Guild Wars 2

What would you say if Anet decided to buff all the weapons on ranger, nerf the pet stats and change the the BM traitline so it gives 500-700 extra stats to pets instead of 300?

So basically it would simply mean a buff to weapons for me as a BM ranger? I’m ok with that

No thanks, I am kind of happy where we are now, if that happened the pets and the class would be op and unfun to play. Steamrolling everything isn’t my way of fun if its yours… then roll a fighter or something. Fighter or guard are easymode in this game thieves are too from what I hear when it comes to pvp areas

Not even going to comment on the accuracy of prior posts.

But any who, the OP idea is a welcome change. It would mesh much better with the idea of having to trait to focus, and would allow the potential for much more build diversity.

choigreywolf.7496:

No thanks, I am kind of happy where we are now, if that happened the pets and the class would be op and unfun to play. Steamrolling everything isn’t my way of fun if its yours… then roll a fighter or something. Fighter or guard are easymode in this game thieves are too from what I hear when it comes to pvp areas

Why do you assume it will be OP? You can clearly figure out (with common sense) that I did not post any exact numbers. I only said Buff and Nerf.

The problem in pets lies at their pathfinding and jaggy paths they take. Updating the path more often would cause more packets to be sent between the server and clients (same reason for condi caps) and therefore gives anet good reason to leave pathfinding as it is.

I don’t hate pets or anything, I like the ranger class but sometimes I only want to use my pets for utility, thus wasting a large portion of damage.

Yes I can run warrior or guardian, but what’s the reason for that? “I roll a warrior because rangers are broken” ?

jcbroe.4329:

Not even going to comment on the accuracy of prior posts.

But any who, the OP idea is a welcome change. It would mesh much better with the idea of having to trait to focus, and would allow the potential for much more build diversity.

This was just a quick thought on making the ranger into a ranger that can choose to be a beastmaster

weapon is a MUST BUFF !!! hahaa

Make offensive pets not be the only viable pets.
Make most ‘offensive pets’ buff the ranger or nearby allies… not easily be such a primary source of dmg…

solrik.6028:

jcbroe.4329:

Not even going to comment on the accuracy of prior posts.

But any who, the OP idea is a welcome change. It would mesh much better with the idea of having to trait to focus, and would allow the potential for much more build diversity.

This was just a quick thought on making the ranger into a ranger that can choose to be a beastmaster

I would welcome having some percentage of the damage taken from my pet and given to me in a heartbeat, however I wouldn’t want a flat pet stat nerf making all non BM pets have even more terrible survival than now just a reduction in their damage.

Manekk.6981:

solrik.6028:

jcbroe.4329:

Not even going to comment on the accuracy of prior posts.

But any who, the OP idea is a welcome change. It would mesh much better with the idea of having to trait to focus, and would allow the potential for much more build diversity.

This was just a quick thought on making the ranger into a ranger that can choose to be a beastmaster

I would welcome having some percentage of the damage taken from my pet and given to me in a heartbeat, however I wouldn’t want a flat pet stat nerf making all non BM pets have even more terrible survival than now just a reduction in their damage.

I didn’t mean all prior posts lol. I meant a single particular one, but wasn’t saying that as to not single a person out and get infracted because I can’t be nice about things.

The liking of the concept still remains though that if damage was split between the player and the pet differently (favoring the player more) and then speccing into Beastmastery provided a higher benefit to the pet, it would help make power specs more viable without being so dependent on the pet.

Not everybody wants to play a pet damage focused build, I personally would love a player damage/pet support build. Traits like compassionate training shows that they have the potential to exist but in practice the pets RNG and lack of meaningful F2 skills on most pets from a utility standpoint (as in, most f2 skills are damage based, and certain support based ones have extremely low durations on boons).

What I can add to the idea, since your right that pet survival would be affected too much, would be to have the pets base toughness and vitality remain high, but reduce their base power/precision. Then, the trait points add 20 points to power/precision (and please for the love of god condition damage as well, so we can get some stronger condition pressure from our pets), but only add 10 to toughness and vitality.

I think that might work.

solrik.6028:

Yes I can run warrior or guardian, but what’s the reason for that? “I roll a warrior because rangers are broken” ?

Versatility is a commodity whose worth isn’t easily weighed.

You’re basically wanting more damage and don’t want to give up versatility. Warriors currently want versatility but don’t want to give up their damage.

jcbroe.4329:

Manekk.6981:

solrik.6028:

jcbroe.4329:

Not even going to comment on the accuracy of prior posts.

But any who, the OP idea is a welcome change. It would mesh much better with the idea of having to trait to focus, and would allow the potential for much more build diversity.

This was just a quick thought on making the ranger into a ranger that can choose to be a beastmaster

I would welcome having some percentage of the damage taken from my pet and given to me in a heartbeat, however I wouldn’t want a flat pet stat nerf making all non BM pets have even more terrible survival than now just a reduction in their damage.

I didn’t mean all prior posts lol. I meant a single particular one, but wasn’t saying that as to not single a person out and get infracted because I can’t be nice about things.

The liking of the concept still remains though that if damage was split between the player and the pet differently (favoring the player more) and then speccing into Beastmastery provided a higher benefit to the pet, it would help make power specs more viable without being so dependent on the pet.

Not everybody wants to play a pet damage focused build, I personally would love a player damage/pet support build. Traits like compassionate training shows that they have the potential to exist but in practice the pets RNG and lack of meaningful F2 skills on most pets from a utility standpoint (as in, most f2 skills are damage based, and certain support based ones have extremely low durations on boons).

What I can add to the idea, since your right that pet survival would be affected too much, would be to have the pets base toughness and vitality remain high, but reduce their base power/precision. Then, the trait points add 20 points to power/precision (and please for the love of god condition damage as well, so we can get some stronger condition pressure from our pets), but only add 10 to toughness and vitality.

I think that might work.

After some thinking, not a lot really….. The problem in Gw2 is that it’s more difficult to balance skills than in Gw1. The actual problem with this would be that a ranger would be able to go full zerker gear, dump 30 points in BM traitline and end up being way too powerful.

What I am going to write now is from an idea I came up with in one minute. I would make the ranger deal full damage, just like any other class, and have the pet as extra damage beyond 100%. The pet can be nerfed so it’s not as fast, buffed so it’s cast times are very short but compensate with cooldowns and it would be more of an utility than a machine that bites. Traits in BM would define how the pets behave, or give them stances that makes them do a certain action. For example, a trait called “Defensive training” which makes the pet constantly position itself between the ranger and the target to take the hits
Traits like:
“Support training” – Adds a Xs cripple effect to the pet’s attacks, Xs CD
“Offensive training” – Converts X% of pet’s Y stat into Z (Emphasis on “Converts”) Adds A% speed
“XXXXXX training” – Steal boons
“XXXXXX training” – Transfer conditions
etc
Ta-da! Ranger no longer relies on pet for dealing damage!

Leo G.4501:

solrik.6028:

Yes I can run warrior or guardian, but what’s the reason for that? “I roll a warrior because rangers are broken” ?

Versatility is a commodity whose worth isn’t easily weighed.

You’re basically wanting more damage and don’t want to give up versatility. Warriors currently want versatility but don’t want to give up their damage.

Versatility does not mean less damage and vice versa. Versatility in this game means that one can play more than one playstyle. A BM ranger should be as effective as a Non-BM ranger or a Trap ranger.

The weapons (this because Anet wants so much ‘balance’) should be equal in average dps. A greatsword should have big hits but slow attacks, a shortbow should be fast but weaker on each shot, a longbow should be slow but strong. The sword should be fast but weak on each strike. All of the 4 mentioned should have the same DPS without traits affecting it.

solrik.6028:

Leo G.4501:

solrik.6028:

Yes I can run warrior or guardian, but what’s the reason for that? “I roll a warrior because rangers are broken” ?

Versatility is a commodity whose worth isn’t easily weighed.

You’re basically wanting more damage and don’t want to give up versatility. Warriors currently want versatility but don’t want to give up their damage.

Versatility does not mean less damage and vice versa. Versatility in this game means that one can play more than one playstyle. A BM ranger should be as effective as a Non-BM ranger or a Trap ranger.

They aren’t?

As for versatility, it means utility, mainly. What else one can do besides damage and how they can adapt that to situations. It’s not so much ‘what builds can I make’ but what you can do with the skills you have.

solrik.6028:

After some thinking, not a lot really….. The problem in Gw2 is that it’s more difficult to balance skills than in Gw1.

Not innately.
But GW2 being in a worse place along with a small staff, meaning there needs to be larger changes that are easier to enact, sways the scale a bit.

Leo G.4501:

solrik.6028:

Leo G.4501:

solrik.6028:

Yes I can run warrior or guardian, but what’s the reason for that? “I roll a warrior because rangers are broken” ?

Versatility is a commodity whose worth isn’t easily weighed.

You’re basically wanting more damage and don’t want to give up versatility. Warriors currently want versatility but don’t want to give up their damage.

Versatility does not mean less damage and vice versa. Versatility in this game means that one can play more than one playstyle. A BM ranger should be as effective as a Non-BM ranger or a Trap ranger.

They aren’t?

As for versatility, it means utility, mainly. What else one can do besides damage and how they can adapt that to situations. It’s not so much ‘what builds can I make’ but what you can do with the skills you have.

They aren’t.

You are correct there with versatility, but think about what a “build” is.
Doesn’t the current set-up get considered a ‘build’ if it’s the one of the different set-ups, which is ultimately used in that particular situation?

solrik.6028:

After some thinking, The actual problem with this would be that a ranger would be able to go full zerker gear, dump 30 points in BM traitline and end up being way too powerful.

I know I was sorta hinting at this in my first reply