Guild Wars 2

This is part one of two on my complaints about ascended weapons. The other one will be in general discussion about how it unfairly benefits power builds over condition builds.

With that said, Rangers do not have the same ability to utilize the potential of ascended weapons as other classes do. This is because of our pet mechanic. When calculating out how much damage will be dealt, the game will use the following formula:

Damage done = (Weapon Strength) * Power * (skill-specific coefficient) / (target’s Armor)

Like any other upgrade in quality, the weapon strength and power are the two variables effected in the above equation. The problem is that Damage Done (exotic) versus Damage Done (ascended) will yield a similar ratio regardless of which class you use for any given combination of weapons for any particular skill. You can think of it as a before and after that could be tested out for every skill because each has a different skill-specific coefficient. This itself doesn’t need to be calculated out because it would be both tedious and trivial.

What does matter is that the skill-specific coefficient does not change. This impacts rangers more than anyone because as a class, we have lower skill-specific coefficients across the board due to our pet being a factor in our DPS. So while our damage before and after may be of a similar ratio to other classes, the difference in how hard they hit will be greater in comparison to the difference in how hard we hit. Mathematically, this is equivalent to saying:

D*w-Dw > D*r-Dr

where

Dw = Damage done by warrior wearing exotic equips
D*w = Damage done by warrior wearing ascended equips
Dr = Damage done by ranger wearing exotic equips
D*r = Damage done by ranger wearing ascended equips

I picked warrior at random, but you could substitute any class and this would still be the case. The point I’m trying to make here isn’t that they do more damage. It’s that these classes that outdamage us already are thrown even further ahead of us than before with the new ascended gear, and this is all due to the fact that our skill-specific coefficients are lower in general as a class.

It isn’t a small increase either. Looking at weapon strength of a couple weapons:

Exotic Sword: 905 -1000
Ascended Sword: 950-1050
Exotic Dagger: 924 – 981
Ascended Dagger: 970 – 1030

That’s an entire 5% increase over before just from the “weapon strength variable”. Full ascended power gear will add quite a bit more “power” variable. Take then the greatsword skill-specific coefficients for the autoattacks of both rangers and warriors:

Warrior GS autoattack has coefficients of 259/259/333 for the chain with chain time of 2.4s
Ranger GS autoattack has coefficients of 203/203/240 for the chain with a chain time of 2.56s

So the damage is already outclassed (supposed to be made up by pet) by around 20%, and ascended gear is increasing it by a minimum of 5%. That means that even if they aren’t taking advantage of the power attribute component of ascended weapons, they are doing a minimum of 1% more damage in comparison to the ranger just by picking up a new weapon. With full ascended gear after the next update, this will be increased by another 12% (1130 major attributes full ascended versus 1003 major attributes full exotic).

The end result is that other classes are getting a 2.5%+ increase in damage (with respect to rangers) just because they are other classes. Meaning that if we do x% more damage when transitioning from exotic to ascended, they will do (x+2.5)% more damage.

This is yet another case where our pets mechanic is making us less effective as a class. It isn’t just another ranger QQing about broken pets. Even if the pets were working, the fact that part of our damage consideration is placed in pets themselves – something that does not scale with increase in gear quality – is yet another shortcoming by the development team and a hit to the ranger class as a whole.

I apologize if my wording was tough to follow at some parts. Perhaps some people who understand what I’m trying to say may say it more clearly in the comments below.

Thanks again, ANet.

They need to make them scale with our gear or revamp rangers so our damage isn’t based on assuming the pet is alive, in the right place and actually hitting the target. But we all know how Anet is with rangers, so yeah.

You didn’t need to make a long mathematical post about this. It’s a well known problem in many MMOs and most rangers were resigned to this when ascended jewelry came out. If we could get all the classes balanced with exotic gear we could then start seeing what happens with ascended, but even the first stage of balance (SPvP) is missing.

+5 to 10 of primary stats to pet for each ascended gear equipped?

Stooperdale.3560:

You didn’t need to make a long mathematical post about this. It’s a well known problem in many MMOs and most rangers were resigned to this when ascended jewelry came out. If we could get all the classes balanced with exotic gear we could then start seeing what happens with ascended, but even the first stage of balance (SPvP) is missing.

I don’t care about rangers in other MMOs. I don’t play other MMOs. This one is the one that’s bothering me, and the math is there to show why. Resign yourself if you’d like. I’m perfectly happy telling ANet what I’m unhappy with tyvm.

Agree completely, this is so basic and obvious that it blows my mind daily to see this is still an issue.

People have been talking about this since last year when Ascended was announced. Don’t expect it to be changed

Being Ranger is Suffering.

Totally agree this needs to be addressed.

I feel like the reason this hasn’t already been addressed is that doing math and tweaking numbers isn’t fun for the balance devs. Being the guy who fixed ascended weapons numbers isn’t as sexy the guy who came up with “a pet ‘catching your scent’ might be a cool way to insinuate some anti-stealth into the game.”

I also agree that this needs to be addressed. They need to stop neglecting the class mechanic of the ranger and put in the extra work that is necessary to keep it up to date and competitive.

This issue was raised when ascended weapons were first mentioned to be coming out. Without proper pet scaling you run into problems both for this class and against it. Look at the BM and pet nerfs this class received a ways back. They were a direct result of pets not scaling with their owner’s gear. Look at the complaints this class received with the spirit ranger builds during the sPvP tournments… also a lot to do with our pets not scaling with gear.

If this class is going to continue to be handicapped because it has a barely functional pet in a game with a real gear treadmill, ANet needs to stay on top of class balance and adjust our pet’s stats and health accordingly.

Either introduce proper pet scaling so our stats have a direct impact on how our pet functions (a bunker pet has more armor but less dps where a glass ranger would have a glass pet that hit like a truck) or be aware that with each new wave of gear released our pets need to have a stat increase accross the board.

I often wonder if ANet even realizes this class exists as random as some of the changes we seem to receive.

They’ll probably just turn up our skill co-efficients to balance it. Works for everyone but BM rangers, then they’ll buff the BM line. Easy peasy.

Kilger.5490:

Easy peasy.

The impression I get is that most days they can’t even get that right, even when they do care enough. Just look at how the LS patches break things on a bi-weekly basis. There is no way they will ever fix pets/bump skill coefficients; they are neither competent nor caring enough.

Kilger.5490:

They’ll probably just turn up our skill co-efficients to balance it. Works for everyone but BM rangers, then they’ll buff the BM line. Easy peasy.

That would be a great help and should be done.

:X these threads makes me sad for my ranger.

I see what problem you mean, and I agree with it, but… what coefficient are ppl talking about all the time? From what I quickly checked on wiki, we aren’t as kittened as most ppl write here. I think weakest coefficient (compared to other classes) we have is GS auto attack. On the other hand LB AA is pretty good when comparing to warr (!) ranged weapons AAs. Speaking about coefficient only ofc, base dmg and atk speed are different topics.

Ya, pretty much. Ranger gets all the burdens of the pet with few of the advantages.

Terkov.4138:

I see what problem you mean, and I agree with it, but… what coefficient are ppl talking about all the time? From what I quickly checked on wiki, we aren’t as kittened as most ppl write here. I think weakest coefficient (compared to other classes) we have is GS auto attack. On the other hand LB AA is pretty good when comparing to warr (!) ranged weapons AAs. Speaking about coefficient only ofc, base dmg and atk speed are different topics.

Shortbow and Longbow for Ranger are the only 2 weapons that are better than their alternates for other classes for the #1 skill. The problem is how much of a Ranger’s damage comes from #1 over a span of 1minute? Compare that to how much of a Thief or Warrior’s damage comes from their #1 over the same span of time. You’ll find that the Ranger’s damage is all low/moderate damage whereas the other classes are capable of extreme burst and much more damage over time.

According to wiki, rangers LB has better coefficient on rapid fire and long range shot (rest skills are utility,so didn’t even check them), than thief or warrior on their ranged weapons, both AA and dps skills. As I said, I know base dmg is… you know what. Someone mentioned coefficients, so I’m trying to find out exactly which ones are so bad.

Just checked sword, as our best dps weapon. It’s much worse there, but still not as tragic as some people try to show it.

I’m not whiteknighting here or saying anything like “ranger is fine, l2p”, but when discussing class, I expect others to discuss real numbers, and apply them to reality, not look at warriors 100b coefficient and say all rangers weapons suck :P

Terkov.4138:

According to wiki, rangers LB has better coefficient on rapid fire and long range shot (rest skills are utility,so didn’t even check them), than thief or warrior on their ranged weapons, both AA and dps skills. As I said, I know base dmg is… you know what. Someone mentioned coefficients, so I’m trying to find out exactly which ones are so bad.

Just checked sword, as our best dps weapon. It’s much worse there, but still not as tragic as some people try to show it.

I’m not whiteknighting here or saying anything like “ranger is fine, l2p”, but when discussing class, I expect others to discuss real numbers, and apply them to reality, not look at warriors 100b coefficient and say all rangers weapons suck :P

I know Rapid Fire’s Coefficient is actually the sum of the coefficients of each individual shot. Outside of PvP(including organized WvW) people hate PBS for knocking people out of AoEs/stacks. As for the saving grace of the sword, it’s DPS saves its lower coefficient similar to shortbow pre-animation fix.

Bombsaway.7198:

Kilger.5490:

They’ll probably just turn up our skill co-efficients to balance it. Works for everyone but BM rangers, then they’ll buff the BM line. Easy peasy.

That would be a great help and should be done.

I’m still waiting for them to do this.

Terkov.4138:

According to wiki, rangers LB has better coefficient on rapid fire and long range shot (rest skills are utility,so didn’t even check them), than thief or warrior on their ranged weapons, both AA and dps skills. As I said, I know base dmg is… you know what. Someone mentioned coefficients, so I’m trying to find out exactly which ones are so bad.

You can’t just look at the coefficients, you also have to look at the attack rate (or cooldowns for non-autoattack skills) and condition damage. I need to retest since ranger LB autoattack got its attack rate sped up from 1.25 sec to 1.00 sec. But:

• If I incorporate that speedup mathematically and compare just autoattack, ranger longbow beats out warrior longbow.
• But if you start cycling in the warrior LB2 and F1 skills, warrior wins.
• Rapid Fire’s damage increase is entirely due to the vulnerability – the high coefficient is canceled out by the 4.5 sec skill activation time and its base DPS is the same as autoattack.
• Barrage is crippled by a 30 sec cooldown. Warrior LB2 is on a 6 sec cooldown (F1 has a 10 sec cooldown, but is limited by adrenaline in practice).
• To top it off, warrior LB is effective at any range; ranger must maintain 900+ range to remain competitive.
• Ranger wins (easily) if the pet is able to attack a stationary target.

From a balance perspective though, if you leave rate of fire unchanged, you can tweak DPS by only tweaking damage coefficient. That’s what people are referring to when they say any weakness incurred by the pet can be offset by tweaking up ranger weapon skill damage coefficients.

My personal take on it is that they should just implement collars that boost pet stats. Yeah it’ll suck that we need to get 7 ascended armor pieces instead of 6, but I’m willing to overlook it to maintain the fiction of the ranger and pet being a team. It’s certainly preferable to the current situation where the pets get nothing.

I don’t have the gold to do the whole test so I am just gonna used build editor to test it (since it’s pretty accurate).
Full ascended berserker GS:
Ranger: 1473 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1938 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2359 dmg over 2.5s

Full exo berserker GS:
Ranger: 1352 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1780 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2166 dmg over 2.5s

The percentage of increased in damage from exo to ascended:
Ranger: 8.949%
Warrior: 8.876%
Guardian: 8.9104%

Clearly that Ranger gain the most benefit from going ascended.

Your feline (untraited from bm):
Slash: 613

Let’s assume that a ranger use gs and has feline pet that use slash:
Full exo berserker Ranger: Ranger: 1352 dmg over 2.56s + 613
Full ascended berserker Ranger: 1473 dmg over 2.56s + 613

By mere sheer raw damage, there is no class that can outhit ranger in consistent damage since there is 2 damage output (when the pet is up).
Here is the new equation that you might look at. When transcending exo gear to ascended, all class gain benefit of min 5% in damage. While Ranger gain min 5% in damage + y where y is the pet he chose.

Edit:
I also used to hate pet system since they are always down but if you think about it. if your pet can remain active or stats increase from what they currently are, ranger will be the best dps class. Pet has recharge time of 20s (untraited) if down will be 60s (untraited).
But when you down and rally, your pet is also up. F2 may be broken but your pet has other 3 skills that you can’t interrupt (nor control). Please spare some thinking on how imbalance a ranger class and its pet.

Jacks.5367:

I don’t have the gold to do the whole test so I am just gonna used build editor to test it (since it’s pretty accurate).
Full ascended berserker GS:
Ranger: 1473 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1938 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2359 dmg over 2.5s

Full exo berserker GS:
Ranger: 1352 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1780 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2166 dmg over 2.5s

The percentage of increased in damage from exo to ascended:
Ranger: 8.949%
Warrior: 8.876%
Guardian: 8.9104%

Your statistics support what I originally said and (ironically) actually give the opposite conclusion than the one you came to. The ranger will not gain the most going to ascended.

Take the ascended damage of each example you just gave and subtract the exotic damage…

Ranger: 1473 – 1352 = 121 more damage
Warrior: 1938 – 1780 = 158 more damage
Guardian: 2359 – 2166 = 193 more damage

The percentage increase in damage from exotic to ascended is about the same for each class (which is what I said in OP). What isn’t the same is how each increase affects the damage the classes do. Since the other classes already do more damage, they gain more from it. This puts rangers even further behind in dps ability than they were before.

Jacks.5367:

Clearly that Ranger gain the most benefit from going ascended.

Clearly not ;(

Kilger.5490:

They’ll probably just turn up our skill co-efficients to balance it. Works for everyone but BM rangers, then they’ll buff the BM line. Easy peasy.

Pretty sure you aren’t playing a game run by the same devs we are.

Faux Sheaux.6179:

Jacks.5367:

I don’t have the gold to do the whole test so I am just gonna used build editor to test it (since it’s pretty accurate).
Full ascended berserker GS:
Ranger: 1473 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1938 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2359 dmg over 2.5s

Full exo berserker GS:
Ranger: 1352 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1780 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2166 dmg over 2.5s

The percentage of increased in damage from exo to ascended:
Ranger: 8.949%
Warrior: 8.876%
Guardian: 8.9104%

Your statistics support what I originally said and (ironically) actually give the opposite conclusion than the one you came to. The ranger will not gain the most going to ascended.

Take the ascended damage of each example you just gave and subtract the exotic damage…

Ranger: 1473 – 1352 = 121 more damage
Warrior: 1938 – 1780 = 158 more damage
Guardian: 2359 – 2166 = 193 more damage

The percentage increase in damage from exotic to ascended is about the same for each class (which is what I said in OP). What isn’t the same is how each increase affects the damage the classes do. Since the other classes already do more damage, they gain more from it. This puts rangers even further behind in dps ability than they were before.

Jacks.5367:

Clearly that Ranger gain the most benefit from going ascended.

Clearly not ;(

Someone got served.

Faux Sheaux.6179:

Jacks.5367:

I don’t have the gold to do the whole test so I am just gonna used build editor to test it (since it’s pretty accurate).
Full ascended berserker GS:
Ranger: 1473 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1938 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2359 dmg over 2.5s

Full exo berserker GS:
Ranger: 1352 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1780 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2166 dmg over 2.5s

The percentage of increased in damage from exo to ascended:
Ranger: 8.949%
Warrior: 8.876%
Guardian: 8.9104%

Your statistics support what I originally said and (ironically) actually give the opposite conclusion than the one you came to. The ranger will not gain the most going to ascended.

Take the ascended damage of each example you just gave and subtract the exotic damage…

Ranger: 1473 – 1352 = 121 more damage
Warrior: 1938 – 1780 = 158 more damage
Guardian: 2359 – 2166 = 193 more damage

The percentage increase in damage from exotic to ascended is about the same for each class (which is what I said in OP). What isn’t the same is how each increase affects the damage the classes do. Since the other classes already do more damage, they gain more from it. This puts rangers even further behind in dps ability than they were before.

Jacks.5367:

Clearly that Ranger gain the most benefit from going ascended.

Clearly not ;(

Gotta love the distinction between relative and absolute

In term of no, obviously ranger has lower no. Ranger has the lowest coefficient among the 3. Ranger has total coefficient of 1.75, Warrior has 2.3 and Guardian has 2.8 for their skill 1. You are looking at no for effectiveness

Here is example of effectiveness:
Box A can fit 10 apples and it has 7 apples in it. 70% space used. 7/10
Box B can fit 10 apples and it has 8 apples in it. 80% space used. 8/10
Each box expand to be able to store 5 more apples and given 5 more apples.
Box A has now used 80% of its space. 12/10
Box B has now used 86% of its space. 13/10
Each box given additional expansion of 5 and given 5 more apples again.
Box A has now used 85% of its space. 17/10
Box B has now used 90% of its space. 18/10

Box A willl always be inferior to Box B. But when they are improved, box A will always be better since the leap is 10% to 5% in relative to 6% to 4%.

In the scenario box A is ranger and warrior is box B. Ranger has more effectiveness in scaling because ranger has lowest output. If you are looking at no, obviously ranger lost out since ranger will never be able to outdo the other class due to their fix coefficient.

You can’t measure effectiveness by no. If you are looking at benefit then it has to be percentage increase. Isn’t this thread is all about the effectiveness of transcending from exo to ascended?

Pet base dmg should be adjusted each time new ascended item types become available.

Would be a much easier solution than developing new tech for pet & ranger gear scaling.

Unless you are wearing heavy amor and jumping with a hammer, you dont exist for the balance team, maths are boring.

Faux Sheaux.6179:

Jacks.5367:

I don’t have the gold to do the whole test so I am just gonna used build editor to test it (since it’s pretty accurate).
Full ascended berserker GS:
Ranger: 1473 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1938 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2359 dmg over 2.5s

Full exo berserker GS:
Ranger: 1352 dmg over 2.56s
Warrior: 1780 dmg over 2.4s
Guardian: 2166 dmg over 2.5s

The percentage of increased in damage from exo to ascended:
Ranger: 8.949%
Warrior: 8.876%
Guardian: 8.9104%

Your statistics support what I originally said and (ironically) actually give the opposite conclusion than the one you came to. The ranger will not gain the most going to ascended.

Take the ascended damage of each example you just gave and subtract the exotic damage…

Ranger: 1473 – 1352 = 121 more damage
Warrior: 1938 – 1780 = 158 more damage
Guardian: 2359 – 2166 = 193 more damage

The percentage increase in damage from exotic to ascended is about the same for each class (which is what I said in OP). What isn’t the same is how each increase affects the damage the classes do. Since the other classes already do more damage, they gain more from it. This puts rangers even further behind in dps ability than they were before.

Jacks.5367:

Clearly that Ranger gain the most benefit from going ascended.

Clearly not ;(

Or in terms of gained raw DPS…
Ranger: 47.266
Warrior: 65.833
Guardian: 77.200

Clearly not!

Despite that, I am still working towards gearing my Ranger in ascended weapons.

The pet is the key. How they choose to figure out how to “ascend” the pet is on them. Could make it a behind the scene’s change in that for every ascended piece a ranger places into a gear slot, a bump in pet stats corresponds. Or they can make pet gear that we can acquire, (bad idea but its not my game). Or Anet can give all gear going onto a ranger a higher stat bump to make up the difference in the pet not getting buffed (bad idea, will make the pet fall even farther down the useless mechanic chain).

Pets were balanced to Exotic Gear, sadly they are not balanced for gear beyond. That is too bad and one more failing of the Ranger class. At least until a Dev comes on here to tell us we are wrong and they do have a plan in place.

Edit: Sadly, this could be yet one more reason not to play a Ranger.

Jacks.5367:

In term of no, obviously ranger has lower no. Ranger has the lowest coefficient among the 3. Ranger has total coefficient of 1.75, Warrior has 2.3 and Guardian has 2.8 for their skill 1. You are looking at no for effectiveness

Here is example of effectiveness:
Box A can fit 10 apples and it has 7 apples in it. 70% space used. 7/10
Box B can fit 10 apples and it has 8 apples in it. 80% space used. 8/10
Each box expand to be able to store 5 more apples and given 5 more apples.
Box A has now used 80% of its space. 12/10
Box B has now used 86% of its space. 13/10
Each box given additional expansion of 5 and given 5 more apples again.
Box A has now used 85% of its space. 17/10
Box B has now used 90% of its space. 18/10

Box A willl always be inferior to Box B. But when they are improved, box A will always be better since the leap is 10% to 5% in relative to 6% to 4%.

In the scenario box A is ranger and warrior is box B. Ranger has more effectiveness in scaling because ranger has lowest output. If you are looking at no, obviously ranger lost out since ranger will never be able to outdo the other class due to their fix coefficient.

You can’t measure effectiveness by no. If you are looking at benefit then it has to be percentage increase. Isn’t this thread is all about the effectiveness of transcending from exo to ascended?

Of those 5 apples, ranger got $1.75 for each. He is now $8.75 better off. Warrior, on the other hand, managed to sell his apples for $2.30. He’s now $11.50 better off! See what happens when you add those coefficients to the math?

Atherakhia.4086:

Jacks.5367:

In term of no, obviously ranger has lower no. Ranger has the lowest coefficient among the 3. Ranger has total coefficient of 1.75, Warrior has 2.3 and Guardian has 2.8 for their skill 1. You are looking at no for effectiveness

Here is example of effectiveness:
Box A can fit 10 apples and it has 7 apples in it. 70% space used. 7/10
Box B can fit 10 apples and it has 8 apples in it. 80% space used. 8/10
Each box expand to be able to store 5 more apples and given 5 more apples.
Box A has now used 80% of its space. 12/10
Box B has now used 86% of its space. 13/10
Each box given additional expansion of 5 and given 5 more apples again.
Box A has now used 85% of its space. 17/10
Box B has now used 90% of its space. 18/10

Box A willl always be inferior to Box B. But when they are improved, box A will always be better since the leap is 10% to 5% in relative to 6% to 4%.

In the scenario box A is ranger and warrior is box B. Ranger has more effectiveness in scaling because ranger has lowest output. If you are looking at no, obviously ranger lost out since ranger will never be able to outdo the other class due to their fix coefficient.

You can’t measure effectiveness by no. If you are looking at benefit then it has to be percentage increase. Isn’t this thread is all about the effectiveness of transcending from exo to ascended?

Of those 5 apples, ranger got $1.75 for each. He is now $8.75 better off. Warrior, on the other hand, managed to sell his apples for $2.30. He’s now $11.50 better off! See what happens when you add those coefficients to the math?

I give up. Please QQ ranger. No point playing the worst class. If you are not playing it already then just ignore my post.

Jacks.5367:

Atherakhia.4086:

Jacks.5367:

In term of no, obviously ranger has lower no. Ranger has the lowest coefficient among the 3. Ranger has total coefficient of 1.75, Warrior has 2.3 and Guardian has 2.8 for their skill 1. You are looking at no for effectiveness

Here is example of effectiveness:
Box A can fit 10 apples and it has 7 apples in it. 70% space used. 7/10
Box B can fit 10 apples and it has 8 apples in it. 80% space used. 8/10
Each box expand to be able to store 5 more apples and given 5 more apples.
Box A has now used 80% of its space. 12/10
Box B has now used 86% of its space. 13/10
Each box given additional expansion of 5 and given 5 more apples again.
Box A has now used 85% of its space. 17/10
Box B has now used 90% of its space. 18/10

Box A willl always be inferior to Box B. But when they are improved, box A will always be better since the leap is 10% to 5% in relative to 6% to 4%.

In the scenario box A is ranger and warrior is box B. Ranger has more effectiveness in scaling because ranger has lowest output. If you are looking at no, obviously ranger lost out since ranger will never be able to outdo the other class due to their fix coefficient.

You can’t measure effectiveness by no. If you are looking at benefit then it has to be percentage increase. Isn’t this thread is all about the effectiveness of transcending from exo to ascended?

Of those 5 apples, ranger got $1.75 for each. He is now $8.75 better off. Warrior, on the other hand, managed to sell his apples for $2.30. He’s now $11.50 better off! See what happens when you add those coefficients to the math?

I give up. Please QQ ranger. No point playing the worst class. If you are not playing it already then just ignore my post.

Jacks, from a pure % number sure if the ranger gets his 80/100 (cause we have a pet that makes up the other 20%) stats buffed by 10% ascended (lets say) and a warrior gets his 100/100% stats buffed by 10%, then sure they both go up by 10%. However, if you don’t see the difference between 10% of 100 and 10% of 80 then how are we to discuss this further?

Or am I missing you’re point?

Sure there are a host of other variables, which pet do you have out? What is the pets primary job? There are dps pets, there are pets that don’t dps as much but give other benefits?

Problems still exist in that percentage figure all else being equal.

Jacks is just trolling now. Not worth another reply.

Also, I like the way you put it Atherakhia. Spot on.

Hate to say it, but Comparisons between Ranger Great sword should never be made with Guardian and Warrior Great sword. Yes the skill Co’s are a little low but the weapon was designed for defense while Warrior and Guard GS was designed for offense. Ranger GS has evade built into 1, an interrupt and a block.

So OF COURSE its weak in damage in comparison.

In my personal opinion, NONE of the ranger weapons except for long bow were designed for full on offense. And since LB is ranged in a melee meta, it OF COURSE feels weak.

Even sword, the weapon that does the most, was designed with build in defense evades, Thats just the sad state, no real offensive designed weapons.

A more fair comparison might be comparing Ranger sword to Guardian Sword, or thief sword.
The 1 skill does good damage, and skills 2 and 3 are defensive minded.

Another good one might be Long bow compared to Mesmer GS,

But what you would rather do is compare the sword to the warrior axe just to make a point without taking weapon design into account.

I’d like to see better comparisons in weapons to support your argument,

I think you have a point, the same point that has been made since Ascended gear came out and that we all know about, but its not nearly as bad as you make it seem.

rpfohr.7048:

Hate to say it, but Comparisons between Ranger Great sword should never be made with Guardian and Warrior Great sword. Yes the skill Co’s are a little low but the weapon was designed for defense while Warrior and Guard GS was designed for offense. Ranger GS has evade built into 1, an interrupt and a block.

So OF COURSE its weak in damage in comparison.

In my personal opinion, NONE of the ranger weapons except for long bow were designed for full on offense. And since LB is ranged in a melee meta, it OF COURSE feels weak.

Even sword, the weapon that does the most, was designed with build in defense evades, Thats just the sad state, no real offensive designed weapons.

A more fair comparison might be comparing Ranger sword to Guardian Sword, or thief sword.
The 1 skill does good damage, and skills 2 and 3 are defensive minded.

Another good one might be Long bow compared to Mesmer GS,

But what you would rather do is compare the sword to the warrior axe just to make a point without taking weapon design into account.

I’d like to see better comparisons in weapons to support your argument,

I think you have a point, the same point that has been made since Ascended gear came out and that we all know about, but its not nearly as bad as you make it seem.

The guardian and warrior also both have superior self preservation abilities either through boon spam, higher base stats, or just plain amazing traits. We may have more defense focused gear, but we are at best equal in that department while they clearly outpace us in offense.

Just thought i would come look for this post since i new there would be one the minute the stream was announced. I think you guys need to suck it up at least you get the stat increase from ascended weapons. look at the engineer. they might as well stay with exotics because there kits get NO bonuses from ascended weapons and an engineer without kits is a free loot bag.

Singer.8740:

Just thought i would come look for this post since i new there would be one the minute the stream was announced. I think you guys need to suck it up at least you get the stat increase from ascended weapons. look at the engineer. they might as well stay with exotics because there kits get NO bonuses from ascended weapons and an engineer without kits is a free loot bag.

No, engineers should complain just as loudly. Sucking it up is stupid. If something is not fair, you say why it is not fair. If it has been said before, say it again so that people who don’t know yet will know.

rpfohr.7048:

I think you have a point, the same point that has been made since Ascended gear came out and that we all know about, but its not nearly as bad as you make it seem.

The post is not about making things seem bad. All I did was toss in the numbers in a way that I hoped would make sense to people and show what I was trying to say. If it seems bad, it isn’t because I made it so. If it seems bad, then it is bad.

Faux Sheaux.6179:

Singer.8740:

Just thought i would come look for this post since i new there would be one the minute the stream was announced. I think you guys need to suck it up at least you get the stat increase from ascended weapons. look at the engineer. they might as well stay with exotics because there kits get NO bonuses from ascended weapons and an engineer without kits is a free loot bag.

No, engineers should complain just as loudly. Sucking it up is stupid. If something is not fair, you say why it is not fair. If it has been said before, say it again so that people who don’t know yet will know.

We in the Engineer forums used too. All the time. Gave up after we figured out it wasnt going to happen. i could l
link you the post. its huge. if i can find it.

Substance E.4852:

The guardian and warrior also both have superior self preservation abilities either through boon spam, higher base stats, or just plain amazing traits. We may have more defense focused gear, but we are at best equal in that department while they clearly outpace us in offense.

If you want to bring in outside factors, you’ll find it very hard to show it mathematically, I’d keep it inside the box and do fair weapon comparisons. Very few builds “do it all” and A net has stated indirectly that “any build that does it all and brings everything to the table will get nerfed” Want proof? Check out the warrior thread.

Ya I feel bad for Engi, Kits hurting you. Both our classes have issue with this. It’s not a ranger stand alone issue.