Guild Wars 2

I thought this class was going to be worth playing eventually, I have 4 other lvl 80 characters but I used up all my resources to buy the ascended gear to my ranger.
So today I meet a warrior in WvW, he doesnt charge me and then hammer stun and then eventually kill me in 2-3 hits as usual but he pulls out his rifle and starts shooting.
I answer with my longbow as my spider starts charging up to him…..
He cripples me and then starts his volley as I was using my 2 skill on my longbow. I hit him for a total of 6k and he hits me for 12k….
I try to use the advantage of my 1500 range but cant really run since I am crippled. I use my dodge to evade few incoming and attacks so does he…
and then BOOM 9k crit and I am dead….
RANGER…..comes from RANGE, I have no problem getting totally destroyed by warriors but in range???
Today I realized a true RANGER is a rifle warrior, and things get though pull out the hammer or 2h sword… unlike our buggy 1h sword or the 2h that hardly damages anything.
Oh btw, I completely forgot to mention my spider in this fight cause it was useless as ever and the F2 skill took 3 secs longer then it should to hit anything…

Is this a rant post? Yes you can say that, DEC 10 is not going to change anything. Devs have no idea how useless this class is compared to others. I can do more damage and heal and support in my guardian…
I resisted and tried to hang on as long as I could, so long ranger community, I will join the truely ranged class…Warriors (even with incoming nerfs they are still the GOD class)

I have never in my life had issues fighting against a rifle warrior as a longbow ranger…. Use your stealth, use your own immobs/cripples, use your knock back.

Also, what spiders are you using? Cause their F2 is instant seeing as how it’s a poison so they don’t normally take too long to use it unless you’re trying to get them to apply it as they wanna use their poison barrage.

Actually the spider f2 is immobilize and it takes forever from the time you hit f2 for the spider to do its animation and the projectile to fly through the air giving your target plenty of time to dodge it. Also agree warrior is better at range than a ranger and isn’t useless when the gap closes like a ranger is. I want to like my ranger but until anet caves and gives us an option to get rid of the stupid pet and boost our dmg class will always be garbage. Traits are terrible pet ai is terrible dmg output is terrible utilites are terrible weapon skills are terrible condition removal is terrible condition output is terrible. Pretty much everything is terrible compared to other classes.

Ranger certainly has lots of problems and I agree to the extent that they should be deadly with bows, but the RANGE in Ranger is not a reference to range of attack, it’s in reference to a fighter who roams the woods and fields.

Yeah, but it shouldn’t have been called a Ranger in the first place. It should have been called Beastmaster. Why? Because that is what it is, not a Ranger.

Then Anet would have avoided all the preception issues.

Bolded for Jon Sharp’s love of changing precpetions instead of fixing actual problems

slingblade.1437:

Ranger certainly has lots of problems and I agree to the extent that they should be deadly with bows, but the RANGE in Ranger is not a reference to range of attack, it’s in reference to a fighter who roams the woods and fields.

The name is arbritrary and only tacked on because there was a Ranger in Gw1 that only used bows.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ranger

At one point in development, according to The Making of Guild Wars 2 book, the ranger profession of the original Guild Wars was split into many different professions, notably the warden and the marksman. Eventually, with only marksman remaining, who only possessed only the aspect of ranged weaponry, was combined with already scrapped elements of warden and beastmaster, and renamed the result as ranger for the sake of the original series.

Substance E.4852:

slingblade.1437:

Ranger certainly has lots of problems and I agree to the extent that they should be deadly with bows, but the RANGE in Ranger is not a reference to range of attack, it’s in reference to a fighter who roams the woods and fields.

The name is arbritrary and only tacked on because there was a Ranger in Gw1 that only used bows.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ranger

At one point in development, according to The Making of Guild Wars 2 book, the ranger profession of the original Guild Wars was split into many different professions, notably the warden and the marksman. Eventually, with only marksman remaining, who only possessed only the aspect of ranged weaponry, was combined with already scrapped elements of warden and beastmaster, and renamed the result as ranger for the sake of the original series.

Sorry but english kinda hard in the morning

Does it say that ranger class is the compilation of some leftover / abandoned elements gathered into making a class which would seem familiar to GW1 player ?

It would explain why our trait trees look so empty and why it’s so hard to find a role in team play …

It actually reminds me twins movie : “I’m a genetic garbage”

Jos.8793:

Substance E.4852:

slingblade.1437:

Ranger certainly has lots of problems and I agree to the extent that they should be deadly with bows, but the RANGE in Ranger is not a reference to range of attack, it’s in reference to a fighter who roams the woods and fields.

The name is arbritrary and only tacked on because there was a Ranger in Gw1 that only used bows.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ranger

At one point in development, according to The Making of Guild Wars 2 book, the ranger profession of the original Guild Wars was split into many different professions, notably the warden and the marksman. Eventually, with only marksman remaining, who only possessed only the aspect of ranged weaponry, was combined with already scrapped elements of warden and beastmaster, and renamed the result as ranger for the sake of the original series.

Sorry but english kinda hard in the morning

Does it say that ranger class is the compilation of some leftover / abandoned elements gathered into making a class which would seem familiar to GW1 player ?

It would explain why our trait trees look so empty and why it’s so hard to find a role in team play …

It actually reminds me twins movie : “I’m a genetic garbage”

Ya, they pretty much mushed 3 failed classes together to create something they new would drag in GW1 Ranger players and anyone looking for the Hunter/archer archetype.

Problem is the class plays like one made up from 3 taped together also.

You got hit by kill shot and died. That is a l2p issue.

Also take note of the tpvp Ranger builds, generally they preform better roaming than anything “1v1.” I’ve done multiple 1v2s vs lvl 80 roamers by running tpvp builds. (Traps bm or spirits).

Durzlla.6295:

I have never in my life had issues fighting against a rifle warrior as a longbow ranger….

+1

Substance E.4852:

Jos.8793:

Substance E.4852:

slingblade.1437:

Ranger certainly has lots of problems and I agree to the extent that they should be deadly with bows, but the RANGE in Ranger is not a reference to range of attack, it’s in reference to a fighter who roams the woods and fields.

The name is arbritrary and only tacked on because there was a Ranger in Gw1 that only used bows.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ranger

At one point in development, according to The Making of Guild Wars 2 book, the ranger profession of the original Guild Wars was split into many different professions, notably the warden and the marksman. Eventually, with only marksman remaining, who only possessed only the aspect of ranged weaponry, was combined with already scrapped elements of warden and beastmaster, and renamed the result as ranger for the sake of the original series.

Sorry but english kinda hard in the morning

Does it say that ranger class is the compilation of some leftover / abandoned elements gathered into making a class which would seem familiar to GW1 player ?

It would explain why our trait trees look so empty and why it’s so hard to find a role in team play …

It actually reminds me twins movie : “I’m a genetic garbage”

Ya, they pretty much mushed 3 failed classes together to create something they new would drag in GW1 Ranger players and anyone looking for the Hunter/archer archetype.

Problem is the class plays like one made up from 3 taped together also.

Exactly. What really irks me, is that of all the possibilities for this this class, the one they insist on forcing down our throats is the aspect they first decided to cut out; pets.
I don’t understand the obsession they have with insisting, nay forcing, ranger to be a pet class that they themselves threw out as a bad idea.
They could have given us a focus on hunter and nature magic, which were the final two classes, would have worked with existing themes and legendaries, would have stood apart as an opposing force to necromancer and would have made more sense with the spirit utilities.
It would also have been a great deal easier to balance, easier to code and they could still have had optional pets as in GW1 or infact, necromancer.

Oh well, though, eh?

The ranger is the beastmaster class if you are playing a ranger and want to only be an archer then you have picked the wrong class.

Range weapons in general are inferior to melee. I don’t believe there isn’t a class a ranger cant win against. There maybe build that give certain build trouble but in no way is fighting with a ranger an unwinnable situation.

The op is a clear example of a l2p issue. Rangers who don’t learn to master range and melee combat will take a dirt nap far more often than those who do.

Serraphin Storm.2369:

The ranger is the beastmaster class if you are playing a ranger and want to only be an archer then you have picked the wrong class.

Don’t forget the “unparalleled archer” that ANet claims it is. But accepting that beastmaster is the central concept don’t you think it would be nice if ANet took a break from smite booning the shortbow and miniscule buffing the longbow and instead fix the kitten ed pet mechanics that are so heavily broken?

Serraphin Storm.2369:

The ranger is the beastmaster class if you are playing a ranger and want to only be an archer then you have picked the wrong class.

Ranger is most archerish class avaible, so ppl who want archer will choose it and ANet even encourages it with class description, arts and well known medium armor + pet + bow combination.

And it’s not BM class. It’s pet class. Just as GW1 ranger was pet class or WoWs hunter wa pet class. Just because thief is stealth class it doesn’t lock him in stealth builds, right?

Terkov.4138:

Serraphin Storm.2369:

The ranger is the beastmaster class if you are playing a ranger and want to only be an archer then you have picked the wrong class.

Ranger is most archerish class avaible, so ppl who want archer will choose it and ANet even encourages it with class description, arts and well known medium armor + pet + bow combination.

And it’s not BM class. It’s pet class. Just as GW1 ranger was pet class or WoWs hunter wa pet class. Just because thief is stealth class it doesn’t lock him in stealth builds, right?

GW1 Ranger wasn’t a pet class if you didn’t want it to be and the Necromancer was way, waaaaaaaaaaay more a minion class in PvE.

The only time the pet ever saw use was in borderline OP Bunnythumper builds.

The rest of the time you could just forget the Beastmaster skill line even existed, never equip your pet, and do just fine or even better in many cases.

Substance E.4852:

Terkov.4138:

Serraphin Storm.2369:

The ranger is the beastmaster class if you are playing a ranger and want to only be an archer then you have picked the wrong class.

Ranger is most archerish class avaible, so ppl who want archer will choose it and ANet even encourages it with class description, arts and well known medium armor + pet + bow combination.

And it’s not BM class. It’s pet class. Just as GW1 ranger was pet class or WoWs hunter wa pet class. Just because thief is stealth class it doesn’t lock him in stealth builds, right?

GW1 Ranger wasn’t a pet class if you didn’t want it to be and the Necromancer was way, waaaaaaaaaaay more a minion class in PvE.

The only time the pet ever saw use was in borderline OP Bunnythumper builds.

The rest of the time you could just forget the Beastmaster skill line even existed, never equip your pet, and do just fine or even better in many cases.

Because the Ranger was the beast master class in gw1 and didn’t see much use is probably why pets aren’t optional.

I do believe that rangers are unparalleled archers. Archery is about accuracy. While you may argue that warriors or thieves do more damage their skills are mainly aoe-ish.

Players that can not master their class mechanism preform poorly across all classes. While a player may preform ok without said mechanisms in almost all cases using them resolutes in better proformance,

regardless of rifle warriors etc., i think most of us can agree that many aspects of the ranger require major reworks.

A lot of things with Warrior irk me. Killshot? When I first saw it my immediate response was “why isn’t this an Engineer skill?” Actually, when I saw all of the attack skills for a Warrior’s LB and Rifle, my responses were “Why the hell are these on the Warrior and not the Ranger and Engineer!?”

Sandpit.3467:

Serraphin Storm.2369:

The ranger is the beastmaster class if you are playing a ranger and want to only be an archer then you have picked the wrong class.

Don’t forget the “unparalleled archer” that ANet claims it is. But accepting that beastmaster is the central concept don’t you think it would be nice if ANet took a break from smite booning the shortbow and miniscule buffing the longbow and instead fix the kitten ed pet mechanics that are so heavily broken?

Just to put it out there in case anyone missed it, to paraphrase ANet, the way pets were originally designed and setup is too difficult to change in the forseeable future. In other words, they’re too broken to be fixed. So while that and 1hSword questions have been answered. People should once and for all decide whether they want to play Ranger or jump ship.

The thread starts with one ranger having lost to a Warriors and it derrails into Sword and pets being broken…

Well in one thing we can clearly agree: enough with the “let’s protest for a game change”, let there be room to tips & tricks discussion, builds and playstyle conversation so we can all enjoy our rangers that much more.

you must be new here. there has been tons of “tips and tricks” threads, guides and countless good players who have pushed the prof to the max, or left it. no one is really protesting either, lots of us have stuck with the ranger.

after a year and a half, we’re at a point where one of the lead devs is admitting our prof mechanic falls short, but doesnt want to fix it now. if you want tips and tricks, you can watch some of my guides or someone else’s. ranger forums should be about how and why the prof need serious tweaks/reworks, at this point anyway.

You must be meaning that i must have a fresh mentality or something and looking on how much i’m fed up with the negativity whyney threads, i’m far from new.

There’s a new build posted on the sticky 4 days ago. I just seen a jaw dropping video about rangers potential less than a week ago and you sound like everything about the ranger is done and discovered.
Well i feel sorry for you mate, as i’m still having a blast and still perfecting and tweaking stuff daily.

I can’t seem to erase the picture an old grumpy person complaining about the government…

Forums are what we make of them, and i just wish talented ppl invested their talent in constructive discussion beyond “this sucks! Here’s what I WANT!”

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Something I would like to add for all of you who are still complaining about the short bow distance nerf. The range of the bow is 300 more than listed anything beyond the listed range you will have to fire manually. So you still can hit target at 1200 with the short bow if you fire manually.

Einlanzer.1627:

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

What this man says is true. If you look at Warrior DPS at 1500 range (full zerker) vs Ranger DPS at 1500 range (full zerker AND pet hitting) you will find that the longbow has much higher DPS over, say 1 minute, then warrior has.
The reason for this, is that warriors, while providing incredible bursts, does NOT possess overly strong sustained ranged damage.

Also, killshot has a 10 second cooldown, AND requires adrenaline. While theoretically possible of hits over 30k (i have yet to see such damage outside PVE), it is only ONE SHOT, and can only produce such damage against a low armor target.
The longbow, can do constant 2.8-3k crits on a medium armor target at 1500 range.
Taking into account flight time, the AUTOATTACK of a longbow, can to a more reliable degree, produce more damage then a warrior’s burst.

Now, sure, targets dont stand still, so in practice, the LB AA does not produce insane damage. Especially since the rifle hits faster (instant hit) contra the rangers arrow speed (and these arrows are too kitten slow already).
However, IF we set the baseline target as a medium tanky guardian (around 3300 armor or so) the longbow, will be more effective at long range, due to the on-demand aegis, which will with high likelihood be activated when the warrior charges his killshot, negating the damage completely.

So yes, while warriors can produce hits of over 30k with their burst, our own burst (rapid fire) can sadly only ever hope to do 16.5k at most (personal high against full zerker ele). But that warrior cannot depend on the weapon to ALWAYS win, he must charge it up (and god knows why you didnt interrupt him, that shot got one of the most telegraphed charge-ups in this game).

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Anet wouldn’t have this preception problem if they would have correctly named the class Beastmaster instead of Ranger. And yes, this is a preception problem.

Hi, despite having 4 level 80’s you seem to not understand the basic game mechanics. First off, volley is a channel skill which means it can be interrupted with longbow #4. Kill shot is also a channel with a very long animation which means you can interrupt it as well with longbow #4. Understandably that might be a little complicated so you’re best bet is to use the dodge button. Default dodge is double tap on a movement key and the button “V”. For another tip, you said you opened with rapid fire at max range. That is a mistake as rapid fire is lower DPS than the auto-attack at max range. Hope this helps more than me just saying L2P.

@ Eurantien /clap

thefantasticg.3984:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Anet wouldn’t have this preception problem if they would have correctly named the class Beastmaster instead of Ranger. And yes, this is a preception problem.

It’s perception, not preception, and the Ranger name isn’t supposed to create the perception that it only does ranged fighting, because that isn’t what the word Ranger means.

You’re right, it’s a perception problem, but it’s a problem with the player base not with Arenanet.

Einlanzer.1627:

thefantasticg.3984:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Anet wouldn’t have this preception problem if they would have correctly named the class Beastmaster instead of Ranger. And yes, this is a preception problem.

It’s perception, not preception, and the Ranger name isn’t supposed to create the perception that it only does ranged fighting, because that isn’t what the word Ranger means.

You’re right, it’s a perception problem, but it’s a problem with the player base not with Arenanet.

Not exactly true, the issue lies that in D and D, all examples of what we know today come from other branches of literature and folklore that influences D and D “lore” in some way or form . For example Crusader/Paladin – which can be linked with subjects such as the Knights Templar leading to Holy Quests, leading to Virtue, which Anet lead into Guardians etc. This is the same reason why people synonymize rangers with ranged weapons, is because classic stories we learn even at an early age, reminds us of the fact that woodmen and protectors of the forest commonly used range weapons mainly bows. The reason for this were mainly for the hunting of beasts who posed a threat to either himself or to a " protected " animal. Another example that the use of bows meant that unlike a clumsy sword, the use of the bow was an elegant weapon that made you utilize camouflage of the surrounding flora and kill your target cleanly and more importantly … quietly, rather like deer stalking.

The issue with people thinking on a D and D train of thought is not in anyway wrong, however it is slightly clouded, as it is a mish mash of all sorts of subjects which some may term as being “overly fantasized”. The fact that D and D in itself is “subjective” and open to any wild fantasy it cares to generate from person to person, and thus is not really a great example to base any critique against others who think rangers use ranged weapons because in all purposes, they are the ones who are legitimately correct.

Einlanzer.1627:

thefantasticg.3984:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Anet wouldn’t have this preception problem if they would have correctly named the class Beastmaster instead of Ranger. And yes, this is a preception problem.

It’s perception, not preception, and the Ranger name isn’t supposed to create the perception that it only does ranged fighting, because that isn’t what the word Ranger means.

You’re right, it’s a perception problem, but it’s a problem with the player base not with Arenanet.

Regardless, Mr. Grammar N@zi, it is a perception problem created by Anet with their description of the class vs. reality of the class.

mzt.3270:

Einlanzer.1627:

thefantasticg.3984:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Anet wouldn’t have this preception problem if they would have correctly named the class Beastmaster instead of Ranger. And yes, this is a preception problem.

It’s perception, not preception, and the Ranger name isn’t supposed to create the perception that it only does ranged fighting, because that isn’t what the word Ranger means.

You’re right, it’s a perception problem, but it’s a problem with the player base not with Arenanet.

and thus is not really a great example to base any critique against others who think rangers use ranged weapons because in all purposes, they are the ones who are legitimately correct.

Uh, no. Not at all. A ranger is a warden, or a scout. In most cases they would be proficient at both melee and range. It just so happens that because of the mechanics of this game melee is a little stronger than range in raw numbers. In practicality it isn’t so black and white, though.

Einlanzer.1627:

mzt.3270:

Einlanzer.1627:

thefantasticg.3984:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

Anet wouldn’t have this preception problem if they would have correctly named the class Beastmaster instead of Ranger. And yes, this is a preception problem.

It’s perception, not preception, and the Ranger name isn’t supposed to create the perception that it only does ranged fighting, because that isn’t what the word Ranger means.

You’re right, it’s a perception problem, but it’s a problem with the player base not with Arenanet.

and thus is not really a great example to base any critique against others who think rangers use ranged weapons because in all purposes, they are the ones who are legitimately correct.

Uh, no. Not at all. A ranger is a warden, or a scout. In most cases they would be proficient at both melee and range. It just so happens that because of the mechanics of this game melee is a little stronger than range in raw numbers. In practicality it isn’t so black and white, though.

Hmmm, not denying that, rangers would use any means of weaponry. However if you read up on your history, most rangers were proficient in bows mainly but in the class of rangers, none of that applies exactly due to Anets own crazy ideas of class balance. So in theory if they can’t even get that right, there is no question of how they figure the mechanics – melee or ranged. Read up on rangers and wardens and also on what a ranger exactly is.
I would like to quote Wikipedia if I may? As per the wiki on ranger as quoted … Ranger archetype[edit]

Rangers skills in books and games can include and are not limited to:
Skilled with the bow, usually because they use them so often for the hunting of wild animals.
They tend to be well versed in other forms of combat however, most notably dual-wielding short swords or long knives, although rangers prefer using ranged weapons, and their melee combat abilities often pale in comparison to other character classes such as a warrior or barbarian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_

Does this settle the debate yet?
P.S note this part “although rangers prefer using ranged weapons, and their melee combat abilities often pale in comparison to other character classes such as a warrior or barbarian”
Seeing Anet made Warriors far better at bow skill than Rangers, don’t you now admit that Anet really have no clue about what a vision of ranger is yet?
Also…
throwing knives – can’t do, can throw an axe but damage is mediocre. On dagger skill 4 again not worth writing on paper re damage.
Stealth – poorly ( just recently added) and on a longbow that’s underpowered
Detecting or laying traps – Needs 30 points in skills and still is not variable on actual condition damage level
Taming, calming or charming animals – Pet Ai is broken
Knowledge of herbs for medical and poisonous uses – necros poison better
The art of healing (magical or medical) due to their self-reliance – proposed to be nerfed on Dec 10th. We also lack a decent passive condition remover.

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

I’ll just leave this here again since people can’t be bothered to read past posts it seems.

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ranger

At one point in development, according to The Making of Guild Wars 2 book, the ranger profession of the original Guild Wars was split into many different professions, notably the warden and the marksman. Eventually, with only marksman remaining, who only possessed only the aspect of ranged weaponry, was combined with already scrapped elements of warden and beastmaster, and renamed the result as ranger for the sake of the original series.

We can all argue what the word “Ranger” means in the general context of fantasy all we want but it’s obvious anet slapped it on with no real intent on it meaning anything other than attracting former GW1 Rangers, a class that was 100% archery.

Rifle shouldnt be a non-viable weapon for warriors since they can equip it, and they should be able to win fights with it. I dont buy that we should automatically win at range. But that killshot is pretty powerful, I definately would like to have a skill like that

Kilger.5490:

Rifle shouldnt be a non-viable weapon for warriors since they can equip it, and they should be able to win fights with it. I dont buy that we should automatically win at range. But that killshot is pretty powerful, I definately would like to have a skill like that

it is also one of the easiest skills to interupt given the incredibly long channeling time

In 1v1 I eat warriors with my ranger. It isn’t my build either, it’s all over the place.

Stealth spam regen thieves are my bane, so I avoid them.

Some times you find a build that suits you and you find your strengths and weaknesses and play to them. Fortunately you can’t counter everything or you would be reading NERF all day long on these forums.

The happy state of the warrior is versatility because they are good at everything and can run virtually any type of build, and play to it’s strengths. Other classes, including ranger, do not share this wider range of options. Warriors are just in a good place in this game.

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

You’re right, Ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons. Just out of curiosity, what percentage of ranger weapons are ranged? (Hint: It’s high.)

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

You obviously have not faced a condi longbow/hammer warrior yet.

Killsmith.8169:

You’re right, Ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons. Just out of curiosity, what percentage of ranger weapons are ranged? (Hint: It’s high.)

Check engineer, its higher. Besides the point, rangers place in fantasy lore dates back to tolkien, which are more like a forest ranger than anything to do with range weapons. I dont really care that much, but the argument that the name alone implies anything about bow mastery annoys me. :P

Cagan.7893:

I thought this class was going to be worth playing eventually, I have 4 other lvl 80 characters but I used up all my resources to buy the ascended gear to my ranger.
So today I meet a warrior in WvW, he doesnt charge me and then hammer stun and then eventually kill me in 2-3 hits as usual but he pulls out his rifle and starts shooting.

I then proceed to run up on his face, Unload all my conditions while evading most of his attacks, down him because he nothing in terms of condition removal, am now disgusted that I wasted my time on said person.. and proceed to just leave him without being stomped. Because that is really the greatest insult in the game….Me thinking you’re not even worthy of a stomp.

Edited this story to describe what happens when I run into a Rifle Warrior

Killsmith.8169:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

You’re right, Ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons. Just out of curiosity, what percentage of ranger weapons are ranged? (Hint: It’s high.)

This is irrelevant. Weapon options are about adaptability, not power. Rangers have more adaptability at range due to their ranged prowess, which in effects means they are ‘better’ at range than other professions. That does not give credence to the idea that they should actually do more damage at range than at melee, or that shouldn’t have melee options.

Prysin.8542:

What this man says is true. If you look at Warrior DPS at 1500 range (full zerker) vs Ranger DPS at 1500 range (full zerker AND pet hitting) you will find that the longbow has much higher DPS over, say 1 minute, then warrior has.
The reason for this, is that warriors, while providing incredible bursts, does NOT possess overly strong sustained ranged damage.

Warrior rifle is limited to 1200 range (except killshot which is 1500). Or is there a trait I’m missing?

Part of the misconception may be because earlier in the year, warrior longbow and rifle had higher sustained DPS than ranger longbow. That got fixed when they dropped longbow’s autoattack channel time from 1.25 sec to 1 sec.

Currently, warrior longbow has higher sustained DPS if you constantly apply the fire field. But that’s scheduled to be nerfed.

mzt.3270:

Not exactly true, the issue lies that in D and D, all examples of what we know today come from other branches of literature and folklore that influences D and D “lore” in some way or form.

Well if you’re going to bring RPG history into this, nearly everything in D&D was ripped off from Lord of the Rings. Tolkien’s LotR and The Hobbit were the genesis of most of the fantasy archetypes we have today.

In LotR, Aragorn is a ranger. In fact I think that’s where the name “ranger” for a woodsman-type character living in the wilds actually originated.

Einlanzer.1627:

Killsmith.8169:

Einlanzer.1627:

OMG OP for about the thousandth freaking time, the name ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons, it refers to roaming ranges of land, i.e. like a scout or a warden. Seriously, how can so many people not know this? It’s like an elementary level vocabulary word.

Regardless, Rangers are unparalleled archers and no other profession does as much DPS at range as the Ranger does. L2P.

You’re right, Ranger has nothing to do with using ranged weapons. Just out of curiosity, what percentage of ranger weapons are ranged? (Hint: It’s high.)

This is irrelevant. Weapon options are about adaptability, not power. Rangers have more adaptability at range due to their ranged prowess, which in effects means they are ‘better’ at range than other professions. That does not give credence to the idea that they should actually do more damage at range than at melee, or that shouldn’t have melee options.

You’re reading too far into things. My only point was that there isn’t a loadout you can equip that doesn’t have a ranged weapon. You can say ranger doesn’t mean ranged (and I would agree) but that doesn’t change the fact that the vast majority of our weapons are ranged and are weaker by design. That’s fine with me as long as we can get some decent options for melee damage. However, the class description does claim that we are unparalleled archers. That should mean that we are without match or equal when it comes to bows. I don’t think that’s currently the case.

Not to add fuel to any flame but the Ranger is a difficult class to play well. If you want to play the Ranger (and you should after that great investment) then do a lot of research on it. There are a lot of viable Ranger builds that will find you success.

Builds and gear aren’t all of it though. If you want to be great in pvp you’ll need to know all classes inside and out. This gives you the ability to read the situation and know what to expect so you can react accordingly.

Rangers are awesome. Many people here that play the Ranger make it work for them with great success – you just have to find your niche in the class.

A helpful tip: Don’t read a lot of the forum postings about Ranger belly aching. Every class has pros and cons. If you constantly read the ‘con’ posts then you’ll start to have an overall negative feel for the way the Ranger plays and you will not be able to find what works for you or, more importantly, have fun.

Bastionhawk.7120:

If you constantly read the ‘con’ posts then you’ll start to have an overall negative feel for the way the Ranger plays…

Ha. I got that feeling from having to deal with a broken class mechanic.

thefantasticg.3984:

Bastionhawk.7120:

If you constantly read the ‘con’ posts then you’ll start to have an overall negative feel for the way the Ranger plays…

Ha. I got that feeling from having to deal with a broken class mechanic.

I got that feeling when my wvw guilds and dungeon parties would ask me “Can you bring anything not a Ranger?”