Guild Wars 2

urdriel.8496:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Nike.2631:

Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call – Using a shout reveals up to 3 foes within 600 and shout skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (renamed Shout Mastery)

Thank you for reading!

While I do agree that we need more revealing options, your suggestion could turn out too powerful. You reveal people up to 3 times, which is already huge. Furthermore it was been suggested multiple times, me included, that RaO and HaO should be turned into shouts. You would be able to reveal an enemy up to 5 times, which would be all their stealth they have.
Anyways, if the devs lower the damage of the pet in order to give us our damage, the pet has to be more centered around providing support. Revealing enemies would be such a support the pet could offer.

Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call – Using a shout reveals up to 3 foes within 600 and shout skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (renamed Shout Mastery) 15 sec cd

Good call. I have no problem adding an internal cooldown. I’ll update the original post .

Aveneo.2068:

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

Yeah, I know a lot of people are posting here from all over the world.
My point was every server has it’s own way of going, specifically in WvsW and most french, spanish or german people would have a better time posting on the official forum dedicated to them.

No offense if i made my self unclear, i just wanted to point the fact that it is understanable not to comunicate directly to the devs, but as far as here, it’s basically lead by a CC who is doing a pretty nice job, why shouldn’t we use the same concept here and there.

That’s not such a huge job if you take in account the fact people are less on thoses officials subforums… And it shouldn’t hurt anyway

Aidenwolf.5964:

Frostfang.5109:

Arghore

U’r suggestion on Permastowing the pets and making them utility-skills….

NO thank u. That would ruin the entire class for me.

Then don’t stow your pet. The pet stow mechanic that is already built into the game changes the UI to remove F1-F4 completely. What is proposed is that the pet UI F1-F4 become something else when the pet is stowed, such as traps (my idea), and that the 30% base damage given to the pet be given to the ranger.

Again, if you don’t want to stow your pet, don’t. Permastow adds to the ranger if you stow, or plays exactly like what we have now if you like your ranger as it is now.

We are trying to get changes to the ranger that are both meaningful and easy to code because I for one don’t want to wait 6 months for a fix to a problem that is already 1.5 years old.

@Frostfang I would like to know which one you mean? suggestion #4 or #5 (from the post linked below). Now it so happens that I suggested both (though more then likely not exclusively, aka. more people may have suggested a similar suggestion, so credit where it is due please, aka. I will not accept full credit (or blame if you so desire) for these suggestions.)

4. is the one where 4 pets become linked to the F-keys, and you summon them for a period of time.

5. is basically how pets worked in GW1, with the difference that they now come with some of their own attacks.

I personally prefer #4 at the moment, mainly because it introduces something new (this is GW2 by all means), and somebody else (sorry that I forgot your name, and didn’t include that specific addition in my summary, I fixed that) suggested that once you summoned the pet of your choice, for the time the pet is up, the F-keys could turn into the current F-keys and let you have more control over the pet you summoned. I prefer it also because I favour ‘CHOICE’ over perma-pet/perma-stow positions, and #4 is the closest to a solution that has perma-stow, could come with a perma-pet (be it only a visual indicator of a ranger), and still keeps the pets the class mechanic of the Ranger (which seems to be high on the wish list for Anet). In this sense it is the suggestion that does the most for all those involved (except for those that want nothing to change, and trust on the a fix to pets to be sufficient, which I doubt will be the case else it would be fixed by now).

@Aidenwolf please read this post, if you haven’t already: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/page/58#post3750947 there are more then one options to deal with the pet, and a possible stow mechanic. Yours basically adds another, or you could see it as a different way to supply a bonus to a stow, though giving a whole new F-mechanic is more akin to a whole new suggestion.

Nike.2631:

WAY OF THE SKIRMISHER: TIME IS ON MY SIDE
As skirmishers, Rangers need to maintain consistent pressure over time. Recharge traits should be key to their performance but often lack secondary “flavor” effects. This is an attempt to update or combine traits to give recharge choices more flavor. New traits filling the resulting gaps are intended to enhance Ranger effectiveness as skirmishers by making it difficult to ignore or recover from pressure applied by Ranger attacks rather than increasing their raw damage. They focus on striping or countering boons that allow the enemy to endure the Ranger’s steady assault.

Marksmanship IV: Perfect Aim (NEW) – The damage from your attacks is not reduced by protection. (fills slot vacated by Signet Mastery; coding note – equivalent to +50% damage against targets with protection)

Marksmanship IX: Mighty Signets – Activating signets grants might and signet recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Signet Mastery & Beastmaster’s Might)

Marksmanship X: Marksman’s Speed – Longbow and short bow attacks pierce and recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Piercing Arrows & Quickdraw)

Skirmishing VI: Hunter’s Horn (NEW) – Horn skills also randomly remove one of Retaliation/Swiftness/Vigor from up to 5 foes in range. (fills slot vacated by Agility Training)

Skirmishing X: Nature’s Venoms (NEW) – Each time you or your pet poison a foe, that foe loses regeneration. (fills slot vacated by Quickdraw)

Wilderness Survival VI: Wilderness Knowledge – Using a survival skill removes a condition from both you and your pet and survival skill recharge time is reduced by 20%.

Wilderness Survival X: Martial Mastery – Critical hits with sword, greatsword, and spear attacks apply vulnerability (one stack; 5 seconds duration; 5 second cooldown) and recharge time for these skills is reduced by 20%.

Beastmastery I: Speed Training – Pets move faster and their basic skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (combines Agility Training and Speed Training)

Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call – Using a shout reveals up to 3 foes within 600 (15 second cooldown) and shout skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (renamed Shout Mastery)

Beastmastery VI: Commanding Voice – Pets gain stability for 4 seconds when you press f2 and f2 skill recharge time is reduced 20%.

Thank you for reading!

I like these suggestions with one exception. The single stack of vulnerability on martial mastery is kind of weak. Maybe it could make vulnerability applied while wielding one of these weapons last XX% longer. Greatsword and spear would benefit directly. Sword would need either offhand axe, a sigil, or opening strikes to take advantage of it.

I made a post last page about what I think should be done to our F1-F4 UI in the event that permastow becomes a reality, it calls for the F keys to be become our traps. While I would like that to become a reality, I would LOVE this one to happen. I hope you enjoy!

PVE

On Permastow the ranger’s F1-F4 become QUIVERS

The goal

To give rangers a chance to be rangers, not beastmasters, when the pet is stowed the F keys in the UI swap out to a new set of F keys. This new set F1-F4 now contain Quivers of elemental Arrows. We would also gain the 30% additional damage recouped from our stowed pet.

The Proposal

Each skill would have a cool down like elementalist attunemnets and would add an on hit chance to both melee and ranged attacks.

F1 – Explosive arrows – While active, grants a 10% chance to cause (non OP) AOE physical damage around the target. (Combo blast finisher with a 5 sec cool down)

F2 – Flaming arrows – While active, grants a 10% chance to cause single target burning.

F3 – Poison arrows – While active, grants a chance on hit to create a poison field at the targets location for 5 sec. (With a 30 sec internal cool down)

F4 – Blinding arrows – While active, grants a 10% chance to blind the target and create a smoke field at the target location for 5 sec. (With a 30 sec internal cool down)

How this is meant to work

The F2 is just a nice addition of a chance to cause burning with our attacks and needs no CD, because burning doesn’t stack so it’s the one that is “always on”. F3 and F4 are combo fields and have decent cooldowns so using them is a tactical choice, but when a field procs, you switch to F1 to use the blast finisher, and then back into F2 you go.

I tried to find a decent way to give us more finishers and I like this idea, it fits what a ranger does in my eyes, and the pets are still here if we unstow them.

Potential problems

In melee especially with traps, the F1 finisher might cause us to be a bit OP for one balance patch, but hey, warriors don’t complain so why should we, right?

I imagine a future where Rangers are wanted in WvW because of their ability to track… but how would it work?

• Red Dots on the minimap (Rangers could sense enemies.)
• Red Dots on the minimap when using a skill (Rangers could check for enemies.)
• Rangers see visible footprints and/or red dot on minimap when enemies stealth (Rangers could follow stealthed foes.)
• Crippling Shot grants a Debuff called “Tracked,” and while that debuff is active the target appears as a red dot on the minimap and leaves visible footprints while stealthed. (Shortbow Rangers could track a single target).

And how much would it upset PvP balance?

oiseau.6481:

Aveneo.2068:

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

Yeah, I know a lot of people are posting here from all over the world.
My point was every server has it’s own way of going, specifically in WvsW and most french, spanish or german people would have a better time posting on the official forum dedicated to them.

No offense if i made my self unclear, i just wanted to point the fact that it is understanable not to comunicate directly to the devs, but as far as here, it’s basically lead by a CC who is doing a pretty nice job, why shouldn’t we use the same concept here and there.

That’s not such a huge job if you take in account the fact people are less on thoses officials subforums… And it shouldn’t hurt anyway

I have been wondering the same… Then I thought about it being 4 CDI going on at the same time here… french forum has (as far as I know), only Stephanie acting as CC, with a few mods…
Yes, looking at commader CDI, we had it nice, but dealing with 4 at the same time, even with few affluence, would be quite a big workload for her… since she would still have to do her regular workload…

Your original question, though, would be better asked in the language-specific subforum, might be directly to Stephanie…

Jocksy.3415:

oiseau.6481:

Aveneo.2068:

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

Yeah, I know a lot of people are posting here from all over the world.
My point was every server has it’s own way of going, specifically in WvsW and most french, spanish or german people would have a better time posting on the official forum dedicated to them.

No offense if i made my self unclear, i just wanted to point the fact that it is understanable not to comunicate directly to the devs, but as far as here, it’s basically lead by a CC who is doing a pretty nice job, why shouldn’t we use the same concept here and there.

That’s not such a huge job if you take in account the fact people are less on thoses officials subforums… And it shouldn’t hurt anyway

I have been wondering the same… Then I thought about it being 4 CDI going on at the same time here… french forum has (as far as I know), only Stephanie acting as CC, with a few mods…
Yes, looking at commader CDI, we had it nice, but dealing with 4 at the same time, even with few affluence, would be quite a big workload for her… since she would still have to do her regular workload…

Your original question, though, would be better asked in the language-specific subforum, might be directly to Stephanie…

Yeah, might be best to ask Stephanie and see if she knows of a way to get you guys involved in the CDI’s.

misterdevious.6482:

I imagine a future where Rangers are wanted in WvW because of their ability to track… but how would it work?

• Red Dots on the minimap (Rangers could sense enemies.)
• Red Dots on the minimap when using a skill (Rangers could check for enemies.)
• Rangers see visible footprints and/or red dot on minimap when enemies stealth (Rangers could follow stealthed foes.)
• Crippling Shot grants a Debuff called “Tracked,” and while that debuff is active the target appears as a red dot on the minimap and leaves visible footprints while stealthed. (Shortbow Rangers could track a single target).

And how much would it upset PvP balance?

So kinda like how Hunter’s Mark worked in WoW?

http://www.wowhead.com/spell=1130/hunters-mark

Arghore.8340:

Aidenwolf.5964:

Frostfang.5109:

Arghore

U’r suggestion on Permastowing the pets and making them utility-skills….

NO thank u. That would ruin the entire class for me.

Then don’t stow your pet. The pet stow mechanic that is already built into the game changes the UI to remove F1-F4 completely. What is proposed is that the pet UI F1-F4 become something else when the pet is stowed, such as traps (my idea), and that the 30% base damage given to the pet be given to the ranger.

Again, if you don’t want to stow your pet, don’t. Permastow adds to the ranger if you stow, or plays exactly like what we have now if you like your ranger as it is now.

We are trying to get changes to the ranger that are both meaningful and easy to code because I for one don’t want to wait 6 months for a fix to a problem that is already 1.5 years old.

@Frostfang I would like to know which one you mean? suggestion #4 or #5 (from the post linked below). Now it so happens that I suggested both (though more then likely not exclusively, aka. more people may have suggested a similar suggestion, so credit where it is due please, aka. I will not accept full credit (or blame if you so desire) for these suggestions.)

4. is the one where 4 pets become linked to the F-keys, and you summon them for a period of time.

5. is basically how pets worked in GW1, with the difference that they now come with some of their own attacks.

I personally prefer #4 at the moment, mainly because it introduces something new (this is GW2 by all means), and somebody else (sorry that I forgot your name, and didn’t include that specific addition in my summary, I fixed that) suggested that once you summoned the pet of your choice, for the time the pet is up, the F-keys could turn into the current F-keys and let you have more control over the pet you summoned. I prefer it also because I favour ‘CHOICE’ over perma-pet/perma-stow positions, and #4 is the closest to a solution that has perma-stow, could come with a perma-pet (be it only a visual indicator of a ranger), and still keeps the pets the class mechanic of the Ranger (which seems to be high on the wish list for Anet). In this sense it is the suggestion that does the most for all those involved (except for those that want nothing to change, and trust on the a fix to pets to be sufficient, which I doubt will be the case else it would be fixed by now).

@Aidenwolf please read this post, if you haven’t already: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/page/58#post3750947 there are more then one options to deal with the pet, and a possible stow mechanic. Yours basically adds another, or you could see it as a different way to supply a bonus to a stow, though giving a whole new F-mechanic is more akin to a whole new suggestion.

Yes, I’m taking it to the next level.

Aveneo.2068:

oiseau.6481:

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

While I agree that it would have been nice to have a post regarding the CDI in the french and german subforums, I have to stop and wonder at the last part of your post.

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

I think you misunderstood him…. he wanted to point out that non english speaking players have the right to express their point of view and he used the french forum as an example.

Btw I agree with him.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

Oh, it is possible. Enough resources and it is more than possible. Y’all don’t want to, understandable, but a large portion of the Ranger player base doesn’t want the class mechanic because it does not work as intended (hence the band-aids from the start).

That just settles that the class will forever be handicapped because it’s going to take at least or more work to make the pet work as intended as it would be to give the option out of it.

Thanks for putting the final nail in the coffin of my hope for the Ranger to be truly fixed.

Markus.9084:

Aveneo.2068:

oiseau.6481:

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

While I agree that it would have been nice to have a post regarding the CDI in the french and german subforums, I have to stop and wonder at the last part of your post.

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

I think you misunderstood him…. he wanted to point out that non english speaking players have the right to express their point of view and he used the french forum as an example.

Btw I agree with him.

Yeah, seemed like it as he/she specifically stated Europe; but that was probably meant to be France then.

At any rate, I also agree that it would have been nice of the devs to mention the CDI’s in the non-english forums.

Killsmith.8169:

Nike.2631:

WAY OF THE SKIRMISHER: TIME IS ON MY SIDE

Wilderness Survival X: Martial Mastery – Critical hits with sword, greatsword, and spear attacks apply vulnerability (one stack; 5 seconds duration; 5 second cooldown) and recharge time for these skills is reduced by 20%.

I like these suggestions with one exception. The single stack of vulnerability on martial mastery is kind of weak. Maybe it could make vulnerability applied while wielding one of these weapons last XX% longer. Greatsword and spear would benefit directly. Sword would need either offhand axe, a sigil, or opening strikes to take advantage of it.

I’ve been looking at that one too. With the addition of an internal cooldown (which it needed) the basic effect is underwhelming. My thinking is to increase it to 3 stacks. There are comparable traits that add 5%, so 3% damage in a form that gives some protection to your other conditions and benefits your pet and allies is probably reasonably in-scale. I’ll update the original post .

misterdevious.6482:

I imagine a future where Rangers are wanted in WvW because of their ability to track… but how would it work?

• Red Dots on the minimap (Rangers could sense enemies.)
• Red Dots on the minimap when using a skill (Rangers could check for enemies.)
• Rangers see visible footprints and/or red dot on minimap when enemies stealth (Rangers could follow stealthed foes.)
• Crippling Shot grants a Debuff called “Tracked,” and while that debuff is active the target appears as a red dot on the minimap and leaves visible footprints while stealthed. (Shortbow Rangers could track a single target).

And how much would it upset PvP balance?

Tracking wouldn’t be overpowered at all. I’m also not convinced anyone would care if Rangers could see red DOTs on the map or not to be honest. Warriors and Thieves can easily fill the role of scout and the Ranger would need quite a few more skills to gain some kind of speed advantage over these classes to actually scout an enemy force with or without tracking.

But there are other advantages a tracker can provide other than just keeping an eye on enemy movements. They could find favorable terrain to fight on. They could find weaknesses in the enemie’s plans.

Simply giving the Ranger another 1200 range leap in some fashion would give them the speed advantage to follow an enemy zerg and be faster than a Warrior. But how would you portray the other things?

You could make Muddy Terrain a larger circle and make it give allies in the circle stability (Improved Muddy Terrain is actually a skill in the game files btw).

The Ranger could be all about AE vulnerability and controlling enemy movements via large cripple and immobilize zones.

They could be given a way to reveal stealthed targets enmass to counter veils (only bring them out of stealth, don’t put revealed on them too as we don’t want to be OP against Thieves).

But yea, the Ranger needs an enormous amount of help when it comes to WvW so groups will want to include them. Not just in zergs, but smaller GvG engagements as well.

Increasing raw damage, giving them some burst, and some AE spells is needed as well. But utility above all else would really help bring the class out of 8th place.

Chrispy.5641:

Atherakhia.4086:

Chrispy.5641:

SkiTz.4590:

Ranger is a single target DPS class, that is the unfortunate truth and would take a lot of change to make it viable in terms of doing AOE damage like eles or necros.

I’ll give you the fact that they can’t spread them to other targets (again, this class is pretty much designed only for 1v1s). Traps aren’t big enough to be considered AOE. But rangers can apply/stack them pretty quickly…maybe not stack as high as a necro but who can? My ranger builds can reapply condis pretty much at will (poison,bleeds and burns that is) yea would be nice to have access to torment or confusion

Still, the build variety would be much better if anet could actually add something to make viable power builds for our class, but there is no such thing right now outside of the joke of a swop + bash + maul combat, which any idiot can see coming. and effectively dodge/block out of it

How big do traps need to be to be considered Aoe? Traps have an effective radius of 240 when traited, which is the same size as Barrage. Is Barrage not considered Aoe to you or something? How big does it have to be to be considered Aoe?

And what about Bonfire? Whirling Defense? drakes? What the heck else do you need to be able to do Aoe? (oh, let me guess, blast finisher like Thief shortbow….)

(oh, and necromancer marks are the same size as traps until you trait them to be bigger as well)

Take it in context. We were talking about AE application of condis between classes. Are you implying Ranger is even a contender when placed next to Engineers and Necros? Cause I have news for you… it’s not. It’s about on par with Warriors but can’t stack bleed to eleventybillion in .5 seconds every 5 seconds like a Warrior can.

Settle down…

…

Here’s my trap build :::http://gw2skills.net/editor/?vMEQRAnf3XjMqUuaHLerw1agYpQQ7vpITmn9wQO6RlcnoA-zECBYhDimWAgqI0k0Q5QFRjtaqIasqbY6YER1BAQA2ZdWnBYn7co7coJFAMLrA-w

It is my most used build, and I use it in PvE and WvW, and it is equally effective against all professions, and it is my 2nd highest dps build because I can hit multiple targets at once with almost all of my attacks, unlike, just about everything else the Ranger has.

So no, I won;t ‘settle down’, and yes, I am a little touchy when people try to suggest changes to traps, but fail to explain why beyond “Uh….it deals condition damage, so, it should be in wilderness survival…right?” (why do you want to move damage to a trait line that almost entirely focused on defense and force us to choose between one or the other?) or “It should deal more physical damage,…because, uh, BURST!” (which it shouldn’t because all skills have a maximum dps to consider when balancing. If traps dealt more physical damage, then the conditions would have to be nerfed because of gear stats like Rampager.) You should consider what Crit Chance and Sharpened Edges does for Traps before you go off blindly making suggestions to change it.

from a post a lil.further down
Also @everyone reading my posts, don’t get too angry at my posts for being the lone wolf pushing back against almost all of the proposed trap changes. Its just that it is one of my most used builds (probably most used), it is very effective, and I really don’t see why Rabid/Rampager/other crit gear has to essentially be less optimized and take a nerf to traps, just so other builds (anything without crit and condition damage) can be optimized for traps. It doesn’t make sense to nerf one only to buff the other. (I still think that moving traps to Wilderness Survival is a nerf to Ranger survival in general, because if you run any trap at all, you now have to choose between survival traits and traps, or conflicting traits like off-hand training.)

You are certainly not the only one looking at these suggestions with a raised eyebrow. I run a rather similar build to yours, but with warhorn and less focussed on max condition application. I would be less hit with a switch to Wilderness, due to not using throwing traps, and likely my play-style is a tad different. But I agree with you on most accounts where you defend traps being in the line they are now.

In my ‘in the ranger subforum’ suggestion for the CDI I tried to make more clear that traps are suitable for the critline by giving traps a ‘pulse’ action on trigger. Traps would pulse a bit of damage and condition application, meaning it is now more clear that traps supply crit.triggers. And due to the pulse action, PvP players get the option to use a dodge to negate some of the trap action, which somewhat justifies the addition of some damage, while at the same time giving the ranger a reason to imob/chill/cripple in a trap. (just don’t check the suggestion now, traps there are currently in the wilderness line :O , they may not be eventually though. )

Why no portals?

Give the ranger a portal utility, like the mesmers one. At the moment the mesmer has a monopol on it. Just let the ranger put two bushes on the ground, let the player can “port” between them for a short time and call it “Shortcut”.

Would be quite fun.

Aveneo.2068:

Yeah, seemed like it as he/she specifically stated Europe; but that was probably meant to be France then.

At any rate, I also agree that it would have been nice of the devs to mention the CDI’s in the non-english forums.

Sure, sorry for the misunderstanding i was responsible for, to be fair let’s make a check of other forums.

• German CDI post, created by player, no red post in here
• Spanish CDI post, created by player, no red post in here
• French one created by player, no red post in here

I don’t blame CM for that as far as i guess they where not requested to work on it. But we were even not told Ranger CDI were opened.

Allie’s good job here shows we can have somethig else than a direct player to dev collaboration, it might be a good idea to figurate a way to work like that

Pets won’t go, (moderator made that quite clear). So lets make pets a threat like a flesh golem is (something I would actually focus attack in a duel due to its power).

Proposal:

-Reduce aoe damage pets receive by x% (perhaps 25?). Maybe pet AI can be made eventually to see red circles but until then, we need a band aid.

-Buff attribute bonus from traits. (compassion training, expertise training, master’s bond). BM passive stats apply to healing power and condition damage as well.

-Merge “Return to me” with “Attack”.

-(BIG one) Remove pet swap, and replace with an appropriate alternative. This would require reworking the pet swap traits to things along the lines of pet revival as well as changing/adding utility skill(s) in the event that the pet dies. Perhaps pets can still be affected by your healing skills while dead and will re-enter combat once fully healed. Some examples of reworked traits and skills could be

/swap [Natures Wrath] with [Loud Whistle]. [Loud Whistle] Now grants pets 20% incoming healing.
/[Zephyr’s Speed] now grants 6 seconds of quickness when your pet is defeated.
/[Vigorous Training] Now grants nearby allies vigor when the pet uses its main ability (F2). ICD of 20 seconds.
/[Mighty Swap] changed to [Inspiring Might] Pets grant might to nearby allies when they activate a skill (non-AA). 3 stacks for 10 seconds.
/[Search and rescue] cooldown reduced to 70 seconds (150 in pvp) and will revive the pet
/[Signet of the wild] works on a defeated pet to slowly revive them.
/All healing skills work at 20% effect on defeated pets

-Change F3 and F4 to the other 2 pet skills. Option to leave these skills unattended so that the pet can use them on their own terms if the micro managing is not in favor of the player. While “unattended” the player can still activate the skill if they wish assuming it is off cooldown.

-Rework pet skills. For example

/[Bear Family] Increase defy pain duration to 6 seconds; Bite cooldown reduced to 15 seconds.
/[Canine Family]Crippling leap is now a leap finisher
/[Feline Family] Increase bite damage; Increase hits of maul to 7 each applying a 10 second bleed with a 3 second channel time and 1 second activation time
/[Porcine Family] Increase maul damage and apply vulnerability instead of bleed.
/[Devourer Family] Twin shots have 25% chance to poison; reduce activation time of tail lash to .75 seconds; increase evasion time of devourer retreat to 2.25 seconds
/[Drake Family] Increase healing from chomp; Reduce activation time of tail swipe to .75 seconds
/[Moa Family] reduce cooldown of harmonic cry to 35 seconds; add vulnerability to each attack from frenzied attack (total of 6 stacks)
/[Bird Family] Remove vulnerability from swoop and change to evasion for the activation time
/[Jellyfish Family] Reduce cooldown of dark water to 35 seconds
/[Armor fish] Reduce the activation time of stunning rush to 1.75 seconds, increase protect duration to 8 seconds

• Specific*
  /[Jungle Stalker] reduce cast time of mighty roar to 1.5 seconds
  /[Lynx] Reduce cast time of rending pounce to .75 seconds
  /[Salamander Drake] Increase range of flame breathe to 600, increase number of hits to 6
  /[Alpine wolf] Change Chilling howl to grant allies frost aura instead. Cooldown reduction to 25 seconds.
  /[Marsh Drake] Increase number of hits to 7 for insect swarm.
  /[Blue Moa] Increase protection duration to 6 seconds.
  /[White moa] Change to freeze for 2 seconds instead of chill, increase cooldown to 35 seconds.
  /[Pink Moa] Change to a channel daze, applying 1 second daze every hit for 3 seconds. Number of hits 4.
  /[Ice Drake] Increase number of hits to 9, increase cooldown to 30 seconds.
  /[River Drake] Each hit applies vulnerability for 5 seconds.
  /[Murellow] Reduce cooldown to 30 seconds.
  /[Fern hound] Increase base heal to 2k, change to apply a water field for 3 seconds, each pulse applying 5 seconds of regeneration. Increase cooldown to 30 seconds.
  /[Black Bear] Reduce cooldown to 25 seconds.
  /[Polar Bear] Change to drop a frost field on its location. Radius 400. Chill 1 second per pulse. Pulses every second. Field duration 6 seconds.
  /[Arctodus] Remove the bleed, drastically bump the damage.
  /[Whiptail Devourer] Reduce cooldown to 20 seconds.
  /[Lashtail Devourer] Bump to 2 stacks of bleed per hit
  /[Hyena] Increase activation time to 3 seconds. Increase hyena ally damage by 40%
  /[Eagle] Reduce aftercast to .5 seconds
  /[Jungle Spider] Reduce cooldown to 30 seconds.
  /[Reef Drake] Increase confusion duration to 7 seconds.
  /[Warthhog] Change to apply an aoe reveal at its location. Cast time 1.5 seconds. Reveal duration 4 seconds. Radius 450 units. Cooldown 40 seconds.
  /[Siamoth] Change to grant itself protection for 8 seconds. Cast time 1.25 seconds. Cooldown 45 seconds.
  /[Boar] Change to leap and knock back your foe. Cast time 1 second. Cooldown 35 seconds.
  /[Pig] Lower forage cooldown to 30 seconds.

Goal: to make pets a force on the battlefield, as well as giving them more group utility (combo fields, finishers). Increasing their survivability to withstand large scale battles, such as reduced incoming AoE damage, and reducing some cast times so they can activate their main abilities. Also giving more options to pet skills, as many skills had very similar effects some within the same family (not speaking of the GW1 pets).

Risks: Potential to make BM spec far too strong. Power spec would be near obsolete if BM spec became too good to pass up. Would require balancing the other builds to be on par but could lead to further reworks on pet skills. Pets should be strong period, BM should just make them stronger. Considering pets are not removable and have a % of the total dps a ranger can pull off (and not all pets are there for damage anyways), they should pull their own weight without a full spec.

Please, no more pet talk.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Also, I don’t want this thread to be entirely about pets. We’ve seen a ton of great feedback about them, and I would like to hear more about utilities that need help (and aren’t viable unless spec’d into) as I haven’t seen as much on that front!

Thanks all

We’ve talked the pet to death at this point.

Flytrap.8075:

Please, no more pet talk.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Also, I don’t want this thread to be entirely about pets. We’ve seen a ton of great feedback about them, and I would like to hear more about utilities that need help (and aren’t viable unless spec’d into) as I haven’t seen as much on that front!

Thanks all

We’ve talked the pet to death at this point.

30% of our damage is tied to the pet so…. it’s the single biggest item to attack. When the pets start working or go away, I’ll stop.

oiseau.6481:

I know I am going to make myself hated, but I have a single question:
Do you care so badly about non English-speaking people that no one dare at least inform us that a CDI is running on other subforums

I mean, I barely can understand than the language makes it harder to transfer information to dev while you are doing pretty well here, but there is no way for me to understand why we don’t deserve any information at all.

I’m talking about French sub forum only:
#We were not informed at all a CDI about Ranger was running here (or an other subject by the way)

1. When we started to create something that way by our own we did not get any remarks about it
2. When the debate here came to have some clues about what is on process, we had to find that by ourself and traduce it.
3. For now we did not have any FR community manager post about Ranger CDI

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

I can’t agree more with you, and I don’t think such a behavior from Anet can help the overall community to progress.

oiseau.6481:

Allie’s good job here shows we can have somethig else than a direct player to dev collaboration, it might be a good idea to figurate a way to work like that

You mean direct player to PR person. She’s not a dev. She’s a middle (wo)man between us and the devs.

The Spirits

1. Weaknesses:
   1. Untraited Spirits
      Simply too weak. Small chance to trigger passive effects, stationary, low HP pool and weak active effects hinder the spirits.
   2. Spirits + “Vigorous Spirits”
      The spirits remain useless for the most time. You can only use them in dungeons vs. boss encounters. You have to place them in a save distance so that they don’t get hit from the boss. Thereby their active effect remains unused.
   3. Spirits + “Vigorous Spirits” + “Spirits Unbound”
      The spirits become somewhat useful in open-world PvE due to their passive effects.
      Their active effects are on a too long cooldown to use them against normal mobs. Certainly the spirits are both too weak to survive heavier mobs and their active effects are too weak vs. those mobs. You don’t want to use them in dungeons since they get killed rather easily when staying by your side.
   4. “Nature’s Vengeance”
      Only useful in PvP.
2. Comparison with banners:
   Banner skills vs. Spirit actives
   • Both are pretty useless vs. boss encounters => Banner = Spirit
   • Both have passive effects (I don’t know which ones are better) => Banner = Spirit
   • Spirits can use their effect while the summoner is fighting => Banner < Spirit
   • If traited, spirits will follow the summoner, banners have to be carried => Banner < Spirit
   • Spirits can offer their passive to more people => Banner < Spirit
   • Banner skills offer dashes, explo. finishers and additional effects => Banner > Spirit
   • Spirits can die, banners can’t => Banner > Spirit
   • Untraited, spirits are stationary, banners can be moved => Banner > Spirit
   • Banners can be used by other classes => Banner > Spirit
   • With traitinvestment, banners have a longer uptime of passive effects => Banner > Spirits
3. Conclusion:
   Spirits are only worthwhile if traited. The mortality of the spirits is a big hindrance and I can’t see how spirits can compensate for that. Right now, they are weaker banners.
4. Suggestion:
   If you are using “Spirits Unbound”, you should be able to put them down on a save place. Furthermore, the active effects should be changed from just one skill starting from the spirit into 5 charges applied to the summoner, which will be consumed on the next hits. The charges should also apply to 4 more allies. To make them more useful in dungeons, you could add a flat damage of 1% of the maximum HP of the target.

First off Nike, I like the creativity and reasoning you put into these ideas many (if not all) were fresh and seemed effective. However I did have some concernes.

Nike.2631:

Marksmanship IV: Perfect Aim (NEW) – The damage from your attacks is not reduced by protection. (fills slot vacated by Signet Mastery; coding note – equivalent to +50% damage against targets with protection)

I understand the want for this but to me there seems to be no counter play. Some builds rely on protection and there is no way for them to alter to play style to counter this. They have two choices either run or try and fight without protection. This creates an un-fun mechanic for the person you are versing. (No counterplay generally means a no go balance wise). Also how would an opponent quickly and easily know whether you are using this trait or not?

Marksmanship IX: Mighty Signets – Activating signets grants might and signet recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Signet Mastery & Beastmaster’s Might)

This is an exact copy (barring differences in might duration and stacks) of the necromancer trait but it is one tier up. I don’t like the idea of spending 10 more points than a necro to get a better version (longer might or more stacks) of their trait. As a community we deserve something unique (idk short-medium fury).

Nike.2631:

Skirmishing X: Nature’s Venoms (NEW) – Each time you or your pet poison a foe, that foe loses regeneration. (fills slot vacated by Quickdraw)

Depending on how much poison you run and the fields your teammates (pets) run this can become a no fun mechanic. Since if there is enough through projectile poison field procs and spider poison and so on… that it is impossible to counter all incoming forms of poison, you opponent gets punished harshly if they are bunker who relies on regen with little counter play. For this I think it would be better to increase poison damage by % or add stacks of either bleed (more reasonable thematically) or burn. The increase of damage would help counter the already reduced healing of regen but allow for the counter play of cleansing the condis.

Nike.2631:

Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call – Using a shout reveals up to 3 foes within 600 (15 second cooldown) and shout skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (renamed Shout Mastery)

This reveal of trait would be useless in pve (to my knowledge at least) and extremely powerful in pvp and WvW. I don’t believe that this is the right way for Anet the address the stealth issue. It would create shout hunters to be hard counters to PU mesmers and thieves in general. This single targeting of one mechanic (that certain builds rely on) shifts balance but it doesn’t make it even. Just as many classes can’t do much against a thief in stealth, the thief couldn’t do much against a shout ranger. I do believe that stealth needs to be addressed but I don’t think aoe reveal is the option. The core of stealth in this game should be looked at.

Remember…

Spirits pulse their buffs 3 more times after they die, so if the fight doesn’t move much, someone will still have the frost spirit buff up to 15 seconds into the 20s cooldown. Death is not the end of the spirit.

If different players are in proximity to the spirit every 3 seconds, the spirit does more. If no one moves and the spirit is buffing the same people over and over, it is giving them a chance to proc that they can’t use because they are already on cooldown (except frost).

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

The Spirits

1. Weaknesses:
   1. Untraited Spirits
      Simply too weak. Small chance to trigger passive effects, stationary, low HP pool and weak active effects hinder the spirits.
   2. Spirits + “Vigorous Spirits”
      The spirits remain useless for the most time. You can only use them in dungeons vs. boss encounters. You have to place them in a save distance so that they don’t get hit from the boss. Thereby their active effect remains unused.
   3. Spirits + “Vigorous Spirits” + “Spirits Unbound”
      The spirits become somewhat useful in open-world PvE due to their passive effects.
      Their active effects are on a too long cooldown to use them against normal mobs. Certainly the spirits are both too weak to survive heavier mobs and their active effects are too weak vs. those mobs. You don’t want to use them in dungeons since they get killed rather easily when staying by your side.
2. Comparison with banners:
   Banner skills vs. Spirit actives
   • Both are pretty useless vs. boss encounters => Banner = Spirit
   • Both have passive effects (I don’t know which ones are better) => Banner = Spirit
   • Spirits can use their effect while the summoner is fighting => Banner < Spirit
   • If traited, spirits will follow the summoner, banners have to be carried => Banner < Spirit
   • Banner skills offer dashes, explo. finishers and additional effects => Banner > Spirit
   • Spirits can die, banners can’t => Banner > Spirit
   • Untraited, spirits are stationary, banners can be moved => Banner > Spirit
   • Banners can be used by other classes => Banner > Spirit
3. Conclusion:
   Spirits are only worthwhile if traited. The mortality of the spirits is a big hindrance and I can’t see how spirits can compensate for that. Right now, they are weaker banners.
4. Suggestion:
   If you are using “Spirits Unbound”, you should be able to put them down on a save place. Furthermore, the active effects should be changed from just one skill starting from the spirit into 5 charges, which will be consumed on the next hits. The charges should also apply to 4 more allies. To make them more useful in dungeons, you could add a flat damage of 1% of the maximum HP of the target.

I like the analysis and would like to point out a couple things. First, banners passive effects are generally considered better in PvE than spirits because they give unique large stat increases versus the only useful effect is a 10% damage increase based off of RNG (as far as pvp goes idk who’s effects are more wanted). Another big difference is that banners take 10 points and one trait to bring to an effective level where as spirits take 20 points and 2 trait (arguably the first 10 points and trait are needed to make them viable where as banners are viable from the start). Also due to the fact that banners produce the stat buff that lasts 5 seconds, ever 3 seconds the buff from each banner lasts 95 seconds total. This means that with the 10 point/1 trait investments banners passive component can get 100% up time where invested spirits have an 71% up times assuming they do not die (since the cd of spirits doesnt start until their duration ends or they die). Banners win in the effect up time too. The only advantage that spirits have is that they move with little effort.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

The reason why I latched onto the aspect idea was because it was an option that seemed we could maybe work around. Rather than having to rebalance the whole class, we’d just have to balance the aspects to be similar to what the pet does damage-wise. That seemed a little more viable.

Your choice of wording here is most surprising, Allie. With all due respect I’m sure you must know by now as well as I do that the majority of perma-stow suggestions don’t rotate around a mere tool to avoid aggro in dungeons but an alternate feasible playstyle. This usually revolves around the idea that ranger weapon skill damage coefficients are currently set 30% lower than every other classes to accomodate for the pet. People are not asking for the ability to put the pet away for good and lose their entire F-bar and that 30% damage basically remaining the same but without a pet, but rather they’re asking for the ability to not only put the pet away but upon the pet being stowed having ALL ranger weapon skill coefficients refunded to standard value reflecting damage potentials seen on other petless classes and an “Alternative” F-key set of skills thrown into the mix upon stow to make such play styles viable.

I hope that clears things up. In other words, pet builds could still play with the pet and remain the same. Less pet dependent builds could play without the pet and see drastic improvements while not becoming OP. Everybody happy. That’s the theory. Granted, there are some major programming challenges but with so many of the community playing rangers it should be a worthwhile investment with some promise of monetary returns following increased customer satisfaction, no? (After all when players are happy with their characters, they are much more set on purchasing enhancements through the Gem store.)

Now, I’m sorry for rearing away from the utility discussion you desire Allie, however it’s kind of warranted. What we of the ranger community feel you and the developers need you and the devs to understand is that in an PvP/WvW environment, it’s not fair to have a AI dependent class because no matter what tweaks are made, if we’re honest the AI WILL NEVER keep up with players. Are we clear with that?

Or, let me ask you: Can an AI controlled pet predict player movements based on past experiences and human patterns and plot an intercept course in the most efficient manner when a player starts kiting around while fighting you?

Can an AI hold back its AI controlled skills for the “perfect moment” while its stuck following presets and script conditions?

Can an AI controlled pet even avoid AoE damages like mines while simultaneously closing the distance to their opponent like players can? (Ie. dodging through mines TOWARD your foe).

Can an AI controlled pet activate its skills with considering to combos and synergistic with the player himself? Can it detect that upon that “Stunlock” is the time we want to unleash our bursts including the pet skills like drake’s tail swipe? Can moas run to us and unleash their heal in our most dire needs of it?

Let’s be honest Allie, rangers will always lagg behind in competitive environment outside the inclusion of skills that would be considered “OP” on other classes due completely to the pets. Enhance and augment those AIs all you want but they will still always lagg FAR behind the ranger and hold us back. AI development is still centuries behind what it needs to be if you want pets to contribute competitively in player vs player environments. These are not matters you can fix with more player control while still retaining AI, or adding on new skills. But also note in that department, the pets are VERY poorly equipped. Not a single melee pet even has one distance closer skill to use against kiting enemies.. but the sad reality is even if they did, they wouldn’t contribute enough.

And on a final note, don’t make me bring up the reaction timing and “instinct” arguments. There’s a reason that even with mere sharpened rocks and sticks in their hands as weapons, human being stood far above everything else and conquered the lands. Humans were prospering even while living in tents on the food chain for creatures like lions, tigers, crocodiles and all the most fearsome creatures that exist and even more fearsome ones that are no longer with us.. and not only did we survive and flourish, we outperformed in every way with a superior body design and intelligence and made these into our footstool, and even in some cases put THEM on the menu. And yet the intelligence and capacity of these AIs cannot even compare to those animals we conquered with the bare minimum of weaponry.

How do you think a class that is 30% based on such incapable functions can ever succeed when its pitted against characters controlled by the mightiest existence that currently roams the Earth? In PvP environment if we come up across a petless class with 30% invested in these AIs’ we’re toast before the fight begins with this handicap if our foe has any amount of fighting instinct. Just as someone else so fondly put it, human controlled characters can negate 85-100% of a pet’s damage output even when these are operated under the best rangers in the community.. by merely doing an L-step! Pathetic!

That’s the source of the hatred here. These AIs are severely overrated. Just imagine for example what a human would do to the giant zergfests if they controlled the boss characters that are currently managed by AI, with the same skillsets available? Nobody would even complete a single dungeon, let alone a Living World end boss. Can the AIs see some improvements and would it help the class? Sure. Can the class become powerful with other positive changes added in addition such? Sure. Will it be enough to compete on equal footing with the top tier players operating petless classes or classes with pets that are not “Always on” deadlocked? No, it will never do such.

Phalaphone.1642:

First off Nike, I like the creativity and reasoning you put into these ideas many (if not all) were fresh and seemed effective. However I did have some concernes.

Thank you.

On *Marksmanship IV: Perfect Aim~

I understand the want for this but to me there seems to be no counter play. Some builds rely on protection and there is no way for them to alter to play style to counter this. They have two choices either run or try and fight without protection…
…Also how would an opponent quickly and easily know whether you are using this trait or not?

If Rangers are to “whittle down their foes” they need the tools to do so to bunkers. Bunker-busting is counter-play and even then it takes 2 traits to cover the bases since protection & regeneration are keystones to separate bunker strategies… To counter Perfect Aim you either stop maintaining protection if the ranger is alone or prioritize the ranger’s destruction if they are in a group (maintaining protection since it still mitigates all other enemies’ damage).

You are absolutely right that this effect needs to be clearly communicated to the victim. My first thought is ‘every time the ranger hits a target who has protection a prominent FX of a broken shield appears over that target’s head’. The target immediately knows the guy with the dog over there needs to die – exactly the response a skirmisher should provoke .

On Marksmanship IX: Mighty Signets~

This is an exact copy (barring differences in might duration and stacks) of the necromancer trait but it is one tier up. I don’t like the idea of spending 10 more points than a necro to get a better version (longer might or more stacks) of their trait.

Take this as a sign of how terrible of a trait Beastmaster’s Might is . I was trying to stick with the tools already in class where possible.

On Skirmishing X: Nature’s Venoms~

Depending on how much poison you run and the fields your teammates (pets) run this can become a no fun mechanic. Since if there is enough through projectile poison field procs and spider poison and so on… that it is impossible to counter all incoming forms of poison, you opponent gets punished harshly if they are bunker who relies on regen with little counter play.

Again I’m not sure how much counter there needs to be to counter-play . If your Regeneration keeps vanishing you can probably figure out why and reduce the priority of regeneration with the knowledge that you need to kill the ranger quickly because you’re not going to ‘outlast the outlaster’. I considered an internal cooldown, but so much regeneration is delivered as 1-2 second pulses even a 5 second cooldown would render the trait nearly meaningless as your target’s regeneration winks out for only moment.

I think there’s some interesting texture to be had that several classes have hp-over-time mechanics that are NOT regeneration that would remain effective. It also places greater emphasis on receiving direct heals & life drains, adding value to support builds. Those offer strong counter-play that is exterior to the character, promoting teamwork. Ranger damage is still poor enough/lacking in bursts that healing someone through it is a very plausible reply.

On Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call

This reveal of trait would be useless in pve (to my knowledge at least) and extremely powerful in pvp and WvW. I don’t believe that this is the right way for Anet the address the stealth issue. It would create shout hunters to be hard counters to PU mesmers and thieves in general. This single targeting of one mechanic (that certain builds rely on) shifts balance but it doesn’t make it even. Just as many classes can’t do much against a thief in stealth, the thief couldn’t do much against a shout ranger.

We may have to agree to disagree that being revealed 3 seconds out of 15 (and tying up all three utility slots to do it if you intend to maintain that pace) is going to completely incapacitate even the sneakiest of Thieves. Again, the counter-play is don’t be a one-trick pony .

I’m not sure the game really strives for or benefits from countering counters ad infinitum. In some cases Rangers have been relegated to playing “paper” to some very sharp “scissors” without recourse. If this arms them with a “rock” or two, introducing the possibility that you may not want to mess with the guy with the dog because he might be built to school you is probably good for the meta-game . As long as those effects are well communicated once the battle is joined.

Specific Game Mode: WvW.

Proposal Overview: Beastmaster rangers.

Goal of Proposal: Improve and give a meaning to rangers who wants to focus on pets, aside from just having a couple of skills and traits which don’t reflect your “bond” with the pets.

Proposal Functionality: Provide this type of “Beastmaster” ranger with tools to express their bond with the pets, being someone that focuses on this they should have a specific benefit or mechanic (call it as you like) by redesigning the Beast Mastery trait line:

• Adept traits: They should provide direct bonuses to your pet, like the bleeding on criticals or attribute increases, something that makes them slightly stronger in battle.

• Master traits: They should improve the pet’s skills or change them to an improved version, for example instead of providing might with the F2 skill it now provides might and fury. Or maybe the “Endure Pain” skill of bear pets changes to “Enraged”, still providing them with damage reduction but also increases damage for the duration of the skill (could be 3 seconds or whatever’s good for balancing).

• Grandmaster Traits: Provide specific bonuses to the ranger, having a trait that changes the #1 skill on your bar depending on the type of pet that you have out:

Canines: Attacks reveal enemies (cooldown: 30-50 seconds).
Spiders: Adds poison to your 5th attack.
Porcine: Weaken opponents after a critical hit (cooldown: 20 seconds).
Ursine: Provide protection after landing a critical hit (cooldown: 30 seconds).
Drake: Increases condition duration.
Feline: (Feline Grace: Sword auto-attack no longer roots you in place) nvm that would make feline pets too OP, Gain might after landing a critical hit (cooldown: 10 seconds).
Devourer: Inflict bleeding on a critical hit (cooldown: 10 seconds).

Btw hopefully you’ll understand that I’m not good at balancing, so don’t take my numbers or proposed bonuses for granted

It’s just an idea to provide ranger’s certain benefits depending on the pet that you’re using, forcing rangers to swap out pets according to the situation (canine could help against thieves, porcine against zerkers, spiders and devourers to apply more pressure with conditions).

Keep in mind that if you swap out a pet one of the master traits might not be as useful, so that would force to players to constantly adapt their trait lines to gain the full benefits. Since this is all on the same trait line there won’t be any need to pay for trait resets.

Associated Risks: Due to how… “interesting” or fun this type of build can become it could be the focus of future ranger builds, if all the other builds are not “buffed” it could make a huge shift to being a beastmaster only.

ASIDE TOPIC

Bear pets are already overpowered, this proposal might further increase their overpowerness (yeah I made that up, sue me). I propose reducing bear damage and tankiness to balance them, oh and also remove their ability to stay on water for such an absurd amount of time…

#HowBearInWater

Game-mode WvW

proposal overview: the design philosophy do not support ranger in WvW zerg

Goal of proposal: empowering ranger AoE capability to support a zerg-busting situation in WvW.

Proposal functionality:
in the design philosophy, it says “best single target and sustained damage”. i think that is the problem why ranger is the worst WvW zerg profession. with this philosophy, ranger did not even get “best” single target damage because it need to be sustained. so this philosophy that Anet has. only works for PVE. why? because people in WvW moves rapidly. and you cannot sustain your damage. longbow is a good example for this. LB is a good sustained damage for PVE. but in WvW, you will be interrupted over and over (forced by situation). so there is no utility for ranger in a WvW zerg.

so to increase ranger support capability, we can:
1. decrease the AoE skill cooldown in Longbow
2. or make new AoE skill in longbow.
3. make longbow’s arrows pierce without a trait.
4. muddy terrain causes cripple plus some other effect.

but… actually… , with this change, Anet can keep hold to the idea of a single target sustained damage. the solution is to make AoE skill not doing much damage. but it have other utility such as stack vulnerability, combo-field, knockdown, etc

Associated Risk:
1. its against the first ranger design philosophy (nvm, actually its not against anything).
2. overpowered ranger AoE support

What about a unique mechanic that builds damage with consecutive hits? The stack would be reset if the enemy evades one of your attacks. Are dodges still too prevalent for a mechanic like that to be worthwhile?

Nektera.9425:

Game-mode WvW

proposal overview: the design philosophy do not support ranger in WvW zerg

Goal of proposal: empowering ranger AoE capability to support a zerg-busting situation in WvW.

Proposal functionality:
in the design philosophy, it says “best single target and sustained damage”. i think that is the problem why ranger is the worst WvW zerg profession. with this philosophy, ranger did not even get “best” single target damage because it need to be sustained. so this philosophy that Anet has. only works for PVE. why? because people in WvW moves rapidly. and you cannot sustain your damage. longbow is a good example for this. LB is a good sustained damage for PVE. but in WvW, you will be interrupted over and over (forced by situation). so there is no utility for ranger in a WvW zerg.

so to increase ranger support capability, we can:
1. decrease the AoE skill cooldown in Longbow
2. or make new AoE skill in longbow.
3. make longbow’s arrows pierce without a trait.
4. muddy terrain causes cripple plus some other effect.

but… actually… , with this change, Anet can keep hold to the idea of a single target sustained damage. the solution is to make AoE skill not doing much damage. but it have other utility such as stack vulnerability, combo-field, knockdown, etc

Associated Risk:
1. its against the first ranger design philosophy (nvm, actually its not against anything).
2. overpowered ranger AoE support

risk:
3. make longbow’s arrows pierce without a trait.
Many people hate piercing arrow… Would they need to trait for arrows not to pierce
4. muddy terrain causes cripple plus some other effect.
Added effect = longer CD… = no

Jocksy.3415:

Nektera.9425:

Game-mode WvW

proposal overview: the design philosophy do not support ranger in WvW zerg

Goal of proposal: empowering ranger AoE capability to support a zerg-busting situation in WvW.

Proposal functionality:
in the design philosophy, it says “best single target and sustained damage”. i think that is the problem why ranger is the worst WvW zerg profession. with this philosophy, ranger did not even get “best” single target damage because it need to be sustained. so this philosophy that Anet has. only works for PVE. why? because people in WvW moves rapidly. and you cannot sustain your damage. longbow is a good example for this. LB is a good sustained damage for PVE. but in WvW, you will be interrupted over and over (forced by situation). so there is no utility for ranger in a WvW zerg.

so to increase ranger support capability, we can:
1. decrease the AoE skill cooldown in Longbow
2. or make new AoE skill in longbow.
3. make longbow’s arrows pierce without a trait.
4. muddy terrain causes cripple plus some other effect.

but… actually… , with this change, Anet can keep hold to the idea of a single target sustained damage. the solution is to make AoE skill not doing much damage. but it have other utility such as stack vulnerability, combo-field, knockdown, etc

Associated Risk:
1. its against the first ranger design philosophy (nvm, actually its not against anything).
2. overpowered ranger AoE support

risk:
3. make longbow’s arrows pierce without a trait.
Many people hate piercing arrow… Would they need to trait for arrows not to pierce
4. muddy terrain causes cripple plus some other effect.
Added effect = longer CD… = no

There’s an easy solution to that… just make it so the bow always hits your target and anyone it passed through on the way to your target similar to greatsword for mesmers. This way you get the reliable shot but don’t run the risk of it piercing that target and agroing things behind it.

Detharos.3157:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

The reason why I latched onto the aspect idea was because it was an option that seemed we could maybe work around. Rather than having to rebalance the whole class, we’d just have to balance the aspects to be similar to what the pet does damage-wise. That seemed a little more viable.

Your choice of wording here is most surprising, Allie. With all due respect I’m sure you must know by now as well as I do that the majority of perma-stow suggestions don’t rotate around a mere tool to avoid aggro in dungeons but an alternate feasible playstyle.

snip

This is exaclty what she is saying… I do not think they have both the resource to “fix the pet AI” and to “create a new class mecanic”,
How would they integrate a possibilit to have two class mecanics? In the traits? in the skills?
Your two posts absolutely do not touch any of the problem linked with introducing a new class mecanic. It’s nice to ask for a feature, nicer to thoroughly think about it’s introduction and it’s effect on the game.

Resource-wise, it might be easier to make the pet better, to maybe shift some of it’s damage back to the ranger, and to allow perma-stow for these contents where the pet is a liability (such as trying to get the laser thing achievement) tyan ecreate a class mecanic.

Also, for your information, many do not think that a pet perma-stow is a good thing for the class.
Whatever Anet does, some people are gonna be unhappy… I moslty hope they don’t make a lesser war or a lesser whatever other class out of the ranger….
____________

I do not understand people playing ranger while hating the class… or just commenting on it without playing it. I read every post of that thread.
Somewhat a quarter of proposals are “we should have this like that class” (most of the time, like War, with some necros and some eles, even some thief, lately).
We are not War, gard, ele, necros, thiefs, engies, etc.
We are rangers,

World English Dictionary
ranger (?re?nd??)

— n
1. ( sometimes capital ) an official in charge of a forest, park, estate, nature reserve, etc
2. chiefly ( US ) Brit equivalent: warden a person employed to patrol a State or national park or forest
3. ( US ) one of a body of armed troops employed to police a State or district: a Texas Ranger
4. (in the US and certain other armies) a commando specially trained in making raids
5. a person who wanders about large areas of country; a rover

And I hope they keep the ranger a ranger.

I’m not sure the game really strives for or benefits from countering counters ad infinitum.

Hmm.
I think he’s more going for the notion of making sure your suggestions have Soft Counters, not asking for a Hard Counter to counter your counter.

That is to say;
This is less a case of you asking for access to rock to defeat their scissors, and then you’re being asked to make sure the opponent has access to paper.

And more;
acknowledging you should have a clear advantage, but how you and your foe are both playing should be able to swing the outcome of you using the skill. For example; giving them a reasonably skillful means to avoid some of rock’s applications or doing something difficult that can reduce it’s impact. Something that gives them a means to respond to your action.

Specific Game Mode
PvE

Proposal Overview
Make greatsword more attractive while giving rangers more blast finisher options.

Goal of Proposal
*Remove the evade from the auto-attack chain and put it on “Swoop,” as one developer once suggested. This takes some power away from that chain while giving us a timed evade.
*Add either an AoE might stack at the end of the chain, or make the first two strikes stack one vuln and the last stack 2-3.
*Remove the vuln from Maul, maybe add two seconds to its cooldown, and make it a blast finisher.

Proposal Functionality
Adding evade to the movement skill would be similar to whirlwind on other greatswords, the short cooldown blast finisher would be similar to Lightning Hammer. The AoE might stack on chain would be new, but I think it would be an interesting supportive ability that would make greatsword ranger more desirable.

Associated Risks
Depending on how this was done, it could make greatsword too strong or too weak

oiseau.6481:

I know I am going to make myself hated, but I have a single question:
Do you care so badly about non English-speaking people that no one dare at least inform us that a CDI is running on other subforums

I mean, I barely can understand than the language makes it harder to transfer information to dev while you are doing pretty well here, but there is no way for me to understand why we don’t deserve any information at all.

I’m talking about French sub forum only:
#We were not informed at all a CDI about Ranger was running here (or an other subject by the way)

1. When we started to create something that way by our own we did not get any remarks about it
2. When the debate here came to have some clues about what is on process, we had to find that by ourself and traduce it.
3. For now we did not have any FR community manager post about Ranger CDI

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

I totally agree with that.

For those that like to read possible new skills, or new traits, that like to evaluate them on their own or as a whole. For those that need a break from this thread and read something else. For those that want to read what sort of pet interaction a ‘4 summoned pets on F-keys’ is possible trait wise. Or if you are just interested

I would love to invite you to this thread: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Suggestion-typed-out-for-the-CDI/first#content and give me some feedback.

Fancy Fool.1743:

Specific Game Mode
PvE

Proposal Overview
Make greatsword more attractive while giving rangers more blast finisher options.

Goal of Proposal
*Remove the evade from the auto-attack chain and put it on “Swoop,” as one developer once suggested. This takes some power away from that chain while giving us a timed evade.
*Add either an AoE might stack at the end of the chain, or make the first two strikes stack one vuln and the last stack 2-3.
*Remove the vuln from Maul, maybe add two seconds to its cooldown, and make it a blast finisher.

Proposal Functionality
Adding evade to the movement skill would be similar to whirlwind on other greatswords, the short cooldown blast finisher would be similar to Lightning Hammer. The AoE might stack on chain would be new, but I think it would be an interesting supportive ability that would make greatsword ranger more desirable.

Associated Risks
Depending on how this was done, it could make greatsword too strong or too weak

Not a fan of moving the evade. The greatsword has a role currently as a defensive weapon, but its auto attack damage has been over nerfed. Also note that guardian hammer skill 2 has a better damage coefficient, a 300 range leap, and a blast finisher on a shorter cooldown than maul. We shouldn’t need a longer cooldown to get a blast finisher on maul.

Specific Game Mode
PvE

Proposal Overview
Modify the functionality of traps to provide more AoE build options, so players who want an AoE Ranger are not forced to build Pure Conditions and/or Pure Melee.

Goal of Proposal
Ranger builds have severely limited AoE potential, currently being limited almost exclusively to Trapper builds (and some minimal melee AoE with GS or Axe off-hand). Because of the way traps are currently designed, Trapper builds must be Pure Conditions builds in order to be acceptably effective. While it is possible to build for AoE Ranger without going Pure Conditions, it is less effective to do so, and therefore inviable. The goal of this proposal is to open up AoE potential for a larger variety of builds, namely power/crit or hybrid, by modifying trap mechanics.

Proposal Functionality
This proposal consists of two parts:

First, rework trap skills so that Condition Damage and Direct Damage scale more strongly based on attributes. Thus, Conditions would start smaller, but scale up to current power levels for pure Condi, while conversely Direct Damage from traps for pure Power/Crit would be similarly high. The goal would also be to make it so that unstatted/ungeared characters, or characters who stat and gear for something other than Conditions, Power, and/or Crit would have approximately the same total damage output as current, but reduced conditions damage and increased direct damage, then have damage scale more completely based on Power or Conditions Damage stats (with scaling durations for conditions, and scaling raw damage for direct damage). The end result should be traps that deal roughly the same overall total damage for pure Power/Crit builds as they do for current pure Condi builds, and would also deal balanced total damage for hybrid builds.

Second, rework Trap Potency trait to include bonus to Direct Damage from traps in addition to the current increase to Condition Duration. This would make traps more viable for power/crit or hybrid builds by making it so that damage increase from the trait is balanced for any/all build types.

Associated Risks
Because Condition Removal and Damage Avoidance/Mitigation are very different mechanics, it would not be as simple as pure numbers changes for the skills. The new scaling, and eventual final numbers and final scaling, would need to be balanced against those disparate mechanics. Additionally, the Direct Damage numbers and scaling would need to carefully weigh both raw direct damage from Power as well as boosted damage from Crit so that Pure Power vs. Pure Cirt vs. Power/Crit Hybrid all remain balanced and in line with each other and with current Pure Conditions builds.

Similarly, this proposal would not be workable for PvP game modes of any kind, primarily due to the way Condition Removal is much more readily available than Damage Avoidance/Mitigation. That is, in PvP game modes, the powerful Conditions Damage from traps can be drastically reduced through judicious use of Condition Removal methods, while raw Direct Damage is much more difficult to address in those game modes.

Lastly, there is the issue of the difference between Damage Over Time (Conditions Traps builds) vs. Burst/Spike damage (Power/Crit type builds). Could maybe mitigate this by making it so that the cooldown for trap skills dynamically scales based on the difference between the character’s Power+Crit vs. Condition Damage. The idea there would be to make it so that Power/Crit builds can use traps more often than Conditions builds, but that the overall total Damage Per Minute would balance out for all build types (in other words, spread the damage out for Power/Crit builds so that it results in more sustained damage and less burst damage — damage more often, but smaller damage packets).

Specific Game Mode
PvE

Proposal Overview
Modify the Longbow #1 skill to make the longbow a more viable weapon option for control and sustained damage.

Goal of Proposal
The current setup for the longbow is such that auto attacks deal considerably inferior overall DPS and DPM compared to other weapons. Part of the problem is low damage from the skills, but another part of the problem is the way that longbow wielders are penalized for failing to maintain maximum range (in a game where maintaining maximum range is virtually impossible, especially for a class that has little snare/stun control mechanisms to work with).

The goal of this proposal is to improve overall longbow viability by modifying the longbow auto-attack skill, Long Range Shot, so that damage is better balanced, and so that the skill also provides additional assistance with keeping targets at max distance.

Proposal Functionality
I propose that Long Range Shot be split into a chained skill with three different sub-skills in the chain as follows…

Long Range Shot:
0.75-second Activation Time
0-500 range — 264
500-1000 range — 311
1000+ range — 358

Entangling Shot:
0.75-second Activation Time
0-500 range — 224, 50% Chance to inflict 2-second Cripple
500-1000 range — 264, 50% Chance to inflict 2-second Cripple
1000+ range — 304 (damage only, no cripple)

?<name>?:
0.75-second Activation Time
0-500 range — 245, 30% Chance to gain 2-second Swiftness for self and pet
500-1000 range — 288 (damage only, no swiftness)
1000+ range — 331 (damage only, no swiftness)

This would result in an increase to overall damage output for the longbow auto-attacks at all ranges for all three skills in the chain (compared to current Long Range Shot), and would allow for increased ability to maintain or regain maximum range, by providing a chance for short duration Cripple on target and Swiftness on self and pet. Based on averages, Cripple would affect targets for approximately 33% of the time while the target is closer than 1000 range units away, and swiftness would affect the Ranger and pet for about 20% of the time while the target is closer than 500 range units (this in addition to the cripple).

Associated Risks
The biggest problem I see with this proposal is that I don’t know enough about how the damage scales with Power in order to determine if the increased damage is enough (or too much) to properly balance the longbow as a viable weapon compared to other weapons available to the Ranger. It seems to me that a Shortbow will still outdamage a max-range longbow on autoattacks alone, even with a Power/Crit build, simply due to the faster attack speed. As such, I think increasing the base damage even more than what I have done here would probably be necessary.

Secondly, I’m not sure that the chance of activation, nor the durations, for the Cripple and Swiftness effects will be sufficient. My goal was to provide increased means to keep good range away from the target, and to regain range when it is lost, without creating a means to gain constant Swiftness or constant Cripple. While the chance to apply the effect and the durations do result in an improvement to the Ranger ability to maintain or regain range, and does so without causing 100% Swiftness or 100% Cripple upkeep, I think the longbow Ranger will still have considerable difficulty maintaining reasonable range from their targets, and so increasing the chances and/or durations may be justifiable.

In the end, it may be easier to simply replace the Long Range Shot skill with something more basic, like a skill that doesn’t have it’s damage considerably penalized based on range. But I wanted to try and keep the general concept and flavor of the longbow, but still improve it enough to make it a more viable option.

Specific Game Mode
PvE

Proposal Overview
This is a pet post, but don’t groan just yet! I’m not going to focus on permastow or AI. Instead, I would like to talk about making pets more varied and interesting. If you think they are varied enough as is, let me just say that there are five pets that apply chilled, and hawk and eagle have the same ability.

Goal of Proposal
While AI is one thing, pets would certainly be more attractive if they were more interesting. Pets should be seen as a large selection of tools to pick from for certain scenarios the player and their allies encounter. They should be helpful, welcome additions to every party. But enough rhetoric. I’m going to look at the active and passive abilities of each pet and make suggestions. Some of them may be strong or impossible, but they might inspire better ideas from the Devs.

MOAS!
Oh yes, moas. The pet nobody really brings or talks about. I want to start here first, as I think they have an interesting aesthetic and really deserve to be able to do more for their beak-loving companions.

In general, Moas seem to have been designed to be the “Support” pet with their boon-applying screeches and healing AoE, but the boons are not great and are delayed, and the healing AoE—while it can be nice—is random. Since Anet has said they’re against giving the player control of all the pets abilities, I would suggest tying the heal to trigger with the Special Skill, or just after it.

I also think Moas should passively give 10% boon duration to up to five allies to reinforce their role

Pink Moa
Dazing Screech. While Daze is nice in PvP settings, this screech is way too hard to use well and has very little application in PvE. Besides that, this is the one moa that breaks from that supporting role. I suggest changing this ability to:

Prismatic Glare — Drops a wall of reflecting a few feet in front of the Ranger. Duration and diameter undefined. This wall would have no field.

Blue Moa
Protecting Screech. Protection is a really nice boon and everyone likes to have it. My change to the Blue would be more minimal. Instead if a screech that other party members have to move towards and have their ears blasted for, I suggest this:

Protecting Screech — The Blue Moa drops an AoE similar to Symbol of Protection/Retalition that lasts 3 seconds and isn’t defined as any field. It applies 3 seconds of protection for every pulse and pulses once every second.

White Moa

Icy Screech — Instead of Chilling Foes, Icy Screech applies Frost Aura to 5 allies in a vicinity.

Red Moa

Furious Screech — For 10 seconds, up to 5 allies in a vicinity receive a buff for 10% increased damage that stacks with similar buffs. Rangers don’t have an incredible amount of damage buffs, so this shouldn’t be too overpowering. But I’m not a Dev!

OTHER BIRDS!

In general, birds are known for their high precision, swiftness, and short cooldown Special Skills. Their damage is relatively high, and their vitality is low. Let’s play more with this.

Since their vitality is low and they are flying creatures, I think this would be the best pet choice to make 100% immune to ground targeted AoEs! I know, that’s probably crazy, but in trade we could make damage directly applied to them stronger (i.e. armor/vita/toughness weaker). Most people think all pets should be mostly immune to AoE, but I think having just one family that is would be functional as well.

Raven
Ravens are a cool, carrion bird aesthetic and I think we should play on that and give them a sort of life siphoning. Instead of Blinding Slash, I propose this:

Carrion Feast — passive: The raven devours a bit of fallen prey, healing itself for each defeated enemy. active:_ Put passive on cooldown and give Ranger a small burst heal.

Hawk
Give hawk Raven’s old Blinding Slash, but make the attack hit up to three targets.

Eagle
Eagle is fine being the sole holder of Lacerating Slash. There is nothing wrong with this ability, as 18 seconds bleeds are huge.

Others!

Murellow We already have pets that apply poison (So many), but a ranger has no access to smoke fields. I find this a little strange and think the Murrellow would be the perfect option to give Rangers one.

I will make another post later with more, if people like this kind of thinking. This should be enough to start to give ideas!

Proposal Functionality
Gives pets more definitive, useful roles

Associated Risks
All the time it would take to do this.

Nike.2631:

WAY OF THE SKIRMISHER: TIME IS ON MY SIDE
As skirmishers, Rangers need to maintain consistent pressure over time. Recharge traits should be key to their performance but often lack secondary “flavor” effects. This is an attempt to update or combine traits to give recharge choices more flavor. New traits filling the resulting gaps are intended to enhance Ranger effectiveness as skirmishers by making it difficult to ignore or recover from pressure applied by Ranger attacks rather than increasing their raw damage. They focus on striping or countering boons that allow the enemy to endure the Ranger’s steady assault.

Marksmanship IV: Perfect Aim (NEW) – The damage from your attacks is not reduced by protection. (fills slot vacated by Signet Mastery; coding note – equivalent to +50% damage against targets with protection)

Marksmanship IX: Mighty Signets – Activating signets grants might and signet recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Signet Mastery & Beastmaster’s Might)

Marksmanship X: Marksman’s Speed – Longbow and short bow attacks pierce and recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Piercing Arrows & Quickdraw)

Skirmishing VI: Hunter’s Horn (NEW) – Horn skills also randomly remove one of Retaliation/Swiftness/Vigor from up to 5 foes in range. (fills slot vacated by Agility Training)

Skirmishing X: Nature’s Venoms (NEW) – Each time you or your pet poison a foe, that foe loses regeneration. (fills slot vacated by Quickdraw)

Wilderness Survival VI: Wilderness Knowledge – Using a survival skill removes a condition from both you and your pet and survival skill recharge time is reduced by 20%.

Wilderness Survival X: Martial Mastery – Critical hits with sword, greatsword, and spear attacks apply vulnerability (3 stacks; 5 seconds duration; 5 second cooldown) and recharge time for these skills is reduced by 20%.

Beastmastery I: Speed Training – Pets move faster and their basic skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (combines Agility Training and Speed Training)

Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call – Using a shout reveals up to 3 foes within 600 (15 second cooldown) and shout skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (renamed Shout Mastery)

Beastmastery VI: Commanding Voice – Pets gain stability for 4 seconds when you press f2 and f2 skill recharge time is reduced 20%.

Thank you for reading!

this!!!, take notes Devs.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Thighum.7295:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

Thank goodness. I am confused about something though, why would perma stow make pets op? I figured that something like a damage boost would only occur while the pet was stowed. I don’t think that the skills themselves would need to be changed, just a %stat boost that would give the approximate damage that the pet gave.

Allie Murdock.8152:

The reason why I latched onto the aspect idea was because it was an option that seemed we could maybe work around. Rather than having to rebalance the whole class, we’d just have to balance the aspects to be similar to what the pet does damage-wise. That seemed a little more viable.

I thought that aspects was basically the equivalent of perma-stowing with a stat boost, an F2 skill by family and glowing particles to show which aspect you were in. I don’t really understand how this is dramatically different from perma stowing with a damage boost while stowed.

Perma stow wouldn’t make pets OP. In rebalancing for permastow, it would make those that still want to play with the pet op. THAT IS, unless we design something that gives the player a boost to balance it out.

The aspects I think were a little different. They talked about having specific bonuses based on the pet that the player was using. That is different from just giving a damage boost, which could end up being difficult to balance.

I think what he meant was that if you gave the ranger an appropriate stat boost only while the pet was stowed, then there would be no need to rebalance in the first place.

RoyHarmon.5398:

I think what he meant was that if you gave the ranger an appropriate stat boost only while the pet was stowed, then there would be no need to rebalance in the first place.

No, I think she got it. What she was saying was a straight stat boost would be hard to balance between pet vs non-pet vs other classes. On the other hand unique effects for stowing the pets (ie aspects) is more lateral power and thus easier to make competitive, each having its own niche.