Guild Wars 2

Post too long…..

I also gotta say to the people fighting for Rifles.

….Dang, gotta give you respect for still making the case for Rangers + Rifles, and refusing to consider any other option. But,….I still don’t like it.

i just want to say one thing:

Personally I’ve given up suggesting or even wishing for anything anymore. As much as I want to love my Ranger being a WvW player I just can’t. Not when I could run a Guardian, Warrior, Engineer, Necromancer and be 10x more helpful and effective. We could sit here all day and argue, “Rifle!” “NO! Staff!” “Shut it, RIFLES!” but none of that matters because ANet does what they want.

Not only are we missing support and control weapons our utility skills are all sorts of screwed up.

Want to use signets? 30 trait points.
Want to use traps? 30 trait points & all utility skills.
Want to use spirits? 30 trait points & all utility skills.
Want your pet to be effective? 30 trait points.

I’m so disgusted with how they designed the entire class in this game. They took entire archetypes of Ranger play from the last GW and delegated it to simple “Utility” and literally ruined all of them.

Traps should have been weapon skills.
Spirits should have been the profession mechanic instead of pets. (Different spirits, not this crap we got now.)
Pets should have been left to the elite Alpha Strike and merged with RaO.
Signets therefore would be effecting us by default.
Rapid Fire should have been a charged “Triple Shot.” (If I wanted to shoot a bunch of weak arrows I’d play with the Shortbow.)

Okay I just made all that up (Cept the Rapid Fire thing, been saying that for ages) but I’m kinda liking it now which sucks because it’ll never happen even if I magically wrote up 100 pages of pure perfection about it. Anyways, just stop caring and go play the game. If you’re not enjoying the game play something else and check back on this one if you ever remember it. As much as I want to say, “Input on the forums is deeply valued.” that statement kinda makes me laugh.

Chrispy.5641:

Kasama.8941:

The first rifle was called a hand cannon, and dates back to the 13th century China. There’s nothing modern about it.

The First rifle was invented almost 800 years ago, but it wasn’t used in Hunting for those 800 years, and it never automatically replaced bows. There are still many people who hunt with bows today, so there is nothing about Bows that equals ancient history either!

Actually the first rifles were made in Europe during the mid 15th century, and only really became more than a novelty during the mid 18th century. Before that they weren’t using rifled barrels, but smooth barrels for firearms, such as muskets.

I understand you guys weren’t actually talking about rifles, but just thought I should add that little note.

Chrispy.5641:

And there have been just as many replies in those Topics, saying that the Rifle is a horrible idea, and it doesn’t fit very well with the Ranger or Nature. So, Your point with that is what, exactly? Topics > Replies?

Rangers are good with Traps and Suvival skills because they are so at one with Nature (especially a Trap that freezes enemys? Or a survival skill that creates literal muddy terrain? Or how about Rampage as one with strengthens the link between you and your animal companion (which you charmed straight out of Nature) with every attack you make? How does that even work without Nature?)

The First rifle was invented almost 800 years ago, but it wasn’t used in Hunting for those 800 years, and it never automatically replaced bows. There are still many people who hunt with bows today, so there is nothing about Bows that equals ancient history either!

Unless the Ranger has a Nest on the end of the gun, and it Shoots Hornets and Wasps out of the gun and they cause Vulnerability and Poison with every attack, It wont be that much different, which is my problem with the weapon. Unless it can be used in a totally off the wall unique way, its not going to be that much different from how the Warrior or Engineer use their rifles.

There are Control Roles the Rifle could fill, like shooting a net, etc (which the Engineer does already). There are Control Roles a Staff or Scepter could fill as well. Hell, a Mainhand Torch could fill a better Control/Support Role than a Rifle,…And hasn’t been done already!

Really, its a new Melee weapon that we need! We have 2! There is a severe lack of representation of the Rangers Close Range combat abilities here!!! And having an Animal Companion to go infront of you to soak up damage is no excuse for the lack of melee options!!!

… The Point I was making in my last post was that Rangers do not automatically equal Range. I am not for or against Rifles, but there are many things besides Range, including their animal companion, survival skills, Tracking, or Nature Magic. I want to see one of those points get overhauled or redone before I see another Ranged weapon. That is my opinion and I am sticking to it!

There are just as many replies that argue for the rifle, as against it. My point is simply that there are many players who want to see a rifle for the Ranger. So arguments about it being an unpopular choice, are untrue. People arguing against it are mostly just scared that a rifle for the Ranger would somehow change everything, which is ridiculous.

There’s a big difference between “being one with nature”, and having knowledge about it. You don’t need any magic to make a trap, to prepare your weapon (Sharpening Stone), or to sic your pet at a foe (“Sic ’Em”). Muddy Terrain is really just a trap, as the description simply says “Use mud to cripple and immobilize foes”. Rampage As One doesn’t say anything about being magical either, just that you simply “rampage” with your pet. If a human with a dog, gets into a fight, you know what the dog will do? Attack the same target to protect its owner.

A rifle is the evolution of a musket, and a musket is the evolution of the hand cannon. Same design, same mechanic, but with small improvements. But it doesn’t really matter in relation to the game.

lol now you’re just being ridiculous for the sake of sounding clever. How about making a bullet that, when it hits a target, the target becomes covered in bees and gets blinded. We can even call it the “Honey Shot”..

But you don’t know that a main-hand torch could fill a better control/support role than a rifle, because until skills are actually created for a weapon, the weapon is just a skin. So what you’re really saying is; “a torch skin could fill a better control/support role than a rifle skin”.

Why do we need a new melee weapon? Because mathematically, based on the amount of weapons we have, it makes sense? The numbers must be equal! Yes? Seriously, that’s a hollow argument. The game is about fun, and if people want to see a rifle for the Ranger, then it would be pretty stupid to let this stand in the way.

I know that the meaning of the word ranger doesn’t have anything to do with ranged weapons. Neither is it my reason for wanting a rifle for the Guild Wars 2 Ranger. As with anyone ells suggesting any other weapon, I simply just think it would be cool to have a rifle..

Surbrus.6942:

Chrispy.5641:

Kasama.8941:

The first rifle was called a hand cannon, and dates back to the 13th century China. There’s nothing modern about it.

The First rifle was invented almost 800 years ago, but it wasn’t used in Hunting for those 800 years, and it never automatically replaced bows. There are still many people who hunt with bows today, so there is nothing about Bows that equals ancient history either!

Actually the first rifles were made in Europe during the mid 15th century, and only really became more than a novelty during the mid 18th century. Before that they weren’t using rifled barrels, but smooth barrels for firearms, such as muskets.

I understand you guys weren’t actually talking about rifles, but just thought I should add that little note.

The rifle is an evolution of the musket. The difference, at the time, was only the projectile and reload mechanism that each used. The first rifles were even refereed to as “rifled muskets”. The idea of both are the same; you have an increased barrel length that gives you a longer fire range.

Screw a Rifle. I WANT a Crossbow.

We need something to distinguish ourselves. Granted our pets do that now but not in the right way. Just just follow people you are attacking then hump their leg when they stop moving.

‘Sigh’

@Kasama..
So….Your reasons for wanting a new weapon is because it will look cool? Then why are we even having this argument?!? I want cool weapons too, (Melee Staff, Whip, Spear, Crossbow, a Freaking Rocket Launcher!!!!) but, unless Anet can find a specific purpose for them in the game, that doesn’t copy other class Mechanics, I don’t want to see it, because that will cheapen the Character class, no matter which one it is.

And what about the Frost ‘Trap’. I guess the Ranger just has such Awesome L33T Survival Skills, that he carries Ice around in a backpack and keeps them for whenever he needs to set a trap, huh?

@ Surbrus
When I said Rifles, I meant Gun, Hand Cannon, etc.

This game really isn’t a traditional MMO. I don’t see what the problem is with the rifle given that we already have wizards using daggers as a meta and a Mesmer class using a ranged great sword. Anet doesn’t have to follow the lore set by other games. The only reason I can see people complaining about such a weapon is because at first glance it seems like it would be single target only. But I’m sure with a bit of creativity it could easily be made an AoE weapon.

The problem with the rifle is that it would not have a unique function among the weapon sets already available. There is already a ranged power weapon and a ranged condition weapon.

You’re not getting a weapon that doesn’t have a unique function or purpose. There are an abundance of other classes to play if the weapon is more defining to you than the actual mechanics behind the gameplay.

/thread

…I’m actually kind of hoping to get Rifles now just so I can peruse all the uproar on the forum. Honestly, I’d like to have another weapon akin to the axe; not long ranged but not melee. Something that does a little of both, maybe? Either way, power to the Rifle supporters, for while it may not fit into the lore it shouldn’t be surprising to anyone if it gets tacked onto us.

Rifles for Rangers, care to donate? Rifles for Rangers!

jcbroe.4329:

The problem with the rifle is that it would not have a unique function among the weapon sets already available. There is already a ranged power weapon and a ranged condition weapon.

You’re not getting a weapon that doesn’t have a unique function or purpose. There are an abundance of other classes to play if the weapon is more defining to you than the actual mechanics behind the gameplay.

/thread

Considering Anet determines a weapon’s function and purpose by unique skills independently for each class, this statement makes no sense. There is no rule in GW2 that states a ranger must use any given weapon to fulfill the same role another class uses it for. In fact there are plenty of skill sets that dictate the exact opposite.

Look at how a warrior uses the rifle compared to the engineer. They are vastly different, and there are several other examples within the game too. Too many to list actually, so the evidence against this mentality renders your opinion somewhat questionable. You are free to keep it, of course; I just don’t understand the logic considering the Anet’s design philosophy.

You say there are already a ranged power and condition weapons. There are no long ranged cc or support weapons for the ranger. I can certainly see rifles used for long ranged cc and even some support with the right set of skills. It would actually compliment the LB quite well and create a unique playstyle opening new builds for current LB players. Who knows what other synergies will emerge for other weapons.

I don’t really care if they add them or not, but the argument they use for not putting it in is flawed at best.

In their eyes, the ranger is a woodsman, a hunter, an expert in handling nature and bending it’s abilities to his/her advantage. They give rangers access to weapons that are all made of things easy to retrieve from nature(wood/stone/iron). The case is, that rifles(as of how they are pretty much made in GW2) are also made out of those elements, with the addition of blasting powder, which is rather easy to make, especially for an “expert woodsman/survival expert”.
Let’s compare bows to rifles. It just uses a different natural mechanic to give acceleration to a projectile. One uses the force of a bowstring, the other uses the air pressure of the exploding gun powder. Both natural mechanics, handled in a different way.

I’m not really happy with the way I expressed my thinking above, but it’s at the best of my translational ability.

Very true, Arenis. That was the original argument made pre-launch, and it was picked apart with the same evidence you present. Not to mention the process for crafting simple, ancient firearms and powder are even simpler than the process American indians used for curing leather.

At some point, Anet basically said rangers don’t use guns as a political statement to resist rise the technology and affect the charr are having on the environment. Which would be fine for a particular group of associated rangers, but for all of them across Tyria? Especially Iron Legion charr rangers? And yet rangers of all races pick up all sorts of technological thingamajiggers and ride in airships and use explosives, etc, throughout the personal story. Hmmm…..

rifle?? nah, we need a crossbow, a real power based weapon.

Chrispy.5641:

@Kasama..
So….Your reasons for wanting a new weapon is because it will look cool? Then why are we even having this argument?!? I want cool weapons too, (Melee Staff, Whip, Spear, Crossbow, a Freaking Rocket Launcher!!!!) but, unless Anet can find a specific purpose for them in the game, that doesn’t copy other class Mechanics, I don’t want to see it, because that will cheapen the Character class, no matter which one it is.

And what about the Frost ‘Trap’. I guess the Ranger just has such Awesome L33T Survival Skills, that he carries Ice around in a backpack and keeps them for whenever he needs to set a trap, huh?

@ Surbrus
When I said Rifles, I meant Gun, Hand Cannon, etc.

We are having this argument, because people here are trying to deny the rifle for the Ranger, based around hollow and ignorant arguments. Which is ridiculous, considering that the skills and animations for a possible Ranger rifle, can be anything ArenaNet makes up. It’s a bit like saying; “the Mesmer shouldn’t have a greatsword, because it’s not a magical based weapon, and I don’t want the Mesmer to swing a greatsword around like a Warrior”. Until skills are actually made, we are just discussing a skin here.

I’m not saying the Ranger is only a hunter, just that it has as much potential of being a hunter, as it does being a druid like Ranger. So arguments about the Ranger only having a magical theme, and the rifle therefor doesn’t fit, are directly untrue. Just as many skills are “hunter based”.

Listen, it’s fine if people don’t want a rifle for the Ranger. The problem I have with it are when people here try and argue against it by using points that are directly false or purely made up. If your argument is “I don’t think a rifle would look good”, then that’s fine. However, if your arguments are; “we don’t need a rifle for the Ranger”, “the longbow already has the role of the rifle”, “not many people want to see a rifle for the Ranger”, “a rifle doesn’t fit the magical theme of the Ranger”, “a rifle is not a weapon of nature, because it makes noise”, “ArenaNet have already decided they don’t want a rifle for the Ranger, over a year ago”, “we already have two ranged two-handed weapons, so we can’t have one more”, and so on… Then you are talking out of your kitten . Don’t try and deny others enjoyment, just because you don’t agree with it.

I am all for the Rifle as long as it IS NOT a Retread of the Longbow, and it DOES NOT COPY OTHER CLASSES WEAPONS If the Rifle is a RETREAD of Other weapons, than DON’T BOTHER ANET, It will be POINTLESS and will CHEAPEN THE RANGER CLASS!!!

That has always been my arguement against Rifles, and I have said it in one form or another in almost all of my posts here. The thing about Rangers being with Nature is just a side thing that I am willing to part with because of Races like the Asura and Charr. So is the whole (Rangers do not = Range)

I am pretty sure I said that already Kasama, but just incase your steam filled rage made you magically forget that fact, I said it again in bold print, and as clear as possible with as few inbetween words as possible so even a Skritt can understand it without hurting their brain.

And Just incase you want to argue even more because you keep saying “Rifles will Look cool! We need Rifles!” The Argument I had in the first paragraph is FAR more a Valid Argument than your “It will look cool!”, so unless you have any REAL reason why the Ranger should have a Rifle, Other than how cool it would look, stop making up reasons and excuses and arguing that the other side’s reasons are stupider than yours are, because in truth, both sides are getting pretty lame in their arguments at this point.

Ooh! I know! Argue a little more for the fact that Rangers don’t have a good Support weapon, and We have a pet that is always out, that we can barely support unless we waste out utility skills on it. I know you tried to earlier, so Try a little harder!

I swear, some people really lack imagination.

Us rangers have kittening dogs! Dogs for crying out loud! Sure you can replace it with a stupid flamingo, but no-one else in this game can have a proper dog companion! And yes, in many ways, we fulfill the hunter archetype. Sure, warriors already have a rifle, but they’re moving around in full plate. Like the prey is gonna stand still while hearing loud-howard stalking through the woods in his plate armour…

Just think for a minute. Rifle 5: “Track’em!”. Opens up a little window with the list of all hostile targets in a radius of 2000/3000/5000/whatever-anyway-it-will-be-nerfed. Pick one, and no, you don’t get an obvious dot on your mini-map. However your dog (or flamingo if you really have to) gains swiftness and rushes straight to that target.

Bang. Unique mechanic? check. Slight counter to stealth? check. Little support through improved souting (counting the baddies in a given radius)? check. Pet synergy? you bet! Hunting flavour? well, duh.

Make the other 4 skills single target damage or cc to keep with the hunting rifle theme (not a frigging shotgun), include wacky Tyria stuff like the tranquiliser rounds the iron legion rangers use to capture large creature to make war beasts (ranged daze) or paint balls (puts a revealed debuff on target, just think of the forum QQ folks!) and you get a brand new hunting style that emphasizes the hunter/dog relationship.

Of course, I still want a quarterstaff to go along with my longbow so i can play Robin Hood with other merry rangers wearing green tights and spamming /laugh.

Us rangers are awesome. From the merry men in the woods to the light infantry elite corps through the shamanic woodland warrior and the deer hunter, there’s just nothing we can’t do. Well. Apart from getting picked for a dungeon.

^here’s someone with a little imagination.

I can definitely see a Tranquilizer/Hunting Rifle. Especially Tranquilizer guns, almost all of which are silent, so it can totally make people happy based on that right there.

the Autoattack skill could be a Tranquilizer Dart, but to keep it unique (and totally not like the Engineer’s Elixer Gun’s Tranquilizer Dart at all!!), instead of it immediately applying any effect, it starts to apply stacks of a new effect called Tranquilizer on an enemy. It has a slow fire rate, like the Longbow though. When it reaches 3 Stacks it starts to apply confusion. When it reaches 6 stacks it applies Weakness instead. At 10 Stacks it applies Daze, and resets. (This skill takes 10 full seconds to build up to that, and longer if the enemy heals to remove conditions.)

Maybe we can have a healing skill where you shoot your pet with a Tranquilizer dart, but its filled with awesome healing stuff that heals your pet, and gives it Health Regeneration, Swiftness, Fury, and Might. |If your pet is dead, Maybe the Skill’s text could change to injecting yourself with the Dart, healing you for(X) and giving yourself health regen, Swiftness, Fury, and Might.|

The Paintball Marker Skill (yeah, stealth debuff is kind of powerful and oddly specific, but would be awesome!). Instead (but probably also too powerful) we can have the Skill target an enemy or area. These Marked Enemies are brightly colored and take 10% extra damage from You, your Pet and Allies (and is independent of the extra damage enemies take from vulnerability). (Stealthed enemies are brightly colored, so atleast we can see where they are.)

Maybe the #4 skill shoots a Bolas out, and it gets tangled up in an Enemy’s legs, Crippling them, Pets that attack a Crippled enemy during this time will apply stacks of Torment. (okay, this skill is sort of like Shortbow skill 4….just torment instead of bleeding)

There we go! Now we’re getting somewhere! I am still not 100% for the idea of a rifle because I still think it would be too much like other classes’ weapons (also, its yet another ranged weapon), but we are getting to something that is more unique. We Need Ideas! Get Back into This Thread and Throw some out there!

Kasama.8941:

(snip) If a human with a dog, gets into a fight, you know what the dog will do? Attack the same target to protect its owner. (snip)

Hate to go all off topic here, but this particular misconception bugs me. If a human with a dog gets in a fight, 90%+ of the time, the dog will attack the loser, regardless of whether it’s the owner or not. Dogs are opportunists, and will (barring extensive, long term training) fight on the side of the winner, every time.

Dog training is what I do, and this idea “my dog will protect me” has resulted in far more harm than I can easily express in a forum post.

Back on-topic? I’m anti-rifle – but then, I’m anti-firearm in my bloody fantasy games anyway. Would much rather see a staff, or a better sword (mainhand dagger, anyone?) than see a rifle.

Yeah, another one hand melee option is needed far more than long range aoe/control. Unless ANET can add and balance multiple new weapons for each profession (which I doubt), there is no real debate in pve and wvw: one hand melee should come first.

I’m not nearly as proficient in spvp so I won’t comment on the usefulness of a second melee option or whether that makes sense in spvp.

Basically, I think the sword’s leap animation is great for sticking on target (could even use a buff on the leaps for more stickiness) but most avoid it in pve and wvw for that exact reason: the leaps “root” you onto the target.

With the greatsword, this isn’t an issue as you all know. It’s too bad we can’t slash freely in melee with a one hander. The push for more medium/long range weapons just doesn’t make sense to me. :/

I’m just being realistic. It’s not even what I want. Personally I want a whip. But we can’t always get what we want. :p

Maybe just try to consider that we’ve discussed this topic to death? Maybe you should go read that thread, Kasami? Instead of being such a meany face to everyone who disagrees…