Seems like the response is that because Rangers have access to a lot of dodges if properly equipped and can possibly manage their pets expertly enough to keep them alive and pounding, buffing rangers is a no-go because skilled players would be OP.
Yeah, makes sense. Especially since a Thief who doesn’t know any more than what move hits hardest can down someone in seconds.
How about an expert Thief? Being skilled with a class that gets permanent invisibility isn’t OP? How about Mesmers, even without culling? A bad Mesmer is still harder to take down than a bad Ranger.
In fact, Rangers are simple to take down unless they’re playing skilled and tactically.
The only place Rangers can excel is if a highly talented player is dueling. Literally their only option is to play conservatively. And then between your constant dodges and lack of DPS, by the time you’d have finished the okayish Elementalist you were fighting you’d have three of their buddies on your kitten
So this is it, then? No dungeon buffs because obviously everyone values the Ranger’s solo survivability and will take them for their complete lack of support and shoddy damage. An experienced player might even get too good at dungeons! That’d be like if Warriors could suddenly speed run CoF like… oh right.
Being a good Ranger is being pigeonholed into playing a low-damage survivalist (and a kitten good one at that if you plan to win anything). How many other classes are forced into a single option? Necros and condition damage? At least they can take someone down before their guild toddles along and cleans house.
tl;dr: The reasoning that ‘a very skilled Ranger is viable’ doesn’t work when your classes are designed to be viable for casual players, not just pros…. /especially/ if you’re forced into a playstyle that’s bad for cooperative play. You don’t have to be talented to do well with other classes; why is it OP if Rangers can be played successfully by less competitive players?
Disciple of Quag