I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
Not always. There are far more moves to punish ranged attackers than there are to punish melee. And if you only have that higher damage at max range, all an opponent needs to do is to close with you and force you into melee and negate that extra damage. That gives them a reason to deal with you in melee instead of just ignoring you.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
Not always. There are far more moves to punish ranged attackers than there are to punish melee. And if you only have that higher damage at max range, all an opponent needs to do is to close with you and force you into melee and negate that extra damage. That gives them a reason to deal with you in melee instead of just ignoring you.
What moves punish range players that doesn’t punish melee? You are basically asking for a weapon to do melee dps at range and then having the option to do melee dps with a melee weapon at a push of a button.
I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
This is not entirely true. If your in melee range against a class not spec’d for it, not carrying a melee weapon, or they just aren’t built for damage; your really in no danger at all. You in fact have a major advantage.
On the other hand, if your carrying a ranged weapon that still fires slow enough for people to easily side step, it should in fact, do far more damage. If the longbow actually was made to hit similar to the rifle, then I can understand it doing less damage than melee.
I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
This is not entirely true. If your in melee range against a class not spec’d for it, not carrying a melee weapon, or they just aren’t built for damage; your really in no danger at all. You in fact have a major advantage.
On the other hand, if your carrying a ranged weapon that still fires slow enough for people to easily side step, it should in fact, do far more damage. If the longbow actually was made to hit similar to the rifle, then I can understand it doing less damage than melee.
The problem with LB is the Arrow mechanics now the damage.
If the enemy has a range weapon and you are in melee and they CC you then you are doing 0 damage while with arange weapon you can still do damage.
I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
This is not entirely true. If your in melee range against a class not spec’d for it, not carrying a melee weapon, or they just aren’t built for damage; your really in no danger at all. You in fact have a major advantage.
On the other hand, if your carrying a ranged weapon that still fires slow enough for people to easily side step, it should in fact, do far more damage. If the longbow actually was made to hit similar to the rifle, then I can understand it doing less damage than melee.
The problem with LB is the Arrow mechanics now the damage.
If the enemy has a range weapon and you are in melee and they CC you then you are doing 0 damage while with arange weapon you can still do damage.
If the arrows are being side stepped, they’re doing no damage. As I said, if the longbow was made so that it could not be side stepped (basically tracks to hit target), then it should do less damage. If it’s slow enough that it can be easily avoided, it should be doing far more damage than any melee weapon.
Think if a Ranger and a warrior were firing at each other at range.. warrior with a rifle, and ranger with a long bow.. who wins? The warrior will connect on every single shot, while the Ranger might not get 1 hit in.
Now take that same warrior carrying a melee weapon coming after the ranger.. That warrior can side step every single shot.. the ranger won’t be side stepping anything in melee range.
This is why the LB or any weapon/skill for that matter should hit like a truck. Just like that elementalists Dragon tooth. It hits very hard, but it’s always easy to avoid.
What moves punish range players that doesn’t punish melee?
Just walking up to the longbow ranger’s face punishes the ranger really badly. After that, the enemy has to strafe the longbow ranger and the longbow ranger does 0 dps due to clunky attacks. Longbow has zero reliable survivability skill on its own.
Shortbow has instant cast Daze/stun, cripple and evade.
MH sword has two evades.
Longbow has a clunky knockback and a easily avoided cripple field.
You are basically asking for a weapon to do melee dps at range and then having the option to do melee dps with a melee weapon at a push of a button.
I am asking a weapon that does melee dps at range. I did not say anything about Longbow getting a melee dps at melee.
Not always. There are far more moves to punish ranged attackers than there are to punish melee. And if you only have that higher damage at max range, all an opponent needs to do is to close with you and force you into melee and negate that extra damage. That gives them a reason to deal with you in melee instead of just ignoring you.
What moves punish range players that doesn’t punish melee? You are basically asking for a weapon to do melee dps at range and then having the option to do melee dps with a melee weapon at a push of a button.
Reflect.
Honestly I’d prefer that rangers work backwards. Higher ranged damage. Less melee damage. Make the ranger work at maintaining range. Because as it is right now, the ranger should always be melee for decent damage. And then what differentiates it from a warrior except lower DPS and a pet?
Every class does more damage in melee than at range so it won’t be changed for Rangers. You keep saying due to the problem of LB arrows missing it should do more damage but you should be asking is fixing LB issues not increasing its damage.
Every class does more damage in melee than at range so it won’t be changed for Rangers. You keep saying due to the problem of LB arrows missing it should do more damage but you should be asking is fixing LB issues not increasing its damage.
No one said that Rangers can’t be unique. Ranger’s Longbow can be the only range weapon that has a higher dps than the ranger’s mh sword dps.
Even if Ranger LB clunkyness is fixed, it won’t make LB any better. LB has tons of issues, it has zero survivability skills(Shortbow has daze, evade, and cripple. MH Sword has two evades. GS has 1200 leap and block to disengage.). It is incredibly easy for the enemy to get inside 1200 range and making LB irrelevant. All of them does more damage than LB.
If LB gets issues fixed enough to be on par with the rest of the weapon set without increasing damage, then LB has to be buffed where it gets all these kinds of survivability skills. I don’t like that. It isn’t the LB role.
The LB role is to be damage support from afar. They assist by sniping enemies. That is why there is Hunter shot and rapid fire. On the otherhand, an enemy that gets in close will slaughter the LB ranger easily.
Oh wait, you’re really serious about this? Hmmm… I’m at a loss for words then besides..
Good luck with that!
I’d just be happy if they undid that unnecessary Stealth nerf TBH.
Even spectral Skirmishers are like “WTH is this stuff ANET? Unnerf us!!” … and they dont’ even have mouths :p
Rangers can trait long bow of a ranger of 1500 but they actual hit further. Wasnt there a thread about ranger hitting for 10k with auto attack and you want this number to be higher really.
Ranger more than any other class needs to learn to use the right weapon for the job. As well as tactics. I watch videos of ranger using a sb agaisnt mesners with confusion stacks on them (yes us a fast shotting weapon with meh damge to trigger the confusion). These ranger are why people consider some rangers walking loot bags.
Some mob are harder to fight at range like the Spider boss in ac. Fighting him at ranger triggers it’s range attack red poison circles of death. Melee’ing or fight up close make this fight solo-able by just about anyone. Giving Rangers an incentive to make bad combat choices is not the answer.
Rangers have medium armor like Thieves and Engineers. These two class dont have a problem getting in there a mixing it up. Why do so many rangers have an adversion to melee combat.
This change would just promote more bad Rangers.
Rangers can trait long bow of a ranger of 1500 but they actual hit further. Wasnt there a thread about ranger hitting for 10k with auto attack and you want this number to be higher really.
One time spike damage requiring multiple long cooldown skills to get that kind of damage. The kind a warrior can repeatedly pull off with a kill shot. Yeah … bad comparison.
Ranger more than any other class needs to learn to use the right weapon for the job. As well as tactics. I watch videos of ranger using a sb agaisnt mesners with confusion stacks on them (yes us a fast shotting weapon with meh damge to trigger the confusion). These ranger are why people consider some rangers walking loot bags.
Don’t assume we are these bad players, or even that a majority of players are that bad. That’s a disservice to the community and just makes you look arrogant.
Some mob are harder to fight at range like the Spider boss in ac. Fighting him at ranger triggers it’s range attack red poison circles of death. Melee’ing or fight up close make this fight solo-able by just about anyone. Giving Rangers an incentive to make bad combat choices is not the answer.
We always have the choice to make good or bad choices. Sometimes we gotta range. Sometimes we gotta mix it up in melee. Any good player already does that. We want a reason to sometimes use our bows, as right now there ain’t really any.
Rangers have medium armor like Thieves and Engineers. These two class dont have a problem getting in there a mixing it up. Why do so many rangers have an adversion to melee combat.
Most of us don’t. We just want a reason to pull out our bows sometimes. Cuz if we’re always in melee, why don’t we just switch to playing warrior or guardian. They fight in melee, but far better. Right now we’re just weaker, squishier warriors saddled with a bad AI responsible for a good percentage of our damage.
This change would just promote more bad Rangers.
No. It’d give us options. Maybe then we’d see some ranged rangers that can actually pull off decent damage. Cuz right now there is no reason to range with a ranger. And that’s a bloody shame.
The 10k hit is one hit my point was that most other class can’t even touch us a 1500 range, but you want to make that damge higher. Ranger are accused of bring no support to the teamas it stands. Creating a situation that puts him further away isn’t the best thing for the class.
Rangers used the SB as a multi -tool. They have used it at rangers greater than 1000 when it wasnt optimal. For whatever reason it doesnt matter why it’s still most.
The way it is with all things is the majority isn’t the most proficient. Those that are good enough to be in the top 75 percentile are miles away in ablitiy and yet still stand miles away from those who are in the top 90 percentile.
What seems logical and what people do rarely are the same.
Yes alot of ranger have a thing with melee. For whatever reason they dont like the root on 1h or they’re just opposed to melee because of what they think a ranger is.
You currently have options you just want different options. Your not asking for a new weapon. You want to change a weapon that does not give you more option it just gives you different options you still have the same number of weapons to choose from.
Very few rangers run in to meet an opposing zerg head on and engage in melee combat. I don’t know many ranger that melee the troll champ in queendale. Can it be done sure but few do it. Even lvled down 80’s. If you can’t come up with reason to use a bow then you can’t. But in the future when you question my thoughts on how I think most rangers perform please look back at this post and count yourself among them.
A ranger wih a longbow, and an engineer with grenades.
(Those happen to be my two main characters.)
Both need 30 trait points at least to work at max 1500 range.
Both fly terribly slow, both are easy to avoid. I believe this is intended and how it should be: if you are at the privilige of attacking someone at 1500 range, the only thing he can do is have ways of avoiding some of your damage.
Grenades are easier to avoid than longbow by the way.
Grenades even have a red circle all the time to show you they are incoming, longbow only has that on barrage.
Longbow can hope to criple you first, grenades can hope to chill you first.
Versus groups I consider grenades the better aoe.
But retaliation says hi…
Against a single player, two things make the longbow stronger:
1. longbow 1-4 is direct targeted
2. longbow have auto-cast, grenades don’t.
I think longbow is the better weapon against a single target.
Main plus for the grenades, if not talking about long range only: grenades have no penalty when used at short range, even on the contrary: they are easier to land.
So to me longbow might be the better weapon against a single player at range, but grenades are the better weapon against groups.
(edited by Kimbald.2697)
The 10k hit is one hit my point was that most other class can’t even touch us a 1500 range, but you want to make that damge higher. Ranger are accused of bring no support to the teamas it stands. Creating a situation that puts him further away isn’t the best thing for the class.
Rangers used the SB as a multi -tool. They have used it at rangers greater than 1000 when it wasnt optimal. For whatever reason it doesnt matter why it’s still most.
The way it is with all things is the majority isn’t the most proficient. Those that are good enough to be in the top 75 percentile are miles away in ablitiy and yet still stand miles away from those who are in the top 90 percentile.
What seems logical and what people do rarely are the same.
Yes alot of ranger have a thing with melee. For whatever reason they dont like the root on 1h or they’re just opposed to melee because of what they think a ranger is.
You currently have options you just want different options. Your not asking for a new weapon. You want to change a weapon that does not give you more option it just gives you different options you still have the same number of weapons to choose from.
Very few rangers run in to meet an opposing zerg head on and engage in melee combat. I don’t know many ranger that melee the troll champ in queendale. Can it be done sure but few do it. Even lvled down 80’s. If you can’t come up with reason to use a bow then you can’t. But in the future when you question my thoughts on how I think most rangers perform please look back at this post and count yourself among them.
Open-world PvE no ranger should ever have any problem. Almost everything, including many group events can be soloed by a skilled ranger. Most of us use melee as well as ranged. Ranged only gets you so far and our best support is best done in melee. Any skilled ranger can tell you that.
I, personally, tend to run SB and GS. SB only because there are limits to how long a glassy ranger can survive in melee and it allows me sustained DPS while I wait for my health to recover. I only ever touch the LB when I’m in a place that forces longer than 900 range in battle (a few dungeon boss encounters) or against a foe that loves throwing on confusion (confusion + SB ranger = dead ranger). I don’t run the sword as it’s DPS is not that much greater than the GS and it’s survivability is significantly lower.
But I get it. You still think you are superior to most rangers, myself included. Maybe you are. Most likely you aren’t. And you’ll get more decent attention to you words if you don’t lord yourself over others. Just saying.
Yes I am an arrogant conceded MF. But I dont persume to speak for all rangers. Just myself and maybe my small rag tag guild. I want rangers to grow; the class and the community. I understand that we all have different ideals of where we are going and how to get there.
I don’t believe I try to lord over people. If someone has a problem or wants feedback I put m two cents in if i think I can help. The best advice is the advice taken. At the end of the day its the Devs that will make the final call on the changes.
And while there are rangers that make an issue after every patch. I have seen the logic and understood why things were changed and supported all except the quickness nerf and the changed to guard.
I have faith in the community, the class and the devs.
And while there are rangers that make an issue after every patch. I have seen the logic and understood why things were changed and supported all except the quickness nerf and the changed to guard.
I have faith in the community, the class and the devs.
I see the logic in their actions, myself, even if I don’t agree on their choice of that particular action to ‘fix’ the issues. Most especially the SB range nerf.
I have faith that the PvP balance devs have some plans. Unfortunately, due to all balance I have seen since launch, I am quickly losing faith that they care about PvE balance. I want to get that faith back. I want to see at least a small sign that the devs care about something other than just PvP. Something more than a pithy statement of ‘we care about all classes equally’.
What is wrong with people? NO! NEVER should it deal melee weapon damage. Not even close.
Longbow damage is already fine. Anything more and it would become stupid like other overpowered ranged AoE kitten that is already in the game. Ranger bows are balanced fine, they just need some more traits/utilities that support berserker playstyle.
Holy kitten I can not deal with the stupidity of these threads. People suggesting most damage should be on ranged weapon (or even only equal damae) have no clue about balancing and should stop talking.
What is wrong with people? NO! NEVER should it deal melee weapon damage. Not even close.
Longbow damage is already fine. Anything more and it would become stupid like other overpowered ranged AoE kitten that is already in the game. Ranger bows are balanced fine, they just need some more traits/utilities that support berserker playstyle.
Ok. Longbow damage already fine. Overpowered ranged … ranger? Yeah. No. Longbow damage is pitiful unless you maintain max range and the weapon is missing any real decent utility. Lots use it now only because SB isn’t an option. It is not a balanced option or you would see more using it.
And if you think the ranger bow is too powerful, you might want to check out the warrior rifle. Or do you think that needs to be nerfed?
Holy kitten I can not deal with the stupidity of these threads. People suggesting most damage should be on ranged weapon (or even only equal damae) have no clue about balancing and should stop talking.
We understand balance just fine. I think you are the one who has missed the part where we’re also talking about how to prevent that from being too OP.
Now please try again politely or check the door.
Now please try again politely or check the door.
There needs to be a rule to read before whining.
Now please try again politely or check the door.
There needs to be a rule to read before whining.
There really does.
I don’t feel the actual dps of the long bow need to be higher than melee weapons really. Ranged weapons have a big advantage over melee in that they can hit a target from quite a distance. A ranger with the right traits and good use of kiting can keep a melee opponent well away from them. Effectivly destroying them before they even get close. The problem, I feel, with the long bow is there are only really two viable attacks, Rapid Fire and Barrage. The vulnerablility you get from Hunters shot is only really useful when coupled with opening strike, and the crippling effect from Barrage is mitigable.
In comparison to the short bow’s faster attack speed, easy condition application and versatility the long bow just cant compare. The only advantage the longbow gives is range and a careful/clever ranger can get around that with the right abilities. The problem lies more with the weapon itself, dps doesn’t need to be buffed up, the longbow just has to be redesigned.
Class concept is a long range class. Ranged should always be the best option for a ranger, otherwise your no different to a warrior.
What moves punish range players that doesn’t punish melee?
Reflect ranged.
The captain of the Skypirates woman…always teleports to the played furthest away and attempts to one shot them.
Its more difficult to attack multiple mobs with bow and less effective in general for a ranger.
(edited by Conan.8046)
Class concept is a long range class. Ranged should always be the best option for a ranger, otherwise your no different to a warrior.
this is not true..ranger is not for range -.-
the topic we got about 6 times?
and no the longbow should not do more dps than melee weapons
Class concept is a long range class. Ranged should always be the best option for a ranger, otherwise your no different to a warrior.
this is not true..ranger is not for range -.-
the topic we got about 6 times?and no the longbow should not do more dps than melee weapons
Ranger
Rangers rely on a keen eye, a steady hand, and the power of nature itself. Unparalleled archers, rangers are capable of bringing down foes from a distance with their bows. With traps, nature spirits, and a stable of loyal pets at their command, rangers can adapt to any situation.
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/professions/ranger/
Now to explain concept – Which means general idea behind Rangers, It is not melee the general idea is you use a longbow and traps. Its in stone written by GW2 people if anyone argues with that, they are wrong.
Ranger
Rangers rely on a keen eye, a steady hand, and the power of nature itself. Unparalleled archers, rangers are capable of bringing down foes from a distance with their bows. With traps, nature spirits, and a stable of loyal pets at their command, rangers can adapt to any situation.
https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/professions/ranger/Now to explain concept – Which means general idea behind Rangers, It is not melee the general idea is you use a longbow and traps. Its in stone written by GW2 people if anyone argues with that, they are wrong.
Practitioners of the dark arts, necromancers summon the dead, wield the power of lost souls, and literally suck the life force from the enemy. Necromancers feed on life force, which they can use to bring allies back from the brink or cheat death itself.
I guess life force isn’t working as intended at all, considering you can’t heal allies with it.
…or maybe cherry-picking flavour text is a bad way to decide intentional class mechanics.
Practitioners of the dark arts, necromancers summon the dead, wield the power of lost souls, and literally suck the life force from the enemy. Necromancers feed on life force, which they can use to bring allies back from the brink or cheat death itself.
I guess life force isn’t working as intended at all, considering you can’t heal allies with it.
…or maybe cherry-picking flavour text is a bad way to decide intentional class mechanics.
Yes you can, so you guess wrong.
Signet of Undeath?
Signet of Undeath
3 Activation time 180 Recharge time 6 Skill point
Passive: Generates life force while in combat.
Active: Revive up to three downed allies in a target area.
Cherry Picking flavor text…so guild wars 2 profession page is my “Cherry picking” lol
Edit –
Range also has higher uptime meaning that melee can do more damage but the DPS should be about the same.
(edited by Conan.8046)
Hmm. Normally I’d agree that melee is more dangerous therefore you should get more reward. But in practice, not so much?
With a few exceptions, when bosses AOE, they carpet bomb the place. Truly dangerous pointblank AOE is in pretty limited supply. You have cleaving melee attacks to deal with, but they’re an unfortunate mix of avoidable and easily surmountable. Considering how much of support is pointblank AOE and accessible without much in the way of speccing for it, and how much easier it is to rez someone whose stacked on top of the group, being closer to the action oftentimes seems safer than being farther away. With the group you have backup, farther away you’re on your own.
I think there’s a case for ranged proficiency that at least meets melee proficiency. That or a movement towards much, much, much more dangerously aggressive melee range gameplay in dungeons.
(edited by Vox Hollow.2736)
Hmm. Normally I’d agree that melee is more dangerous therefore you should get more reward. But in practice, not so much?
With a few exceptions, when bosses AOE, they carpet bomb the place. Truly dangerous pointblank AOE is in pretty limited supply. You have cleaving melee attacks to deal with, but they’re an unfortunate mix of avoidable and easily surmountable. Considering how much of support is pointblank AOE and accessible without much in the way of speccing for it, and how much easier it is to rez someone whose stacked on top of the group, being closer to the action oftentimes seems safer than being farther away. With the group you have backup, farther away you’re on your own.
I think there’s a case for ranged proficiency that at least meets melee proficiency. That or a movement towards much, much, much more dangerously aggressive melee range gameplay in dungeons.
Also we’re not calling for an across-the-board change to that melee > ranged thing. Just to have the ranger break it to give them a unique position. You know. Just something that will make the class stand out more than the weaker warriors saddled with bad AI for a good portion of their damage. Because that is kinda what the class seems like, balance-wise.
I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
Tell that to dungeon mob AI that has bosses use more dangerous skills against ranged targets. Melee rangers have an evade on auto attack on the greatsword, the best movement leap in the game and a block skill, main hand sword has not one but two evades and the dagger also has an evade (which is on a fairly short cooldown when traited). The biggest threat to a melee ranger is the leap from the main hand sword. The speed at which melee builds are killing mobs is making them by far the easiest builds to play.
Just watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGJylZBKmos&feature=youtu.be . At no point in that video is he in danger at all. He doesn’t even need to be controlling his character during the fight, he can just press 1 when it begins and alt + tab. Once he’s in range to attack his target, he doesn’t even more or use any skill other than auto attack. Too much of the dungeon content in GW2 is this way to justify the DPS imbalance of ranged and melee weapons.
Hell tell that to the developers that said that the first five skills of your bar were all predetermined by weapon to prevent bad builds, but the fact that ranged weapons are given worse DPS is making ranged builds bad builds in PvE and a big part of the stigma rangers suffer.
Class concept is a long range class. Ranged should always be the best option for a ranger, otherwise your no different to a warrior.
this is not true..ranger is not for range -.-
the topic we got about 6 times?and no the longbow should not do more dps than melee weapons
Now to explain concept – Which means general idea behind Rangers, It is not melee the general idea is you use a longbow and traps. Its in stone written by GW2 people if anyone argues with that, they are wrong.
Ranger
Rangers rely on a keen eye, a steady hand, and the power of nature itself. Nearly worthless archers, rangers are capable of bringing down chickens and other harmless critters with no hit points with their Longbow bows. With traps in their Precision line, Nature spirits and a stable of nearly worthless pets because of their broken AI Rangers tend to come in last in about any situation.
^^ Fixed that description for Anet
This description has been change it use to include a line about melee as well.
Are you guys saying you cant kill a target at range. As far as the unparrale part. Archery is about pin pont accuratecy. The warroir and the thief both have mostly aoe skills on thier bows.
This description has been change it use to include a line about melee as well.
Are you guys saying you cant kill a target at range. As far as the unparrale part. Archery is about pin pont accuratecy. The warroir and the thief both have mostly aoe skills on thier bows.
And if their AoEs do more damage than our precise shots, which they do, imagine what their precise shots would do.
I find it easier to melee than to stay at 1200+ range and have arrows actually hit.
Longbow has slow arrows against moving enemies, obstruction, terrible maneuverability and adds zero to survivability. On top of that, in order to do max dps, you need to be in 1200+ range. At 1200+ range, you are not able to buff other teammates or receive their buffs.
I suggest that Longbow at max range deals a higher dps than MH sword. With this, Longbow will be more balanced that way. After all, MH sword has tons of maneuverability and survivability.
No. Melee weapons should always be higher dps than range weapons as you are in more danger in melee than at range.
This is not entirely true. If your in melee range against a class not spec’d for it, not carrying a melee weapon, or they just aren’t built for damage; your really in no danger at all. You in fact have a major advantage.
On the other hand, if your carrying a ranged weapon that still fires slow enough for people to easily side step, it should in fact, do far more damage. If the longbow actually was made to hit similar to the rifle, then I can understand it doing less damage than melee.
The problem with LB is the Arrow mechanics now the damage.
If the enemy has a range weapon and you are in melee and they CC you then you are doing 0 damage while with arange weapon you can still do damage.
My berserker longbow was critting a Guardian for 1.4k at max range. My maul wasn’t doing much better but at least it’s cleaving people besides that guardian I’m tickling.
I’d rather be caught in weapon swap cooldown with a GS than a longbow, anytime.
The only good thing I might have to say about LB is that it’s good for chasing squishy characters with no leaps.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.