Guild Wars 2

RoyalPredator.9163:

Bow is not a sniper rifle… its more like a “DMR”.
I would rage delete my account if the autoattack ROF gets even slower O.o

Yeah. You are right. However how many ppl including devs know what DMR means? Everybory knows what is a “sniper rifle”, though.

About the autoattack ROF, well I care more about the dps. That signet of fire would likely proc less often, thats right.

Fext.3614:

RoyalPredator.9163:

Bow is not a sniper rifle… its more like a “DMR”.
I would rage delete my account if the autoattack ROF gets even slower O.o

Yeah. You are right. However how many ppl including devs know what DMR means? Everybory knows what is a “sniper rifle”, though.

About the autoattack ROF, well I care more about the dps. That signet of fire would likely proc less often, thats right.

The longbow should atleast have one “sniping” skill. I am thinking of a channeled skill with very long range (~3000), high damage, which would further increased by opening strike and the target beeing out of combat and a cripple to close the distance afterwards.

For me the ranger is either the guy who defends a fortress (where we currently suck at), or the guy who sneaks up on enemies to get a clean shot on them (this “gamestyle” is already implemented through Opening Strike. Yet, the effect is way too weak.)

thefantasticg.3984:

Prysin.8542:

thefantasticg.3984:

Still interested to know what Devs roll a Ranger main and how many hours they have them.

Does Allie roll a Ranger? How many hours on it if so?

There is two devs that roll ranger, mostly in sPvP and they roll spirits.

Go visit SPVP forums, there was a thread there called “What builds does the Devs use?”

Yeah, I did, but I don’t remember if they said they main them… And, I don’t much care for sPVP. Needs of sPVP are going to be different than my needs in PVE/Dungeons… That being said I want to know if the PR person we are dealing with for this CDI knows anything about playing Ranger in any game mode… and if not, can we get someone in here like a Dev that actually plays a Ranger more than a few hours.

honestly, most likely they have all tested it a little bit, but raw knowledge of it, aside from mr Hrouda who is no longer with them, i haven’t heard of any dev maining/playing a ranger on regular basis. I don’t blame them, their free to play what they enjoy.

Yoh.8469:

Well, I wouldn’t go that far.
But what I would recommend is that the Longbow had 1500 range by default.

Because honestly, range is a joke in this game. Everyone is almost always in range of each other, and with the shear number of gap closers, you can’t even kite melee effectively. Makes you wonder what the bloody point is.
And that cripples this weapon, since you can’t maintain your distance.

Maybe it wouldn’t be so much of an issue if high ground advantage actually existed, where you had longer ranger the higher up you were, ala GW1.
But no, of course not, that would be interesting.

So if it had slightly longer range by default and some better distance making skills, I could see it become a very cat and mouse sort of weapon.
Say if Rapid fire also increase movement speed by 50% during it’s channel.

And say Hunter’s Shot crippled as well.
Barrage as many have asked for, should be able to be channeled while moving.
(actually turn it into a channel skill)

-
How about this for a trait as a replacement for Eagle Eye.
Channeling skills give you 50% movement speed for their duration.

Make Barrage and Whirling Defense mobile skills, and then I think you could get some pretty interesting results. Potentially overpowered results, but interesting.

I can’t see them implementing something like that. Imagine all the meleers whinning… and for a reason. But I can imagine to have the kiting support on the short ragne shortbow, plus the range and spike damage skills (with some stuns, knockbacks, or condis thrown in) on the longbow. So you use a longbow at a distance and finish with a shortbow whatever lives long enough to get close to you. And this is the very moment when you start running (using roots and slows as you go) as well.

What remains to be solved is how to make longbow useful in dungeons and stacking. I’m affraid that unless somebody comes with some smart idea, lb will remain useful for soloing only.

Fext.3614:

I can’t see them implementing something like that. Imagine all the meleers whinning… and for a reason. But I can imagine to have the kiting support on the short ragne shortbow, plus the range and spike damage skills (with some stuns, knockbacks, or condis thrown in) on the longbow. So you use a longbow at a distance and finish with a shortbow whatever lives long enough to get close to you. And this is the very moment when you start running (using roots and slows as you go) as well.

What remains to be solved is how to make longbow useful in dungeons and stacking. I’m affraid that unless somebody comes with some smart idea, lb will remain useful for soloing only.

I’m ok with the LB beeing not “the optimal” weapon for dungeons if it would excel in any other point in the game. I do like Yoh’s idea, you could also revert the range on shortbow. However the arrow speed would be still a mess. Also I don’t think you should run faster while channeling but slower. You shouldn’t be rooted, though.

Taushullu.6180:

• Longbow could use a real burst skill. I’d suggest changing Rapid Fire to first fire 5 arrows rapidly (1½ second channel / 10s vulnerability per arrow) and then charge up a more powerful shot in the end (3/4 – 1s charge). Attack of Opportunity would synergize well with this last arrow.

After a second look at my suggestion about Rapid Fire… maybe it would be better as a sequence skill?

Game mode
PvX

Proposal overview
Rapid Fire reworked into a sequence skill

Goal of Proposal
Longbow is missing a burst skill, something that makes the weapon feel like the sniper-type of power weapon it’s supposed to be (that’s how I see it, at least). Rapid Fire-Punishing Shot sequence skill would fill this place nicely.

Proposal functionality

• First part of the sequence, Rapid Fire, would make the sustain consisting of shortened version of the skill we have now. Let’s say 5-8 arrows in 2-3 seconds each causing 10 seconds of vulnerability (About the same speed as we have currently, just a bit faster). You could move normally during the channel of this skill.
• Second part, Punishing Shot, would make the burst part. You would have about 2 seconds to activate this skill (like Monarch’s Leap). The damage would be about the same as 3-4 arrows of Rapid Fire combined. Activation time should be 3/4 or 1s during which you cannot move (opportunity cost). It could also have a secondary effect such as daze or stun (1s).

This is more of a bonus:

• Stealth tracking with Rapid Fire seems a little silly. I guess that this isn’t actually something that is intended but more of a “feature” that just happens to work for us. Maybe the skill should simply remove stealth (wouldn’t apply revealed) with each arrow. This might make it too powerful though, as your opponent cannot stealth at all during the channel.

Associated Risks
Punishing Shot needs a new animation which requires extra resources.

You could just make it a ‘from stealth’ skill.

Rapid Fire, if used from stealth, does Punishing Shot.

Fext.3614:

Yoh.8469:

Well, I wouldn’t go that far.
But what I would recommend is that the Longbow had 1500 range by default.

Because honestly, range is a joke in this game. Everyone is almost always in range of each other, and with the shear number of gap closers, you can’t even kite melee effectively. Makes you wonder what the bloody point is.
And that cripples this weapon, since you can’t maintain your distance.

Maybe it wouldn’t be so much of an issue if high ground advantage actually existed, where you had longer ranger the higher up you were, ala GW1.
But no, of course not, that would be interesting.

So if it had slightly longer range by default and some better distance making skills, I could see it become a very cat and mouse sort of weapon.
Say if Rapid fire also increase movement speed by 50% during it’s channel.

And say Hunter’s Shot crippled as well.
Barrage as many have asked for, should be able to be channeled while moving.
(actually turn it into a channel skill)

-
How about this for a trait as a replacement for Eagle Eye.
Channeling skills give you 50% movement speed for their duration.

Make Barrage and Whirling Defense mobile skills, and then I think you could get some pretty interesting results. Potentially overpowered results, but interesting.

I can’t see them implementing something like that. Imagine all the meleers whinning… and for a reason. But I can imagine to have the kiting support on the short ragne shortbow, plus the range and spike damage skills (with some stuns, knockbacks, or condis thrown in) on the longbow. So you use a longbow at a distance and finish with a shortbow whatever lives long enough to get close to you. And this is the very moment when you start running (using roots and slows as you go) as well.

What remains to be solved is how to make longbow useful in dungeons and stacking. I’m affraid that unless somebody comes with some smart idea, lb will remain useful for soloing only.

Yeah well I am just throwing out wild ideas at this point.
I think that range just needs something to equal the odds, since melee have vastly more gap closers then range has the means to maintain range, both in distance covered, number of skills and cooldown time.
Unless there is something physical the prevents your opponent from getting to you, you can’t maintain range for very long.

For some weapons it’s not that bad, but since the Longbow requires you to be back as far as you can for the damage to be reasonable, it suffers the most by not having the tools to maintain range. Maybe this wouldn’t be as much of an issue if there were more skills like Lightning Reflexes in their kit, but sadly there are not.

@Yoh, but isn’t the idea to keep distance by ‘blowing’ dodges and compensate with high endurance gain and vigor boons ?

Arghore.8340:

@Yoh, but isn’t the idea to keep distance by ‘blowing’ dodges and compensate with high endurance gain and vigor boons ?

It’s part of it, but not entirely.
So are skills that Cripple/Chill, knockback, or physically move you backwards.

As for the Longbow:
Hunter’s Shot is good, and so is Point Blank Shot, thou they both require you to hit your target in order to function, where as most gap closers do not.
Barrage is your Cripple/snare, but it roots your which is entirely counter productive.

Which just leaves Rapid Fire which is just kind of garbage, and your AA which requires that long range I just mentioned.

Dodges should be reserved for avoid attacks once they are in your face, not just to maintain distance. If you have to resort to that to keep them away, something is wrong.

One small change I’d like to see is Natural Vigor stacking with the Vigor boon, if it stays at 25%. That would be a nice change.

To summarize this thread:

1. Pet is useless
2. Spirit melee builds are lame
3. Range skills need a big buff

3000 played GW2, 2000 as ranger and done 8 orbs Liadri with ranger and some other feats. This is the single and worst problem with ranger’s profession: inability to stow pets.

Specific Game Mode
PvX – It refers for all game modes

Proposal Overview
Ability to stow pets and recieve small buff instead. This buff should be relatively small so the pets are still desired.
Historicaly in GW merchandise rangers are not “the pet” profession.
There are many issues with the profession, but pets are the worst problem.

Goal of Proposal
Fixing major problem with profession mechanic.
Rangers are unique among the other professions in that that their profession mechanic is handicap and non-optional rather then optional and desired bonus. (See for example warrior, they can spend their rage or keep it as passive buff to damage or healing, but in any case acumulation or spending of rage is desired)
In many instances and situations pet is serious handicap. It is springing traps, obstructing, etc (most recent example is marionette, warden 2)
If there are better ideas how to fix the profession, this can serve as band-aid until proper implementation and will give more freedom of choice how to play the game.

Proposal Functionality
There is no obvious problem implementing it. Plain 5-10% damage/deffence increase and all pet related skills and abilities either unavalible if pet is stowed (another reason pet to be desired) or self-casted

Associated Risks
If the buff is not balanced correctly, there is risk rangers to become too strong and overrepresented (in many games ranger/hunter class is overly popular)

We’ve seen a large number of suggestions that would go a long way in improving the Ranger itself so it could do more damage and survive longer, but we haven’t seen too many suggestions with ideas to increase the class’s overall worth in WvW.

What do you guys think are some things WvW is missing right now that would fit the theme of the Ranger class as a whole?

For example, this game has a lot of barrier mechanics that various classes can place down, but stability counters them with relative ease. What if the Ranger was given a ‘Wall of Thorns’ move that would immobilize targets that passed through it for 1 second.

Another option would be ‘Favored Ground’. The Ranger could choose a large area and allies that pass through the area gain stability and enemies that pass through it are crippled.

I don’t play ranger much so I can’t really contribute in terms of what needs fixing indefinitely, but what I didn’t like was the fact that as a ranger you were given a pet. What if I didn’t want one? What if I hated them with a passion because they constantly pulled aggro that I didn’t particularly want? (same can be said for the necromancer minions and how there’s a trait that gives you minions upon killing something – whether you want them or not, you’re given them >_<)

That was my main beef with the ranger. I’m sure the traps and other skills could have had changes as well but like I said, I don’t play it enough to fully contribute towards this class.

Game Mode:
PvX

Proposal Overview:
Zephyr’s Speed Beastmaster trait change.

Goal of Proposal:
To prevent the Ranger’s pet from wasting its quickness boon/buff.

Currently, the Ranger and pet acquire quickness immediately after pet swapping. This isn’t an issue for the Ranger, but the pet is a little slower to react. The quickness only lasts 3 seconds, so more often than not, the pet wastes the entire duration running to the target or standing around.

I propose that the quickness boon/buff be applied after swapping pets, but ONLY after attacking. This will allow the pet time to run to the desired target before initiating quickness.

Proposal Functionality:

Pet
Swapped in>runs to target>attacks>quickness procs

Perhaps creating a boon/buff icon similar to the Attack of Opportunity would be wise, to prevent exploiting the effect.

Does that make sense?

Associated Risks:
None.

If Rangers are suppose to trade burst for resilience, at least make the class resilient without the need to go bunker.

Yoh.8469:

Yeah well I am just throwing out wild ideas at this point.
I think that range just needs something to equal the odds, since melee have vastly more gap closers then range has the means to maintain range, both in distance covered, number of skills and cooldown time.
Unless there is something physical the prevents your opponent from getting to you, you can’t maintain range for very long.

For some weapons it’s not that bad, but since the Longbow requires you to be back as far as you can for the damage to be reasonable, it suffers the most by not having the tools to maintain range. Maybe this wouldn’t be as much of an issue if there were more skills like Lightning Reflexes in their kit, but sadly there are not.

This is why LB1 needs a chance cripple.

Why Predator’s Instinct should proc on crit instead of being HP based.

And why Rangers need a fast hand trait like the warrior so you can swap, leap and kite.

In trying to change what’s wrong with the traditional MMO, they completely swung the pendulum over to the melee side, while it’s unique, but it doesn’t necessary make the game design balanced.

Fix AI. → Can’t and / or don’t want.
Remove AI. → Can’t and / or don’t want.

Is this still the situation in the past few days or something actually happened that i’m not aware of?

Nothings changed that is still there stand on the matter

Synister.8629:

Game Mode:
PvX

Proposal Overview:
Zephyr’s Speed Beastmaster trait change.

Goal of Proposal:
To prevent the Ranger’s pet from wasting its quickness boon/buff.

Currently, the Ranger and pet acquire quickness immediately after pet swapping. This isn’t an issue for the Ranger, but the pet is a little slower to react. The quickness only lasts 3 seconds, so more often than not, the pet wastes the entire duration running to the target or standing around.

I propose that the quickness boon/buff be applied after swapping pets, but ONLY after attacking. This will allow the pet time to run to the desired target before initiating quickness.

Proposal Functionality:

Pet
Swapped in>runs to target>attacks>quickness procs

Perhaps creating a boon/buff icon similar to the Attack of Opportunity would be wise, to prevent exploiting the effect.

Does that make sense?

Associated Risks:
None.

I like the idea. Often using Zephyr feels like a waste because the damage you gain from your own skills comes at the cost of swapping the pet out of range of its target. I do notice pets sometimes just standing still for most of the Quickness duration.

Yoh.8469:

Anyone else dissapointed in Allie for her general lack of participation?

I think she was doing a good job in the beginning, then she just up and disappeared and hasn’t reared her head since.
If your not going to participate in the CDI you started, then what’s the point of the CDI to begin with? We can have these discussions in the Ranger sub forum, for the fat lot of good they do.

Take a page from Chris, comment, often. Even if you have nothing more to add, just let us know your still alive and paying attention.
(Even thou I am sure your still reading and keeping up with it, but that’s not the point.)

They don’t work on the weekends, so this is probably her Friends/Family time.

Also, her title is “Community Coordinator” so, it wouldn’t surprise me if she is limited in what she’s allowed to say, before getting confirmation from one of the Profession Devs.

Give her some more time, I’m sure she’ll do a great job in the end.

videoboy.4162:

Yoh.8469:

Anyone else dissapointed in Allie for her general lack of participation?

I think she was doing a good job in the beginning, then she just up and disappeared and hasn’t reared her head since.
If your not going to participate in the CDI you started, then what’s the point of the CDI to begin with? We can have these discussions in the Ranger sub forum, for the fat lot of good they do.

Take a page from Chris, comment, often. Even if you have nothing more to add, just let us know your still alive and paying attention.
(Even thou I am sure your still reading and keeping up with it, but that’s not the point.)

They don’t work on the weekends, so this is probably her Friends/Family time.

Also, her title is “Community Coordinator” so, it wouldn’t surprise me if she is limited in what she’s allowed to say, before getting confirmation from one of the Profession Devs.

Give her some more time, I’m sure she’ll do a great job in the end.

Can’t really blame Allie here, she is only a liason. She can only do so much

On that note, Anet completely dropped the ball on this whole subject

This is Collaborative Development…. its right in the title… so where are the DEVELOPERS?

That’s a backhand to the player base, no spinning it. This is supposed to be about development, yet we get no such feedback straight from the developers themselves.
That is utterly pointless.
Let me hear real thoughts, summaries, plans FROM DEVELOPERS.

This must be a joke to anet because there are plenty of other MMO forums that have devs constantly post plans/changes about classes.
Right now theres maybe 3 posts from developer in a 33 page thread… that is a blatant disregard.. I’m sure they are busy(hopefully writing a big summary)..but it’s not much to ask for from your player base that a dev or 2 post some things at the end of each work day…

I’m almost positive anet could care less about rangers. There is absolutely no reason for me to even continue playing this class when literally ever class can do anything better and more effeciently than ranger.

There is not a single unique thing about ranger, meanwhile every other class has something nice to offer

This class is literally for people who just want to solo and have no meaningful impact in a party enviroment (which is what MMOs are all about)

I don’t blame the developers for not playing a larger role in this CDI thread, and I suggest that you read the Fractal Evolution CDI thread starting here (if you haven’t already) :::
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Fractal-Evolution/3706456

The lack of dev interaction in our Ranger thread was addressed there. Apparently some of our suggestions have been talked about, but….nothing else was really explained beyond that.

I would say that everyone should stay patient,…and only start raising hell if during the next profession CDI, suddenly there is alot more dev interaction (and I’m not talking about a little tiny bit more, I’m talking about there being a dev post on every freaking page, etc). Then that would prove your suspicions. Because we cannot prove that Anet hates and ignores Rangers, and Until then, lets keep giving this corporate focused rapid fire thread the benefit of the doubt.

Specific Game Mode
< PvX.>

Proposal Overview
< improve rapid fire on the longbow>

Goal of Proposal
< allow rapped fire to be affected by damage multiplies for entirety of cast and reduce cast time to bring the attack in line with simular abilities on other professions. >

Proposal Functionality
<

• Rapid fire is currently a damage loss if you are standing at max range, the channel time is actually taking away from a harder hitting per critical auto attack at max range for the duration than the entirety of rapid fire. Many other classes have abilities that attack fast and with consecutive attacks such as the thief and warrior. If rapid fire was brought up speed wise down to the 2¾ sec cast it would be much more beneficial for our overall output of damage on the bow.

• Also currently only the first shot of rapid fire is affected by damage multiplied such as Signet of the Hunt, which leads to a wasted utility because it is only +150% on a 1-2k attack at best instead of the total damage for the ability. Allowing such abilities to affect every single arrow from rapid fire is all that I am asking.>

Associated Risks
< Rapid fire would be brought in line with similar abilities as well as be affected by all of our utilities for the duration, which may end up making longbow more valuable as a damage weapon. The associated risk is the shock factor from other classes until it is taken as the norm.>

Specific Game Mode
< PvX>

Proposal Overview
< improve opening strike>

Goal of Proposal
< to make opening strike more valuable and making the grandmaster trait Remorseless in marksmanship more valuable >

Proposal Functionality
< Changing the function of Opening strike to cause + 225% damage on the next attack making it more of a strategic use of opening strikes rather than burn it while you got it buff that it is now. This change would be more in line with necromancer Dhummfire on command that they are getting because it puts strategy back into passive buffs and encourages combos to be made rather than encouraging thoughtless attack. >

Associated Risks
< This would allow for rangers to be able to get slightly higher damage through playing smarter but as far as risks it could open up ranger spike builds if planned very well but this is not much of an issue at the moment do to most of our harder hitting attacks being heavily telegraphed via animations.>

Atherakhia.4086:

You could just make it a ‘from stealth’ skill.

Rapid Fire, if used from stealth, does Punishing Shot.

Adding from stealth mechanics to it’s shots is a nice idea. Has control from the limited ways we can gain stealth. Strikes me it would be a chained 3 most logically but placement is kind of irrelevant.

While they are at it could they add a hookshot pull to 4 from stealth. Believe you mentioned siege issues in previous comments would give a way aside from PoS.

Revealed should be pet ability and shout.
Otherwise, it may would be nice feature to “steal” the stealth. Its like rolling the dice on thieves – Funny when they lose stealth and you get it. Its like “You wanted to stalk up on me my dear? Hah!”

BUT Weapon skills should focus on fastcontrol hunting abilities. Ranger isn’t for managing tricks unless it wields a Staff.

Chrispy.5641:

I don’t blame the developers for not playing a larger role in this CDI thread, and I suggest that you read the Fractal Evolution CDI thread starting here (if you haven’t already) :::
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Fractal-Evolution/3706456

The lack of dev interaction in our Ranger thread was addressed there. Apparently some of our suggestions have been talked about, but….nothing else was really explained beyond that.

I would say that everyone should stay patient,…and only start raising hell if during the next profession CDI, suddenly there is alot more dev interaction (and I’m not talking about a little tiny bit more, I’m talking about there being a dev post on every freaking page, etc). Then that would prove your suspicions. Because we cannot prove that Anet hates and ignores Rangers, and Until then, lets keep giving this corporate focused rapid fire thread the benefit of the doubt.

Honestly I’ld rather deliberate posts and fewer than false hopes. Feeling misled generates alot more anger.

misterdevious.6482:

Synister.8629:

Game Mode:
PvX

Proposal Overview:
Zephyr’s Speed Beastmaster trait change.

Goal of Proposal:
To prevent the Ranger’s pet from wasting its quickness boon/buff.

Currently, the Ranger and pet acquire quickness immediately after pet swapping. This isn’t an issue for the Ranger, but the pet is a little slower to react. The quickness only lasts 3 seconds, so more often than not, the pet wastes the entire duration running to the target or standing around.

I propose that the quickness boon/buff be applied after swapping pets, but ONLY after attacking. This will allow the pet time to run to the desired target before initiating quickness.

Proposal Functionality:

Pet
Swapped in>runs to target>attacks>quickness procs

Perhaps creating a boon/buff icon similar to the Attack of Opportunity would be wise, to prevent exploiting the effect.

Does that make sense?

Associated Risks:
None.

I like the idea. Often using Zephyr feels like a waste because the damage you gain from your own skills comes at the cost of swapping the pet out of range of its target. I do notice pets sometimes just standing still for most of the Quickness duration.

/agreed emphatically. Even ranged pets don’t reliably orientate in time for benefit. Ranger should get the same treatment on next attack.

Chrispy.5641:

I don’t blame the developers for not playing a larger role in this CDI thread, and I suggest that you read the Fractal Evolution CDI thread starting here (if you haven’t already) :::
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Fractal-Evolution/3706456

The lack of dev interaction in our Ranger thread was addressed there. Apparently some of our suggestions have been talked about, but….nothing else was really explained beyond that.

I would say that everyone should stay patient,…and only start raising hell if during the next profession CDI, suddenly there is alot more dev interaction (and I’m not talking about a little tiny bit more, I’m talking about there being a dev post on every freaking page, etc). Then that would prove your suspicions. Because we cannot prove that Anet hates and ignores Rangers, and Until then, lets keep giving this corporate focused rapid fire thread the benefit of the doubt.

Where do you think I got the quote from?
But if it turned out that she’s just the type the enjoys her weekends, then I totally take it all back. Thou that being said Chris manages to somewhat stay able to communicate during the weekends, which makes him a trooper.
And it’s the right attitude to have when it comes to these CDI treads.

I made this suggestion before in another thread, so I thought I’d add it here.

Game Mode:
Mainly PvE, but would be useful in other modes.

Proposal Overview:
Making Hunter’s Shot behave more like the Thieves’ stealth > Surprise Shot (stealth attack).

Goal of Proposal:
Making Hunter’s Shot more interesting and fun. I think the skill has potential to be great again, with this small addition. I hope others feel the same. I don’t hate Hunter’s Shot, but I do feel it is missing something.

Proposal Functionality:
Use Hunter’s Shot. After gaining stealth, Hunter’s Shot changes to Debilitating Shot (pick any name you like). At this point you can fire the new skill Debilitating Shot or stay in stealth. If you use Debilitating Shot, Hunter’s Shot goes on a 24 second cool-down instead of the original 12 second cool-down.

Debilitating Shot:
Fire an arrow that immobilizes the enemy. Your pet’s next attack does 50% more damage and inflicts cripple.

I would much rather Hunter’s Shot > Focused Shot, but I didn’t want to suggest it because ANet doesn’t want Rangers to burst. :’(

Associated Risks:
May need some balancing.

Specific Game Mode
PvX

Proposal Overview
Compress the Opening Strike mechanic

Goal of Proposal
Make the currently mediocre Opening Strike mechanic more appealing by changing places of a few traits. No in-depth functionality change necessary.

Proposal Functionality
1.) Combine the traits Opening Strike and Alpha Training to Adept tier minor “Alpha Strike: You and your pet cause vulnerability with your first strike when entering combat”.
2.) Master minor trait: “Precise Strike: Opening Strikes always critical hit” (both for the player and pet).
3.) Grandmaster minor trait: Remorseless in its current functionality

Results:
- gives all minor traits of the Marksmanship trait line purpose
- for the entire opening strike/remorseless mechanic you just need to invest 25 trait points now. Saves you 5 points, if you don’t want the grandmaster major.
- frees up a grandmaster major trait slot, which can be selected on top of the remorseless synergy by investing 30 trait points.

Associated Risks
Should be checked balance-wise, but seeing how subpar the entire opening strike mechanic is at the moment, I don’t think these changes would be overpowered.

Additional Notes
Make the Remorseless trait work for the pet as well.

The opening strike traits should be comprassed to one minor tier.

This is a review of the changes I would like to do on weapon’s skills, it’s mostly based on PvP.

Ranger’s weapons

Longbow
This is a power based-long range weapon, it also have some controll-ish element.
#1 Only 2 ranges are needed (0-500= 50%, 501-1200= 100%), this will help a lot the positioning to be in range of allies’s buffs while doing max damage; arrows need to fly 10-20% faster, at 900+ you wont hit anything that’s not static wich is a problem for a long range weapon.
#2 It’s usefull to negate the #1 drawback, It’s good like it is now.
#3 should not pierce or else you will break out of stealth istantly.
#4 Ok
#5 Should cast in half time, do half of the hits and do double damage/cripple. As is now retaliation can kill you in team battles (let’s not think about WvW). If it’s still not that usefull after this change a 1 sec immobilize on the first hit can be added.

Shortbow
This is a short-medium range weapon with emphasis on positioning and mixed damage.
#1 Cut a bit the normal damage, add some extra damage to flanking and 1 extra bleed second; 900 range is fine if we add tools to mantain the side/rear bonuses.
#2 V shape is ok, but add some bonus for the point blank hit (extra damage + something like weakness? extra bleeding?)
#3 Dodge in the direction you’re moving (so you can dodge to get the flanking bonus), 20% extra damage.
#4 add 1 second of immobilize, 20% extra damage.
#5 Stun 1 sec on frontal hit, 1 sec stun and 2 second daze on flank (mind that you can double up with Moment of Clarity)

Greatsword
Greatsword it’s a power based melee weapon focused on defence and mobility.
#1 The damage is low, but the evade is so good, it’s good as it is now.
#2 Cut the animation time to 1/2 second, 3/4 is quite long for a skill with such an obvious animation. If you can land the skill the overall DPS of the weapon it’s not that bad.
#3 One of the best skill for mobility ever.
#4 the kick part (if hits) usually will launch the opponent outside the #2 range, and will root you in place until the animation is done. A shorter knockback and the mobility on kick should help a great deal; with an extra 20% damage it can be used as a sort of spike initiator with #2.
#5 while good on paper this skill has some problems. It wont hit a moving opponent (you will never hit someone running from you) and the extra damage bonus cancels out with the trait that should buff the skill. Extend the range of the leap or cut the animation time and the skill should hit moving stuff.

Attack of Opportunity should be changed a little, Rangers dont have big 1 hit attacks (barring Maul) and the pet’s skills cant be controlled that much. Make Attack of Opportunity give a number of charges (2-3) with "your attacks do extra 30% damage, 1 charge is consumed each time you hit something". Make each source add extra charges.

Sword
A Power based melee weapon based on in combat mobility and evades.
#1 The leaps on the #1 chain is good for sticking on the target but the delay you get on the dodge/skills can kill you. Faster execution times on the chain (with a damage nerf to compensate) is a cool band-aid solution.
#2 the animation time after the 1/2 sec cast feels a little cluncky, but it could be related to the #1 delay.
#3 Love it.

Axe
Mainhand Axe is the default 1h ranged weapon so it’s a mix between power and condi.
#1 Add a little effect on the 1st hit, damage wise it’s quite good with 2-3 targets; but in 1v1 damage is too low. (maybe a 15-20% extra damage in 1st hit?)
#2 For a ranged weapon wannabe a point blank skill is a bit odd, should be an AoE that Bleeds on hit, or pulse bleeds a couple of times.
#3 Add an extra second of chilled to keep players in #2 better.

#4 This is the only skill that it’s worse if traited, the extra range make the poiectile likely to disappear on a wall or on a ledge. It also slows down the pull on the return. It’s a shame because it work so well with the sword. Long range pull it’s good for WvW (even if it’s slower) so the work should be done on the proiectile itself or the range should be limited to 900 in PvP.
#5 Reflects are always good, the main problem is that this one roots you in place for its duration. Low damage, vulnerability and retaliation wont scare away any meleer nor AoE placement. There are 2 possible solutions; the effect stays in the area after the initial cast (1/2 sec) and you can move around or instead of retaliation the area pulses blind each second or so.

Warhorn, torch and dagger are quite good for me as they are now, I feel that warhorn #4 is a bit underwhelming, but the weapon overall is good.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Shadowsong.4820:

Permastowing a pet really shouldn’t be the “solution” to clunky pet mechanics. The people who would prefer this over having the pet mechanics improved/reworked just shouldn’t play rangers, I guess.

That idea would actually be in lieu of a permastow. It would give Rangers a little more utility while not losing site of the concept of a Ranger.

Either way though, I don’t want this whole CDI to be about stowing the pets. There have been a lot of great ideas outside of this one that will help pets to be a more viable option. Perhaps just fixing some of the issues with the AI could be enough for people to feel better about the lack of permastow.

This them of the discussion concerns me greatly. I am strongly against perma stowing of the pet and giving the ranger a buff.

I played GW1 since 2005 and ranger was my first character. I chose the class because I wanted a pet. Throughout the years in GW1 I was very unhappy that the pet was such a poorly implemented mechanic in the game. It was always optimal to not bring the pet except for a handful of metas (vastly outweighed by the metas that didn’t involve pets). It was a sad reality for me as a ranger in GW1 that every time I brought my pet (and I always did) I did so while bringing less to the table. I never felt like this while playing a hunter in WoW. To this day I was so sad that the GW1 team never redesigned the beast mastery line (the optional trait line that pets fell under – not a coincidence it was the worst line in GW1) to make it competitive with the others. Pet rangers were just bad.

Fast forward to GW2’s reveal of the ranger class and I was overjoyed that the pet was a core mechanic for the class. Finally I can play my ranger as I always wanted – a team with my pet, fighting together and being just as effective as any other class doing that. I foolishly believed that the pet being the core class mechanic meant that it would be a fine tuned and polished mechanic that would never be a hindrance and would always feel good to have. As this discussion points out, that’s not the case for GW2 rangers.

So why am I against making pets permanently stow-able if I agree they “don’t work” with their current design and it’s holding back the class? Because the day the ranger is designed to play without the pet is the day the pet becomes just like the beast mastery tree of GW1 – the unwanted option that drags you down if you take it. It’s not longer a priority to fix it because players can play without it now and every situation you choose to bring it is a situation the pet has to prove it’s better than an alternative (with it’s current design this is likely never going to be the case). It’s giving up on making the pet mechanic the satisfying and fun AI mechanic that I wanted to play when I chose the ranger class.

You might think making the pet “optional” is the solution that satisfies everyone, but the hard reality for players that want to play the ranger is that this simply won’t be the case. It will only be optional if the class is balanced so that a ranger playing without a pet is no more effective than a ranger playing with a pet. If that’s the case, why bother making the pet optional in the first place? If you can make a pet ranger just as effective as a thief or a warrior, why remove the pet? Players want the pet to become “optional” because they don’t want the pet.

To put it another way. Many players don’t think the pet works well. The problem is that the pet doesn’t work well, not that the pet exists. Removing the pet from the build doesn’t solve the problem, it removes it. For players who still want to play with the pet, the problem will still exist.

Synister.8629:

Game Mode:
PvX

Proposal Overview:
Zephyr’s Speed Beastmaster trait change.

Goal of Proposal:
To prevent the Ranger’s pet from wasting its quickness boon/buff.

Currently, the Ranger and pet acquire quickness immediately after pet swapping. This isn’t an issue for the Ranger, but the pet is a little slower to react. The quickness only lasts 3 seconds, so more often than not, the pet wastes the entire duration running to the target or standing around.

I propose that the quickness boon/buff be applied after swapping pets, but ONLY after attacking. This will allow the pet time to run to the desired target before initiating quickness.

Proposal Functionality:

Pet
Swapped in>runs to target>attacks>quickness procs

Perhaps creating a boon/buff icon similar to the Attack of Opportunity would be wise, to prevent exploiting the effect.

Does that make sense?

Associated Risks:
None.

There is a way to solve that, hit F1 as soon as you swap, your pet will attack right away.

Honestly, the slow reaction problem people are getting from the pet can be solve if that one button.

Shiren.9532:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Shadowsong.4820:

Permastowing a pet really shouldn’t be the “solution” to clunky pet mechanics. The people who would prefer this over having the pet mechanics improved/reworked just shouldn’t play rangers, I guess.

That idea would actually be in lieu of a permastow. It would give Rangers a little more utility while not losing site of the concept of a Ranger.

Either way though, I don’t want this whole CDI to be about stowing the pets. There have been a lot of great ideas outside of this one that will help pets to be a more viable option. Perhaps just fixing some of the issues with the AI could be enough for people to feel better about the lack of permastow.

This them of the discussion concerns me greatly. I am strongly against perma stowing of the pet and giving the ranger a buff.

I played GW1 since 2005 and ranger was my first character. I chose the class because I wanted a pet. Throughout the years in GW1 I was very unhappy that the pet was such a poorly implemented mechanic in the game. It was always optimal to not bring the pet except for a handful of metas (vastly outweighed by the metas that didn’t involve pets). It was a sad reality for me as a ranger in GW1 that every time I brought my pet (and I always did) I did so while bringing less to the table. I never felt like this while playing a hunter in WoW. To this day I was so sad that the GW1 team never redesigned the beast mastery line (the optional trait line that pets fell under – not a coincidence it was the worst line in GW1) to make it competitive with the others. Pet rangers were just bad.

Fast forward to GW2’s reveal of the ranger class and I was overjoyed that the pet was a core mechanic for the class. Finally I can play my ranger as I always wanted – a team with my pet, fighting together and being just as effective as any other class doing that. I foolishly believed that the pet being the core class mechanic meant that it would be a fine tuned and polished mechanic that would never be a hindrance and would always feel good to have. As this discussion points out, that’s not the case for GW2 rangers.

So why am I against making pets permanently stow-able if I agree they “don’t work” with their current design and it’s holding back the class? Because the day the ranger is designed to play without the pet is the day the pet becomes just like the beast mastery tree of GW1 – the unwanted option that drags you down if you take it. It’s not longer a priority to fix it because players can play without it now and every situation you choose to bring it is a situation the pet has to prove it’s better than an alternative (with it’s current design this is likely never going to be the case). It’s giving up on making the pet mechanic the satisfying and fun AI mechanic that I wanted to play when I chose the ranger class.

You might think making the pet “optional” is the solution that satisfies everyone, but the hard reality for players that want to play the ranger is that this simply won’t be the case. It will only be optional if the class is balanced so that a ranger playing without a pet is no more effective than a ranger playing with a pet. If that’s the case, why bother making the pet optional in the first place? If you can make a pet ranger just as effective as a thief or a warrior, why remove the pet? Players want the pet to become “optional” because they don’t want the pet.

To put it another way. Many players don’t think the pet works well. The problem is that the pet doesn’t work well, not that the pet exists. Removing the pet from the build doesn’t solve the problem, it removes it. For players who still want to play with the pet, the problem will still exist.

more than one year after release, and the core mechanic of ranger class still broken……….Anet said they CANT fix it because Pet AI is bound to Mob AI , so, IMHO we are better without a broken pet (-30% damage)……..

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

Because even on passive, the pet draws aggro…

Jocksy.3415:

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

Because even on passive, the pet draws aggro…

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/info/updates/Game-Update-Notes-April-30-2013/first#post1927551
“Summoned creatures and pets can no longer draw aggro from enemies that have not already aggroed on their master.”

Maybe its just a matter of perception? My pet didn’t draw any aggro last time I checked…

I asked here and in the ranger subforum what people liked about rangers that made them play the profession, so what shouldn’t change :

In short:

• Reactive/mobile gameplay
• Animations
• Use of two characters

In long:

• outplaying opponents by watching what they are doing and having the tools on my ranger to avoid / counter what they are doing.
• I dont use many on my weapon skills, LR or my elite in many fights, simply because I use them when needed not because they are off CD, and in most fights LR and elite are not needed.
• I just really like the mobile gameplay with the weapons abilities. It’s the most fun I have on any toon.
• having a profession mechanic that I get to customize.
• having a wide range of game mechanics to choose from, being a jack of all trades.
• having widely varied playstyles… melee tank, beastmaster, or pew-pew spirit support
• the mobile active melee combat.
• that I can take camps, towers, champions, and some dungeons alone.
• strategic thinking. (pet tanking & blocking projectiles, trap & spirit placement, cooperation)
• I am epic with the sword. Visually at least
• The weapon skills are so friggen cool.
• the reactive gameplay, that weapons have built in defense/offense on demand,
• that in PvE, I can switch aggro with the pet,
• in WvW, that I can take camps and towers alone,
• my water fields and my control in zergs,
• the support I can give when the spirits and the pet don’t die…
• to stop thieves from stelthing, particularly when we swipe a structure (WvW)
• I like the defensive/offensive on-demand abilities (SB#3, GS#4)…
• like the fact that we don’t have a mechanism that is overly abused and make the class to simple to play. Spirit ranger are close but the build in general is ok at best.
• Ranger have to create opportunities with skillful play rather than using one skill to win.
• That said, I love how hard they are to play if you REALLY want to pull out their maximum. How you’re playing for 2, you AND your pet.
• watching my s/d lightning reflex ranger fly across the screen makes other classes seem boring

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

Playing a beastmaster is one of many playstyles the ranger is capable of. The pet is excelent if not necessary for a beastmaster. However this doesn’t apply to the other gamestyles. If you play archer or trapper there is simply no benefit you gain through using a pet over having it stowed and the damage reverted.
Also stowing your pet and regaining the damage is not OP if the AI is fixed.
You gain 100% of your damage but maybe you will be as effective with your pet as without. Furthermore you sacrifice the utility the pet offers. Yet we shouldn’t be forced to use the pet.

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

OFC, fight with pet in passive and lost 30% of your damage, THIS is the problem of this class, pet have 30% of our damage and is random, a “put any class here” will hit you with 100% of his damage in each hit, we hit with 70% of our damage because pet have the other 30%, so, if pet cant land a hit in your opponent we have a nice 30% damage lost, it is a BIG handicap, ofc you can outplay your opponent, but a Good player with ranger will be probably a GOD player with another class, because we must fight against our core mechanic each fight.

urdriel.8496:

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

OFC, fight with pet in passive and lost 30% of your damage, THIS is the problem of this class, pet have 30% of our damage and is random, a “put any class here” will hit you with 100% of his damage in each hit, we hit with 70% of our damage because pet have the other 30%, so, if pet cant land a hit in your opponent we have a nice 30% damage lost, it is a BIG handicap, ofc you can outplay your opponent, but a Good player with ranger will be probably a GOD player with another class, because we must fight against our core mechanic each fight.

Not only in each fight, but also, in each traits…
In too many instances, we have to choose “us or the pet”; A better synergy of “us and the pet” would be great…

Why do we need the pet to take over our alterations? Why do we always have to choose between buffing us OR the pet? Giving and advantage (damage/crit/alterations) to us OR the pet, having us OR the pet survive.

I wish there was more synergy in traits/competencies between rangers and the pet.
Like pretty much everything should do something for ranger AND pet (like guard might also give something to rangers, would it only be swiftness – without being traited)

Specific Game Mode
Obviously it will impact on all modes but my primary focus will be pet issues in PvE.

Proposal Overview
Ranger DPS is too low to account for the pet. This makes the ranger’s actions feel less important, it makes pet deaths (far too common) a massive hindrance for the class and it pigeon holes rangers into specific pet selections (DPS pets). Conversely, durable pets with high DPS are too powerful and not an active enough mechanic for skilled gameplay. Weaken the pet’s DPS role and give them more support and utility functions. Rangers also lack diversity in their effective options to support parties in PvE in the current meta.

Goal of Proposal

• To make pets less of a hindrance and more desirable contributions to the ranger and other party members by giving pets more desirable support and utility skills and meaningful F2 skills that impact the battle.
• To ensure pets survive in situations they currently don’t have the AI or design to do well in (PvE dungeons, WvW zergs) without allowing them to break encounters via tank and spank or become indestructible terminators.
• To give back ownership of DPS to the ranger while still including the pet as a core part of your gameplay and combat experience that promotes choices and interesting changes to the battle field.
• To make pets feel less like separate entities that do their own thing and move them more towards being team players while preserving and enhancing positional skill based gameplay of a pet.

Proposal Functionality

• Shift some of the pet DPS to the ranger. This allows the pet to move more into a support role while the ranger can be more self sufficient in DPS.
• Redesign pet durability. Give them immunity to several boss AoEs, resistance to boss cleaves (unless directly targeted) and give them more passive traits that help this process (similair to warrior durability builds). This means the pet won’t just die to stray AoE or casual cleaves but they aren’t invulnerable when targeted specifically.
• Redesign all the pets to offer more utility value.
  • A stonger focus on boons. Allow most pets to give at least one or more boon(s) as part of their basic AI skill rotation (birds give swiftness and fury, cats give might and fury etc). Maybe make it a mix between some boons shared with the whole party and some boons given only to the ranger (unless traited?).
  • A stronger focus on combo fields. One of my favourite pet skills is the spider’s poison field. I find combo fields in general to be very interesting. I’d love to see the Fern Hound drop a water field or the Salamander Drake drop a fire field.
  • A single Beast Mastery trait that gives family specific buffs similair to a weaker Spotter for birds (Hunter’s Eye) or a weaker Empower Allies for wolves (Pack Leader). Make it either a 20 or 30 point trait in Beast Mastery (this means pure DPS builds can’t bring it and it helps players investing into the BM line contribute to their party without giving up too much DPS).
  • Rework F2 skills so that they have a greater impact on the field. Not a true “bomb” (using MTG terminology “a powerful, game-ending, stabilizing” skill) but if I’m going to press F2 I want it to change the battlefield and feel rewarded for using it (like Terrifying Howl from the wolf, Lacerating Slash from the hawk is an example of an F2 skill I don’t like). Possible options would be the untraited functionality of “Search and Rescue” for the Drake Hound, Swirling Winds from the hawk, Muddy Terrain from the warthog, Healing Spring from the Fern Hound, Earthshaker from the brown bear, maybe a skill like Stike as One from GW1, but this time the ranger teleports to the pet’s location, from the jaguar. Not quite as powerful as their true counterparts, but imitations.

Associated Risks

• Obviously all of these suggestions are incredibly powerful and likely OP.
• Altering the skill sets of every pet would create a lot of pressure to balance them properly (to be fair I don’t think this has been achieved with the current pet skill bars).
• Giving a class so much “free” utility is quite powerful even if it is limited to two pets at a time.
• This proposal does heavily focus on turning pets into “stat sticks” that give out auras and boons and it doesn’t focus enough on the active combat roles of pets. I like the knockdowns on boars and wolves, the pressure that a stealthed jaguar puts on an enemy player or the control and snares that a spider provides. Balancing that with less DPS and more utility (or even enhancing those roles) would be very complex.
• Some players love pets as passive DPS (some builts rely on them to do a kind of hybrid DPS build like condi pets that rely on a jaguar).

Specific Game Mode

WvW – Part 2

Proposal Overview

Pets are part of the Ranger’s heart and soul.

As everyone knows, the current Pets for the Ranger are World Entities (Mobs) leashed by the Ranger, and as such share the exact same game AI as the world mobs. Messing with a Ranger’s Pet’s AI, messes with the world mobs – that change is never gonna happen, we understand that.

The idea here is to remove those poor world creatures from the Ranger’s care, and give her (to start with) three or four completely unique ‘Ranger Animal Spirits’. The new Pets will have Ranger specific AI, and as suggested in my Part 1, share a perfect synergy with the Ranger so that they act as one.

This rework will allow the game Devs a chance to polish their original game concept without actually ruining the PVE aspect of the game.

Goal of Proposal

Balance the Ranger with her natural role as a Champion of Nature let her be as one with the ‘unique’ wild animals she calls friend.

Create a new array of animals (or animal spirits) which are unique to the game world, and adhere to a full synergistic relationship with the Ranger.

The new Pets will have unique builds, with their own personal traits sheet and custom skins/armors. These traits can be quested for, or enhanced through special power spirits (perhaps a Gem store item?) the Ranger finds in the World.

The new animals will have roles which they can play. Some examples of trait builds might include (there are virtually limitless possibilities):

Defensive Warder: a proximity condition removal, healer Pet build

Offensive Interceptor: charge to stun/interrupt, then immobilize Pet build

Defensive Dodger: lunge & dodge then zig & zag, then block Pet build (percentage of success of damage avoidance based on stats/traits and gear (Pet gear)

Offensive Interloper: either through stealth, or speed, a surprise attack which steals all boons from the opponent and shares them with the Ranger

Those are just some of the ideas, but through the combination of Pet traits and Pet gear/spirits, the Ranger can create a unique array of defensive and offensive capabilities which she imparts upon her Pet through the full synergy of her traits (as mentioned in Part1), and the selections made for the Pet specific traits/gear.

Proposal Functionality

Remove the current Pets from the Ranger’s line-up.

Initially, create three or four brand new, unique Pet, or animal spirits that can be obtained by the Ranger. Remember, the animal is a blank sheet until the Ranger trains the Pet traits, adds the power spirits, as well as dresses the Pet up in armor/trinkets.

Each new animal has a base ‘racial’ functionality for both offensive and defensive action (this was mentioned in Part 1 – essentially Ranger and Pet become as one, and a new character bar will allow the Ranger access to either offensive, and/or defensive synergistic powers imparted by the Pet).

Create a new trait line for the Ranger’s Pet (role specific traits only), so that she may train her Pet to become the ideal companion, a Pet specialize for a specific role, or one that is a hybrid of many roles.

Create a new character sheet for the Ranger’s Pet/spirit, allowing the Ranger to customize her companion’s appearance (color, fur style [yes, that’s a thing!], armor, etc.) as well as build up and modify the Pet’s stats and gear through questing (or Gem Store).

The astute reader will note, in Part 1 of this proposal, I suggest that the traits in the Ranger’s character tree be shared completely between Ranger and Pet – this is important because the trait line suggested in Part 2 is a specialize trait line for the Pet only. Therefore it is important to note, Part 2 suggests a new control system for the Pets through a role specific trait/build mechanism, not additional traits for the Ranger herself.

Associated Risks

There are no risks associated with this, as it will simply balance the game play of the Ranger, forever removing the handicap of having a class with reliance on an AI driven game mechanic.

By allowing the Pet to be a unique entity, no longer tied to the world mob(s) AI system, the Ranger will be given the freedom to modify how the Pet responds under various circumstances through the use of the new Pet trait/build mechanism.

Further, a profitable opportunity will arise by this addition as well, for all Ranger’s love to have their Pets look unique and beautiful. This in turn will give rise for the need of ‘Pet Grooming Kits’, ‘Pet Armors’, ‘Pet Power Boosts’, etc..

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

Well in most case 30-40% more damage on all your attacks is much better than random knock back or condition. It would be totally different thing if we can trust pet to do its job .

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

I think your reponse is a bit hypocritical, to call people who want permastow “overdramatic”. Pot Kettle Black. Many who want the stow, want it as a band-aid solution to parts ofthe game where the pet is perma-dead, through no fault of the player or is a liability as in certain boss fights. Of course permastow would be tactically less sound than using the pet in many situations, that’s blindingly obvious, that’s why people would still use the pet IN those situations.

Permastow isn’t the same thing as getting rid of all pets. It would be an advantage to many players in certain environments and wouldn’t affect people like you at all. It wouldn’t harm your gameplay, it wouldn’t affect how you play, it wouldn’t prevent you from using the pet. It would only grant people the option of not using the pet, when the pet is a liability.

Since ANET clearly has no intention of fixing the encounters where pet-death is 100% certain, the only fair option is to provide Rangers the opportunity to restore their own 100% attack power, stowing the pet has just been one listed suggestion. Building on that option to create new playstyles by allowing what others have called ‘aspects’, based on the active pet stowed, ANET could create a greater meta, where people use their pets and stow as part of their tactics for encounters.

Trust me, no one is trying to take your pet away from you. We just want the opportunity to compete fairly with other classes, which means fixing the pet or, failing that, allowing us to bypass it as necessary. Whatever it takes to get our lost damage back.

Zorpi.5904:

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

Well in most case 30-40% more damage on all your attacks is much better than random knock back or condition. It would be totally different thing if we can trust pet to do its job .

This