Guild Wars 2

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Ghertu.7096:

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Burning the end of a sharp stick in the fire also can be defined as technology. Ranger doesn’t use technology of the particular type that constitutes firearms and technical gadgets.

Oh, you starting to understand. Look, you dividing technology to some types based on your personal feeling of it. If there is ranger who can use sharp stick in the fire but can’t use firearms there should be a profession that can use firearms but can’t use a plasma cannon because it’s “too much technology” for them. Then there sould be a profession that can use a plasma cannon but can’t use quantum teleporting device because it’s “too much technology” for them. Then there sould be a profession that can use a quantum teleporting device but… And so on and so forth.
So, technology is technology. Theme you describing feels non-existent for me because it doesn’t really supported by something I saw in game. “Doesn’t use technology, huh? But actually they do. Is there theme at all?”

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Skins do not center around the class themes, a Warrior can use a magical longbow just the same as a Ranger can use a mechanical one.

Since magical artifacts and mechanical devices do exist in the world, it’s pretty stupid to not use them if it doesn’t take to be a magic caster or technical specialist. No much difference from using a pistol.

Oh I always understood, it is you yourself that doesn’t.

I’m going to explain it once more. It’s not my personal feeling on technology, but the term is broad and I did define it as pertains to the Ranger.

No matter how you try and justify it, you’ll always be wrong because you are not accepting that ANet has decided against it when they initially designed the Ranger and they are not going to change that now. They have designed the classes around aesthetics and archetypes that people will associate with. A Nature magic pet class will never use guns because Engineers and Deadeyes exist, they have the aesthetics and archetype that uses firearms and they are also the reason that a firearm wielding Ranger is pointless.

Once more. “Ranger doesn’t use technology of the particular type that constitutes firearms and technical gadgets.” Ranger/Druid/Soulbeast has around 120 skills and none are mechanical in nature or involve any form of modern technology the likes of which I have described above. Ranger’s theme is nature magic and beast affinity.

Here’s a direct quote from the guys who designed Ranger.

OnRPG: I knew there would be bows and things, but as you say the technology has advanced, so will they be more than pointy sticks on a string?

Anet: [Jon]The Ranger, one of the things we did with it in Guild Wars 2 is kind of go with a much more bestial and naturey feel and so because of that he kind of focuses on a lot weapons that are very natural. If he’s in melee combat he uses great swords and swords, and at range he throws axes, uses bows and short bows, long bows, and a lot of his spells, I got to mention the trap that [has] poison snakes, or he summons a nature spirit, and so we kind of embraced that naturey feel with him, kind of took him in that direction because we feel like that’s an archetype that people who play a Ranger really like and it gives us kind of an opportunity, you know in other places, to use the more advanced rifles and pistols with our [more earthly? doesn’t sound right..garbled..Sounded like it was a glitch or edited out intentionally..] professions.

[Eric]Yeah, I think we’d like to look at as the Ranger profession has evolved the same way that the world has evolved, and the Rangers have sort of gone anti-technology, they’ve gone into the wild, they’ve gone and embraced sort of spirit, and things like that. There are other professions in our, you know, five unye, as yet revealed, we mentioned Warriors for example have no problem using rifles. There are plenty of other professions remaining we’re going to use both rifles and pistols, and so for the Ranger it just didn’t feel right for them to be using firearms.

To summarise that quote box;

• The Ranger, one of the things we did with it in Guild Wars 2 is kind of go with a much more bestial and naturey feel and so because of that he kind of focuses on a lot weapons that are very natural…

• …we feel like that’s an archetype that people who play a Ranger really like…

• Rangers have sort of gone anti-technology, they’ve gone into the wild, they’ve gone and embraced sort of spirit, and things like that…

• …for the Ranger it just didn’t feel right for them to be using firearms…

See, it doesn’t matter how you and I feel about whether or not Ranger should use rifles and similar technology, because the archetype is set in stone. You can’t just change the archetype, even with an eSpec. And, there really is no point trying to make it fit because the other two medium armor classes can already use this technology. Ranger will remain separate from this form of technology because they have no need for it. Anything Ranger needs can be provided by martial weapons or nature magic.

I do not demanding ANet to provide certain weapon asap, I’m just arguing against that “firearms do not fit ranger theme” thing.
Well, I can understand the way of thinking that produced such theme, though I find that way of thinking pretty boring.
Finally. Ranger is someone affiliated with nature, I got it. But, in my opinion, firearms do not contradict with that. A pistol is not less naturey than a sword. So rejecting to use firearms do not make rangers look more naturey, it makes them look like some weirdos or hypocrites. If ANet tried to create a certain flavor that way, they failed.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Burning the end of a sharp stick in the fire also can be defined as technology. Ranger doesn’t use technology of the particular type that constitutes firearms and technical gadgets.

Oh, you starting to understand. Look, you dividing technology to some types based on your personal feeling of it. If there is ranger who can use sharp stick in the fire but can’t use firearms there should be a profession that can use firearms but can’t use a plasma cannon because it’s “too much technology” for them. Then there sould be a profession that can use a plasma cannon but can’t use quantum teleporting device because it’s “too much technology” for them. Then there sould be a profession that can use a quantum teleporting device but… And so on and so forth.
So, technology is technology. Theme you describing feels non-existent for me because it doesn’t really supported by something I saw in game. “Doesn’t use technology, huh? But actually they do. Is there theme at all?”

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Skins do not center around the class themes, a Warrior can use a magical longbow just the same as a Ranger can use a mechanical one.

Since magical artifacts and mechanical devices do exist in the world, it’s pretty stupid to not use them if it doesn’t take to be a magic caster or technical specialist. No much difference from using a pistol.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

…there is zero point in making a rifle ranger, since any possible role the rifle could serve is already covered either by Ranger bows, Deadeye, Warrior or Engineer. What purpose could a rifle Ranger serve that isn’t already taken?

I actually agree with you on that. I rather was thinking about how properly designed pistol (pistol can be hunting weapon) could make a nice addition to existing one-handed weapons.

…Warrior is a non-magical, martial oriented class, ANet will not change this for the same reason they will not change Ranger to use technology.

This. Warrior doesn’t use magic. Ranger do use technology. Bow is technology. Trap is technology. Troll unguent is some mixture of natural components, I guess… and gunpowder is that too!
Also.

Well, there are also bow skins that are made out of clouds and lightning, or living creatures.

Aaaaaaand… Soooooo… What’s your point?

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

See here’s the thing. It does have a right to exist, it is their intellectual property and they decide what theme it will have. Do you think they haven’t already thought about it? Just because you have an opinion on the matter, doesn’t mean anyone has to agree with it, or even listen. You’ll just have to tolerate it, you have no choice.

That’s purpose of public forums: I’m stating my opinion, it’s up to them to listen or not. First, I think they better do just because I see no advantage for them in what you are describing here, there is no “pros and cons”, it looks just plain bad. Second, anyway, I can’t really remember ANet directly stating ranger theme in a way you are describing here so I still suspect you are slandering them. I actually started this argument against some fellow user personal opinion about “usage of firearms doesn’t fit ranger theme”, not against ANet opinion, I didn’t event know they may think this way before tou told me that.

Hah, know what? Even if that is true, they can change their view on ranger theme and no one even notice. Look. it’s obvious why warrior can’t get light armor or focus, no one ever asked ANet to provide foci for warriors and that doesn’t require explanation. But it seems there is plenty of people who don’t understand how usage of firearms doesn’t fit ranger theme and you had to explain that thing to me.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Like I said man, I don’t need to draw the line because it’s not my opinion, I’m just trying to explain ANet’s stance on the subject.

I got it, but it also seems like you also implying that such stance has right to exist and I should tolerate it. I’m explaining why is it terribly wrong not really to you but to everyone who has accidentally bumped into this thread, including, maybe, some of ANet staff.

Lazze.9870:

There is a difference between how a weapon is made and how it functions. Swords, axes and daggers are by no means mechanical weapons just because they were forged by a smith with some awesomesauce gear.

A sword is a pretty mechanical thing not only because it may be made with usage of some complex technology, but because the whole idea of an artifical sharp edge is based on “less area – bigger pressure” rule. Oh, wait, Mother Nature uses the same trick: claws, talons and pecks are based on “less area – bigger pressure” rule. Well, that’s because… nature is a pretty mechanical thing.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

If technology is about exploiting nature, then that is more of a reason for Rangers to reject its use.

I rather meant “just using what nature provides already”.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Like I said before, this is the class design, I’m not making this stuff up, just explaining it and why gunpowder and rifles do not fit into the design as stated by ANet.

It actually looks like you agree that whole idea makes no sense since, again, you are not able to draw a decently visible line between complex and non-complex technology, it remains blurrish because it based on nothing but someone’s personal feelings and that person feels that weird way because… I actually have no idea.

Note: I’m not a native English speaker so I thought “casting” and “forging” are synonyms. And it doesn’t really matter.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

I mean wheels, gears, bearings, complex moving parts etc.

Like a harpoon gun, eh?

Well, I didn’t buy it on release. I bought it later when I got many reviews from my friends saying it is quite fun to play. Why didn’t I buy it on release? Poorly done advertisment campaign, I guess. Information was scattered all around, I was like “Can I have a simple short feature list, please? No? Fine”. And I didn’t bother to lurk for the information because I was tired and doubting if I wish to continue playing. It was on ANet marketing department to got me hyped and they failed. Plus I thought LW2 locations is some kind of preview for HoT and I didn’t like them much. Also theme and flavour were not very appealing. “More jungle landscapes? Thank you sir, I had enough in vanilla game”.

There is to much weapon swapping in the mechanics design right now. I think longbow is not meant to work like that. Since the weapon benefits from a longer distance swapping it for a melee weapon like S/A or GS means: 1) leaving your optimal firing position 2) dealing less damage while you getting back to it after re-swap. Longbow should do decent damage on its own and be swapped for secondary weapon only for occasion like if enemies are getting too close. Choosing a weapon for appropriate situation rather than just mashing swap key would make some different gameplay. I mean, condi-skirmisher style weapon juggling is quite fun, I like it, but it should be an option, not only possible way to use the weapon swap key in this game.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

GS is not a DPS weapon. It’s a utility weapon with powerful defense and CC. Sword is semi-DPS with evasion. Dagger on SoulB is looking to be straight up DPS if built right.

I consider GS defensive abilities as backup for close combat glass cannon wearing medium armor.

Laivine.9308:

Yes but you may salvage exotics and precursors, as they can hide in the “green unidentified” objects.

Well, I believe, the server decides will you get a precursor or not at the very moment you identifying the item. Anyway, you misses an opportunity to get it though.

So with this unidentified gear it not only costs coin to identify it but you also have to go to a heart vendor to do it? Seems like an annoying system just to save some bag space.

This, also.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Ghertu.7096:

Miellyn.6847:

Before we get a rifle or pistol we will get off-hand sword or hammer. Rifle and pistol don’t fit the theme.

Firearms don’t fit “a hunter roaming the woods” theme? And hammer does fit? You kidding me.

Rangers are not hunters roaming the woods. The entire thematic behind the design of the Ranger at the outset was to create a class that rejected the use of mechanical weapons and technology and went further into the forest to develop their Nature Magic skills. Hammer fits as it is a martial weapon.

Lazze.9870:

Ghertu.7096:

Miellyn.6847:

Before we get a rifle or pistol we will get off-hand sword or hammer. Rifle and pistol don’t fit the theme.

Firearms don’t fit “a hunter roaming the woods” theme? And hammer does fit? You kidding me.

The way Anet is setting it up, Ranger is far less focused on mechanical types of weapons, as opposed to thief and engineer. Not that hammer fits that well, but it was a fun build to play in gw1 that revolved around ranger and hammer skills. More important, the rifle brings very little to the table. Hammer does.

I’d assume off-hand sword and focus (some kind of warden type) are on the table. At some point I guess they will introduce new weapon types.

Agree. 2H Spear, Hammer, OH Sword, OH Shield, MH Mace, even MH Torch will happen before Ranger gets a rifle.

An Iron Legion ranger has dropped his compound bow when heard that. Well, it’s not necessary compound bow beacause even primitive bow made of a stick and a lace is pretty mechanical. Also, a sword or an axe, while being really simple weapon in a case of operation way, is usually made with some complex metal casting technology. Well, technology is about exploiting nature. A bow string and a powder both based on physics. Technology may be primitive but it is still technology, lower or higher level. What level of technology is appropriate for a ranger? Can you draw the border?

And I think there is more in ranger than just druid.

Disclaimer: Grammar is kittened up, I know. Sorry for that.
Well, my idea of new elite spec is totally weapon-based. I found myself struggling to come up with some fun ideas expanding profession core mechanics (pets, I mean), so I decided to consider what kind of weapon ranger can possibly get in the future and how it would work. So here is my idea:

The new elite spec would be called Sentinel. The spec grants access to pistol for the main hand and the off-hand both, also it grants access to the shadowstep mechanic. Tier 1 lesser trait allowing you to swap places with a pet.

Weapon skills are those (I intentionally didn’t put there any numbers just to let you get the basic idea also because I didn’t really bothered with proper calculations yet) :

Main Hand Pistol:
1. Fugitive Shot – Fire a long range shot. The closer you to your target, the more damage it does.
2. Keen Shot – Fire a long range shot. Always does a critical hits and grants Fury beyond the range threshold.
3. Mak Sikker – Fire a point-blank shot. The less health your target has, the more damage you cause. Shadowstep away from the target.

Off-Hand Pistol:
4. Chaser’s Shot – Fire a medium range shot. Shadowstep to your target. Gain Swiftness.
5. Hail of Lead – Fire multiple shots to nearby foes. Gain one second of Quickness for each hit (up to five).

I owe you an explanation, I guess. The previous weapon we got was a main hand dagger – condition-based melee weapon. So for the sake of diversity the next one should be power-based ranged weapon. And probably your first thought is “rifle”. Well, It seems perfectly fitting ranger flavour – hunting, tracking the prey, roaming the wilds, reading marks etc. Hunters, rangers, jagers, you name it wield rifles. I was one of those who been demanding rifles for rangers since the game release… And now I don’t really think it’s a good idea. My biggest concern was there is one too obvious use for yet another long ranged power-based weapon – to be a secondary weapon for a long bow and be swapped on cooldown. Despite in GW2 any weapon mechanics can be working any way you can possibly imagine, I realised that if you give a new ranger weapon big range like 1200 or 1500 there just can’t be better secondary weapon for it than longbow, no matter what weapon skills do, and that kills much of sustomization opportunity. Or… what if the weapon would do a slightly different things depending on distance at which you using it? Not one-way like longbow, but with pros and cons for close and long range both. So the character would be forced to move in and out.
With such thoughts in my head I started making weapon skills then realised that they may look much better on one-handed weapon since they can make nice combos with existing one-handed weapons. Well, pistols are allowed in hunting. Using it requires a steady hand and a keen eye. And if “ranger with a pistol” still doesn’t look like a thing for you, you probably should put “Texas” before “ranger”.

You probably have noticed, there is no much Vulnerability and Might in skills, which is unusual for power based weapons. Well, I think actually ranger has so big supply of those things from existing skills and traits that just doesn’t need more.

Miellyn.6847:

Before we get a rifle or pistol we will get off-hand sword or hammer. Rifle and pistol don’t fit the theme.

Firearms don’t fit “a hunter roaming the woods” theme? And hammer does fit? You kidding me.

Aenaos.8160:

The visuals and the setting are nice,but the mechanics make it feel more like SAB than GW2.I thought the great balls of fire in Nightmare were bad and out of place,but this new one I just can’t play,it doesn’t feel GW2ish,it plays more like something for playstation.
And dodging and avoiding AoE is cool,but if I have to do it every 2 seconds it gets old really fast.
The first boss is ok,but everything after is wtf I’d rather slap my face with dirty socks than play this.

What I really love in Guild Wars 2 is fast-paced combat and reliable movement controls. I felt it very underused. Arkk bossfight is just like what I think the game should be from the beginning.
It is pretty well designed actually. Arkk entertains you with dodge game long enough to not get dull yet he have reasonable attack window. I mean, sometimes in PvE enemy attack spam gets so hard so you too busy with dodging to maintain your rotation which is frustrating since besides I enjoy dodging I also enjoy using my weapon and utility profession skills. And this one is definitely not of such encounters, you have enough time and space to unload everything you have on Arkk. It’s really well designed.
Mechanics like bouncing balls and exploding towers are good too since they are ideal for pugs. I mean, they require teamwork and cooperation yet they do not require long explanation, random lfg newbie can realize how do they work just by observing.
Special action key is really great tool expanding game mechanics yet it’s default binding is awful choice. It makes you think that it’s something you rarely use and don’t need to reach quickly which is not true. You can rebind it but other default layout is reasonable and can be played as is. Anyway it’s not this fractal specific problem cos special action has been introduced before.

Actually, that ridiculuos Shining Blade initiation ritual would be perfectly fitting as the beginning of the high fantasy story. You know, normal guy lives normal boring live then joins a secret order and starts a life full of adventure, danger and romance. Problem is the Pact Commander is actually pretty seasoned guy (or girl) who has seen some kittens.
More so, there is about 33,333% chance the Commander is a member of the Order of Whispers – you know, secret society too but working on the bigger scale. So the Shining Blade feels just like… less cool version of it.
There were no reason for so deep dive into human politics. ANet writers could make litteraly the same plot (including working with Shining Blade while tracking Balthazar and slaying the last of Mursaat that finally ties one of hanging story lines from GW1) with some small changes to make it not feel like sequel to Human Noble personal story.
…Wait I just realized I said that. Whole Season 3 final episode makes sense if you assume it continues Human Nobleman personal story. Holy kitten.

Well, many years ago Glint has foretold the inevitable extinction of Mursaat race in her famous Flameseeker prophecy. So, why is it named so? What is actual meaning of that word – “Flameseeker”? We all thought the Flameseeker is vizier Khilbron who was seeking for Door of Komalie in Ring of Fire then unleashed Titans who almost wiped whole Mursaat race from Tyria. Still fullfilment of the prophecy has been delayed for more then two hundred and fifty years. Nevertheless it is fullfilled now: the last Mursaat has been slain. And he has been slain by the person who was tracking down running god of flame. So this person can be called…

Probably there is no magic in oath at all. Oath may be a fraud.

Hello. I’m Ghertu, and i’m ranger. My attack range with longbow is 1500. Despite this, i need to come very very close, almost melee, to Tequatl to not be “out of range”. What da kitten?

High content in the open world is a gimmick of the game. Doesnt matter is it good or bad, it’s a gimmick, ANet can write in an advertisment: “There are HUGE bosses in the open world, so you HAVE TO buy this game, kittensucker”. Instancing any world boss just like removing ability to roll from Sonic the Hedgehog.
About suggestion for adding instanced Tequatl for guild missions while keeping it in the open world. It will be rather less epic if enyone who have a big guild be able to just summon Tequatl when they want to fight him. Anyway, ANet could just add new diffcult bosses to guild missions without bothering Tequatl. World bosses are separate piece of content, are you not going to ask devs make copies of every single boss for open world, dungeons, guild missions and WvW?

Frostfang.5109:

The stance of the charr is just fine! Making them more upright just adds to the feeling of “puuting a cats head on a human body”… The charr straighten when they are being formal.

What is not fine is how many of the armours and other things behave on the charr – THAT is what needs to be fixed.

We are Charr and we will never give up mour existance because of some non-fitting armour! But we would very much apriciate having fitting, good looking armour and gear!!

Signed /

Ao, Oa and My

Watch your charr’s animation while inactive and out of combat. Sometimes they stretches and stands more upright for a second. I predict, you will find they are looks just awesome this second.

Colocal. I wanna my personal zergling. I really see from where inspiration came. And Google confirms my hunch: it says colocal’s concept name was “beastalisk”.

Have no idea where to ride mount. There are no giant and almost empty locations like Silithus or Nagrand. ANet should add mounts for next April Fools’ Day only too let mountlikers feel how ridiculous is climb in the saddle, ride to destination and get out of the saddle in less than a minute. It’s just like cab from the bedroom to the kitchen. Tyria isn’t small, it is just… tight, while Azeroth is 70% barrens.

Totally agree. Personally, i don’t play charr only because armor textures ridiculously stretch. Also, funny coincidence: few days ago i though that GW1 charr concept art looks better than charr we currently have.

Firstly, i am the one who against idea of perma-stowing in any form. It’s not even what you call “simple”, it’s primitive, while ranger’s mechanics already not very complex. By the way, i should admit – i never seen any professions but ranger complaining about their F-mechanics is hindering. They can call it boring or weak but never – hindering. Only rangers feel encumbered by their own F-mechanics.
I have the idea how to revamp birds. Despite the fact that i suggesting it, i don’t find it perfect. Also, it’s even too similar with perma-stowing. I just hope it could inspire ANet game designers for something better.
So. Bird isn’t real pet anymore, it becomes additional skill bar. It has animation of flying around, pecking ground, sometimes sitting on ranger’s arm or shoulder, but isn’t present in game as unit, it’s untargetable and can’t attack. “Attack My Target”, pet’s skill and “Return to Me” on F-bar replaced by another set of skills. F1 is “Swoop” – bird strikes enemy once and applying a condition, F2 is “Mark a target” – bird strikes enemy once than you gain attack of opportunity, F3 is “Enter combat” – bird becomes a targetable unit, enable to attack, with stats of current bird pets, if it killed returns to its previous state after cooldown.

Wish to compile all suggestions for new pets in one topic. Post them here and no one will be lost.

You have no way to check spikes but dying, so you spending some lives only to know where they are. Yes, i know, it is intentinal forcing to buy infinite coin. But i still think that making spikes visible or simply removal of spiked platforms (i mean not removal of spikes, removal of platforms exactly, so you will not see place to jump) would not make tribulatiuon mode drastically easier. And definetly will be more honorable.

Seriously, i’m surprised a bit. When i read patch preview i though Torment is introduction especially for rangers. Punishing enemies for moving – it’s what all profession about. Maybe, ANet now working on balancing it, but i hope Torment will be added to some ranger skills.
P.S. It’s not whining, i don’t think profession is weaker without Torment. I mean, Torment just suits ranger style too well to be absent.

Aretak.3826:

and get screwed over by immobilise too.

Awful. Main point of all pet mechanics – saving potential while character disabled someway.
But i still appreciate idea of sharing energy bar. I remember, some dude wrote on this board that such mechanic is bad because it is forcing rangers to spending their energy for saving pets. Lol, really distorted thinking. For most rangers it only means opportunity to save their pets if attack on ranger lucky coincided with attack on pet. And to dodge things like Kholer’s special attack, that pets just have no way to survive now, of course.
Wanna sleep. My English even worse than usually.

Could be solved with adding new function to party UI: “Guest to party member” . Even if it not will be faster than current ways, players will choose it because of convenience. No necessity to quitting for character select screen or opening web browser.

SynfulChaot.3169:

I think you hit the nail on the head. Yes, they are cautious as they don’t want a ‘fix’ to cause more problems than the initial problem. And a lot of the potential fixes are not as simple as people seem to think they are.

Sometimes they are more daring. Also, ANet never showed so lightspeed reaction for whining before. Correct me if i wrong.

Funny. Ever though ANet is a bit sluggish for doing such things. But now i can see it more clear. Seems game designer who is in charge of rangers is too cautious person. Most of previous changes was very conservative, because they are afraid of break something in mechanics. And they easily turns into panic when something appeals already broken. Sorry, it’s only assumption, but i find it probable.

Adine, so, we have greatsword.

Sword still very glitchy weapon. It’s really strong in close combat, but sword attack interrupts your own actions, like finishing enemy or even simply strafing.

Adding new weapon means adding and balancing new weapon skills, while already existing still isn’t tuned well. But I think rifle suits ranger’s woodman-style fine. Also, when you say “ranger” many people think of this guy:

Banal Hem.1635:

Long bow is not a sniper weapon. You can just about out heal the DPS from LRS and the damage from RF is only 3-500 per plink. I’m a high power/crit build And range attacks from every other class (except engy) out DPS the ranger. Yes I have one of everything.

It better be. I take that as the game design omission, needs to be fixed. I’m not saying i know how to balance game better then devs, but… For kitten’s sake, despite other things, it will be at least more fun.

Not so fast, there still something that i wanna to discuss.

As for Ranger DPS not matching thief burst… yeah, that’s pretty obvious – I don’t think I’m rocking some boat by saying that. I accept that trade-off of lacking burst potential for having a better toolbox of things I can do to survive while outputting consistent DPS.

Wait, wait, wait. I ever though longbow supposed to be sniper weapon – dealing burst from afar. Maybe, current kit isnt balanced well, but it suits sniper role – slow autoattack with damage depends on range, Rapid Fire for burst, no damage-over-time conditions. I hope you are not going to turn longbow into DPS tool, adding bleeding and nerfing direct damage. It will be even not feel as bow.

Eggyokeo.9705:

Don’t use a longbow?
some wepones are not a good choice for different situations. Longbows are not good against a large zerg with lots of a guards in it. If you want bags use an axe and run through the middle of the zerg, dodge rolling through the melee train. If you want to sit in a tower build an arrow cart and use it.

If long ranged weapon with AoE works bad for massive battles, like WvW, it’s omission of game design. Like if anti-tank rocket launcher works poor against tanks in a video game about modern war.
Also, about retaliation. Lot games contain such things, but I never saw them hurt attacker more than his own attack hurts attacked. Look, if there is berserker gear that grants wearer lot of attack and poor defense, there should be class… eh, sorry, they call it “profession”… there should be profession utilizes that gear well. Maybe profession with long ranged weapon and nice abilities to escape, like ranger? Oops, nope.
On the other hand, if there is really long ranged weapon there should be suitable gear for it. Wear tanky gear for longbow? For kitten sake, than why i even carry longbow? i just dont need such range if i wear tanky gear.

Look at the attachment. ArenaNet, you kittened my aesthetical feelings. Now I trying to find new colors for my whispers meduim armor, but I doubt that I can make it better than it was. Please, make us possible to dye these lines again.

As i said once before, i prefer necromancer surrounded by large crowd of similiar looking minions in GW1. So, what’s wrong with with five (or six) different looking minions in GW2? Group of them looks like this: http://animayhemzzz.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/the-flintstones-characters.jpg It’s just comical.

Also, i used to perceive undead minions as cannon fodder, swarm of zerg. But current minions mechanic makes them rare and valuable units, diffcult to restore. But, excuse me , that is more question of gameplay than of appearance, so don’t fit this topic.

Making pet dodging while ranger dodging isn’t such bad idea, as it was stated lot posts ago. I think it’s not really forces rangers to spend stamina for saving pets, but giving them opportunity to keep pets alive against enemies damaging all around, like Liutenant Kohler in Ascalonian Catacombs.

Exterminans.9723:

“No! I handraised that minion!”

“Now I need to make another one.”

“It began as a corpse and now it is a corpse again.”

Seriously, who thought it would be a good idea to make necromancers have a line EVERY TIME a minion dies?!

Man, i’m with you. It’s a freaking annoying thing.

PvP Instructor:
“Greetings, weapon bearer! How are you?”
“Greetings, weapon bearer! How are you?”
“Greetings, weapon bearer! How are you?”
“Greetings, weapon bearer! How are you?”

ODB, two posts higher.

I noticed that mersmers purple color… uhm… drags more attention than other professions colors. If i see guardian with red colored armor or ranger with blue colored armor i absolutely dont care about it. But when i see mesmer whose attire is not purple (or at least color that good combines with purple) i feel that something wrong. Maybe, because mesmers’ spells have very very bright and noticable effects, i perceive them not as something temporary, but as part of mesmer’s permanent appereance.

Disclaimer: this topic is not about tankiness, squishiness, armor, health and other things related to passive survivability here. This topic about escaping abilities.
When i started profession with trait line named “Wilderness Survival” and special skill type “Survival” i predicted that i’ll be able to roleplay Bear Grylls. I imagined lot of skills that help my character survive by evading attacks and escaping from hopeless situations. And they are there, but… dont you feel that master of wilderness survival should have more skills of such type, community?
P.S. GW2 isn’t first game which makes me feel this way. There is another very famous MMO containing Hunter class that had “Survival” specialization but rather less abilities to evade combat and escape from difficult encounters than Mage, lets say.

Josh P.1296:

Nop. You mad you bad brah. l2p scrub.

Oh, you don’t want to discuss game balance, you want to discuss my person instead. It’s a great honor for me.
Now serious.

Oh, please, less emotions. I especially tried make “thread-where-someone-asks-for-nerf” not so hysterical as they usually are, dont break my efforts.

My suggestion is aftermath of calm logical thinking. I tried to think as game developer, not player, when made it. So, if you – all of you, not only mr Josh P – going to discuss it, leave your emotions behind the door.

Josh P.1296:

I read through a few of the OP’s posts and saw a lot crying that eles aren’t good (Lol!) and how classes like thief and mesmer are better.

Oh, boy, you are liar.

Also, I even have suggestion to buff mesmer: make illusions though for AoE spells. AoE destroys clones almost just they summoned, so when mesmer fights against character with lot of AoE spells, like ele, or passing dungeon like Crucible of Eternity, it really seems illusions removed from the game, or even never existed.

Kaiyanwan.8521:

Great idea. Let’s take away the illusions too, so that it is easier to target the real mesmer.
And yes, you are complaining right there, asking for a nerf is a clear sign for that, isn’t it.

Oh, please, less emotions. I especially tried make “thread-where-someone-asks-for-nerf” not so hysterical as they usually are, dont break my efforts.
Clones are fine. And idea of original post exactly about it. It’s very funny to search real mesmer among their clones. I every enjoy this minigame on sPvP. It requires some attentivness. But then I should attack real mesmer almost same time as I searched them among clones. Hey, I want my reward (their fragile life, I mean) FASTER. Mwahahahaha!