Guild Wars 2

Is anyone using 1H sword for ranger? I haven’t used it for months, it just collects dust in my inventory.

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons, but sometimes it’s not that bad to have a bit of melee, so my question is:

Are there any plans to change the auto-attack on the 1H sword (yes I’m talking about the jumping kick that interrupts the movement and makes your character jump onto target)?

The ranger isn’t designed to use ranged weapons it’s designed to use ranged or melee weapons and a pet and the 1h sword happens to be the best dps weapon we have, personally I use it mostly in pvp combined with dagger but there are a few dungeon encounters I want it too.

I hope they don’t change it it’s good like it is.

Watch Exploits Video right here in the Forums – it is amazing. If you are beastmaster 1H/D combination and GS are amazing:
-1H gives Might to the pet
-GS #5 gives more DMG to the pet for the next attac.
Both sets combined give SO much evades it is rediculous!

Mentalhead.5721:

Is anyone using 1H sword for ranger? I haven’t used it for months, it just collects dust in my inventory.

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons, but sometimes it’s not that bad to have a bit of melee, so my question is:

Are there any plans to change the auto-attack on the 1H sword (yes I’m talking about the jumping kick that interrupts the movement and makes your character jump onto target)?

It’s not designed for range. Sword is one of our best weapons in terms of damage and Greatsword is ridiculously good all around.

GW2 mantra was Melee Damage will always trump Ranged. Ideally you’d be darting in and out and around balancing a bow and a sword.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbNuv4T8J1I @2:50
For me, it just feels restrictive since I strafe and dodge a lot in this game, and I really don’t want to tap “1” each time I’m using the 1h sword.

No complaints here

It’s a pain, but with practice you get the ‘rhythm’ of the autoattack, allowing you to move between the leaps (and dodge). Also consider that is has two evades. Once again, with practice you can dodge with ease most attacks, especially in pve. Also while it roots you in place it also pretty much roots your target in place with perma-cripple.

If you’ve got the dagger for the offhand, you’ve got a snare and another evade as well.

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

I really hate that people are OK with the sword. I wish everyone was on board with changing it so ANet might listen.

I hate hate HATE the animations and effects (leap on 3). It’s like if a game had a graphics overhaul, converting all old textures to new HD textures.. but they left one out.

The 1H sword is the glaring old and ugly version that never got updated.

Maybe the damage is good, but it FEELS AWFUL. And it looks awful (the animations).

Writetyper.1985:

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

It comes from Anet themselves. They touted the ranger as the master of ranged combat. This isn’t something that the community dreamed up themselves, it’s something Anet claimed, then changed.

“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.”

The fact that we’re not “unparalleled archers” and in fact play second fiddle to thieves and warriors despite what it says on the website and when creating a character, I understand why people are bent that we do kitteny damage from range.

I think Kick shouldn’t lunge towards your foe. I mean, c’mon, 2 out of 3 parts of the auto-attack chain disable dodging? I would be perfectly fine with the chain if only the leap disabled dodging, but right now the sword feels too clunky to me.

stale.9785:

Writetyper.1985:

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

It comes from Anet themselves. They touted the ranger as the master of ranged combat. This isn’t something that the community dreamed up themselves, it’s something Anet claimed, then changed.

“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.”

The fact that we’re not “unparalleled archers” and in fact play second fiddle to thieves and warriors despite what it says on the website and when creating a character, I understand why people are bent that we do kitteny damage from range.

The ranger’s techniques are more technical (the warrior’s are ‘dumb force’ as are the thieves) and their weapons have better ranges (warriors need to trait to match a longbow’s base range for the ranger) which again suggests better raw talent. You’re also conveniently forgetting the warrior being described as a master of all weapons.

Writetyper.1985:

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

The profession’s name might have something to do with it…

stale.9785:

Writetyper.1985:

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

It comes from Anet themselves. They touted the ranger as the master of ranged combat. This isn’t something that the community dreamed up themselves, it’s something Anet claimed, then changed.

I didn’t know that, but I wouldn’t mind squashing it either because anet say some silly kitten sometimes. Anyway, that just says they’re the master of ranged combat, not that they are exclusive to ranged combat.

Blaine Tog.8304:

The profession’s name might have something to do with it…

Common misconception. The profession’s name has NOTHING to do with it. Just because it has “Range” in it doesn’t mean they are exclusively archers. “Rangers” means someone who ranges the land, a scout, a survivor, with the wilderness.

Aragorn is a ranger. His title is “Ranger of Numenor”. Yet I wouldn’t call him ranged specialist at all, really? Even when he was more ranger and less king he used bows where needed, and melee weapons more often than not.

On the contrary, Legolas may or may not be classed as a Ranger, but NOT because he is proficient with archery.

If I see one more Aragorn reference I swear I’m going to burn those books.

That ONE reference does not equate to a strong argument. I mean, you could reference the military, even ranger Smith from Yogi Bear. But always always ALWAYS people want to use the defense of Aragorn for this game.

That is only the basis step in an inductive argument. It does not account for every other MMO ever that ensured that rangers were top performers at ranged weaponry.

Fact: If ANet calls a class rangers and markets them with the description that has already been quoted in this thread, then that class should not have a lackluster feel to any aspect of its ranged gameplay when compared to any other class. Due to the design of the game, yes, it’s melee should outdamage it’s ranged.

Stop with the Aragorn though. If Aragorn is the ONLY “ranger” people continue to use as an argument, then maybe, amongst the sea of other ranger examples, Aragorn was doing it wrong. Variety (large sample size) is the key to a sound argument.

stale.9785:

Writetyper.1985:

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

It comes from Anet themselves. They touted the ranger as the master of ranged combat. This isn’t something that the community dreamed up themselves, it’s something Anet claimed, then changed.

“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.”

The fact that we’re not “unparalleled archers” and in fact play second fiddle to thieves and warriors despite what it says on the website and when creating a character, I understand why people are bent that we do kitteny damage from range.

I think it’s way simpler than that, it’s in the name people don’t understand what it means and they repeatedly show it.

For me the 1h sword is pure PvP weapon, in PvE dungeons and other content where you might get one shotted because you missed your dodge by 0.5 seconds because of that rooting is a no go. But in PvP the sword is excellent for staying up close and personal with your opponent .

jcbroe.4329:

If I see one more Aragorn reference I swear I’m going to burn those books.

That ONE reference does not equate to a strong argument. I mean, you could reference the military, even ranger Smith from Yogi Bear. But always always ALWAYS people want to use the defense of Aragorn for this game.

That is only the basis step in an inductive argument. It does not account for every other MMO ever that ensured that rangers were top performers at ranged weaponry.

Fact: If ANet calls a class rangers and markets them with the description that has already been quoted in this thread, then that class should not have a lackluster feel to any aspect of its ranged gameplay when compared to any other class. Due to the design of the game, yes, it’s melee should outdamage it’s ranged.

Stop with the Aragorn though. If Aragorn is the ONLY “ranger” people continue to use as an argument, then maybe, amongst the sea of other ranger examples, Aragorn was doing it wrong. Variety (large sample size) is the key to a sound argument.

It’s to show what is meant by the word ranger to the people that don’t understand what it means not that Aragorn would be the one and only type of ranger allowed.

Ranger has never meant “person who uses ranged combat” unless you want to say arena net invented that meaning for this class, atleast I have never seen that definition of the word.

jcbroe.4329:

If I see one more Aragorn reference I swear I’m going to burn those books.

That ONE reference does not equate to a strong argument. I mean, you could reference the military, even ranger Smith from Yogi Bear. But always always ALWAYS people want to use the defense of Aragorn for this game.

That is only the basis step in an inductive argument. It does not account for every other MMO ever that ensured that rangers were top performers at ranged weaponry.

Fact: If ANet calls a class rangers and markets them with the description that has already been quoted in this thread, then that class should not have a lackluster feel to any aspect of its ranged gameplay when compared to any other class. Due to the design of the game, yes, it’s melee should outdamage it’s ranged.

Stop with the Aragorn though. If Aragorn is the ONLY “ranger” people continue to use as an argument, then maybe, amongst the sea of other ranger examples, Aragorn was doing it wrong. Variety (large sample size) is the key to a sound argument.

It doesn’t matter whether you hate the aragorn or not, ranged combatant is not what “Ranger” means. I mean let’s go to the most base level here, a kittening dictionary.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ranger

1, 4, 5 and maybe even 3 by a stretch of the imagination support that defenition of ranger. Not a single defenition anywhere supports “Ranged combatant”, because that’s not what a kittening Ranger is. The Aragorn thing is just an analogy to explain it.

Manekk.6981:

I think it’s way simpler than that, it’s in the name people don’t understand what it means and they repeatedly show it.

epic xddddd i cant into english either xd

@Writetyper are you sure you read my posts correctly?

Yeah I did. You said it’s in the name. It’s not. Where’s the issue?

Mongo.2490:

I really hate that people are OK with the sword. I wish everyone was on board with changing it so ANet might listen.

I hate hate HATE the animations and effects (leap on 3). It’s like if a game had a graphics overhaul, converting all old textures to new HD textures.. but they left one out.

The 1H sword is the glaring old and ugly version that never got updated.

Maybe the damage is good, but it FEELS AWFUL. And it looks awful (the animations).

I was on the fence with 1H sword. Some days I liked it, others I didn’t. Then I rolled a Warrior and got him to 80. Fought a Ranger who used a 1H Sword and realized what a huge pain in the kitten it was trying to track him down.

I don’t care about the autoroot. For me, since my fast twitch controls aren’t so fast , I really like that !h Sword tracks and sticks to the enemy. I can go a couple of rounds with Sword 1/3 and Dagger 4/5…then disengage whenever I like with Sword 2. If I like the way the melee is going, I will bounce back in with Sword 2. If not, I go back to SB and some more kiting.

Don’t change a thing

Writetyper.1985:

Yeah I did. You said it’s in the name. It’s not. Where’s the issue?

You didn’t get my sentiment, I was saying people simply mistake ranger for meaning ranged combatant and they repeatedly reveal that is exactly what they think the word means so it is in fact in the name, I thought I was clear I’m not one of them but apparently not.

Manekk.6981:

Writetyper.1985:

Yeah I did. You said it’s in the name. It’s not. Where’s the issue?

You didn’t get my sentiment, I was saying people simply mistake ranger for meaning ranged combatant and they repeatedly reveal that is exactly what they think the word means so it is in fact in the name, I thought I was clear I’m not one of them but apparently not.

Ok. I’m extremely stupid and it’s ironic because that’s what I was making fun of in the first place. That whole ranged combatant thing just irritated me so much.

What if the auto attack did everything it currently does, but you could dodge at any time and break out of the animation. Are you guys really saying you don’t want that capability?

Killsmith.8169:

What if the auto attack did everything it currently does, but you could dodge at any time and break out of the animation. Are you guys really saying you don’t want that capability?

I think it has a good chance of being quite overpowered. That said, it might not be. I actually think its a good compromise. It wouldnt really affect those who love it as is (as I do), and it would allow those who hate the rooting to use one of the best weapons in the game more effectively.

I am completely against changing the core mechanics of the weapon. But, I have to admit that since the buffs to greatsword, I havent been using 1h sword much. Adding the ability to evade may pull me back to it.

I can see it being very OP for those that can use it properly, but Im on the edge with it after some thought. I think the best thing to do is test it in a live environment.

Writetyper.1985:

On the contrary, Legolas may or may not be classed as a Ranger, but NOT because he is proficient with archery.

Legolas was ‘just’ a soldier, which in GW would be a Warrior.

Mentalhead.5721:

For me, it just feels restrictive since I strafe and dodge a lot in this game, and I really don’t want to tap “1” each time I’m using the 1h sword.

Well you tap 2-5 just as much, if not more, than you tap 1. It sounds tiring but it’s really not.

Taku.6352:

For me the 1h sword is pure PvP weapon, in PvE dungeons and other content where you might get one shotted because you missed your dodge by 0.5 seconds because of that rooting is a no go. But in PvP the sword is excellent for staying up close and personal with your opponent .

I actually use the sword quite a bit in dungeons to squeeze out some extra dps. As long as you stay behind your target and watch out for aoe’s, you’ll be fine. And take advantage of sword 3 to reposition yourself and 2 to disengage, you’ll find it is quite viable.

Writetyper.1985:

jcbroe.4329:

If I see one more Aragorn reference I swear I’m going to burn those books.

That ONE reference does not equate to a strong argument. I mean, you could reference the military, even ranger Smith from Yogi Bear. But always always ALWAYS people want to use the defense of Aragorn for this game.

That is only the basis step in an inductive argument. It does not account for every other MMO ever that ensured that rangers were top performers at ranged weaponry.

Fact: If ANet calls a class rangers and markets them with the description that has already been quoted in this thread, then that class should not have a lackluster feel to any aspect of its ranged gameplay when compared to any other class. Due to the design of the game, yes, it’s melee should outdamage it’s ranged.

Stop with the Aragorn though. If Aragorn is the ONLY “ranger” people continue to use as an argument, then maybe, amongst the sea of other ranger examples, Aragorn was doing it wrong. Variety (large sample size) is the key to a sound argument.

It doesn’t matter whether you hate the aragorn or not, ranged combatant is not what “Ranger” means. I mean let’s go to the most base level here, a kittening dictionary.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ranger

1, 4, 5 and maybe even 3 by a stretch of the imagination support that defenition of ranger. Not a single defenition anywhere supports “Ranged combatant”, because that’s not what a kittening Ranger is. The Aragorn thing is just an analogy to explain it.

Manekk.6981:

I think it’s way simpler than that, it’s in the name people don’t understand what it means and they repeatedly show it.

epic xddddd i cant into english either xd

No, that was actually the entire point I was getting at, as it’s been a circular argument since release, of people going:
“wiki definition”
“Aragorn”
“WIKI DEFINITION”
“ARAGORN”
“GRRRR”
“RAWR”

It just really needs to stop. I wasn’t going for any hidden intention, I was literally saying that it’s time to use a different reference besides Aragorn. I’m fond of the ranger Smith from Yogi Bear one. He’s a ranger too, and he shouts, just like us, at an animal, just like us.
Strong correlation lol.

Writetyper.1985:

Common misconception. The profession’s name has NOTHING to do with it.

You’re responding to an argument I wasn’t making.

I’m saying the RANGEr’s name makes people think the profession should be good at RANGEd combat because it has RANGE in its name. Maybe “The ranger is a master of ranged combat” is a misconception, but I was just speaking to where the misconception might’ve come from: the name. Which has the word “Range” in it.

That said, I really don’t see what’s wrong with expecting the description of the Profession from ANet on profession’s page to be generally accurate.

Writetyper.1985:

Just because it has “Range” in it doesn’t mean they are exclusively archers.

Sure sure. But they should be good archers.

We’ll try it another way then: Rangers are usually pigeon-holed into the sitting-at-the-back-firing-the-bow in mmorpg convention. Consider how ANET has gleefully murdered ther aspects of mmorpgs:
-Warriors being melee only
-Healer class
-Elementalists being only damage

So, shock of shocks, the Ranger isn’t like Every Other Ranger in a mmorpg, and they are no longer the ranged class. They can certainly do it, but the pet is being dragged from up from a tacked on feature, now played up big time since the warrior’s identity is set up for weapon based damage and it gives the ranger class an identity.
For goodness’s sake, the Thief is never burgling houses or stealing gold or items but you never see the thief forum complaining about it they just roll with it and that class’ name has even less room for misunderstanding.

Ryan.8367:

Although, I will say that Gw2 did exclusively want this class to be the best at range and have the most utility at range and the class mechanics clearly show that. Broken or not.

Proof please? I really wish they’d kept the original class description, which was “A jack of all trades, and a master of them all” because it would avoid stupid threads like these.

I REALLY wish people would quit referencing the description in a wiki and just look at the traits, the pet mechanics, spirit mechanics. How do you not see that the ranger is predominately a ranged class? I’m just confused on how you don’t see this.

Tell you what, next time you run a dungeon (or for that matter, next time you do a skirmish with a guild in wvw , or for that matter, when you do a tpvp match, or for that matter when you do anything with a group), tell all the melee classes to sit back and let you melee it. You’re not designed to be a melee class, it’s simple as that. It’s why a majority of our ‘melee’ weapons have evasion and mobility aspects on them. It’s for positioning and utility more so than dealing melee damage.

kitten the wiki description, look at the kitten we have and get your head out of your kitten

Ryan.8367:

I REALLY wish people would quit referencing the description in a wiki and just look at the traits, the pet mechanics, spirit mechanics. How do you not see that the ranger is predominately a ranged class? I’m just confused on how you don’t see this.

Tell you what, next time you run a dungeon (or for that matter, next time you do a skirmish with a guild in wvw , or for that matter, when you do a tpvp match, or for that matter when you do anything with a group), tell all the melee classes to sit back and let you melee it. You’re not designed to be a melee class, it’s simple as that. It’s why a majority of our ‘melee’ weapons have evasion and mobility aspects on them. It’s for positioning and utility more so than dealing melee damage.

kitten the wiki description, look at the kitten we have and get your head out of your kitten

I think you should probably look at the melee options again, yes there’s plenty of mobility, but its hardly all based on getting away(in fact there’s literally only 1 melee skill that involves disengaging from melee range, and that one includes a leap right back into the fight), in fact, a couple of the skills actively keep pushing you closer, see sword auto attack, and tell me that’s about positioning for attacking at range. Also about the traits, you know that there are more trait trees than just skirmishing and marksmanship, right? Because those are the only two trees that really emphasize ranged combat.

Regardless, I don’t understand why people feel the need to argue this, rangers should be good at range, sure of course, but there’s no reason to keep going BUT IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE BEST RANGED CLASS, like you want them to nerf melee and make ranged super awesome. I don’t see any particular reason some of ranger’s weaker ranged options(cough, longbow, cough) can’t be improved without claiming that the ranger is a primarily ranged class.

Writetyper.1985:

Can’t live without it bro. Best weapon the ranger has.

Mentalhead.5721:

I know that ranger is designed to use ranged weapons

I want to figure out where this mentality is coming from and quash it.

Probably for the name. It’s misleading in the way it can make people think it means ranged user if they don’t look to the real meaning. In spanish the profession is called Guardabosques, which in english is Forestal Guard. And without using other languages you can always remind everyone how Ranger in Texas and the Power Rangers were excellent melee fighters to mention some famous “Rangers” :P

Bean Muncher.5197:

I think Kick shouldn’t lunge towards your foe. I mean, c’mon, 2 out of 3 parts of the auto-attack chain disable dodging? I would be perfectly fine with the chain if only the leap disabled dodging, but right now the sword feels too clunky to me.

Completely agree. Using 1h sword makes us so incredibly immobile. One thing that is handy is that we can pretty much stay on top of a target because its basically a moving attack.

I love 1 handed sword, with either dagger or warhorn depending on the situation (whether or not I need to buff myself/others), and shortbow.

I just disable the autoattack on the sword and it’s just fine. I know a lot of people complain about having to do this to get around the dodge issues, but it’s never been much of a problem for me since I play a lot of Street Fighter so I am comfortable with accurately timed button presses. The trick is to not spam the key more than you need so you can always pull off a dodge when you must and not get stuck in the startup for the next attack. It does no good to disable auto attack if you are spamming the key.

Finally, as for the Aragorn business it is really quite simple. When designing Dungeons and Dragons (of course the granddaddy of all RPGs) the Ranger class was admittedly a direct rip off of Aragorn in LotR. They literally based the archetype and abilities off of Aragorn, and called it a Ranger just because that’s what he was. Since it can be argued that every RPG since is derivative of DnD, all Ranger classes are derived in some way from Aragorn. The notion of an all ranged Ranger class is in fact non-traditional and not the other way around. Aragorn is the prototype.

A close second that is always mentioned is the legendary Ranger who is also not known for using bows(but is known for his pet): Drizzt Do’Urden.

Chrone.6809:

Bean Muncher.5197:

I think Kick shouldn’t lunge towards your foe. I mean, c’mon, 2 out of 3 parts of the auto-attack chain disable dodging? I would be perfectly fine with the chain if only the leap disabled dodging, but right now the sword feels too clunky to me.

Completely agree. Using 1h sword makes us so incredibly immobile. One thing that is handy is that we can pretty much stay on top of a target because its basically a moving attack.

1h sword is EASILY, the most mobile option rangers have, just turn off auto attack and auto targeting and it has more in combat movement options than almost any other weapon in the game. And almost certainly any one handed weapon in the game.

Bob.8456:

I love 1 handed sword, with either dagger or warhorn depending on the situation (whether or not I need to buff myself/others), and shortbow.

I just disable the autoattack on the sword and it’s just fine. I know a lot of people complain about having to do this to get around the dodge issues, but it’s never been much of a problem for me since I play a lot of Street Fighter so I am comfortable with accurately timed button presses. The trick is to not spam the key more than you need so you can always pull off a dodge when you must and not get stuck in the startup for the next attack. It does no good to disable auto attack if you are spamming the key.

Finally, as for the Aragorn business it is really quite simple. When designing Dungeons and Dragons (of course the granddaddy of all RPGs) the Ranger class was admittedly a direct rip off of Aragorn in LotR. They literally based the archetype and abilities off of Aragorn, and called it a Ranger just because that’s what he was. Since it can be argued that every RPG since is derivative of DnD, all Ranger classes are derived in some way from Aragorn. The notion of an all ranged Ranger class is in fact non-traditional and not the other way around. Aragorn is the prototype.

A close second that is always mentioned is the legendary Ranger who is also not known for using bows(but is known for his pet): Drizzt Do’Urden.

Guild Wars 2 is a derivative of Guild Wars 1 in which rangers primary weapons were bows, and the use of another weapon required a secondary profession to be picked up and specced into.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Can anybody really be mad at guild wars 1 ranger veterans who used a bow for almost a decade as a primary weapon to expect the same level of efficiency with a bow as the class with the same name?

Not to mention that there is lore connecting the games, and the professions are based of the lore from the first game and the 250 years in between. Meaning that rangers, for 250 years, forgot how to use the bow well, forgot how to work with their pet as efficiently, forgot how to summon their strong spirits, and forgot how to actively remedy conditions from themselves. On top of that, they gained no real proficiency at anything.

So now things are screwed up from an expectation AND a lore perspective. So as much as people want to get on here and tell people they are wrong for wanting a ranger to be ranged base, those people have every reason and right to be disappointed with how the class has turned out versus where the lore shows it came from.

Mongo.2490:

I really hate that people are OK with the sword. I wish everyone was on board with changing it so ANet might listen.

I hate hate HATE the animations and effects (leap on 3). It’s like if a game had a graphics overhaul, converting all old textures to new HD textures.. but they left one out.

The 1H sword is the glaring old and ugly version that never got updated.

Maybe the damage is good, but it FEELS AWFUL. And it looks awful (the animations).

I love the feeling of the 1 handed sword, actualy i would leave this class and play mesmer if they did alter the attack chain
All i can say is TURN OF THE AUTOATTACK and you have THE best weapon in game.

jcbroe.4329:

Bob.8456:

I love 1 handed sword, with either dagger or warhorn depending on the situation (whether or not I need to buff myself/others), and shortbow.

I just disable the autoattack on the sword and it’s just fine. I know a lot of people complain about having to do this to get around the dodge issues, but it’s never been much of a problem for me since I play a lot of Street Fighter so I am comfortable with accurately timed button presses. The trick is to not spam the key more than you need so you can always pull off a dodge when you must and not get stuck in the startup for the next attack. It does no good to disable auto attack if you are spamming the key.

Finally, as for the Aragorn business it is really quite simple. When designing Dungeons and Dragons (of course the granddaddy of all RPGs) the Ranger class was admittedly a direct rip off of Aragorn in LotR. They literally based the archetype and abilities off of Aragorn, and called it a Ranger just because that’s what he was. Since it can be argued that every RPG since is derivative of DnD, all Ranger classes are derived in some way from Aragorn. The notion of an all ranged Ranger class is in fact non-traditional and not the other way around. Aragorn is the prototype.

A close second that is always mentioned is the legendary Ranger who is also not known for using bows(but is known for his pet): Drizzt Do’Urden.

Guild Wars 2 is a derivative of Guild Wars 1 in which rangers primary weapons were bows, and the use of another weapon required a secondary profession to be picked up and specced into.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Can anybody really be mad at guild wars 1 ranger veterans who used a bow for almost a decade as a primary weapon to expect the same level of efficiency with a bow as the class with the same name?

Not to mention that there is lore connecting the games, and the professions are based of the lore from the first game and the 250 years in between. Meaning that rangers, for 250 years, forgot how to use the bow well, forgot how to work with their pet as efficiently, forgot how to summon their strong spirits, and forgot how to actively remedy conditions from themselves. On top of that, they gained no real proficiency at anything.

So now things are screwed up from an expectation AND a lore perspective. So as much as people want to get on here and tell people they are wrong for wanting a ranger to be ranged base, those people have every reason and right to be disappointed with how the class has turned out versus where the lore shows it came from.

One problem with this argument; you speak for all GW1 rangers I played GW1, and I utterly disagree with you.
I love the GW2 ranger because of the pet; in guildwars 1 I enjoyed my pet to the point all 8 skills were pet skills, and brought 16 beast mastery. I never relied on the bow because it was boring and dreadfully inefficient for anything beyond interrupting which I never saw the point of in most cases when you can just have your pet maul them to death for you.
The pet was, especially after the pve update, was so broken as to be a joke. 21 second deep wound and +53 damage attack every 5 seconds for 3 energy anyone? With another pet attack that gave a total of 13 energy if the target had conditions? All on something that never got dp, and could be unblockable for 26 seconds in every 30.

I can count the number of other beastmaster rangers I saw in GW1 on one hand. Five. I saw five over the years, and I can’t count how many were splinter+barrage rangers who wasted a skill slot (two before the pve update) bringing a pet that did absolutely nothing beyond dying from the first two hits because they hadn’t put any points in beastmaster, shutting down their skills for 10 seconds. The best that could be said is provided a corpse for the necromancer to summon minions (to those of you who didn’t play gw1; necromancers needed a corpse to produce a minion) but they’d often bring one even if there wasn’t. So it was eyecandy that died two seconds into a fight, shutting the ranger down for ten. Is that the

So I hope you can find it in yourself to forgive me if I’m not exactly crying that the ranger in GW2 isn’t very much like the ranger in guildwars 1. If you want to use the bow, fine I am not saying you shouldn’t. What I’m getting annoyed with is your apparent insistence they are supposed to use it entirely (why melee weapons then?) and the insistence that because of this, they should be the best with ranged weapons (when the warrior is clearly supposed to be the “grab weapon, kill stuff with it” class) and the pet should be this nebulous eyecandy thing (when it’s been made very clear it’s not)

jcbroe.4329:

Bob.8456:

I love 1 handed sword, with either dagger or warhorn depending on the situation (whether or not I need to buff myself/others), and shortbow.

I just disable the autoattack on the sword and it’s just fine. I know a lot of people complain about having to do this to get around the dodge issues, but it’s never been much of a problem for me since I play a lot of Street Fighter so I am comfortable with accurately timed button presses. The trick is to not spam the key more than you need so you can always pull off a dodge when you must and not get stuck in the startup for the next attack. It does no good to disable auto attack if you are spamming the key.

Finally, as for the Aragorn business it is really quite simple. When designing Dungeons and Dragons (of course the granddaddy of all RPGs) the Ranger class was admittedly a direct rip off of Aragorn in LotR. They literally based the archetype and abilities off of Aragorn, and called it a Ranger just because that’s what he was. Since it can be argued that every RPG since is derivative of DnD, all Ranger classes are derived in some way from Aragorn. The notion of an all ranged Ranger class is in fact non-traditional and not the other way around. Aragorn is the prototype.

A close second that is always mentioned is the legendary Ranger who is also not known for using bows(but is known for his pet): Drizzt Do’Urden.

Guild Wars 2 is a derivative of Guild Wars 1 in which rangers primary weapons were bows, and the use of another weapon required a secondary profession to be picked up and specced into.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Can anybody really be mad at guild wars 1 ranger veterans who used a bow for almost a decade as a primary weapon to expect the same level of efficiency with a bow as the class with the same name?

Not to mention that there is lore connecting the games, and the professions are based of the lore from the first game and the 250 years in between. Meaning that rangers, for 250 years, forgot how to use the bow well, forgot how to work with their pet as efficiently, forgot how to summon their strong spirits, and forgot how to actively remedy conditions from themselves. On top of that, they gained no real proficiency at anything.

So now things are screwed up from an expectation AND a lore perspective. So as much as people want to get on here and tell people they are wrong for wanting a ranger to be ranged base, those people have every reason and right to be disappointed with how the class has turned out versus where the lore shows it came from.

There were lots of GW1 rangers who ran with melee weapons as well….R/A, R/W, R/D, etc.

I wasn’t commenting on how people chose to play the game. It is an undeniable fact that the rangers primary choice of weapon in guild wars 1 was a bow, and that in order to be proficient with another weapon, you had to pick up a secondary class in order to do so.

Just because you didn’t like it or didn’t choose to play it that way, it doesn’t mean that the bow is any less the primary weapon. If you chose to use another weapon or chose not to take any bow skills on the bar, it didn’t make the rangers natural primary weapon magically change from something other than a bow.

Also, PvE wasn’t the only content in the game. Interupt rangers were a huge part of the meta for the majority of the life cycle of guild wars 1 competitive play. The game was balanced primarily around PvP, just like it is now. Which is why every state of the game has a pvp focus, and why all of the livestreams are done between the pvp devs and high level pvp players.