Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Ranger balance: buff -> QQ -> nerf?
A sub optimal option for a sub optimal class? Subception!?
point 1: it is a bow. A bow shoots arrows. Want something else? get a musket or something, oh wait, rangers cant get those.
point 2: see point 1
point 3 : exploding trick arrows and flaming arrows of fiery death are already taken by other professions.
kitten, now I’m imagining how awesome it would look if rapid fire shot flaming arrows, or if barrage was like an arrow firestorm. Or if point blank shot were to shoot some kind of floral breeze at the enemy or some shiz. I can dream kitten.
I believe what you’re thinking of is what’s known in the GW2 vernacular as a “Warrior”
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Combustive_Shot
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Fan_of_Fire
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Smoldering_ArrowRangers can only shoot arrows really far, shoot a bunch of arrows really fast, or shoot an arrow really hard; all in the same stance. It not like the class has access to Nature Magic or anything…
More than likely he’s a GW1 vet who doesn’t understand how 250 years of lore made rangers forget how to use a lot of their skills (who ANet gave quite a few of to warriors):
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Burning_Arrow
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ignite_Arrows
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Incendiary_Arrows
http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Kindle_ArrowsIt’s a real shame that between GW1 and GW2 lore wise, Rangers forgot how to combine fire with arrows, gave away their preparations to thieves in the form of venoms, completely forgot stances and “mirror stancing” with the pet, forgot most of their good pet skills and bow skills in general, and completely forgot all of the amazing spirits with awesome abilities in favor of the tissue paper, have to follow you to keep up with combat instead of having amazing range and effects spirits that we have now.
It’s okay though I guess, because now we can use a 2 handed sword and 2 pets at a time (with arguably less than half the effectiveness they could have in GW1 combined together, but still).
Current iterations of the classes be kitten ed, because every single class in the game retains most of the capabilities they had in GW1 if they existed in GW1, except the ranger, who in the transition sacrificed almost everything that made them unique and in return didn’t receive any sort of compensation in the form of design or capabilities.
“Different games, different designs, blah blah blah, etc.” To that argument, I say that if everything was going to be different in this game but use the preexisting lore, then the least they could’ve done as courtesy is not call this the “ranger” class when any sort of resemblance to the GW1 class is a mere shell of what Rangers were truly capable of. Should’ve just went ahead and called the class “Beastmasters.”
Preach it brother preach! Preach it on high!
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
But…it is a better weapon. It provides the highest DPS of all weapons, which puts it at the top for PvE, where DPS is almost everything. In sPvP, it provides a high amount of dodging, particularly when paired with dagger.
There’s a reason why it’s listed in almost every meta build out there.
The mechanics of the auto attack are frustrating as hell, but you can’t argue with the results.
Also, there’s nothing about a “Ranger” that requires the class to be a ranged class. If you need some sources for why this is, I can provide them, but the “range” in the name has nothing to do with shooting arrows.
I think he is the new resident troll for this sub forum
1> that’s personal attack that is against the Forum T.O.S.
2> I’m not “new” to Guildwars or the community. You must be the new one if you’ve never noticed my contributions. I’ve been here since GW Guru was the only real discussion forum. I started playing in April 2005 and only took vacations when Anet was screwing up. (been taking a LOT of vacations from it lately). I’m more surprised you never noticed me on CD, b/c I sure remember watching you play on there a few times when that was my home server….
3> address the actual point. This franchise may have started out focused on the 4v4 or 6v6 tiny arena formats that the studio named itself after. But all of us have had to make adjustments over time as technology meets a much larger potential. Arena games were something we all did because the technology just wasn’t there to support any other format. It’s time to move on. This includes their balancing team. The Ranger was left behind and calling anyone who doesn’t find Arena “fun” anymore “QQ’ers” or bad at the game…. is ignoring the big picture here and just living in the past. Move on. Adapt. Don’t tell people who-expect-better for Ranger to adapt when you’re not willing to adapt yourselves. Try not to yell in all Caps either, it’s just as bad as calling calm rational people “trolls” and makes you look desperate. Use proof as your exclamation plz.
(edited by ilr.9675)
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
Ranger =/= Archer
Your disconnect with the reality of class design is striking, young one.
inb4 you copy pasta that horrendously outdated pre-launch description – yes we are the best ranged damage users. That still doesn’t mean that our ranged option is the best performing weaponset. Not even remotely so.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
You clearly don’t know what a ranger is dude.. lmao. What you’re thinking of is an archer, which is very different. A ranger is more of a warden, and in gw2 it’s a kind of warden/druid hybrid class. Sword IS a better weapon, goes to show how much you know about the class. If you’ve ever watched LotR, Aragorn is a ranger, and he used a greatsword 90% of the time. For the love of god stop confusing “ranger” with “archer”, people figured this out like last year.
If you want to be an archer that’s fine, ranger is the best class for it simply because it can use both bows. HOWEVER always remember if you use two bows you will always be outshined by much simpler builds that don’t limit themselves to ranged only. SB and LB don’t even have good synergy together as one is a raw power weapon for sniping and the other is more of a hybrid or condi weapon.
It’s been mathematically proven our melee does more DPS than our ranged. So given that, it’s foolish to assume that just because the class name has the word “Range” in it, our ranged is better. I suggest you go try out all of ranger’s weapons other than two and come back and make an educated post. Good day.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
I think he is the new resident troll for this sub forum
1> that’s personal attack that is against the Forum T.O.S.
2> I’m not “new” to Guildwars or the community. You must be the new one if you’ve never noticed my contributions. I’ve been here since GW Guru was the only real discussion forum. I started playing in April 2005 and only took vacations when Anet was screwing up. (been taking a LOT of vacations from it lately). I’m more surprised you never noticed me on CD, b/c I sure remember watching you play on there a few times when that was my home server….
3> address the actual point. This franchise may have started out focused on the 4v4 or 6v6 tiny arena formats that the studio named itself after. But all of us have had to make adjustments over time as technology meets a much larger potential. Arena games were something we all did because the technology just wasn’t there to support any other format. It’s time to move on. This includes their balancing team. The Ranger was left behind and calling anyone who doesn’t find Arena “fun” anymore “QQ’ers” or bad at the game…. is ignoring the big picture here and just living in the past. Move on. Adapt. Don’t tell people who expect better for Ranger to adapt when you’re not willing to adapt yourselves. Try not yell in all Caps either, it just as bad as calling calm rational people “trolls” and makes you look desperate. Use proof as your exclamation plz.
nice post, well thought out. Completely pointless and without any real message behind it short of snide remarks and arrogance. However, i don’t mind that.
I tell people to shut up, not because they shouldn’t voice their opinion, but because usually they voice their opinion in such a incoherrent and uninformed manner that they just cause drama rather then discussion. When presented with “proof” the same people usually start flailing their arms and flamebait…
You cannot ration with people that are outright unable to comprehend how one can do something. So it is more effective to just outline what they do wrong and leave them to reflect upon it.
I outlined that your continuous stubborn and rather harsh replies to several people stating that the ranger changes had already been posted by addressing your series of posts as a troll attempt, If i had known how oblivious you were to the current amount of avaliable information i would have treated you nicer.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
(edited by Prysin.8542)
I outlined that your continuous stubborn and rather harsh replies to several people stating that the ranger changes had already been posted by addressing your series of posts as a troll attempt, If i had known how oblivious you were to the current amount of avaliable information i would have treated you nicer.
But you don’t get to decide this. You’re not the Arbiter of who should and should not be insulted here to “make a point”. You don’t GET to tell people they’re stupid, trolls, OR incoherent. No one gets to do that here, and you need to come to terms with it and address their actual points. The reason I know you’re actually the “new one” here is that you would already know this protocol if you were watching their community discussions predating Beta closely and the reasons they shifted away from Fan-site-only discussions in the first place. They did not want people “poising the well” or escalating arguments like this in the first place b/c it just led to virtiol on both sides that always ended up eventually being directed right at Anet in even more personal attacks and hurtful comments about how bad they were at their own game.
If you actually support the Developers and their “new direction”, then this is a fact you need to accept and adjust to by taking more time in compiling your replies. Reconsider them a couple times and make sure you’re talking about all of the things Ranger can and cannot do. But mostly, stop attacking the messenger who might agree with a lot of the other things you think the ranger may be good at. If you can’t do that, then maybe the moderators will need to get involved to help you
(edited by ilr.9675)
Seriously what’s with this fascination with carrying two bows at once?
Has there ever been an archer, historically and contemporarily, who carries two bows at once?
I outlined that your continuous stubborn and rather harsh replies to several people stating that the ranger changes had already been posted by addressing your series of posts as a troll attempt, If i had known how oblivious you were to the current amount of avaliable information i would have treated you nicer.
But you don’t get to decide this. You’re not the Arbiter of who should and should not be insulted here to “make a point”. You don’t GET to tell people they’re stupid, trolls, OR incoherent. No one gets to do that here, and you need to come to terms with it and address their actual points. The reason I know you’re actually the “new one” here is that you would already know this protocol if you were watching their community discussions predating Beta closely and the reasons they shifted away from Fan-site-only discussions in the first place. They did not want people “poising the well” or escalating arguments like this in the first place b/c it just led to virtiol on both sides that always ended up eventually being directed right at Anet in even more personal attacks and hurtful comments about how bad they were at their own game.
If you actually support the Developers and their “new direction”, then this is a fact you need to accept and adjust to by taking more time in compiling your replies. Reconsider them a couple times and make sure you’re talking about all of the things Ranger can and cannot do. But mostly, stop attacking the messenger who might agree with a lot of the other things you think the ranger may be good at. If you can’t do that, then maybe the moderators will need to get involved to help you
If you make a post with arguments that a two year old would disagree with, then anybody has the liberty to point out the flaws in said arguments. Don’t pretend you are protected from criticism on the internet bud, get off that high horse of yours.
Looking at your post history you seem to say ranger’s are useless a few times, which leads me to assume, perhaps you aren’t new to the forums, but evidently if you believe that, you must be new to the class. And regardless of how long you have been here, your posts here aren’t backing that statement up. With a mix of ignorance and misinformation you make yourself look the exact opposite of what you say to be.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
I outlined that your continuous stubborn and rather harsh replies to several people stating that the ranger changes had already been posted by addressing your series of posts as a troll attempt, If i had known how oblivious you were to the current amount of avaliable information i would have treated you nicer.
But you don’t get to decide this. You’re not the Arbiter of who should and should not be insulted here to “make a point”. You don’t GET to tell people they’re stupid, trolls, OR incoherent. No one gets to do that here, and you need to come to terms with it and address their actual points. The reason I know you’re actually the “new one” here is that you would already know this protocol if you were watching their community discussions predating Beta closely and the reasons they shifted away from Fan-site-only discussions in the first place. They did not want people “poising the well” or escalating arguments like this in the first place b/c it just led to virtiol on both sides that always ended up eventually being directed right at Anet in even more personal attacks and hurtful comments about how bad they were at their own game.
If you actually support the Developers and their “new direction”, then this is a fact you need to accept and adjust to by taking more time in compiling your replies. Reconsider them a couple times and make sure you’re talking about all of the things Ranger can and cannot do. But mostly, stop attacking the messenger who might agree with a lot of the other things you think the ranger may be good at. If you can’t do that, then maybe the moderators will need to get involved to help you
sigh and the threats continue.
Point 1 → Just as you are in your full right to voice your opinion, so am i. You voiced your opinion, so did i. Are you going to go into a deeper discussion as to why your opinion, regardless of how it is voiced, is more or less appropriate or correct then mine?
Point 2 → You cannot discuss or in any form make any progress when the people in question have not done appropriate research on a subject to even voice a constructive opinion, let alone a thought out response when someone contests that opinion.
Point 3 → Continuous threats of moderation in any form can be seen as a sort of personal attack and such threatening behavior applied in order to subdue other members voicing an opinion against yours will probably not be any more well received then outright insults will.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Seriously what’s with this fascination with carrying two bows at once?
Has there ever been an archer, historically and contemporarily, who carries two bows at once?
Archers always had a melee sidearm. But because our name has “range” in it we are forbidden from carrying such a disgrace.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
I don’t understand why all I see in pvp is longbow campers that stay in their longbow in melee range when thats so far off the meta pvp builds for the class.
Its like everyone has a sick bow fetish except for me :o
Necromancer Main
Taking a break from GW2 to play various
Nintendo games..
Taking a break from GW2 to play various
Nintendo games..
I don’t understand why all I see in pvp is longbow campers that stay in their longbow in melee range when thats so far off the meta pvp builds for the class.
Its like everyone has a sick bow fetish except for me :o
Probably because most people that care about the meta don’t play ranger. =P
Seriously what’s with this fascination with carrying two bows at once?
Has there ever been an archer, historically and contemporarily, who carries two bows at once?
Archers always had a melee sidearm. But because our name has “range” in it we are forbidden from carrying such a disgrace.
^That’s what I always thought. A competent archer would carry a dagger or shortsword or a hatchet, in case things do get personal.
And Isn’t melee also a form of “range?” Like we have melee-range, short-range, and long-range?
And Isn’t melee also a form of “range?” Like we have melee-range, short-range, and long-range?
I like this, i like that fact that the Ranger has a large choice of ranges to fight at every where from traited longbow to short sword.
@Prysin did you not see the sign the says don’t feed the Trolls
And Isn’t melee also a form of “range?” Like we have melee-range, short-range, and long-range?
I like this, i like that fact that the Ranger has a large choice of ranges to fight at every where from traited longbow to short sword.
@Prysin did you not see the sign the says don’t feed the Trolls
I saw it, i just like to feed em until they get constipated
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
And Isn’t melee also a form of “range?” Like we have melee-range, short-range, and long-range?
I like this, i like that fact that the Ranger has a large choice of ranges to fight at every where from traited longbow to short sword.
@Prysin did you not see the sign the says don’t feed the Trolls
I saw it, i just like to feed em until they get constipated
/nerd
The fantasy ranger concept originated with Aragorn and Legolas. Aragorn used swords, Legolas used bows.
/nerd
Now kiss and make up.
Like they did.
Ranger can be many things
Legolas was a Warrior though, wasn’t he? Aragorn was the Ranger.
But that’s not really the point the above posters were trying to make really. The MMO/RPG genre pretty much set the stage that Rangers use bows. They didn’t use ‘archers’ because that’s just plain boring.
One would also expect that each Ranger weapon would be viable on their own just like every other class’s weapons are supposed to be viable on their own regardless of it being a Ranger, a bow or a sword.
Atherakia. Please define your idea of viable, i am truly interested in that opinion.
Edit: legolas was more of a rogue. Stealthy, deadly accurate, prefer either extreme range or extreme close quarters (hence dual elven daggers and bow)
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
Ranger =/= Archer
Your disconnect with the reality of class design is striking, young one.
inb4 you copy pasta that horrendously outdated pre-launch description – yes we are the best ranged damage users. That still doesn’t mean that our ranged option is the best performing weaponset. Not even remotely so.
This goes to the above poster as well as warriorjrd.8695…
Try this..
1. go to www.google.com
2. Type in Ranger in your search bar.
3. Click Images tab.
Q: What do you see?
Yes, clearly I am the one in “disconnect from reality” as you say..
One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS
We could just look at Anet’s vision for rangers…
“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.”
Unfortunately none of this is really optimal for a dungeons, although you could argue spirits have their place.
Personally I’ll use any weapon that is most optimal for DPS, but I can understand why some maybe disgruntled by less than optimal performance of other weaponry especially when it’s in the description of the class.
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
Ranger =/= Archer
Your disconnect with the reality of class design is striking, young one.
inb4 you copy pasta that horrendously outdated pre-launch description – yes we are the best ranged damage users. That still doesn’t mean that our ranged option is the best performing weaponset. Not even remotely so.This goes to the above poster as well as warriorjrd.8695…
Try this..
1. go to www.google.com
2. Type in Ranger in your search bar.
3. Click Images tab.
Q: What do you see?
Yes, clearly I am the one in “disconnect from reality” as you say..
Searchin google for “ranger” only gives you images of some ford pickups. This is what you need to search for:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&biw=1280&bih=214&site=imghp&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=yXUAVMKWEePO0QWe14CQCQ&q=d%26d+ranger&oq=DnD+ranger&gs_l=tablet-gws.1.0.0i10l3.98486.101968.0.103924.6.6.0.0.0.0.314.1427.0j1j4j1.6.0....0...1c.1.52.tablet-gws..1.5.1187.qNWtUNOt4AE
Why D&D? Because that is one of the core things this game, perhaps the entire MMORPG franchise is based upon. D&D is further inspired by Lord of the Rings, Silmarillion and The Hobbit. Stories that, while popular now, actually was published in
1937, which apparently is a few years before the internet.
This info, is old, it is been stated indirectly by devs through various interviews and the wiki. So before you try to be arrogant you should read up on a few facts, perhaps even check up on info pertaining this game.
Yes, rangers are commonly seen as proficient with a bow, however that is not their one and only weapon.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
“Yes, rangers are commonly seen as proficient with a bow, however that is not their one and only weapon.”
Did I ever mention that a bow was a rangers only weapon?
No, but a Ranger without a bow is not much of a ranger from any LORE perspective. It’s a rangers trademark, unless you are Chuck Norris. I’m pretty sure you aren’t Chuck…
Edit: Me personally, I would use daggers and knives before I used a sword as a Ranger.
One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS
Good question Prysin. I don’t know how I would define viable as it’s a totally subjective word. I would simply say that various other classes have niche roles to fill either due to the class or their specific weapon but when I try and determine that niche for the Ranger or their respective weapons I’m left wondering what it could be. Or if I can come up with one, it’s overly vague… like ‘pet class’ or ‘archer’.
For me, the day I hear a commander on teamspeak ask Rangers to do something will be the day I know Rangers are a viable class in guild wars 2. Hell, I’d say a day I don’t hear Rangers disparaged on Teamspeak may be enough for me to consider them viable in GW2.
We could just look at Anet’s vision for rangers…
“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.”
Unfortunately none of this is really optimal for a dungeons, although you could argue spirits have their place.
Personally I’ll use any weapon that is most optimal for DPS, but I can understand why some maybe disgruntled by less than optimal performance of other weaponry especially when it’s in the description of the class.
“rangers can adapt to any situation”
Funny how few rangers seem to be able to adapt to melee…
And the description is right. Rangers can bring down foes with their bows. They do have unparalleled damage with their bows. Just because they do more damage with the sword doesn’t mean this is untrue.
Another happy day on the Ranger forums.
Genuinely amazed to see we still argue over the definition of “Ranger”, especially since one of the main premises that this game is built on it breaking away from old MMO stereotypes, such as the Holy Trinity and clear cut roles for classes, and yet people are persistant in their belief that if the class isn’t exactly like a WoW Hunter, or Aragon, or Legolas, or whoever else, then it must be wrong.
I don’t get it… at all.
Cufufalating – Ranger / Part-Time Mesmer
Gunnar’s Hold
Gunnar’s Hold
Good question Prysin. I don’t know how I would define viable as it’s a totally subjective word. I would simply say that various other classes have niche roles to fill either due to the class or their specific weapon but when I try and determine that niche for the Ranger or their respective weapons I’m left wondering what it could be. Or if I can come up with one, it’s overly vague… like ‘pet class’ or ‘archer’.
For me, the day I hear a commander on teamspeak ask Rangers to do something will be the day I know Rangers are a viable class in guild wars 2. Hell, I’d say a day I don’t hear Rangers disparaged on Teamspeak may be enough for me to consider them viable in GW2.
play in EU then. They more often then not call for LB rangers to kill siege on walls, drop waterfields or (in the past) target commanders and focus em down.
In NA you never see this, and having played on both sides, i can with certainty say that every class is more appreciated in EU “meta”. Not saying rangers is in a good spot in WvW zerging (their ok, but need some more useful group functionality. AOE stability on pet swap pl0x).
Why i ask for your definition of viable is because that word, “viable”, is being thrown around like it is some sort of “proof of quality”. However what most people find “viable” will by a select vocal few not be found “viable” thus they preach it is useless.
Example – Water spirit.
I used to be among the “not viable” crowd on this healing skill. I found it useless, bland, unimaginative and not very helpful. Then one day i tried to use it, alongside my shout heal build, as a periphery backup system in WvW and i realized it is awesome.
Just looking around me, i saw green numbers from regen and water spirit proc everywhere. Sure i had to stay a little bit away from the heat, but the sheer radius of the spirit buff is so large that it allows players to pop in and out of range (thus picking up the “ability to proc” buff that lasts 6 seconds) and get a heal off.
Then i ran the spirit in Dry Top, and i realized that if i could get 2-3 rangers to run that spirit, alongside 1-2 shout heal warriors, we could facetank almost all the bosses with zero dead players. Simply due to the proc spam…
Then i tried it with my glassbow build in PvP, realized that with some clever positioning, i could use it to cover a node with the AOE proc while still being far enough away for the spirit to “gather negative attention”.
my point is, while most find things instantly “not viable” for some twisted reason, it is in more cases then not, actually a invalid statement. Things are more often then not, actually much better then perceived. This goes for the whole class.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
(edited by Prysin.8542)
What tier is this Prysin? I’ve found it ridiculously difficult to keep any of our AI alive on EU T1 match ups. The blobs are in excess of 60 people the majority of the time.
I wouldn’t use the term not viable, but you’d ask the question, Why Ranger (purely WvW composition) over another class? Most of the times when hearing the words Ranger over TS it’s usually followed by some sort of joke / laugh.
I enjoy playing my Ranger and would love to play it more, but unfortunately as you’ve also stated, we need a bit of help with our skills for this particular area of the game. This leaves me playing a different class most of the time simply because it’s more useful to my group / team.
The spirits (and pets) are a good example of something I’d consider to be unviable in WvW. The problems pets and spirits have in PvE are often overstated. World bosses less so as the pets and spirits still get dropped quick, but in dungeons things have been blown out of proportion.
But WvW in particular, the spirits and pets (and minions etc) are completely unviable in my opinion. The buffs being limited to 5 targets makes them less useful. The fact that they don’t prioritize the Ranger or their pet makes them less useful. But the simple fact that even basic AE or being crippled when running through a single arrow cart kills them outright makes them totally unviable in any WvW setting involved more than 3 players. It’s a similar issue in PvP where all 5 people are on the same node. Even in these situations they don’t hold up but it certainly is no where close to the WvW problems.
What tier is this Prysin? I’ve found it ridiculously difficult to keep any of our AI alive on EU T1 match ups. The blobs are in excess of 60 people the majority of the time.
I wouldn’t use the term not viable, but you’d ask the question, Why Ranger (purely WvW composition) over another class? Most of the times when hearing the words Ranger over TS it’s usually followed by some sort of joke / laugh.
I enjoy playing my Ranger and would love to play it more, but unfortunately as you’ve also stated, we need a bit of help with our skills for this particular area of the game. This leaves me playing a different class most of the time simply because it’s more useful to my group / team.
im a long time Desolation player, before that i was playing on Far Shiverpeaks (before the hackers took over). Things may have changed in the last 3-4 months that ive been in NA. however during season 2, ranger were (albeit by then WvW had become more toxic) still wanted for a few tasks.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
What tier is this Prysin? I’ve found it ridiculously difficult to keep any of our AI alive on EU T1 match ups. The blobs are in excess of 60 people the majority of the time.
I wouldn’t use the term not viable, but you’d ask the question, Why Ranger (purely WvW composition) over another class? Most of the times when hearing the words Ranger over TS it’s usually followed by some sort of joke / laugh.
I enjoy playing my Ranger and would love to play it more, but unfortunately as you’ve also stated, we need a bit of help with our skills for this particular area of the game. This leaves me playing a different class most of the time simply because it’s more useful to my group / team.
im a long time Desolation player, before that i was playing on Far Shiverpeaks (before the hackers took over). Things may have changed in the last 3-4 months that ive been in NA. however during season 2, ranger were (albeit by then WvW had become more toxic) still wanted for a few tasks.
Ah, a fellow Desolation Defender! Yes, I’d certainly agree with the toxic comment, I’ve even heard of commanders demanding no Rangers be a part of their raids. (Open PUG raids). Generally now though, I think waterfield (best in the game) is essentially our only meaningful task of late.
We shall see how the latest patch effects our overall kit we might find something that works in the future but this would just be the beginning.
In Guild Wars 1, rangers not only had poison arrows, but ignite arrows, and apply poison.
Too bad only rogues are allowed to apply poison in GW2… how i miss GW1 ranger..
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Serpent%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Stalker%27s_Strike
http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Poison_Volley
???
First skill is a sword ability, second skill is dagger, third skill is a 2 sec poison..
???
All 3 are poison skills. It doesn’t matter if it’s a bow skill or not (apply poison could be used with all weapons). And Poison Volley is a 10 second poison without condi duration increases when you use it correctly (at point blank range) and it has a 9 second cooldown without traits. This actually makes it more efficient at applying poison compared to Apply Poison since there is no cast time associated.
But the point is you said only “rogues” (lol) had access to poison, when it’s pretty clear that rangers have tons of access to poison in GW2.
My list didn’t include traps, pet skills, or even the master trait that makes poison more effective.
lol…
Point he was trying to make is that rangers have plenty of poison, much more than a “rogue”. We can keep 100% uptime on poison with one skill if you trait into marksmanship, like 80% uptime if you don’t. Saying rangers can’t poison is pretty false when we probably have the most in game, maybe a necro beats us. Not only that but we have a trait that makes our poisons stronger.
Except by using a “Bow”. Which is why most people picked the class to begin with. (FOTM Meta Sword Rangers dont count). Now this is the part where my opinion is my opinion, but I am a ranger who refuses to pick up a sword because that is not the class that I rolled.
I mean I was a huge fan of HE-MAN, but he was a warrior.. not a ranger..
http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/236x/93/46/4f/93464fd97b8ae2ac060eac718aa3a0e0.jpg
So because you refuse to use better weapons they don’t count? Well if you want to hurt yourself by using only bows then complain about poison, what do you expect? Rangers have plenty of poison, you simply refuse to use it, so instead of wanting more poison on ranged weapons, perhaps you should branch out a bit and play the class to it’s strengths.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
Ranger =/= Archer
Your disconnect with the reality of class design is striking, young one.
inb4 you copy pasta that horrendously outdated pre-launch description – yes we are the best ranged damage users. That still doesn’t mean that our ranged option is the best performing weaponset. Not even remotely so.This goes to the above poster as well as warriorjrd.8695…
Try this..
1. go to www.google.com
2. Type in Ranger in your search bar.
3. Click Images tab.
Q: What do you see?
Yes, clearly I am the one in “disconnect from reality” as you say..
i wish i could post an old post from the first days of my forum experience.
A ranger posted interesting facts about the “ranger”
But some examples
Prysin mentioned Legolas, the real Ranger of LotR was in fact aragorn. WHAT? he is a sword user but in the legends of tolkien ranger were trained in using bows AND swords.
In Past rangers were men from kings in order to secure landscapes and forests of their kingdom. That explains the German name of “Rangers” – Waldläufer – “Forest walker”.
and here a link to wikipedia to all ranger sites:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger
Show us a Dallas Ranger with a bow and all our arguments are invalid
Safi/Clio Del Ray |Ranger, Elonas Reach,
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Suggestions-Gemstore-Items/page/31#post4533037
the skrittfinisher was my idea!
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Suggestions-Gemstore-Items/page/31#post4533037
the skrittfinisher was my idea!
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
All the facepalm… At least do the effort to look up what a ranger IS before making such silly statements.
As for the lore, GW1 rangers were never forced to use bows. Although it was its main and, for the sake of lore, preferred weapon (preferred being the actual word used in GW1), there were several viable builds in both pve and pvp using spears, daggers, hammers etc. Anet even acknowledges this by giving the ranger boss in AC Story a hammer.
Ok…seriously? How many replies do we need to restate the same thing, lol.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
All the facepalm… At least do the effort to look up what a ranger IS before making such silly statements.
As for the lore, GW1 rangers were never forced to use bows. Although it was its main and, for the sake of lore, preferred weapon (preferred being the actual word used in GW1), there were several viable builds in both pve and pvp using spears, daggers, hammers etc. Anet even acknowledges this by giving the ranger boss in AC Story a hammer.
Correction, in GW1 Rangers WERE forced to use bows. Ranger/Warriors, like the Aragorn reference, could use other weapons effectively. Make sure your information is completely accurate next time. =)
One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS
Seriously what’s with this fascination with carrying two bows at once?
Has there ever been an archer, historically and contemporarily, who carries two bows at once?
ikr?
if I could I would carry 8 bows, 14 quivers, and a crossbow for safety. Master of range and fumbling about. Yeah, Death from afar: my own death as I drop all my bows on the ground trying to decide which one to use.
Sword is not a better weapon, its barely a rangers weapon. Lore matters, in Guild Wars Lore Rangers used bows. If you prefer other weapons more power to you..
However, I do not choose to accept it and play the class for its so called “strengths”. I will play it as a RANGER and maybe in time it will be fixed. Until then, I intend to use the forums for the purpose they were created. To discuss my concerns, to the community and to the game Developers.
All the facepalm… At least do the effort to look up what a ranger IS before making such silly statements.
As for the lore, GW1 rangers were never forced to use bows. Although it was its main and, for the sake of lore, preferred weapon (preferred being the actual word used in GW1), there were several viable builds in both pve and pvp using spears, daggers, hammers etc. Anet even acknowledges this by giving the ranger boss in AC Story a hammer.
Correction, in GW1 Rangers WERE forced to use bows. Ranger/Warriors, like the Aragorn reference, could use other weapons effectively. Make sure your information is completely accurate next time. =)
Low level gw1 weapons lacked reqs so anyone could use any weapon. Once the reqs came into play you got a second prof so every weapon was still open for use.
GW1 rampage as one builds with hammers, spears or daggers. Shield sets, energy sets, staff sets for spirits etc. All viable on ranger. You were not forced to use bows and in many cases bows were suboptimal.
If you care so much then why not complain about s/d theives d/d eles, mesmers, pistols, rifles, swimming, jumping, endurance, and maybe even the gold system. If lore matters don’t pick and choose what bits matter.
Ranger | Elementalist
(edited by Ryan.9387)
Seriously what’s with this fascination with carrying two bows at once?
Has there ever been an archer, historically and contemporarily, who carries two bows at once?
ikr?
if I could I would carry 8 bows, 14 quivers, and a crossbow for safety. Master of range and fumbling about. Yeah, Death from afar: my own death as I drop all my bows on the ground trying to decide which one to use.
Meanwhile the Warrior rushing you with his massive hammer, suffers critical damage on his back from the massive Greatsword he tried to hold as a secondary weapon.
Point noted, that would make a pretty funny spoof video… lol but back on topic.
One day.. all of you shall submit to the Flame Legion…. to me… I AM BLADABOS
We could just look at Anet’s vision for rangers…
“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.”
Unfortunately none of this is really optimal for a dungeons, although you could argue spirits have their place.
Personally I’ll use any weapon that is most optimal for DPS, but I can understand why some maybe disgruntled by less than optimal performance of other weaponry especially when it’s in the description of the class.
“rangers can adapt to any situation”
Funny how few rangers seem to be able to adapt to melee…
And the description is right. Rangers can bring down foes with their bows. They do have unparalleled damage with their bows. Just because they do more damage with the sword doesn’t mean this is untrue.
The thing is, we don’t have unparalleled damage with our bows. Warrior longbow with celestial or even full condi would probably out dps ranger LB, however ranger LB would have more burst, but in some fights you want slower reliable dps rather than a quick burst. Thief SB can probably come pretty close to our SB as well. It definitely beats it power wise, and ranger SB would only come out on top with celestial or condi.
The only reason we are “unparalleled” archers is because we can use both of the bows, but the other classes that use the same bows, use them just as well and sometimes better.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
What tier is this Prysin? I’ve found it ridiculously difficult to keep any of our AI alive on EU T1 match ups. The blobs are in excess of 60 people the majority of the time.
I wouldn’t use the term not viable, but you’d ask the question, Why Ranger (purely WvW composition) over another class? Most of the times when hearing the words Ranger over TS it’s usually followed by some sort of joke / laugh.
I enjoy playing my Ranger and would love to play it more, but unfortunately as you’ve also stated, we need a bit of help with our skills for this particular area of the game. This leaves me playing a different class most of the time simply because it’s more useful to my group / team.
im a long time Desolation player, before that i was playing on Far Shiverpeaks (before the hackers took over). Things may have changed in the last 3-4 months that ive been in NA. however during season 2, ranger were (albeit by then WvW had become more toxic) still wanted for a few tasks.
Ah, a fellow Desolation Defender! Yes, I’d certainly agree with the toxic comment, I’ve even heard of commanders demanding no Rangers be a part of their raids. (Open PUG raids). Generally now though, I think waterfield (best in the game) is essentially our only meaningful task of late.
We shall see how the latest patch effects our overall kit we might find something that works in the future but this would just be the beginning.
Even though our water field lasts the longest, in a lot of scenarios it isn’t the best. Given some scenarios it’s quite good, but in wvw I would have to say ele waters beat us out by quite a margin, especially when they trait to support. Two water fields even though they last about the same time as our one combined, is often better when you stagger them. If you throw one down and everybody blasts, then wait 16s until the blasts are off cooldown and drop the second, that’s two full rounds of blasts, and ours is still on CD for 9s. Not to mention frontline ranger isn’t the greatest right now (it will be much better after patch with signet changes) and that’s where you would need to be to drop it because it has no ground target.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
Warriorjrd hit the problem square on the head and points out why the Ranger’s water field isn’t as valuable as you’d think it is. In reality, the only time we use them anymore is when PvD’ing and just healing through arrow cart spam.
In a perfect world, you’d think the Ranger would act as a vital rally location for a melee train. The idea being the melee train goes into the enemy zerg in either a GvG or Zerg Busting function. They do the damage and pull out for re-empowers. When rallying, they could rally on the Ranger’s location which would allow a low CD, large duration water field to be bursted to top the group back up.
The problem with this is the Ranger lacks adequate survivability to sustain themselves against not only the periphery classes but also the opposing teams backline. They also lack the ability to reposition themselves safely so the melee train can rally in more strategic locations.
In other words, very rarely will your group move forward 900 yards, hit some people, and move directly back 900 yards to the Ranger. Instead they’ll likely move forward 1500 yards to hit the opposing groups back end and force their DPS classes along the periphery which gives their thieves and dps warriors more targets to choose. Meanwhile the opposing team probably did the same but the Ranger died due to being trained or he fled to the periphery which is not an ideal rally location to re-empower.
Just in my experience this is how we’ve attempted to use Rangers in the past with not so great results.
Warriorjrd hit the problem square on the head and points out why the Ranger’s water field isn’t as valuable as you’d think it is. In reality, the only time we use them anymore is when PvD’ing and just healing through arrow cart spam.
In a perfect world, you’d think the Ranger would act as a vital rally location for a melee train. The idea being the melee train goes into the enemy zerg in either a GvG or Zerg Busting function. They do the damage and pull out for re-empowers. When rallying, they could rally on the Ranger’s location which would allow a low CD, large duration water field to be bursted to top the group back up.
The problem with this is the Ranger lacks adequate survivability to sustain themselves against not only the periphery classes but also the opposing teams backline. They also lack the ability to reposition themselves safely so the melee train can rally in more strategic locations.
In other words, very rarely will your group move forward 900 yards, hit some people, and move directly back 900 yards to the Ranger. Instead they’ll likely move forward 1500 yards to hit the opposing groups back end and force their DPS classes along the periphery which gives their thieves and dps warriors more targets to choose. Meanwhile the opposing team probably did the same but the Ranger died due to being trained or he fled to the periphery which is not an ideal rally location to re-empower.
Just in my experience this is how we’ve attempted to use Rangers in the past with not so great results.
Ranger has the ability to be mobile and get to a safe location, but that’s unnecessary when you take into account two 1200 range fields from an ele.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
I personally don’t find them mobile enough to both defend themselves and reposition reliably to do their specific task. But that’s just my opinion.
We could just look at Anet’s vision for rangers…
“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.”
Unfortunately none of this is really optimal for a dungeons, although you could argue spirits have their place.
Personally I’ll use any weapon that is most optimal for DPS, but I can understand why some maybe disgruntled by less than optimal performance of other weaponry especially when it’s in the description of the class.
“rangers can adapt to any situation”
Funny how few rangers seem to be able to adapt to melee…
And the description is right. Rangers can bring down foes with their bows. They do have unparalleled damage with their bows. Just because they do more damage with the sword doesn’t mean this is untrue.
The thing is, we don’t have unparalleled damage with our bows. Warrior longbow with celestial or even full condi would probably out dps ranger LB, however ranger LB would have more burst, but in some fights you want slower reliable dps rather than a quick burst. Thief SB can probably come pretty close to our SB as well. It definitely beats it power wise, and ranger SB would only come out on top with celestial or condi.
The only reason we are “unparalleled” archers is because we can use both of the bows, but the other classes that use the same bows, use them just as well and sometimes better.
actually, no, warrior cannot surpass ranger in pure ranged DPS.
Even if running rampagers or celestial, the sheer difference in coefficiencies not to mention projectile hit rate (warrior fires very slow projectiles) and range is low.
While skills like Arcing Arrow got one hell of a high coefficiency, combustive shot (apart from being ridiculously easy to avoid the full damage of it) and the AA has low coefficiencies. Fan of Fire has a good coefficiency of 1.2, however that is a 3x skill (like AA is 2x) meaning the projected damage of the skill is when 3x projectiles hit ONE target. Thus it does 1/3rd damage/arrow, with 1/3rd coefficiency (0.4) pr arrow.
Sure burning hurts, but slow moving and easily avoided arrows alongside poor coefficiencies allows ranger to deal more damage.
In comparison if both professions use their mechanic (IE Pet DPS + ranger DPS vs Warrior using burst).
Ranger will have a coefficiency of longbow AA + spider AA a rangers constant DPS coefficiency is 1.3364/1 second (time according to wiki)
Against warriors 0.66/1.19 second (time according to wiki)
Even if adding in other warrior attacks like combustive shot (0.33 coeff, 5 pulses) and arcing arrow (2.0 coeff) the total time it takes to build up that adrenaline, alongside the warrior having fewer sheer damage modifiers avaliable in a pure DPS build means that ranger will pull ahead on ranged DPS.
In terms of ranged single target DPS the “leaderboard” has since before december last year been;
LB Ranger
GS Mesmer
LB Warrior
SB Thief
tha rest
Ranger IS the best ranged damage dealer. The most reliable and tanky? that is another discussion entirely.
Lv 80 Guard, Ranger, Ele, Thief, warr, engi
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
Currently @ some T1 server in EU
We could just look at Anet’s vision for rangers…
“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.”
Unfortunately none of this is really optimal for a dungeons, although you could argue spirits have their place.
Personally I’ll use any weapon that is most optimal for DPS, but I can understand why some maybe disgruntled by less than optimal performance of other weaponry especially when it’s in the description of the class.
“rangers can adapt to any situation”
Funny how few rangers seem to be able to adapt to melee…
And the description is right. Rangers can bring down foes with their bows. They do have unparalleled damage with their bows. Just because they do more damage with the sword doesn’t mean this is untrue.
The thing is, we don’t have unparalleled damage with our bows. Warrior longbow with celestial or even full condi would probably out dps ranger LB, however ranger LB would have more burst, but in some fights you want slower reliable dps rather than a quick burst. Thief SB can probably come pretty close to our SB as well. It definitely beats it power wise, and ranger SB would only come out on top with celestial or condi.
The only reason we are “unparalleled” archers is because we can use both of the bows, but the other classes that use the same bows, use them just as well and sometimes better.
actually, no, warrior cannot surpass ranger in pure ranged DPS.
Even if running rampagers or celestial, the sheer difference in coefficiencies not to mention projectile hit rate (warrior fires very slow projectiles) and range is low.
While skills like Arcing Arrow got one hell of a high coefficiency, combustive shot (apart from being ridiculously easy to avoid the full damage of it) and the AA has low coefficiencies. Fan of Fire has a good coefficiency of 1.2, however that is a 3x skill (like AA is 2x) meaning the projected damage of the skill is when 3x projectiles hit ONE target. Thus it does 1/3rd damage/arrow, with 1/3rd coefficiency (0.4) pr arrow.Sure burning hurts, but slow moving and easily avoided arrows alongside poor coefficiencies allows ranger to deal more damage.
In comparison if both professions use their mechanic (IE Pet DPS + ranger DPS vs Warrior using burst).
Ranger will have a coefficiency of longbow AA + spider AA a rangers constant DPS coefficiency is 1.3364/1 second (time according to wiki)
Against warriors 0.66/1.19 second (time according to wiki)
Even if adding in other warrior attacks like combustive shot (0.33 coeff, 5 pulses) and arcing arrow (2.0 coeff) the total time it takes to build up that adrenaline, alongside the warrior having fewer sheer damage modifiers avaliable in a pure DPS build means that ranger will pull ahead on ranged DPS.In terms of ranged single target DPS the “leaderboard” has since before december last year been;
LB Ranger
GS Mesmer
LB Warrior
SB Thief
tha restRanger IS the best ranged damage dealer. The most reliable and tanky? that is another discussion entirely.
If you’re going to say that LB warrior doesn’t out DPS ranger LB because it’s attacks are easy to dodge, however true it may be, you never take into account how easy something is to dodge when calculating DPS. If that was the case trap ranger does no damage because I just walk out of the circles =p Also literally just tested it out, a rabid LB war VS a zerk LB ranger have about the same DPS. Tested on heavy golems in spvp, sometimes I killed mine faster, sometimes my war friend killed his faster.
Now obviously if you’re talking about a real fight then dodging is going to come into play, but if you try and say AOE rings are a no go because you can walk out of them, barrage is off the list. And in a hectic fight animations aren’t really visible unless you are looking right at that target. Besides, my whole point was that despite being “unparalleled archers” according to Anet, other classes can use their bows just as well, which they can. In fact thief SB is probably higher DPS than ranger SB, at least with power.
One more thing is that after patch with the signet and LB changes ranger LB will have infinitely more burst than warrior LB and probably more DPS, but only slightly those conditions do hurt, and warriors can get bleeds on crit too. However conditions have no burst ability, so if you wanted to kill something quickly ranger LB will always be better.
It is not what you do, but how and why you do it that counts.
(edited by warriorjrd.8695)