrage. If possible, the first hit Immobilizes, then it Cripples. If not, then Immobilize followed by Crippled when Immobilize ends. If that’s not possible, Immobilize 1s per hit and call it a day.

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

whyme.3281:

GameMode
Overall, weapon suggestion

Proposal Overview
change Longbow to AoE-control ranged weapon
introduce rifle as ranged single-target weapon
change axe (mainhand) to melee (or <=600 range) condition weapon

Your proposal would give the LB a niche he could fill but I don’t like direction you’re going. The warrior LB is also a AoE-control weapon. Yet I want to use the ranger LB to kill people, not to CC the to death. I don’t want a counterpart to the warrior LB.

Sustain damage, no burst damage. With the CC you keep your enemy at range to have the higher AA damage. And for the killing part it would then be the rifle, which isn’t that bad I think. And ofcourse fix the lack of AoE.

If we don’t get a summary post today or at least some sort of guidance from ANet, I’m giving up on this cause.

I understand that Allie and Co. are busy people, but we’re forty-plus pages into this thread and still have not received a single summary post. I thought the whole point of these CDI’s was to facilitate interaction between the devs and the community to help come up with something great, but right now this thread has devolved into people spit-balling random ideas and hoping that something sticks.

We’ve talked the pet to death. We’ve talked about clunky weapon sets and how a lot of our skills (both weapon and utility) lack impact or “uumph”. We’ve talked about how Ranger is typically a selfish class and doesn’t really provide that much to his or her team. We’ve talked about awkward/terrible (both really) trait lines. We’ve talked about ANet’s vision of the Ranger and the whole sustained damage debacle. We’ve talked about how Ranger suffers in all aspects of WvW aside from roaming.

Please, tell us where we currently stand on these issues and what we can do to move forward. The ball is entirely in your court, ANet.

darkace.8925:

Specific Game Mode
PVE

Proposal Overview
Restore Hunter’s Shot to what it was. In PvE, opening a fight with 10 stacks of Vulnerability allows some decent burst damage (when used with pets like Jaguars). In PvE, Stealth is useless on the longbow.

Goal of Proposal
I’m sure PvP and WvW rangers love the Stealth provided by Hunter’s Shot, but it’s nothing but a dead space on the weapon skill bar of a PvE Ranger. With a longbow, we’ve got long range, a pet, a knockback, and utility snares/roots to keep my enemies away. By changing Hunter’s Shot, you not only lowered my dps, you also gave me a skill that I have will never use in PvE.

Associated Risks
WvW and PvP Rangers would lose the Stealth, but as far as I know you guys still intend to add new skills to the game. Perhaps adding a Utility Skill that provides the Stealth would be the better way to handle it. They’d get their Stealth, and PvE players wouldn’t be saddled with a useless weapon skill.

its pretty good with the opening strikes buffs, essentially gives you a guaranteed crit and 5 stacks of vulnerability during fights, heck, id rng ever gets a smoke field, or works with a thief/engy/mes, could be downright hax

Specific Game Mode
All

Proposal Overview
Giving ranger’s equal damage to all other classes

Goal of Proposal
Give rangers 100% of the damage, not this useless 70:30 split with our pet
I don’t care if you nerf the pet damage or even take it away completely, people could care less about pet damage, I want my damage back on par with every other profession

Did you nerf Ele’s damage because you know, they can have summons of their own too
Did you nerf Necro damage? they have an entire zoo for an army
Did you nerf Mesmer damage? they got more clones than Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones

I would love to see a dev give me one logical reason as to why rangers should NOT have 100% damage

No other profession has a drain on their damage from their core mechanic.
The only way to even make pets do noticeable damage is to spend more than half my traits configuring my pet (which btw cripples my character, thx again anet). And than I have to micro manage my pet in combat as well.
This is an obvious crutch to players

Associated Risks
The design philosophy for this class has failed miserably.
Players will lose what little hope there is for this class if you don’t give rangers 100% damage

Our damage is pathetically laughable, don’t even try to play it like it isn’t.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Your proposal would give the LB a niche he could fill but I don’t like direction you’re going. The warrior LB is also a AoE-control weapon. Yet I want to use the ranger LB to kill people, not to CC the to death. I don’t want a counterpart to the warrior LB.

Try this:

Longbow skills:

1. Long-Range Shot. Gets increasing damage the further it travels to the target. Starts lower and gets higher than it is currently, so you will want to use it at range and so people will not want to be at maximum range against a ranger.

2. Rapid Fire. Needs to be no longer a net loss of DPS. So make it a stacking ability with 0.5 sec recharge; each hit adds a stack which makes the next shot of Rapid Fire stronger to a value something on par with a full Might stack. Any other skill than Rapid Fire will have the bonus but set Rapid Fire’s cooldown ticking. A shot after Rapid Fire reaches full stack will also reset it. No matter what, if you keep this skill it has to be stronger instead of a net loss of damage vs auto-attack.

3. Hunter’s Shot. Leave it alone for the most part, maybe increase Stealth duration a little and let the pet inflict Vulnerability on its next attack if it hits.

4. Point Blank Shot. Knockback and Interrupt in case of Stability. This doesn’t need changing, really since it’s supposed to help keep an enemy out of your face where LB is weakest.

5. Barrage. If possible, the first hit Immobilizes, then it Cripples. If not, then Immobilize followed by Crippled when Immobilize ends. If that’s not possible, Immobilize 1s per hit and call it a day.

Why not add a small aoe explosion to the auto attack?
Also: I really like your Rapid Fire suggestion.

Flytrap.8075:

If we don’t get a summary post today or at least some sort of guidance from ANet, I’m giving up on this cause.

I understand that Allie and Co. are busy people, but we’re forty-plus pages into this thread and still have not received a single summary post. I thought the whole point of these CDI’s was to facilitate interaction between the devs and the community to help come up with something great, but right now this thread has devolved into people spit-balling random ideas and hoping that something sticks.

We’ve talked the pet to death. We’ve talked about clunky weapon sets and how a lot of our skills (both weapon and utility) lack impact or “uumph”. We’ve talked about how Ranger is typically a selfish class and doesn’t really provide that much to his or her team. We’ve talked about awkward/terrible (both really) trait lines. We’ve talked about ANet’s vision of the Ranger and the whole sustained damage debacle. We’ve talked about how Ranger suffers in all aspects of WvW aside from roaming.

Please, tell us where we currently stand on these issues and what we can do to move forward. The ball is entirely in your court, ANet.

Agreed.
I see posts in other CDIs daily but here? nah

At this point, it looks awful on Allie now.
She has even turned her attention to some pistol whip thread about theives lol

Ironically enough, she has pistol whipped this Ranger CDI…

SkiTz.4590:

Flytrap.8075:

If we don’t get a summary post today or at least some sort of guidance from ANet, I’m giving up on this cause.

I understand that Allie and Co. are busy people, but we’re forty-plus pages into this thread and still have not received a single summary post. I thought the whole point of these CDI’s was to facilitate interaction between the devs and the community to help come up with something great, but right now this thread has devolved into people spit-balling random ideas and hoping that something sticks.

We’ve talked the pet to death. We’ve talked about clunky weapon sets and how a lot of our skills (both weapon and utility) lack impact or “uumph”. We’ve talked about how Ranger is typically a selfish class and doesn’t really provide that much to his or her team. We’ve talked about awkward/terrible (both really) trait lines. We’ve talked about ANet’s vision of the Ranger and the whole sustained damage debacle. We’ve talked about how Ranger suffers in all aspects of WvW aside from roaming.

Please, tell us where we currently stand on these issues and what we can do to move forward. The ball is entirely in your court, ANet.

Agreed.
I see posts in other CDIs daily but here? nah

At this point, it looks awful on Allie now.
She has even turned her attention to some pistol whip thread about theives lol

Ironically enough, she has pistol whipped this Ranger CDI…

The main problem that I have is that we have no idea as to the extent that ANet is willing to change the Ranger profession.

Is this going to be a massive rework, or are they just looking to change some numbers and move some traits around? Will weapon skills be altered, or is that pretty much set in stone? How are they looking into adjusting the pet mechanic, and is implementing a new mechanic completely off the table? Are we sticking to ANet’s original vision of the Ranger, or are things going to change?

In my opinion, it’s pretty hard to provide valuable feedback at this point because we have no idea what ANet has in mind.

Why do people get so uptight because Allie isn’t posting here lately? She is a freaking PR person. She won’t be deciding anything when it comes to any class. It’s like phoning your cable or wireless company with complaints. The person on the other end of the line will let you rant….give you a few “I understands” and promise to look into it. Their entire job is to diffuse the situation and let you blow off a little steam.

Placate – make (someone) less angry or hostile. pacify, calm, appease, mollify, soothe, win over, conciliate, propitiate, make peace with, humor

SkiTz.4590:

Agreed.
I see posts in other CDIs daily but here? nah

At this point, it looks awful on Allie now.
She has even turned her attention to some pistol whip thread about theives lol

Ironically enough, she has pistol whipped this Ranger CDI…

I wouldn’t blame Allie since she seems to be a community talker (meaning she’s PR agent), I would blame the devs for not taking responsibility for making a single class the worst in the game, and then repeatedly MAKING IT WORSE THROUGH ACROSS THE BOARD NERFS.

Anet, unfortunately you’ve reached the point where the hard route is the only route to fix this. I understand this is an undertaking to fix pet AI or even work something else into us as a class mechanic (or even adjusting the ranger:pet damage ratio), but considering Ranger is the worst class in the game and is seen by 80% of the community as the worst class, you probably have no other choice.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

whyme.3281:

GameMode
Overall, weapon suggestion

Proposal Overview
change Longbow to AoE-control ranged weapon
introduce rifle as ranged single-target weapon
change axe (mainhand) to melee (or <=600 range) condition weapon

Your proposal would give the LB a niche he could fill but I don’t like direction you’re going. The warrior LB is also a AoE-control weapon. Yet I want to use the ranger LB to kill people, not to CC the to death. I don’t want a counterpart to the warrior LB.

Try this:

Longbow skills:

1. Long-Range Shot. Gets increasing damage the further it travels to the target. Starts lower and gets higher than it is currently, so you will want to use it at range and so people will not want to be at maximum range against a ranger.

2. Rapid Fire. Needs to be no longer a net loss of DPS. So make it a stacking ability with 0.5 sec recharge; each hit adds a stack which makes the next shot of Rapid Fire stronger to a value something on par with a full Might stack. Any other skill than Rapid Fire will have the bonus but set Rapid Fire’s cooldown ticking. A shot after Rapid Fire reaches full stack will also reset it. No matter what, if you keep this skill it has to be stronger instead of a net loss of damage vs auto-attack.

3. Hunter’s Shot. Leave it alone for the most part, maybe increase Stealth duration a little and let the pet inflict Vulnerability on its next attack if it hits.

4. Point Blank Shot. Knockback and Interrupt in case of Stability. This doesn’t need changing, really since it’s supposed to help keep an enemy out of your face where LB is weakest.

5. Barrage. If possible, the first hit Immobilizes, then it Cripples. If not, then Immobilize followed by Crippled when Immobilize ends. If that’s not possible, Immobilize 1s per hit and call it a day.

I honestly haven’t posted here yet but I wanted to point some things out:

1- What you’re asking for is basically exactly how the LB works right now but with increased damage unless I’m understanding something wrong.

2- All RF really needs is to have a shorter channel time so that it actually does more damage. I’d honestly rather have it do more damage with the same channel time as I see the Longbow as a long range pressuring and control weapon and not the long range snipe the kitten out of you weapon (though I wish it was).

3- I’d say increase the stealth duration a bit and make it on cast and not on hit.

4- No. Just. No. That suggestion just goes completely against the concept of Stability which in other case would mean you’re breaking the game by giving a skill that would render stability useless

5- The main problem with Barrage is how long it takes to channel it. Lower the channel time and increase the cripple time and it should be good imo.

Ofc all of this is my opinion so feel free to disagree on what I said.

Forzani.2584:

Why do people get so uptight because Allie isn’t posting here lately? She is a freaking PR person. She won’t be deciding anything when it comes to any class. It’s like phoning your cable or wireless company with complaints. The person on the other end of the line will let you rant….give you a few “I understands” and promise to look into it. Their entire job is to diffuse the situation and let you blow off a little steam.

Placate – make (someone) less angry or hostile. pacify, calm, appease, mollify, soothe, win over, conciliate, propitiate, make peace with, humor

It’s her thread and, from the response by another ANet dev, largely her responsibility to keep this thread moving in a productive manner. The players have noticed that this thread is pretty far from being productive at this point. We’ve gone in circles for a week now on pet issues for example.

Frustration is spilling over because this isn’t a CDI thread, it’s a suggestion thread that ANet pinned red so people would take notice of but not necessarily read.

We need instructions from ANet so we can get this thread moving in a productive direction. As others have said, we’re averaging one post a day at best.

The CDI thread about fractal is pretty “collaborative” compared to this or the wvw one.

arkealia.2713:

The CDI thread about fractal is pretty active compared to this or the wvw one.

And this thread is twice the size of the Fractal thread; clearly the community has spoken.

EDIT: Re-read all of the red posts and I feel that some of us have been a bit too inflammatory in our demands/accusations, myself included. I’m going to attempt to patiently wait for our next dev post.

If they’re hesitant, or unwilling, to spend the time reworking a dozen different skills, why don’t they just do 2 things and see what happens:

1. The damage split is supposedly 70% / 30% between ranger and pet. Change that to 85% / 15%
2. Increase base health to Ranger by 3,000

Will increase damage and survivability and then the community can test it out and see if it works.

I agree that the class needs a complete overhaul, but Anet will probably tell us that would take 6 months to a year to do. This is simple, could be done tomorrow by changing a few numbers, and could be implemented into the game for the players to test.

Bottom line is they need to do something and do it quickly to show they acknowledge there’s an issue, and that they care.

Tryxtr.6295:

If they’re hesitant, or unwilling, to spend the time reworking a dozen different skills, why don’t they just do 2 things and see what happens:

1. The damage split is supposedly 70% / 30% between ranger and pet. Change that to 85% / 15%
2. Increase base health to Ranger by 3,000

Will increase damage and survivability and then the community can test it out and see if it works.

I agree that the class needs a complete overhaul, but Anet will probably tell us that would take 6 months to a year to do. This is simple, could be done tomorrow by changing a few numbers, and could be implemented into the game for the players to test.

Bottom line is they need to do something and do it quickly to show they acknowledge there’s an issue, and that they care.

Bingo.

That’s exactly what they did for Warriors who went from an under performing class to some say over powered. all it takes is a couple of tweaks like the ones you suggested. No redesign needed.

Forzani.2584:

Tryxtr.6295:

If they’re hesitant, or unwilling, to spend the time reworking a dozen different skills, why don’t they just do 2 things and see what happens:

1. The damage split is supposedly 70% / 30% between ranger and pet. Change that to 85% / 15%
2. Increase base health to Ranger by 3,000

Will increase damage and survivability and then the community can test it out and see if it works.

I agree that the class needs a complete overhaul, but Anet will probably tell us that would take 6 months to a year to do. This is simple, could be done tomorrow by changing a few numbers, and could be implemented into the game for the players to test.

Bottom line is they need to do something and do it quickly to show they acknowledge there’s an issue, and that they care.

Bingo.

That’s exactly what they did for Warriors who went from an under performing class to some say over powered. all it takes is a couple of tweaks like the ones you suggested. No redesign needed.

I think that this would definitely help in PvE/sPvP, but it would fall short of addressing any of the issues that Ranger suffers from in WvW.

I’m of the mind that Ranger needs a design overhaul, but I’m not sure how realistic that is at this point.

RyuDragnier.9476:

SkiTz.4590:

Agreed.
I see posts in other CDIs daily but here? nah

At this point, it looks awful on Allie now.
She has even turned her attention to some pistol whip thread about theives lol

Ironically enough, she has pistol whipped this Ranger CDI…

I wouldn’t blame Allie since she seems to be a community talker (meaning she’s PR agent), I would blame the devs for not taking responsibility for making a single class the worst in the game, and then repeatedly MAKING IT WORSE THROUGH ACROSS THE BOARD NERFS.

Anet, unfortunately you’ve reached the point where the hard route is the only route to fix this. I understand this is an undertaking to fix pet AI or even work something else into us as a class mechanic (or even adjusting the ranger:pet damage ratio), but considering Ranger is the worst class in the game and is seen by 80% of the community as the worst class, you probably have no other choice.

Well no doubt devs are to blame but last time I checked, Allie is the person in charge of this thread.

I see all other CDI’s getting posts by their respective CDI manager, I don’t see that here.

No offense to Allie, but at this point, she has to get some blame (now if Devs are giving her no feedback period and see comes out and says so, than this entire CDI will erupt with backlash because than it will be officially obvious that they don’t give a kitten about this class or CDI (right now, this is only unofficially true lol)

CDI has been up like 10 days now? She has posted a couple times every 2-3 days…. thats embarassingly low amount of interaction with the most important CDI that is currently on the forums.

I still however put more blame into Anet and the developers. It’s completely obvious Allie needs some more support here and by the looks of it, Anet could care less about this.

Why is it that when you try ‘not’ to think about a certain topic (pets in my case) you actually come up with things related to the thing you do not want to think about :/ … anyways, at least this could be useful in the area I was trying to think about, mainly multiplayer area’s of the game.

Specific Game Mode
PvX (mostly WvW, LS, possibly dungeons with foe downedstates)

Proposal Overview
Give the Ranger a shout or activated signet, or just another skill that does the following:
Feral Rage: “_search out downed foes in range, and defeat them, The pet takes 50% less damage from all sources for the duration”

Goal of Proposal
The goal is to give pets more useful commands that would actually offer an increased value to the ranger in certain game modes. Being able to task the Pet with defeating foes in downed state, will give the ranger time to focus on a new target.

It would also make players fear and respect pets a bit more, and it would be as useful as having the pet resurrect downed allies.

Proposal Functionality
The game would check for any foes in downed state in range, if there are none the skill icon would stay ‘inactive’ (this is why it would also work well on a signet/charm as activation effect).

After the skill is activated the pet searches out downed foes and finishes them off, during this time the pet receives a buff of 50% damage from all sources, to make sure the pet will actually successfully carry out the order.

Associated Risks
another shout may well have to make room for this one. Or a signet activation might have to be changed to make room, or any skill might have to make room for this one.

ps. oke back ‘hopefully’ to non-pet suggestions for multiplayer environment improvements to Rangers suggestions. I have now taken up the stance to try and ‘not’ think about these kinds of improvements, lets hope it will work similar to ‘not’ trying to think about pet suggestions :P ;D

SkiTz.4590:

RyuDragnier.9476:

SkiTz.4590:

Agreed.
I see posts in other CDIs daily but here? nah

At this point, it looks awful on Allie now.
She has even turned her attention to some pistol whip thread about theives lol

Ironically enough, she has pistol whipped this Ranger CDI…

I wouldn’t blame Allie since she seems to be a community talker (meaning she’s PR agent), I would blame the devs for not taking responsibility for making a single class the worst in the game, and then repeatedly MAKING IT WORSE THROUGH ACROSS THE BOARD NERFS.

Anet, unfortunately you’ve reached the point where the hard route is the only route to fix this. I understand this is an undertaking to fix pet AI or even work something else into us as a class mechanic (or even adjusting the ranger:pet damage ratio), but considering Ranger is the worst class in the game and is seen by 80% of the community as the worst class, you probably have no other choice.

Well no doubt devs are to blame but last time I checked, Allie is the person in charge of this thread.

I see all other CDI’s getting posts by their respective CDI manager, I don’t see that here.

No offense to Allie, but at this point, she has to get some blame (now if Devs are giving her no feedback period and see comes out and says so, than this entire CDI will erupt with backlash because than it will be officially obvious that they don’t give a kitten about this class or CDI (right now, this is only unofficially true lol)

CDI has been up like 10 days now? She has posted a couple times every 2-3 days…. thats embarassingly low amount of interaction with the most important CDI that is currently on the forums.

I still however put more blame into Anet and the developers. It’s completely obvious Allie needs some more support here and by the looks of it, Anet could care less about this.

Keep in mind that it’s currently only ~8:30 AM in ANet’s time. I’m hoping that we get some dev feedback later today.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Forzani.2584:

Agree 100%

1. Community decides on 4 people to represent their class …the Ranger.
2. Internal CDI with the Ranger community and the 4 reps monitoring the debate.
3. The 4 reps talk to Anet to better understand what Anet is able to, and willing to do for the class …IE what is their vision
4. The 4 reps produce a well thought out, legible, accurate report to present to Anet that reflects both the Ranger communities ideas that correspond with Anets parameters.

It’s not like the above format is a ground breaking new idea. It’s tried and true. Strange how it’s not being used.

No.

I don’t want “the best four rangers” to determine how to run my class the best, I don’t want ANet to only listen to “the people who know the class”, because that immediately pushes me out of the focus because I don’t do as much WvW or PvP. And I don’t sit there crunching numbers and stats and agonizing over what to change with the Ranger. I’ve learned how to use what’s there which works for me.

And I have this . . . not unfounded suspicion . . . those people who the community would elect? Wouldn’t care what I thought, wouldn’t care how I want to play, and would put forth a design paradigm which wouldn’t be the ranger I like to play or want to play.

I did this once before where I went looking on PvX Wiki for a ranger build in GW1. Four builds, and I couldn’t handle any of them because of the sheer amount of micro two required, one was gimmicky as all heck, and the fourth was purely PvP focused. I can’t play a class exactly like another person says I should be playing it.

The longer this thread gets, the more I just see if the “top community” gets to work on this, then I won’t be able to play my ranger and I’ll have to make the decision to jump to another class and start learning them . . . or just leave.

Community reps in games are fairly atrocious ideas. In LOTRO they did that and it is horrendous. The devs speak with the “Council” as the call it and ignore the community at large. A few of the council members have inside info on market stuff and they get fat wallets in game because of it. Absolutely, 100% disagree with player reps for professions. No offense against you. I have seen it implemented in several games and it is an inferior method. I am not saying that this thread is working, but the other CDI’s will yield results.