We're so OP now that we'll dominate sPVP.
You either:
Have never fought a good ranger over a node.
Are a bad ranger who thinks the class is hardmode
Good Rangers have dominated and will continue until the next patch when it comes to defending\assaulting a node.
The kittens will come in due time. Dun worry.
\-\ Poquito (Engineer) /-/ Tarnished Coast
Not Sure If Serious [BZNZ] ||| Cynical [CYN]
Not Sure If Serious [BZNZ] ||| Cynical [CYN]
Rangers were quite decent in pvp before the patch and now they’re even stronger. I like those changes for my catmaster build, cause it realy makes me a recon to consider with. Faster Sick’Em, more healthy cats, responsive F2, signets buff – this is fantastic.
As Robert Hrouda said – this patch hadn’t fix all our problems but it is a step in the right direction. Little love to LB and spirit redesign – and ranger will become what it is intended to.
sPvP != PvE & WvW
Buffing pets like they did is bad for both. By all accounts rangers are an outstanding skirmish class and they have just been made stronger.
They could have left the pets with the crappy AI and lower stats if they had bothered to fix the trait lines and weapons instead. Rather than address those they buffed the pet… when they do get around to fixing those they will need to nerf the pet. Or they’ll never fix traits and rangers will continue to be a mess.
sPvP != PvE & WvW
Buffing pets like they did is bad for both. By all accounts rangers are an outstanding skirmish class and they have just been made stronger.
They could have left the pets with the crappy AI and lower stats if they had bothered to fix the trait lines and weapons instead. Rather than address those they buffed the pet… when they do get around to fixing those they will need to nerf the pet. Or they’ll never fix traits and rangers will continue to be a mess.
I definitely agree that Rangers were a good skirmish class before these changes. Not so much that buffing them was out of the question, but not the most in need in that regard.
However, I don’t agree that they can buff Ranger-based DPS without first addressing pets. All of the Ranger’s personal DPS is balanced around the pet being in combat with the target and being a functional element of overall damage. By buffing the Ranger first and leaving the pets crappy, you’re only forcing your way to the same goal while committing your design to bad gameplay for the Ranger (via a class mechanic that has crap functionality that you’re now afraid to improve).
Once the pets are functioning on the level they need to be you’ll have a clearer idea of how far you can adjust the Ranger’s personal DPS and utility to put the class where it needs to be.
Well it comes down to a basic question, when you are playing ranger class, are you the ranger or are you the pet? The more they buff the pet, the more the pet is the class and the more the ranger is supporting the pet. You are not a ranger with a pet, you are a pet with a ranger.
The problem with “fixing” pets first is that it skews heavily how they will fix the “player” after.
If you wanted build diversity, the effectiveness ranger for the pet should be heavily gated by the BM trait line. At 0 BM, the ranger pet should be about as useful as a mid range necro minion (maybe with some utility that you can pop 1-2 times per combat). At 30 BM, the pet should be beast mode beatdown kinda like the BM/Bunker builds we are seeing now. Likewise a ranger who doesnt spec into BM shouldnt just outright be functioning at 70% efficiency because they didnt want to pay the pet trait point tax.
Well it comes down to a basic question, when you are playing ranger class, are you the ranger or are you the pet? The more they buff the pet, the more the pet is the class and the more the ranger is supporting the pet. You are not a ranger with a pet, you are a pet with a ranger.
The problem with “fixing” pets first is that it skews heavily how they will fix the “player” after.
If you wanted build diversity, the effectiveness ranger for the pet should be heavily gated by the BM trait line. At 0 BM, the ranger pet should be about as useful as a mid range necro minion (maybe with some utility that you can pop 1-2 times per combat). At 30 BM, the pet should be beast mode beatdown kinda like the BM/Bunker builds we are seeing now. Likewise a ranger who doesnt spec into BM shouldnt just outright be functioning at 70% efficiency because they didnt want to pay the pet trait point tax.
I agree with you, however it is quite hard to achieve it cause the whole machanics must be overhauled. No one will do it ) So just enjoy your pet – you will have to be a pet with a ranger as long as your pet can kill things.
The class design is pretty loud and clear in that there is no intent to trivialize the pet’s contribution; when you play a Ranger you’re taking the Ranger and the pet as an assumption of every build option. You’re not playing “either or” in the same sense that no matter how much one of your Elementalist’s elements is specced into, you’re not able to make it defining. You’re still tied to the responsibility of all four elements to play any build capably.
The class design is pretty loud and clear in that there is no intent to trivialize the pet’s contribution; when you play a Ranger you’re taking the Ranger and the pet as an assumption of every build option. You’re not playing “either or” in the same sense that no matter how much one of your Elementalist’s elements is specced into, you’re not able to make it defining. You’re still tied to the responsibility of all four elements to play any build capably.
I agree that this is what is evident, I am saying that if you want build diversity, this is the wrong way to go.
The class design is pretty loud and clear in that there is no intent to trivialize the pet’s contribution; when you play a Ranger you’re taking the Ranger and the pet as an assumption of every build option. You’re not playing “either or” in the same sense that no matter how much one of your Elementalist’s elements is specced into, you’re not able to make it defining. You’re still tied to the responsibility of all four elements to play any build capably.
I agree that this is what is evident, I am saying that if you want build diversity, this is the wrong way to go.
How’s it the wrong way to go? We have a large amount of pets to choose from (you don’t have to use canines in PvP like so many forum goers seem to think) and you can buff your pet without even going into BM, hell skirmishing has like what? 4 traits early on to buff the pet? (Granted one is total kitten). We have TONS of diversity, I mean hell just changing my pets can change my role in dungeons with my current build.
They sing dark, delicious notes about power and family.
As their mother, I have to grant them their wish. – Forever Fyonna
As their mother, I have to grant them their wish. – Forever Fyonna
According to this guy anyway.
Oh man, I swear. It’s always the people that don’t actually play the class shouting the loudest for nerfs.
Yeah, figures. A bad rolls an easy class and dies to the underdog profession and automatically assumes this recent updates turned us into omnipotent gods. I try not to be too cynical with ‘nerf’ arguments and complaints about the status quo to Anet, but this is just re—…
…Special. This is just special. And swell. And delightful and dandy.
Grind Wars 2: Heart of Tears
On the note of design, Why if the pet is such an vital part of Ranger and their performance why is most of the condition removal tied to bending the pet over and kitten it?
Pets have been hidden due to rising Player complaints.