Guild Wars 2

Rangers don’t just have boons as distance problems :
- Utilities like traps and spirits are too defensive and static. Most dungeon runs, for example, are based on forward progress through enemies. Traits partially solve a problem that should be there in the first place.
- The pet and the ranger can be in different places and this leads to difficulty in maintaining boons or spirit buffs. If the ranger has to fight beside the pet then this negates many of the advantages a mobile pet should bring.
- In my opinion the main/off hand weapon pairings are badly designed and have little synergy.
- The ranger has poor gap closing and mobility skills. This exposes the limitations of the poor weapon options.

If all those other problems were tackled then maybe rangers wouldn’t see boon sharing as an issue.

RedStar.4218:

Azhure.1857:

One of my favorite bosses is a simple Champ Abomination. I love watching it charge through a crowd, usually downing a dozen or more people. It makes me smile every time and actually keeps me on my toes. I also can’t help but cheer for the champion in a way, because its main victims are those players that are so set in a “melee or bust” mentality. The argument has been made that melee is just better because ranged can’t compare on a DPS level. Well neither does standing in front of a charging rhino on steroids, getting downed, and throwing dirt at said rhino. Another point is made that melee is more effective because of increased risk. Debatable. But I get what you’re saying, stupidity is risky.

It’s been awhile since I’ve fought that champion, but isn’t there a huge tell to his charge ?

But I don’t laugh at people dying repeatedly in melee range during meta events. At first I don’t mind because we all had to learn. After a while it becomes perfectly clear that that kind of player isn’t paying attention to anything.

Yup, it has a large tell. Sometimes wish it didn’t but I’m at least happy that it isn’t a giant static meat bag and can actually down/kill many of the zergfest type of players.

Azhure.1857:

One of my favorite bosses is a simple Champ Abomination. I love watching it charge through a crowd, usually downing a dozen or more people. It makes me smile every time and actually keeps me on my toes. I also can’t help but cheer for the champion in a way, because its main victims are those players that are so set in a “melee or bust” mentality. The argument has been made that melee is just better because ranged can’t compare on a DPS level. Well neither does standing in front of a charging rhino on steroids, getting downed, and throwing dirt at said rhino.

There are good melee players and there are bad melee players and there are melee players learning the ropes. If players are wiping and learning, all power to them.

Azhure.1857:

Fyrebrand.4859:

I can see the problems that come out of removing the distance limits on boons, but I would still greatly like to see encounters in dungeons where being a ranged character is actually beneficial in some way. Too many bosses in this game play like “MMORPG bosses,” rather than “videogame bosses.” More bosses should do something other than just stand there and swipe at whomever is closest. They should be more mobile, and more resistant to being kited into a corner and stacked on by burst damage. Think of cool bosses in old-school games — they would teleport to different places, leap around the room, shoot stuff at you from afar that you have to dodge, charge at you, and make you navigate the environment in order to get at a good place to hit them for a few moments.

Master Ranger Nente in AC Story Mode was pretty good for this. He would teleport to different places, and sometimes appear on that central platform that was not easy to get to for melee, but ranged damage could still hit him with no problems.

I’m not saying every fight should be a major pain for melee either, but at least bring some character, variety, and mobility to future bosses, please! Make it so the whole party can’t just stack in one spot the entire fight; while things are momentarily hectic for melee then the ranged people can still shoot while moving around. This also gives added value to condition damage, which also seems to be undervalued in PvE.

All things being equal, ranged damage doesn’t have to be on par with melee during “stable” moments where you can just wail on the boss — but a ranged-focused player should still have a role in a party. It’s like how single-target is good for some situations, and AoE is good for others. There should be a time and a place for everything. Unfortunately, I think it is to GW2’s detriment that there is no time nor place for ranged attacks, at least in dungeons.

I agree with the boss mechanic needing more depth and variety.
One of my favorite bosses is a simple Champ Abomination. I love watching it charge through a crowd, usually downing a dozen or more people. It makes me smile every time and actually keeps me on my toes. I also can’t help but cheer for the champion in a way, because its main victims are those players that are so set in a “melee or bust” mentality. The argument has been made that melee is just better because ranged can’t compare on a DPS level. Well neither does standing in front of a charging rhino on steroids, getting downed, and throwing dirt at said rhino. Another point is made that melee is more effective because of increased risk. Debatable. But I get what you’re saying, stupidity is risky.

I know this thread is primarily about applied boon distance. Just wanted to throw my two cents in there concerning better boss mechanics. Would LOVE for them to be more than giant hp pools.

The reason people get downed to the charge is because people can’t dodge and the frenzy stacks build up. If you never let many build up you can melee it easily. Linky: http://youtu.be/_PasfQD2t_c

Fenrir.3609:

Azhure.1857:

One of my favorite bosses is a simple Champ Abomination. I love watching it charge through a crowd, usually downing a dozen or more people. It makes me smile every time and actually keeps me on my toes. I also can’t help but cheer for the champion in a way, because its main victims are those players that are so set in a “melee or bust” mentality. The argument has been made that melee is just better because ranged can’t compare on a DPS level. Well neither does standing in front of a charging rhino on steroids, getting downed, and throwing dirt at said rhino.

There are good melee players and there are bad melee players, meanwhile the guy being smug at the fact people are getting downed whilst he pew pews away at x000 range, well there is not alot you can say in terms of positives about that really.

Yup, you’re right. Nor is there much, in terms of positives, to say about people that make derogatory comments based on something another person didn’t actually say.

But you’re right – I am “smug” in those situations. In a game that supports passive, “no brains needed beyond this point” gameplay… Yeah. I’m going to cheer for the 1%-2% of the bits of this game that actually challenge that system, that meta.

maha.7902:

The reason people get downed to the charge is because people can’t dodge and the frenzy stacks build up. If you never let many build up you can melee it easily. Linky: http://youtu.be/_PasfQD2t_c

Agreed. Its not just the dodge, many people have no incentive to learn boss mechanics.

Azhure.1857:

Yup, you’re right. Nor is there much, in terms of positives, to say about people that make derogatory comments based on something another person didn’t actually say.

But you’re right – I am “smug” in those situations. In a game that supports passive, “no brains needed beyond this point” gameplay… Yeah. I’m going to cheer for the 1%-2% of the bits of this game that actually challenge that system, that meta.

The abom isn’t a challenge (outside of the solo remit), nor does it challenge any meta. Bad/new players get caught out at it just as they get caught out by/at plenty of other mobs/events. That in no way reflects on whether melee or any given meta is optimal, it merely reflects on the given players ability.

If you were not trying to be smug/condescending then I apologise, but I can assure you it certainly came across that way.

Don’t apologize. “Smug” is probably the best word for it.
But I stand by what I said.

Good day.

Stooperdale.3560:

Rangers don’t just have boons as distance problems :
- Utilities like traps and spirits are too defensive and static. Most dungeon runs, for example, are based on forward progress through enemies. Traits partially solve a problem that should be there in the first place.
- The pet and the ranger can be in different places and this leads to difficulty in maintaining boons or spirit buffs. If the ranger has to fight beside the pet then this negates many of the advantages a mobile pet should bring.
- In my opinion the main/off hand weapon pairings are badly designed and have little synergy.
- The ranger has poor gap closing and mobility skills. This exposes the limitations of the poor weapon options.

If all those other problems were tackled then maybe rangers wouldn’t see boon sharing as an issue.

Other problems……

The Sword’s auto attack roots you in place, and its difficult to move around while stuck like that. Even if you disable the auto, you can’t interrupt 2 of the 3 skills in the auto attack chain, which means that your reaction time is always slower

The Greatsword is all around slower than the sword, and deals less damage because its slower. Maul does not actually make that much of a difference in your dps, and neither does any of the other GS skills, unless seeing slightly bigger numbers is your sort of thing.

Rangers aren’t that great in melee compared to other professions. The Longbow doesn’t work in melee range unless you got a good weapon/skill rotation. The Shortbow is a condition weapon. The Axe is….the Axe.

Going back to Boons and distance…there really aren’t any good solutions to that. You could remove the range limit, but there goes any strategy. You could make it to where any boons you give automatically affects the party, regardless of distance, but that would leave out pets and summoned creatures, and would be bad in WvW if you are trying to support immediately surrounding allies, and not your half-afk party in the tower.

Possible fixes for Ranger (and why they wouldn’t work)
- For Spotter, you could make it to where the Ranger and Pet give the Spotter buff, so the ranger can still Range, and buff the melee people.
- You could make Fortifying bond work both ways.
- You could make Spirits a ground targeted skill so you can strategically place them.

With this, you can set yourself up to give and receive buffs and boons, no matter if the Ranger was ranged or melee, but all 3 come with their own problems.
- Spotter would be going way over the 5 target limit for this stuff unless you can figure out a way for the target limit to be shared between the Ranger and Pet.
- Fortifying Bond would infinitely stack boons unless you find a way to tell the difference between what boons were already shared, and which boons are Ranger/Pet only.
- Ground Targeted spirits wouldn’t work very well with Spirit’s Unbound, though having spirits move would serve an entirely different purpose that having them stand in place. It would also make it possible to summon spirits in unreachable places to prevent them from being killed.

I like the Ranger and its what I play 99.99% of the time, but honestly the entire design of the profession is screwed up, and if Anet tries to fix those screw ups…it will just screw up more stuff.

maha.7902:

The person meleeing and dying is always better since at least they’re trying to learn the fights.

This is getting silly now. As if someone who’s ranging doesn’t (have to) learn the boss mechanics. It is quite the opposite. I’ve seen many players fail at bosses because they’ve always meleed (through stacking) it. Because of the screenclutter and the simplification stacking offers they’ve never truly learned the boss mechanics.

They don’t. If you get a ranged weapon versus spider queen you just have to step to the side every now and then to avoid the poison. People try to afk range mossman. People used to afk range bloomhunger. People range maw tentacles. People range lupicus. Doing this requires basically zero understanding of the boss mechanics besides just trying to avoid red circles. They don’t know what the boss attacks do or why they do them besides that they hurt.

maha.7902:

They don’t. If you get a ranged weapon versus spider queen you just have to step to the side every now and then to avoid the poison. People try to afk range mossman. People used to afk range bloomhunger. People range maw tentacles. People range lupicus. Doing this requires basically zero understanding of the boss mechanics besides just trying to avoid red circles. They don’t know what the boss attacks do or why they do them besides that they hurt.

The spider does only have two attacks. And while reflection was still a thing, people didn’t realized how much damage her AoE does. Mossman will use his attacks also against ranged targets, the only thing ranged fighters wont see is that mossman can cleave. Bloomhunger is more difficult in melee? With reflects and so on? I don’t think so. Avoiding red cycles is always what you want to do, against any boss.
Also, many people who always meleed Subject Alpha in CoE didn’t even know that there are two differen’t versions of his ice attack. Or that his earth attack does only focus one player and can be avoided by everyone else.

You get to learn every boss encounter, just as a ranged fighter, you usually don’t want the enemy to get in melee range to you, so you keep your distance. Which means that they wont see the melee attacks of Lupicus but they will see his ranged attacks instead. So I don’t know what you’re trying to prove here but most bosses will stay the same at range. At range you just have more space to avoid certain attacks while players who melee either dodge or utilize reflects and stuff.

Want to be at max range? Ok, your buffs won’t be as useful.

Want your buffs to be useful? Change weapon set up to be able to attack at a closer range. (Rangers have quite a few melee-mid ranged weapon options—you don’t have to only use bow)

This isn’t rocket science.

Draknar.5748:

Want to be at max range? Ok, your buffs won’t be as useful.

Want your buffs to be useful? Change weapon set up to be able to attack at a closer range. (Rangers have quite a few melee-mid ranged weapon options—you don’t have to only use bow)

This isn’t rocket science.

The strongest ranged weapon for the ranger is the longbow. So if you feel the need to fight a boss at range, atleast do it the right way and take the strongest weapon.

While this looks to be more of a discussion about dungeons, I wouldn’t mind an increased boon range in WvW(1500-2000 maybe). It would encourage people to think more about individual positioning, rather than just running around in a ball. You might not get all the effects of combo fields if you’re standing over there, but wouldn’t it make group fights a little more interesting?

Oh, and saying that people who want to play ranged in dungeons shouldn’t get boons, because it’s more dangerous to be in melee, is just absurd. Anet can tweak the bosses if needed, so ranged players can’t just stand there and pew pew.
I’ve never played an MMO before where people have been so obsessed about stacking and at the same time shunning ranged players in dungeons. Perhaps a part of that problem is actually the very small range of boons?

maha.7902:

Why should you be able to chill out at 1500 range and get as many boons as everyone else up in the boss’ face in melee? You’re at no risk, they are, you don’t deserve to receive any of their boons. You’re taking ‘play how you want’ out of context just like everyone else in this forum, anet haven’t said anything about how you should be allowed to chill at max range and be rewarded for afk pewpewing bosses.

This is pretty much how I feel. Whether in dungeons or the open-world, it doesn’t matter. Ranged classes are very safe 90% of the time when compared to melee. Especially with the new Champions in Dry Top. Ranged classes can chill on the cliffs that break LoS from Colocal and spam 1 while eating an ice cream cone and Melee classes do their best to dodge and block its flurry of attacks and AoE’s. Same for the Devourer Queen and Twister.

In my opinion let those melee classes that need the Aegis’s, Protections, Regenerations, Vigors, and Stabilities have them because chances are they’re going to actively make use of them.

The spider does only have two attacks. And while reflection was still a thing, people didn’t realized how much damage her AoE does.

you could never reflect her attacks anyway

Mossman will use his attacks also against ranged targets, the only thing ranged fighters wont see is that mossman can cleave.

Or … you just drop a reflect, keep him crippled and then kite him ad infinitum. Or, you just bug him underwater and afk him. Not saying I approve of the latter, I either leave groups trying to do that or purposely try to unbug him.

Bloomhunger is more difficult in melee? With reflects and so on?

IIRC the pug strat used to be sit at 1500 range, go afk and the reflect class would just put a reflect up every now and then. People didn’t understand what attacks were reflectable, dodgeable, blockable or that before the clearer AOEs it was safer to stand behind him while he did his agony attack as it helped you see AOE better.

Also, many people who always meleed Subject Alpha in CoE didn’t even know that there are two differen’t versions of his ice attack. Or that his earth attack does only focus one player and can be avoided by everyone else.

Anyone who has done COE and actually paid any attention would notice that the teeth of mordremoth attack was a targeted cone AOE attack. Anyone who doesn’t pay attention, either range or melee wouldn’t know that.

You get to learn every boss encounter, just as a ranged fighter, you usually don’t want the enemy to get in melee range to you, so you keep your distance. Which means that they wont see the melee attacks of Lupicus but they will see his ranged attacks instead. So I don’t know what you’re trying to prove here but most bosses will stay the same at range. At range you just have more space to avoid certain attacks while players who melee either dodge or utilize reflects and stuff.

If you know a boss’ mechanics but refuse to go in to melee range you’re either being stubborn (“play how I want” falls under this category) or roleplaying as ranged DPS. Once you know a boss’ mechanics there is no practical reason to chill at range. My experience has been that people ranging don’t understand a boss’ mechanics. Belka is the #1 example of this, she has 5 seconds of projectile reflection and 7 seconds without it, and I’ve seen guardians with scepters suicide themselves on it. I’ve seen people against Alphard range from behind some rubble so the terrain would prevent them from being pulled rather than just putting up a reflect. People who range don’t bother learning mechanics on the whole.

No – the formula and boons are fine as they are.

Ranged play is safe play and should not be rewarded even more.
If you’re staying at a range you already have the huge advantage of not having to deal with the boss’ mechanics or having to twitch dodge everything he throws.

Ranged play has enough benefits as it is – why make it even easier for players to afk/range in a game where almost everything is too easy anyway?

maha makes some great points. The last thing we need right now is people ranging every encounter then complaining on the forums that “the game isn’t challenging” or “encounters are too easy”.

Azhure.1857:

Are you seriously trying to say that the Ranger profession isn’t iconic and known to be “range based”. Just because it has the ability to use melee weapons, doesn’t mean that its a primary weapon type for the profession. …. That because of cheap combat/game mechanics the Ranger now has to melee and view its bows as equally cheap toys?
I’m not a Ranger main… but I feel the need to speak up for them in this.

The ranger class is based on the ranger archetype. What’s that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragorn

This guy. He’s not a bowman or sniper – he’s a ranger.

Ranger comes from the verb “to range” which means : to roam at large or freely
or to move over an area so as to explore it

It has nothing to do with ranged combat.

Also there’s a distinct advantage for ranged players that has nothing to do with AI.

If you’re melee the time it takes for the boss to hit you when he’s preparing to is much lower than the time it would take the same boss to hit you 1200 units away rather than right on top of him.

It takes longer for the boss to reach you at a range distance so you have a time advantage on your dodges/ reflects/ blocks /etc.

Harper.4173:

Azhure.1857:

Are you seriously trying to say that the Ranger profession isn’t iconic and known to be “range based”. Just because it has the ability to use melee weapons, doesn’t mean that its a primary weapon type for the profession. …. That because of cheap combat/game mechanics the Ranger now has to melee and view its bows as equally cheap toys?
I’m not a Ranger main… but I feel the need to speak up for them in this.

The ranger class is based on the ranger archetype. What’s that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragorn

This guy. He’s not a bowman or sniper – he’s a ranger.

Ranger comes from the verb “to range” which means : to roam at large or freely
or to move over an area so as to explore it

It has nothing to do with ranged combat.

Also there’s a distinct advantage for ranged players that has nothing to do with AI.

If you’re melee the time it takes for the boss to hit you when he’s preparing to is much lower than the time it would take the same boss to hit you 1200 units away rather than right on top of him.

It takes longer for the boss to reach you at a range distance so you have a time advantage on your dodges/ reflects/ blocks /etc.

The Ranger in Guild Wars 2 is mostly based on the classical Fantasy Ranger, meaning, it came directly from Dungeons and Dragons. Ranged combat, dual wielding, animal companions, and some Nature Magic. The Ranger in Guild Wars pretty much follows that exactly.

While you can always go back to the original source, that does not mean that it’s the meaning of the word or title today.

@ Harper

Please don’t insult me. I’m very well aware of what the word “ranger” means.
Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough in that post to get my message across, as you’re not the first person to pull out a dictionary and try to spell something out for me.

My point is that in a fantasy world – the primary image of a Ranger is one wielding a bow. With that imagery in mind… it isn’t unreasonable to expect them to be good at it. They should be good at it.

@ Chrispy
Thank you.

Harper.4173:

Azhure.1857:

Are you seriously trying to say that the Ranger profession isn’t iconic and known to be “range based”. Just because it has the ability to use melee weapons, doesn’t mean that its a primary weapon type for the profession. …. That because of cheap combat/game mechanics the Ranger now has to melee and view its bows as equally cheap toys?
I’m not a Ranger main… but I feel the need to speak up for them in this.

The ranger class is based on the ranger archetype. What’s that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragorn

This guy. He’s not a bowman or sniper – he’s a ranger.

Ranger comes from the verb “to range” which means : to roam at large or freely
or to move over an area so as to explore it

It has nothing to do with ranged combat.

Also there’s a distinct advantage for ranged players that has nothing to do with AI.

If you’re melee the time it takes for the boss to hit you when he’s preparing to is much lower than the time it would take the same boss to hit you 1200 units away rather than right on top of him.

It takes longer for the boss to reach you at a range distance so you have a time advantage on your dodges/ reflects/ blocks /etc.

If we were playing a game based on Lord of the Rings, you would have a point. We aren’t, and in the Guild Wars universe, ranger has always meant archer. Here’s the official description on the GW2 homesite:
Ranger
Rangers rely on a keen eye, a steady hand, and the power of nature itself. Unparalleled archers, rangers are capable of bringing down foes from a distance with their bows. With traps, nature spirits, and a stable of loyal pets at their command, rangers can adapt to any situation.
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/professions/ranger/

The GW1 description is similar, but longer so I won’t paste it here:
http://www.guildwars.com/gameplay/professions/ranger/

And people who claim that Rangers somehow are a “safe” profession have either never played Ranger or are poor at melee. My Guardian and my Warrior are far more survivable, even decked out entirely in Zerker gear, and not just because of dps. Hell on my Guardian I almost never have to dodge. And bosses often have area affects in the 1500 – 1000 range that target ranged players specifically.

You conveniently ignore how it says a ranger can adapt to any situation.

…and you conveniently ignore how it says unparalleled archers.

It would have been silly of ArenaNet to introduce a profession with no melee capabilities into Guild Wars 2. That is where the “adaptation” comes from. They’re somewhat of a jack-of-all-trades type of class. In that they can do many things but usually to the point of sacrificing max effectiveness in their ability to use many weapon types.

None of that negates the fact that they’re supposed to be superior archers. Yet in GW2 they are stunted versions of what they could be, of what they should be. Game mechanics like the one the OP brought up is just one of the things that hampers rangers from using their most iconic weapon to their greatest potential.

“unparalleled archers” just means that they’re better archers than everyone else, it doesn’t mean archery is good in this game.

Blix.8021:

“unparalleled archers” just means that they’re better archers than everyone else, it doesn’t mean archery is good in this game.

Did you even read where all the replies were coming from or just the last few?

Azhure.1857:

Blix.8021:

“unparalleled archers” just means that they’re better archers than everyone else, it doesn’t mean archery is good in this game.

Did you even read where all the replies were coming from or just the last few?

Yeah, I did. You’re one of those people who argue that rangers should be the best at ranged combat, even though if rangers were indisputably the best at ranged combat, range would still be inferior to melee for balance reasons. And for whatever reason, you use the flavor text description of the class to make your point.

…“one of those people”…

You really don’t know me, Blix. I’ve never even visited the ranger forums. I’m not a ranger main. I have no invested interest in my own class getting a buff or not. This is about a game that has mechanics in play that make it more difficult for ranged players, not just Rangers, to use ranged weapons effectively. Its not just a matter of difficulty, its also to a point where a Ranger using its most iconic weapon is viewed as being unacceptable by many people.

That’s not right.

The warrior description says “Warriors are masters of weaponry who rely on speed, strength, toughness, and heavy armor to survive in battle. Adrenaline fuels their offensive power—the longer warriors stay in a fight, the more dangerous they become.”

That means I should be able to use any weapon in the game, right? Cause I’m a master of weaponry. It says so right on the website! Why can’t I sit back and shoot with my bow? I’m a bow master, ANet said so!

Azhure.1857:

That’s not right.

Yes it is. I don’t get to sit back and pew pew with my warrior’s bow; neither do rangers.

P.S. I expect warriors to be buffed to do more damage the longer the fight goes on, because it says so on the website. Thanks.

Increased hostility only serves to undermine a person’s own argument.

no kitten no , noo need for more kitten scrub bearbows and thieves camping shortbow or rifle war garbage

Azhure.1857:

Increased hostility only serves to undermine a person’s own argument.

So does passive-aggressively dodging the issue instead of admitting they’re wrong

cwutididthar

Aside from roleplay reasons, why do you want to play with a ranged weapon ?

I’m honestly asking this question. And I don’t want to hear bullkitten like “because it’s what is told in the description” or “well I don’t. But if I did …”
The real reason. It can be anything, but I’m really interested in it.

RedStar.4218:

Aside from roleplay reasons, why do you want to play with a ranged weapon ?

I’m honestly asking this question. And I don’t want to hear bullkitten like “because it’s what is told in the description” or “well I don’t. But if I did …”
The real reason. It can be anything, but I’m really interested in it.

Personal preference of combat style. Just like in any game players like the freedom to choose what they like and not be considered inferior for it. In fighting games some players like Grapplers, some like Rushdown fighters and some like Zoners, yet all of those playstyles are considered valid. Here we have a single playstyle that’s considered valid and a multitude that work but server no practical purpose in PvE.
This is a game that is supposed to promote creativity and personal preference in it’s combat. Is it right for over half the game’s combat options to be so weak they’re considered by some unviable?

I could go onto say, in gaming, when something it overly popular, it can be considered overpowered, and in the same vein, when something in underpicked it can be considered underpowered. I’m betting no one would disagree that Guild Wars 2 is horribly unbalanced in PvE. I mean, to the degree that over half the customization options are considered “for training” or “for funzies”.
It’s almost amusing watching the “best” players blindly defend the balance and demanding that nothing new or interesting be added to the game.

Maybe I should have asked which ranged weapon on which class.
Because a staff necromancer doesn’t really have the same combat style of a grenade engineer.

And as dumb as it can sound, do you play at maximum range with a ranged weapon ? For example, when I play with my engi, I don’t go at 1500 to kill monsters. I stay in melee range.

Regarding the last part : think carefully about what your trying to accomplish with your build and ask yourself if you’re doing the most efficiently. Yes you have a lot of options, but what are you really trying to accomplish ?

Oh the number of times I’ve heard elementalists say “I want to heal people so I’m only playing a staff water ele” to which I had to explain that if you want to help your team, killing monsters faster would be more useful than only trying to “heal” them. You can use support skills (blind, weakness, stun, condition removal) without having to sacrifice a large chunk of your damages.

I think the counterpoint here is that it really doesn’t matter what you or other games consider “iconic.” Guild Wars 2’s mechanics defines a ranger as an inside/out fighter, melee first with ranged secondary. It’s your choice to ignore that… at the cost of not being as effective as the game allows.

chemiclord.3978:

I think the counterpoint here is that it really doesn’t matter what you or other games consider “iconic.” Guild Wars 2’s mechanics defines a ranger as an inside/out fighter, melee first with ranged secondary. It’s your choice to ignore that… at the cost of not being as effective as the game allows.

Well this thread is asking to lessen the gap between effecive and ineffective by pulling up the usefulness of the bottom. The gap between ranged and melee doesn’t need to be quite so huge as it is in PvE. I don’t even know why the meta crowd is so against it. Not like it’ll make is so they can’t stack anymore.

Dual.8953:

Well this thread is asking to lessen the gap between effecive and ineffective by pulling up the usefulness of the bottom. The gap between ranged and melee doesn’t need to be quite so huge as it is in PvE. I don’t even know why the meta crowd is so against it. Not like it’ll make is so they can’t stack anymore.

I guess it really depends on how far you want to pull up the “bottom.” You pull it too far up, then you’ve completely flipped the script and there will no reason to play in melee range.

Personally? My feeling is that the buff ranges are FAR too small. I’d have no problem with buff ranges being around 1500. Or something like your buffs will always apply to party members if they are in sight (if you’re not in party, the ranges are as they are now).

However, you still have the issue of in all but a couple classes, ranged damage is still significantly lower than melee. Would just buffs alone “pull up” the bottom enough to suit your tastes?

To me it would. I suspect many would disagree.

So, from a game world perspective, anyone who uses shouts to grant boons now has to bellow at the top of his lungs so his friend on the other side of a mountain can hear “FOR GREAT JUSTICE!” and gain boons.

Gameplay wise, others have already given the reasons why this is a bad idea.

Harper.4173:

Azhure.1857:

Are you seriously trying to say that the Ranger profession isn’t iconic and known to be “range based”. Just because it has the ability to use melee weapons, doesn’t mean that its a primary weapon type for the profession. …. That because of cheap combat/game mechanics the Ranger now has to melee and view its bows as equally cheap toys?
I’m not a Ranger main… but I feel the need to speak up for them in this.

The ranger class is based on the ranger archetype. What’s that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragorn

This guy. He’s not a bowman or sniper – he’s a ranger.

Ranger comes from the verb “to range” which means : to roam at large or freely
or to move over an area so as to explore it

It has nothing to do with ranged combat.

Also there’s a distinct advantage for ranged players that has nothing to do with AI.

If you’re melee the time it takes for the boss to hit you when he’s preparing to is much lower than the time it would take the same boss to hit you 1200 units away rather than right on top of him.

It takes longer for the boss to reach you at a range distance so you have a time advantage on your dodges/ reflects/ blocks /etc.

In RPG’s the Ranger archetype is more closely associated with hunter/archer. This has been the case since the earliest RPG’s. Although DnD Rangers, for example, had options for melee, including dual sword wielding, they were the game’s primary physical ranged combatants.

Ranger originated as a term for game wardens. They ranged the king’s (or other lord’s) lands. Their primary armament was generally ranged.

There is definitely an advantage inherent to being at a distance from your foe. Then again melee damage is higher as a form of compensation.

Lindbur.2537:

So, from a game world perspective, anyone who uses shouts to grant boons now has to bellow at the top of his lungs so his friend on the other side of a mountain can hear “FOR GREAT JUSTICE!” and gain boons.

Gameplay wise, others have already given the reasons why this is a bad idea.

LOL!

You should have gone a different route if you were trying to belittle the idea given by the OP. But sure, I’ll bite. You want to get more literal with this? Personally if you take the current range of boons via shouts – you would have to be extremely hearing impaired to not hear someone shouting at that distance. Even to go so far as increasing boon range to 1500 – that is still literally well within “hearing” range of a shout.

Hey, I’m not totally against the idea of more “open” combat being more viable. I certainly like that idea more than 5 people standing on top of each other.

But at the same time, I also like the higher risk/higher reward that they have with melee and ranged balance. If things get too hot in melee, I like the idea of stepping out into range and not gimping the rest of the team’s buffs.

But finding that “sweet spot” in the game mechanics is the rub.

Ashen.2907:

Harper.4173:

Azhure.1857:

Are you seriously trying to say that the Ranger profession isn’t iconic and known to be “range based”. Just because it has the ability to use melee weapons, doesn’t mean that its a primary weapon type for the profession. …. That because of cheap combat/game mechanics the Ranger now has to melee and view its bows as equally cheap toys?
I’m not a Ranger main… but I feel the need to speak up for them in this.

The ranger class is based on the ranger archetype. What’s that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aragorn

This guy. He’s not a bowman or sniper – he’s a ranger.

Ranger comes from the verb “to range” which means : to roam at large or freely
or to move over an area so as to explore it

It has nothing to do with ranged combat.

Also there’s a distinct advantage for ranged players that has nothing to do with AI.

If you’re melee the time it takes for the boss to hit you when he’s preparing to is much lower than the time it would take the same boss to hit you 1200 units away rather than right on top of him.

It takes longer for the boss to reach you at a range distance so you have a time advantage on your dodges/ reflects/ blocks /etc.

In RPG’s the Ranger archetype is more closely associated with hunter/archer. This has been the case since the earliest RPG’s. Although DnD Rangers, for example, had options for melee, including dual sword wielding, they were the game’s primary physical ranged combatants.

Ranger originated as a term for game wardens. They ranged the king’s (or other lord’s) lands. Their primary armament was generally ranged.

There is definitely an advantage inherent to being at a distance from your foe. Then again melee damage is higher as a form of compensation.

I must disagree with your DnD argument, because Fighters could arguably be better than some Rangers depending on how players built their character….(Which does actually mirror the Warrior somewhat). The Fighter could be your primary Ranged attacker, while your dual wielding Ranger was the primary melee attacker.

To the point though (which I put in Bold in your post….)….

In other games, the aggro system actually works to where if you deal high enough dps to an enemy, the enemy goes after you. In Guild Wars 2, 99% of the time, the boss/mob/etc. just attacks whoever is closer, and sometimes whoever has higher armor/toughness.

If Anet really cared about Ranged Combat that much in PvE, then many of these enemies would have been designed better to be able to deal with both Ranged and Melee players. Instead (either by time constraints or it was designed as intended), it seems like Anet took the easy way out by making a vast majority of enemies with no ability to counter both a ranged and melee player, and not designing bosses properly to have countermeasures for any style of combat, and by extension, making Ranged always weaker than Melee because of the shortcomings of the enemies.

In PvP and WvW, I will argue that it doesn’t matter if Ranged deals the same damage as melee, because of all the 500-1000+ range melee gap closers/openers that almost every profession has access to, and even the professions that don’t makes up for it with other skills. Those gap closers that half of all weapons have, combined with the lower dps output of ranged weapons, is what always puts range at a disadvantage in this game (on the player vs. player side).

changing the range on boons is only asking for all sorts of balance problems.

Do not try to fix what is not broken.

Ranger is ‘an unparalleled archer’ though. The only other competitors are longbow warrior and short bow thief, both of which, a Ranger would destroy given a weapon vs weapon duel. This, however, has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on the fact that Ranger can “adapt to any situation” and that melee is inherently a superior choice. Being ‘an paralleled archer’ doesn’t change the fact that a melee Ranger is superior in a melee situation. It seems like you are ALL mistaken " an unparalleled archer" for ‘bows are (should be) the Ranger’s superior option". These are entirely different expectations/assumption and you should recognize the difference.

And ‘archer’ isn’t the only meaning of ranged combat. If you would like to argue this, then I’d be more than happy to wreck ANY bow Ranger with my staff Ele.

Tman.6349:

Ranger is ‘an unparalleled archer’ though. The only other competitors are longbow warrior and short bow thief, both of which, a Ranger would destroy given a weapon vs weapon duel. This, however, has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING on the fact that Ranger can “adapt to any situation” and that melee is inherently a superior choice. Being ‘an paralleled archer’ doesn’t change the fact that a melee Ranger is superior in a melee situation. It seems like you are ALL mistaken " an unparalleled archer" for ‘bows are (should be) the Ranger’s superior option". These are entirely different expectations/assumption and you should recognize the difference.

And ‘archer’ isn’t the only meaning of ranged combat. If you would like to argue this, then I’d be more than happy to wreck ANY bow Ranger with my staff Ele.

Then you missed the point of almost all of this thread. Rangers are a big talking point because everyone incorrectly refers to them as ‘Ranger = Ranged’, but that’s not all of it. Instead of a Ranged Ranger vs. a Melee Ranger, Look at the situation from a general Ranged Weapon vs. Melee Weapon standpoint. If Melee weapons were purposely designed to be superior in 99.9999% of all situations, then why bother to have Ranged weapons in this game at all if they were purposefully designed to be inferior weapons?

(That’s what the discussion evolved into, though the original thing was about the range of boons..)

Dual.8953:

RedStar.4218:

Aside from roleplay reasons, why do you want to play with a ranged weapon ?

I’m honestly asking this question. And I don’t want to hear bullkitten like “because it’s what is told in the description” or “well I don’t. But if I did …”
The real reason. It can be anything, but I’m really interested in it.

Personal preference of combat style. Just like in any game players like the freedom to choose what they like and not be considered inferior for it. In fighting games some players like Grapplers, some like Rushdown fighters and some like Zoners, yet all of those playstyles are considered valid. Here we have a single playstyle that’s considered valid and a multitude that work but server no practical purpose in PvE.
This is a game that is supposed to promote creativity and personal preference in it’s combat. Is it right for over half the game’s combat options to be so weak they’re considered by some unviable?

Personal preference falls under role play.

maha.7902:

Dual.8953:

RedStar.4218:

Aside from roleplay reasons, why do you want to play with a ranged weapon ?

I’m honestly asking this question. And I don’t want to hear bullkitten like “because it’s what is told in the description” or “well I don’t. But if I did …”
The real reason. It can be anything, but I’m really interested in it.

Personal preference of combat style. Just like in any game players like the freedom to choose what they like and not be considered inferior for it. In fighting games some players like Grapplers, some like Rushdown fighters and some like Zoners, yet all of those playstyles are considered valid. Here we have a single playstyle that’s considered valid and a multitude that work but server no practical purpose in PvE.
This is a game that is supposed to promote creativity and personal preference in it’s combat. Is it right for over half the game’s combat options to be so weak they’re considered by some unviable?

Personal preference falls under role play.

Ah.
Right.
I must have missed the fine print on the game packaging when I purchased this game. This game is only meant for players who enjoy being Meta pawns. Do not purchase if you choose to play how you want in “Open World” content. Again, this game isn’t actually for you – its for meta players only. All others get the kitten out.

’Cause you know some of those fine print lines are just so well hidden.

Dual.8953:

RedStar.4218:

Aside from roleplay reasons, why do you want to play with a ranged weapon ?

I’m honestly asking this question. And I don’t want to hear bullkitten like “because it’s what is told in the description” or “well I don’t. But if I did …”
The real reason. It can be anything, but I’m really interested in it.

Personal preference of combat style. Just like in any game players like the freedom to choose what they like and not be considered inferior for it. In fighting games some players like Grapplers, some like Rushdown fighters and some like Zoners, yet all of those playstyles are considered valid. Here we have a single playstyle that’s considered valid and a multitude that work but server no practical purpose in PvE.
This is a game that is supposed to promote creativity and personal preference in it’s combat. Is it right for over half the game’s combat options to be so weak they’re considered by some unviable?

Agree with Dual here.
But to add to it I would say that I also enjoy and appreciate diversity in gaming – which includes weapon choice and play style.

Please also consider that if ranged combat, again not just Rangers here, were considered OP and melee combat was being treated unfairly – I would be supporting the right of players that prefer to melee to have equal opportunities to be efficient, helpful, and have fun doing what they want to do.