Guild Wars 2

Forestnator.6298:

Do I miss something? U wanna give up an utility slot – which are already rare on engineer – for a stupid passive 25% movespeed?? U must be kidding.

I’m not, actually. The rocket boots themselves aren’t bad, but if they had the extra movespeed, you’d see a lot more people using them. We’re really not hurting on utility slots, either. In fact, we effectively get double the utility slots that the other professions get due to our class mechanic (the toolbelt).

Another thing this would do is perhaps start giving kitless engineers a bit more going for them. I actually would love it if we started seeing less reliance on kits, but I don’t think that’s going to happen anytime soon.

I know we have speedy kits, which is basically just a poor man’s perma-speed buff, but every other leather wearing profession gets a persistent move speed utility without having to dump trait points. There’s really a simple fix for this in my eyes; add a 25% movement speed bonus to, say, Rocket Boots.

Makes sense, right?

Honestly, I never play any “cutsie” or bestial race in any MMO I pick up. Just ain’t my thing, so as such Asura and Charr are a no-go. In GW2, I’m more partial to Human or Sylvari. I would also say Norn, but the male Norns are very oddly proportioned. If they were just larger humans with celtic/viking hairstyles, that would have been fine. Hell, the Norn females actually do look more like larger human females, but the males have the exaggerated steroid-popping, sausage-fingered musculature going on for them, which turns me away, and also makes any class that’s not a heavily armored facebasher look rather odd.

I thought the same about humans in WoW, funny enough. Didn’t matter if you were a mighty warrior or clever mage, you always were JACKED.

As an addition to #3, I’d also look into retooling the base weapons and making them more worthwhile to use. Things I’d personally look into:

1) Increase initial damage, and up the bleeding duration on the pistol auto-attack. Piddly damage and a 2 second bleed is not really anything great. In fact, I’d tweak most of the condition durations for the main weapon sets.

2) Adjust the rifle skills a little. Fristly, swap the place/cooldowns of Net Shot and Jump Shot. Control abilties deserve the longer cooldowns imo. Secondly, decide whether the rifle should be a close or long range weapon and retool the skills accordingly. If going with short range, perhaps give Hip Shot a damage bonus up close. Finally, I’d remove the root on Jump Shot.

3) A reduction on cooldowns across the board. Most of the engie weapon skills have a cooldown of 10 seconds or more and approach 20-30 seconds for the 4s and 5s (shield definitely get the bad end of the stick when it comes to cool downs). Giving each weapon set an ability at a ~6 second cooldown would make a worlds difference. Perhaps look into tweaking cooldowns for some kits as well. Personally, I’d give Blunderbuss and Poison Dart Volley (or Static Shot) the lower cooldowns.

Taran Redleaf.7912:

@CuteLilKittenHugz.2064
“Do some more research” – Research? Well, I guess those years serving in the Army must have been for nothing compared to your book knowledge. I guess the military doesn’t know what Rangers in real life are because I lifted the description from our website. But let’s not get distracted from the point of the OP’s post.

There are multiple definitions, but the root of it all when it comes to the fantasy archetype is that it is more in line with the original definition as someone who protects a range of territory. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Ranger

Hell, the page for the D&D Class (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Ranger+) which, let’s face it, all modern day RPGs can be traced back to D&D in some fashion, lists Aragorn as the main influence in the aesthetics of the class. You can even feel it a bit in GW2 with the inclusion of the Torch as a weapon for the ranger class (Ringwraiths at Weathertop, anyone?).

Furthermore, it’s the only definition that even makes sense, because if you’re taking the word “Ranger” as an indication of the range of the unit’s engagement… well… there’s melee range, there’s long range. What sort of range are we talking about? If the class were called “Long-Ranger”, you may have a case. But what do I know? I’m a guy over the internet.
——-
As far as OP’s topic, the main problem is that our DPS is split between ourselves and our pet. It’s simple as that. The common philosophy that “You do 0 DPS when dead” also applies to our pets, which the DPS pets tend to melt in dungeons, thereby making us half of a class. There are a few ways that could be fixed.

One would be to up survivibility on pets. With the incoming DPS nerf on them, that would make sense. They could make it to where pets only take like half AOE damage or something.

Another way, one I would prefer, would be to offer a petless spec that gives us the damage that our pet would be contributing. Yes, it would be nullifying our class gimmick, but they could retool it to work. One way, off the top of my head, would be to instead offer petless rangers what I would like to call Companion Abilities, that call in temporary companions that do things. These skills would essentially be similar to the 4 skill on Warhorn, where birds are called to attack an enemy. Perhaps they could retool the whole of one of the trait trees to do something like this. I’d go with beastmastery, because imo, the idea of having mastery over many kinds of beasts outweighs the idea of mastery over one at a time…

… or perhaps I just want to be this guy. http://d.ratingmovies.com/servlet/Main/CoverDisplay/Beastmaster__The_(1982).jpg?film_rn=4109