Guild Wars 2

Onikage Dagoth.7859:

I don’t play my ranger often so i don’t really have room to talk, but why don’t they just add an avoidance feature similar to that of WoW? Make pets immune to x% of aoe damage, it seems to me this would balance pve and wvw because of the frequency of aoes there while not being nearly as big of a buff in pvp where it would be easier to just focus the pet for all of 10 seconds or less to burst it down.

Have you ever worked as an engineer? “Why don’t they just” is a lot more work than you think. I bet that’s why. There’s a lot they would do right now if they could, I’m sure. But they have priorities and pets dying in PVE just isn’t at the top of that list as it stands today. Eventually it will get there, but for now they cannot do it. The only logical answer is money/resources, right?

*Note: It may seem to be an “easy” change but you don’t know what their code base looks like. Many things are tied together in a dynamic spreadsheet that’s calculating and re-calculating under the hood. Some things are tied to “code classes” such that their attributes are passed onto all three gametypes. It’s likely that engineers would have to re-structure large parts of the code to get this done and all of that needs tested through and through. This is only a guess though, an in depth answer would be nice but, again, ANET devs don’t like to elaborate on technical issues, as you’ve seen before. The best you can get out of them is “this might happen someday”

Chopps.5047:

I’m of the opinion that arrows should pierce by default and longbow should be default 1500 range. Because right now you need 3 separate traits to effectively use bows, shutting the player out of traiting for signets or traiting for pets. This is a lot of the reason that Malicious Training—a fantastic adept trait by the way—fits into few builds (why go malicious training when you have to give up steady focus, signet mastery, or keen edge? Can you really justify Expertise training in the already tight Wilderness Survival line? etc). Just a thought…because I find that there’s a lot of neat builds in theory, that would only work if you have 80 points to utilize. Ever get that feeling? That it’s always 10 points away?

We are both of the same opinion. I think arrows should just naturally pierce through targets, because they are in fact arrows. The longbow should also act like a longbow by default, not having to have it traited to do so.

I think by default, it should be 1500 but when traited, could go up to 2000. Nobody can really call this OP because people can still side step the arrows which is another issue in itself + we don’t do a a lot of damage to begin with as it’s tied to our pet.

While were on this line of thinking, I think pets should just follow their natural abilities:

Birds – Fly up to attack people in towers; they also shouldn’t take fall damage

Felines/Wolves/Canines – Should naturally run a kitten of a lot faster than players

Bears – They are scary kittens, they should just naturally instill fear in people while around. One of their auto abilities should be to stand up, growl, and cause AoE fear.

Spiders – Webs and lots of them. Fire off AoE webs that slow all enemies down in the area via cripple. Also webs around the spider and player than also cause cripple to players that get too close.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Covered some points, but avoided many important ones, especially points that are very important for PvE players.

It’s an sPvP podcast. They aren’t supposed to talk about PvE. It’s an unfortunate consequence that there is no platform for discussion about PvE issues (but going off of their actions and comments in this video, the devs don’t know the first thing about the class in a format other than sPvP).

Shiren.9532:

SynfulChaot.3169:

Covered some points, but avoided many important ones, especially points that are very important for PvE players.

It’s an sPvP podcast. They aren’t supposed to talk about PvE. It’s an unfortunate consequence that there is no platform for discussion about PvE issues (but going off of their actions and comments in this video, the devs don’t know the first thing about the class in a format other than sPvP).

That may be true, but there is only so much longer people will stand for being repeatedly ignored and nerfed in PvE with absolutely no recourse, voice, or dialogue to improve it.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s great that they are pushing the eSports bent. But to destroy game balance everywhere else to do it is not the way to expand your game. This isn’t a game like LoL or SC2 that is PvP only. There are three distinct game modes. Focusing so kitten one to the detriment of both others is very dangerous and risks losing a large portion of your customer base.

This is the part that I have been going over in my head, wondering in bewilderment the whole time:

Obviously Jon is not happy with the longbow and even now, after its buff, succeeds that there is still more work to be done with it to make it stand out. So, is it really surprising that people used the shortbow over longbow, then? Why nerf the supplementary shortbow then if you flat out admit that longbow had problems? It’s down right hipocracy to think that anyone given the choice would choose a lower tier weapon for the sake of build diversity.

What should have been done from the start was to make longbow stand out on its own merits. This BS about longbow and shortbow ranged weapons shouldn’t have the same range is crazy.

What I see in the future is a big split between bow types depending on which stat build you are going for. Condition rangers will go shortbow, while power rangers will go longbow. To keep from discouraging either build, they should both have the same range!!!

It really seems like arena net is forgetting that the bow is what draws a lot of people to the class in the first place. They act like players are wanting other weapon options, when in reality we want a strong bow class that has the options to get in and out of melee on our terms. Comparing the thief shortbow to that of the ranger is down right blasphemous.

Chopps.5047:

Onikage Dagoth.7859:

I don’t play my ranger often so i don’t really have room to talk, but why don’t they just add an avoidance feature similar to that of WoW? Make pets immune to x% of aoe damage, it seems to me this would balance pve and wvw because of the frequency of aoes there while not being nearly as big of a buff in pvp where it would be easier to just focus the pet for all of 10 seconds or less to burst it down.

Have you ever worked as an engineer? “Why don’t they just” is a lot more work than you think. I bet that’s why. There’s a lot they would do right now if they could, I’m sure. But they have priorities and pets dying in PVE just isn’t at the top of that list as it stands today. Eventually it will get there, but for now they cannot do it. The only logical answer is money/resources, right?

*Note: It may seem to be an “easy” change but you don’t know what their code base looks like. Many things are tied together in a dynamic spreadsheet that’s calculating and re-calculating under the hood. Some things are tied to “code classes” such that their attributes are passed onto all three gametypes. It’s likely that engineers would have to re-structure large parts of the code to get this done and all of that needs tested through and through. This is only a guess though, an in depth answer would be nice but, again, ANET devs don’t like to elaborate on technical issues, as you’ve seen before. The best you can get out of them is “this might happen someday”

Did you forget the time Robert Hrouda actually said they did try this and it made pets too tanky? It’s not a technical limition from what I understand, they don’t want pets to have damage reduction against bosses. They’d rather they die than tank.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Shiren.9532:

SynfulChaot.3169:

Covered some points, but avoided many important ones, especially points that are very important for PvE players.

It’s an sPvP podcast. They aren’t supposed to talk about PvE. It’s an unfortunate consequence that there is no platform for discussion about PvE issues (but going off of their actions and comments in this video, the devs don’t know the first thing about the class in a format other than sPvP).

That may be true, but there is only so much longer people will stand for being repeatedly ignored and nerfed in PvE with absolutely no recourse, voice, or dialogue to improve it.

Don’t get me wrong. It’s great that they are pushing the eSports bent. But to destroy game balance everywhere else to do it is not the way to expand your game. This isn’t a game like LoL or SC2 that is PvP only. There are three distinct game modes. Focusing so kitten one to the detriment of both others is very dangerous and risks losing a large portion of your customer base.

I’m with you on that one. The shortbow nerf is massive to me because it hits very hard at how I played the class in dungeons. The weapon doesn’t feel worth using any more because of it. I was amazed at how often I was out of range during the first boss fight in the new dungeon using the weapon. The range nerf doesn’t seem like much in sPvP, but in PvE and WvW it’s a huge loss. They really should have made that an sPvP only range nerf. Hopefully they change it in the future.

Shiren.9532:

Did you forget the time Robert Hrouda actually said they did try this and it made pets too tanky? It’s not a technical limition from what I understand, they don’t want pets to have damage reduction against bosses. They’d rather they die than tank.

And the problem is that pet AI can’t do anything but attack/tank. It just isn’t smart enough to do anything else. So they are saying pet against boss = dead pet. And invalidating our pet, our core class mechanic, in the most difficult part of dungeons is just not right.

Except pets don’t necessarily seem all that squishy against bosses. It seems the AI targets players over pets, making them actually have a longer uptime than Ranger players themselves… The only possible thing I can think of to improve that is to synchronize the player and pet dodge so that they survive against Subject Alpha AoE if the player dodges correctly.

Shiren.9532:

Chopps.5047:

Onikage Dagoth.7859:

I don’t play my ranger often so i don’t really have room to talk, but why don’t they just add an avoidance feature similar to that of WoW? Make pets immune to x% of aoe damage, it seems to me this would balance pve and wvw because of the frequency of aoes there while not being nearly as big of a buff in pvp where it would be easier to just focus the pet for all of 10 seconds or less to burst it down.

Have you ever worked as an engineer? “Why don’t they just” is a lot more work than you think. I bet that’s why. There’s a lot they would do right now if they could, I’m sure. But they have priorities and pets dying in PVE just isn’t at the top of that list as it stands today. Eventually it will get there, but for now they cannot do it. The only logical answer is money/resources, right?

*Note: It may seem to be an “easy” change but you don’t know what their code base looks like. Many things are tied together in a dynamic spreadsheet that’s calculating and re-calculating under the hood. Some things are tied to “code classes” such that their attributes are passed onto all three gametypes. It’s likely that engineers would have to re-structure large parts of the code to get this done and all of that needs tested through and through. This is only a guess though, an in depth answer would be nice but, again, ANET devs don’t like to elaborate on technical issues, as you’ve seen before. The best you can get out of them is “this might happen someday”

Did you forget the time Robert Hrouda actually said they did try this and it made pets too tanky? It’s not a technical limition from what I understand, they don’t want pets to have damage reduction against bosses. They’d rather they die than tank.

While I agree with Robert’s rational behind it, it doesn’t make sense when compared to other classes. Does any of the other 7 classes have an handicaps against them that cause an instant 40% dps loss? I ask because I havn’t played all 8 classes.

It would seem to me that it’d make more sense to either have the pets extremely tanky or completely invulnerable if we count on them to provide that much dps.

Chopps.5047:

I’m of the opinion that arrows should pierce by default and longbow should be default 1500 range. Because right now you need 3 separate traits to effectively use bows, shutting the player out of traiting for signets or traiting for pets. This is a lot of the reason that Malicious Training—a fantastic adept trait by the way—fits into few builds (why go malicious training when you have to give up steady focus, signet mastery, or keen edge? Can you really justify Expertise training in the already tight Wilderness Survival line? etc). Just a thought…because I find that there’s a lot of neat builds in theory, that would only work if you have 80 points to utilize. Ever get that feeling? That it’s always 10 points away?

10points? how about 5? every “brilliant” idea I get when playing around with builds is 5points short of reaching a crucial trait for whatever idea I had, it’s totally infuriating at times.

Manekk.6981:

Chopps.5047:

I’m of the opinion that arrows should pierce by default and longbow should be default 1500 range. Because right now you need 3 separate traits to effectively use bows, shutting the player out of traiting for signets or traiting for pets. This is a lot of the reason that Malicious Training—a fantastic adept trait by the way—fits into few builds (why go malicious training when you have to give up steady focus, signet mastery, or keen edge? Can you really justify Expertise training in the already tight Wilderness Survival line? etc). Just a thought…because I find that there’s a lot of neat builds in theory, that would only work if you have 80 points to utilize. Ever get that feeling? That it’s always 10 points away?

10points? how about 5? every “brilliant” idea I get when playing around with builds is 5points short of reaching a crucial trait for whatever idea I had, it’s totally infuriating at times.

Oh god, i feel your pain… I got this idea at work yesterday and was like “That build would be amazing!!” got home and found out i didn’t have enough trait points for it…. soooo close…

Chopps.5047:

Durzlla.6295:

Oidmetala.8426:

oh, wow

that was much love for ranger on sotg again.
bb gw2

Sarcasm? And can someone post a link? I’m at work atm and thus don’t really wanna search through stuff with audio right now.

Well, Durzlla, basically for every profession Jon gets excited and elaborates more on the actual playstyles (even going over fights and examples on why warrior is where it is or all of the in depth information with necro or mesmer). Sadly, this excitement is lost when Jon spoke on rangers (only for other professions was Jon discussing playstyles, builds, and why those playstyles/builds are interesting). I’m also pretty disappointed in Bat’s questions given all the nice comments in this thread. Sorry, Bat, I still like you!!!

Specifically, for ranger, he “took some notes” and had little to say besides revealing that he felt longbow “doesn’t flow well” and wants to combine two (or three!?!) skills and add new ones that give it more burst potential. They will also be doing more splitting in pvp, wvw, and pve, and pets will get more sustain in pve, according to Jon (spirits and minions in general).

The basic conclusions were….

• the spirits builds are decent in PvP and horrible in wvw and pve. nothing we didn’t know
• They can’t make longbow range longer than 1500 for technical reasons and they felt shortbow overshadowed it at 1200 range
• Pet health and sustainability of minions in general (spirits too) will be going up in wvw and pve
• Rangers are currently, basically, forced into a precision/condi spec (usually traps/bleeds) and devs consider that a problem
• Longbow is going to get a make over at some (unknown) point in the future; considered to “not flow well” and will get a redesign
• Player will not be able to use pet skills individually because that’s considered too much micro
• Empathic bond might get a redesign since passive condition removal is considered unfun. Jon likes fights where you try to save your condi removal as long as possible whereas your opponent is trying to make you waste it. They like that kind of tension in fights and will be adding more of it.

I hope that helps for anyone that can’t catch it.

Wow really that’s the best we got? no 1 hand sword no reasons for ruining short bow in PvE and WvW no removal of Pets…

Yea good bye Guildwars 2.

Durzlla.6295:

Manekk.6981:

Chopps.5047:

I’m of the opinion that arrows should pierce by default and longbow should be default 1500 range. Because right now you need 3 separate traits to effectively use bows, shutting the player out of traiting for signets or traiting for pets. This is a lot of the reason that Malicious Training—a fantastic adept trait by the way—fits into few builds (why go malicious training when you have to give up steady focus, signet mastery, or keen edge? Can you really justify Expertise training in the already tight Wilderness Survival line? etc). Just a thought…because I find that there’s a lot of neat builds in theory, that would only work if you have 80 points to utilize. Ever get that feeling? That it’s always 10 points away?

10points? how about 5? every “brilliant” idea I get when playing around with builds is 5points short of reaching a crucial trait for whatever idea I had, it’s totally infuriating at times.

Oh god, i feel your pain… I got this idea at work yesterday and was like “That build would be amazing!!” got home and found out i didn’t have enough trait points for it…. soooo close…

I know that feel all too well. I have a some builds I want to try out but just don’t have enough points to do it because I’m locked to 20 skirmishing for Quick Draw.

I wish these changes to the longbow and traits would come sooner rather than later.

I wanted to thank you for bringing up the questions. I’m so glad you pointed out that rangers need more active condition clearing (was one of my questions) because it is a huge problem with the profession right now as we are forced into 30 WS. Thanks again for that! Many rangers don’t understand how big of an issue this is for the profession and I believe you are correct, fixing this would solve many issues for the profession.

I’m hoping for some longbow changes like Jon said, but didn’t like his response about the shortbow/longbow range. They could just add sb range increases to 1200 and longbow/harpoon range increases to 1500 in the same trait (remove that kittenty 5% damage buff) although I can’t blame him as it is hard to think of that during the stream.

The spirit movement toggle is genius! I’m not sure how it will be implemented, but I really think that it needs to happen.

Again, thank you. You represented the ranger profession well and I appreciate it.

Represented it well for sPvP. Us PvEers still have too many unanswered questions as we are a lot less viable in PvE than PvP.

Now yes, I understand that this is a sPvP State of the Game. But why is sPvP the only one that gets this kind of attention? Are not all classes affected in all game modes each month? Why does only sPvP get the dialogue?

SynfulChaot.3169:

Represented it well for sPvP. Us PvEers still have too many unanswered questions as we are a lot less viable in PvE than PvP.

Now yes, I understand that this is a sPvP State of the Game. But why is sPvP the only one that gets this kind of attention? Are not all classes affected in all game modes each month? Why does only sPvP get the dialogue?

Well … without sounding like too much of an kitten, I give zero kittens about PvE in GW2. I want to see changes for WvW and sPvP because fighting players is what I enjoy. With that said, the points he made (if implemented) could bring the profession up to par where build diversity can prosper for not just PvP but PvE as well.

Indoles.1467:

Well … without sounding like too much of an kitten, I give zero kittens about PvE in GW2. I want to see changes for WvW and sPvP because fighting players is what I enjoy. With that said, the points he made (if implemented) could bring the profession up to par where build diversity can prosper for not just PvP but PvE as well.

I don’t play PvP at all but I still care about the classes balance in PvP as well. It’s great that you enjoy PvP. But please don’t ‘not care’ about us PvE players. We are playing the same class as you and want all of our fellow rangers to enjoy the class.

The points that he did make could help the class greatly in all game modes, yes. But his evasiveness on answers, and even how he answered makes me worry.

SynfulChaot.3169:

Indoles.1467:

Well … without sounding like too much of an kitten, I give zero kittens about PvE in GW2. I want to see changes for WvW and sPvP because fighting players is what I enjoy. With that said, the points he made (if implemented) could bring the profession up to par where build diversity can prosper for not just PvP but PvE as well.

I don’t play PvP at all but I still care about the classes balance in PvP as well. It’s great that you enjoy PvP. But please don’t ‘not care’ about us PvE players. We are playing the same class as you and want all of our fellow rangers to enjoy the class.

The points that he did make could help the class greatly in all game modes, yes. But his evasiveness on answers, and even how he answered makes me worry.

A little confused at your response. First, I never said I don’t care for PvE players, I just don’t care for PvE. Second, I was under the impression you were referring to Battosai as not representing the ranger community well, but you say his answers were evasive meaning that you are talking about Jon, correct? If that is so (not saying I don’t agree with you), understand that it would be hard to come up with all the answers right there on the spot. I know whenever I do something like that I always mentally kick myself afterwards because I could/should have said something but didn’t remember it when I was on the spot. That said, we can all agree that ranger needs work everywhere, so any changes that aren’t nerfs are good for us regardless of how we play.

Indoles.1467:

A little confused at your response. First, I never said I don’t care for PvE players, I just don’t care for PvE.

My apologies. I misunderstood your wording.

Indoles.1467:

Second, I was under the impression you were referring to Battosai as not representing the ranger community well, but you say his answers were evasive meaning that you are talking about Jon, correct? If that is so (not saying I don’t agree with you), understand that it would be hard to come up with all the answers right there on the spot. I know whenever I do something like that I always mentally kick myself afterwards because I could/should have said something but didn’t remember it when I was on the spot.

I’m speaking strictly of his body language. He exhibited evasive body language that led me to believe that he was highly uncomfortable even saying what little he did. And the fact that the ranger discussion was half as long, with far fewer people participating, than any other class discussion was also disheartening.

Indoles.1467:

That said, we can all agree that ranger needs work everywhere, so any changes that aren’t nerfs are good for us regardless of how we play.

True. I am looking forward to what little was said, especially the potential of more survivable pets in PvE and a longbow worth using.

That being said? I’m still a bit worried about the direction of the class. Seeing more positive changes will make me less worried and I know that all we can do now is wait and see.

EDIT: Also, I will main a ranger until the class is removed from the game or the game ends.

After watching “State of the Game”. i come to the conclusions…

As always

Rangers will be walked all over once again, in amusing the Elite Favorite Classes.

I’ve lost my Hopes since last patch and that includes Future patches.

I’ve had it; enough of any thing they have to say, that include so-called reasoning for

Intentionally setting this class to Fail, in Praising their Favorite Elite Classes wishes.

In other word, Im Immune to whatever, anything they say; same way they are immune in seeing goodness for our class,

Yes Heartless; as they are to our class; the Ranger

There are no Desire, Hope with whomever would mention the name Ranger because they are all the same
.
Same news, same explanations, same reasonings, same story, same everything

Their Reasonings are Malicious, Heartless, Vengeful and Sadistical.

Seriously

What more can we Rangers expect by whatever anyone have to say “converning” the class?

Absolutely Nothing

At the end of the day, they get to Laugh, Mock, Humiliate and Belittle the Ranger class along side their Favorite Elite classes.

Their Favorite Elite Class Warior is getting getting Hea;lth buff.

There shouldn’t be no shock by this…

Seriously

In conclusion.

I encourage the Ranger community to not be decieved by anything..they hear or see
“concerning” this class.

Because as i already mentioned,

They’re all the same…

They Pride in seeing this class Fail and will Decieve you into thinking they care

I remind you of “the wolf in the sheep clothe”

We are the sheep and they’re the wolves…

Beware

SynfulChaot.3169:

Represented it well for sPvP. Us PvEers still have too many unanswered questions as we are a lot less viable in PvE than PvP.

Now yes, I understand that this is a sPvP State of the Game. But why is sPvP the only one that gets this kind of attention? Are not all classes affected in all game modes each month? Why does only sPvP get the dialogue?

SOTG is hosted by GW2 Guru. Guru has asked multiple times for hosts who are interested in producing a show that covers WvW and another that covers PvE, and that show would get to interview the devs semi monthly.

No one stepped up to host any of the shows, except for sPvP. The PvE and WvW community is huge, but its not at all competitive in GW2 like it is in say, WoW, so no one who is in the business of podcasting/blogging is going to cover it because there is no known guilds to talk about competing for “firsts.” there are no names or deathspam in wvw, hell keeps dont even show the guild tag of the owner, just some ambiguous emblem, so again, no notoriety = no interest in shows.

Raven.9603:

SynfulChaot.3169:

Represented it well for sPvP. Us PvEers still have too many unanswered questions as we are a lot less viable in PvE than PvP.

Now yes, I understand that this is a sPvP State of the Game. But why is sPvP the only one that gets this kind of attention? Are not all classes affected in all game modes each month? Why does only sPvP get the dialogue?

SOTG is hosted by GW2 Guru. Guru has asked multiple times for hosts who are interested in producing a show that covers WvW and another that covers PvE, and that show would get to interview the devs semi monthly.

No one stepped up to host any of the shows, except for sPvP. The PvE and WvW community is huge, but its not at all competitive in GW2 like it is in say, WoW, so no one who is in the business of podcasting/blogging is going to cover it because there is no known guilds to talk about competing for “firsts.” there are no names or deathspam in wvw, hell keeps dont even show the guild tag of the owner, just some ambiguous emblem, so again, no notoriety = no interest in shows
.

If it took some of us to speak up and take the helm, I’m sure that many of us would be very willing to step forward and assist. I don’t frequent GW2 Guru, so I know very little of what goes on there. I prefer to keep my attentions to the official forums.