Guild Wars 2

AN don’t even need to dictate how we play anymore. The community do it for us!

#BurnYourBows

spoj.9672:

Its unreasonable to ask for this as it goes against the games core design (melee being superior to range but having increased risk). There are issues but you can play how you want and its still viable so there arent actually any core design flaws in the rangers case. Other than them having less single target range dps than an ele.

Disagree but that’s off topic and I’ve talked about this elsewhere. If you’re interested can point you in that direction.

spoj.9672:

And anyway. The actual order should be this:

addressing serious core design flaws (within reason, not to the extent of making everything equal) > new content > bug fixes > balance

This is because there is always bugs and balance is never perfect. They should not be priorities they should just be dealth with on a regular basis. New content is what keeps people playing,

Agreed. Think that’s the best compromise for now

spoj.9672:

Why dont you go complain about the ranger on a different thread. I dont think anet will ever satisfy your wants so with that in mind we would never get any new weapons if they tried to perfect balance first. Its a poor arguement. Anyway in the recent stream they mentioned they wanted ranger to be the best at single target range dps so they will probably be tweaking things eventually. That doesnt mean they cant work on weapons at the same time. Dont be selfish just because you play one class and are happy playing 2 boring weapons for the forseeable future.

Nice tone guy.

Also bare in mind the context of this discussion is about the number one priority. That’s what we’re discussing here. Obviously everyone knows a business can do more than one thing at a time. But OP explicitly stated s/he wanted to discuss the priority. Having a priority on one thing doesn’t mean ignoring everything else. If that’s something you believe I don’t see us progressing with this talk.

Also in terms of being selfish, the OP made a suggestion. I gave an example of a counter argument to that. I believe I wrote:

AN delivering on core-design promises > Balance > bug fixes > new things.

not:

AN delivering on ranger core-design promises > Balance > bug fixes > new things.

Everything you wrote could have been addressed without me replying if you had just read properly.

zapv.8051:

Lace.9472:

I’m sorry that rangers aren’t the class that they should be, but your argument doesn’t hold. No where does it say “play how you want and be assured it will be as useful as playing other ways.” It has always been play how you want unless you want the best set up then play a very specific way. This won’t change anytime soon (maybe rangers could get a buff, but something will be weaker somewhere). I’ve already explained the balance and bug fix, and why the dev team can’t just put infinite time into those things.

None of your arguments provide a compelling reason to work on balance, the dev team clearly thinks this game is decently well balanced because they aren’t dedicating all their time to balance. Bug fixes could probably spend more time, but new weapons add something to the game. Players with 5000 hours played need that to keep them interested.

My arguments do provide a compelling reason to work on balance. And even if they didn’t (they do) I shouldn’t have to ARGUE to get balance for the class I play O_O
See: https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/professions/ranger/

“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.”

If we take the above as AN’s design mechanics for the Ranger I will explain why I feel the reality falls short of them:

1. “Rangers rely on a keen eye, a steady hand, and the power of nature itself” – this is true enough. We have some “nature skills” and I rely on some of them.

2. “Unparalleled archers, rangers are capable of bringing down foes from a distance with their bows.” No. We aren’t. The only place bows are in the meta are in SPVP and only is a very select specific builds. That means, in PVE, WvW whether it’s dungeons, zergs, fractals or otherwise we fall short. The bows are not balanced enough in these (the vast majority of the game) areas. Also, outright the class does not compete with other classes range in the majority of scenarios.

3. “With traps, nature spirits, and a stable of loyal pets at their command” while it’s true we have traps and spirits and have access to pets. What’s not mentioned in the inherent decrease in DPS subjected to the rangers damage for having a pet. This means our DPS is offloaded and shared with an AI which has never been in an acceptable state. In SPVP top rank players have spoken out about the pets “delay”. Meanwhile in dungeons/fractals the pet a handicap due to poor uptime (doing damage) .. (the damage our weapons don’t do because the pet exists..) also very poor survivability. The only place I find value in my pet is in small groups or duels in WvW/PVP or in world exploration (champ/vets) …

4. “rangers can adapt to any situation.” … By going melee and treating the pet like a passive “f2” button. Which is AVOIDING both our pet and bow. Which are explicitly stated in the class summary as the Rangers design goals.

“the dev team clearly thinks this game is decently well balanced because they aren’t dedicating all their time to balance.” If you genuinely believe this then that’s worrying.

“Bug fixes could probably spend more time, but new weapons add something to the game. Players with 5000 hours played need that to keep them interested.” I agree completely that new weapons add to the game – that’s not a valid argument against my point. The issue is with priorities … and that’s what I obviously take issue with. Why on earth should priority be given to veteran players playing their OP classes/builds when there’s genuine areas where AN have yet to deliver their core design promises?

As a ranger who just wants to use bows in content. I am disgusted with your suggestion.

Reading the official ranger summary references bows and “archer”. Yet bows are not viable in PVE and lack in WvW. Talking of delivering on core-design promises… my pet is useless in content where it matters.

AN delivering on core-design promises > Balance > bug fixes > new things.

When getting balancing figures is there any thought to different builds, condition/dps situation, positioning evading, the number of weapons we chose from etc.

Or do they log in, pick 1 weapon (sword) and exclusively hit the 1 key with a cat mauling a stationary enemy?

Viking Jorun.5413

I’m a little overwhelmed.
It seems like you’re attaching about 3-4 different arguments – somehow with what I’ve written.

To just respond to with that I deem relevant to my thread: – you claim all builds are viable in all content and that CDI changes have already manifested.

The first point is obviously a difference in semantics on what we both mean by viable. I’m absolutely happy to not address your point here and we can leave it at that.

For the second point, I think it’s fairly obvious (given that the CDI’s were supposed to include all issues and feedback) that any changes since then, would very likely be in areas mentioned by the CDI.

Therefore, if you’re suggesting a change being made matching an issue bought up in the CDI is proof of a reasonable “response” to the CDI and that wanting anything more is to…

Viking Jorun.5413:

… cater to needy players who want things done now shows how ignorant you are to the process and shouldn’t be demanding changes if you don’t know a thing about …

..etc. Then I would have to disagree with you.

On another note I don’t see myself having much progressive discussion with someone of your discussion style. Therefore I apologize in advance if I don’t respond to any future posts by you.

Carighan.6758:

Quite weird though to talk about the “ranged DPS” of a Ranger. You’re in PvE, no one is supposed to be at range. What are you doing there in the first place? O.o

Darox.8069:

Staff ele:
- target moves => 60% less dps
- target moves and changes directions => 100% less dps
- need to do anything else than damage => 100% less dps for 13 seconds

Just stating the facts.
The problem comes from encounter designs

I guess my question here is:
Is it AN’s intention for all PVE (especially dungeons) to be melee focused?
In which case
Why the hell is ranged combat not catered for in core gameplay AI?

Obviously, for Ele AoE and massive superior ranged damage, the AI aren’t going to move out of it. Due to LOS/Stack/AFK dungeon meta.

Is that an intended design? then Why is it an intended design?

Is your (AN) design for the Ranger to have viable bow builds in all content. I appreciate your design decisions may be on-going, but I basically want to know so I can decide if I should find another game to play.

AN had class designs coming into the game.
Those designs obviously fell short in some areas.
As part of a quality initiation, CDI’s were organised.
In the Ranger CDI an AN representative summarised the feedback.

Due to poor community communication we were left to hope/assume they were going to work on the feedback from the CDI.

Now I see this: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Ranger-Balance-Philosophy

Basically, I really-really want to know whether the Ranger will ever have viable bow builds for all content. If not, fine there’s other games out there for me to use bows. What I don’t like is extremely little information and vagueness that keeps me interested, yet never delivers.

I’m not demanding anything I just want a little clarification on what will or will not be changed with the Ranger, what AN feel the design for ranger is. As for the official design summary: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Longbow-Useless/first#post4106607

Please note I have posted this on this forum as the Ranger forum has had extremely little AN-presence. Also it is a direct response to the professions/balance topic asking for feedback by AN posted here.

Ranger

As a ranger I feel I should be able to use my bow in dungeons and fractals. That is typically not the case due to balance. I should be able to viably use my bow anywhere.

As I ranger I feel I should be a able to kite (somewhat) with my bow. Yet the melee options offer better kiting.

As a ranger my core positioning and sense of “safety” is completely undermined by a frenzy of distance closers. I expect better mobility while wielding bow. Even if this includes normal speed side and back peddling.

As a ranger it would be nice to have a ranged spike. The “get in, DPS then get out” is not an option with bows unfortunately.

As a GW2 ranger with a strong pet focus. I would expect that pet to be viable for all content and not left out of aoe/dungeons/fractals/zergs.

Strengths

Strong mobility and damage at range. (stronger and more mobile that current state)

Weaknesses

Generally less armor and health.

I did the same and returned. I found the game to be just as bad, except for a subtle boost in pet reactions.

To be honest with you, I probably wont be properly active until the CDI thread is addressed (where AN acknowledged a lot of Class issues). People are guessing this will be at the end of the year or first quarter next year.

Unless I am mistaken zerk-warriors 1v1’n us with their knock down duration can get 90% or more of our HP if lightning reflex is off cooldown. Which is kittening annoying.

Naevius.3185:

The class mechanic for rangers is pets, not bows.

Didn’t say it was/wasn’t.

Naevius.3185:

The balance between ranged and melee is the same across all classes – lower risk and lower damage.

I didn’t say the problem was specifically damage either – I ask for viability. Please try not incorrectly presume what I am saying otherwise we might not be able to have a progressive discussion.

As for bow viability in PVE I believe the problem is a mixture of two things.
Firstly In meta-groups the survivability I am supposedly gaining for being ranged is not something I can harness in the meta. Therefore the dps trade-off I am subject to for the privileged of being ranged is hurting my relationship with other classes in groups.
Secondly I dispute the ranged weapons offering anything the melee weapons don’t in a survival sense. WvW is a clear example of this where melee provides better mobility to run away. But just sticking with PVE, the evades on offer from the melee weapons more than out-do the supposed privaledge of bows “low risk” power. Sword 2 takes you to short bow range, 180 and hit it again and you’re in longbow range. There’s nothing high risk about that.

A valid counter arguement is that while the sword can do that on a very low cooldown and be safe. The long bow is still in that area but still doing damage right? This is a failure of the dungeon mechanic. Stacking and LOS are exploits that need to be addressed. But aside from that, the sword having to stop doing damage in order to evade off to regen is akin to bossess and mobs using reflect etc. Basically ranged weapons have periods where they need to stop attacking too – as per an underlined gameplay mechanic..

Naevius.3185:

Rangers have no special strengths (or weaknesses) in terms of ranged weapons, and rangers using bows are just as ‘viable’ as engineers using rifles.

This may be a valid point (I don’t play engie) but it’s not a valid excuse. I could probably argue with good reason that given the rangers deep ties to GW1 and the lore of bow use, compared to a completely new class like engineer. That the bow to ranger being viable is much more important than the rifle to Engineer. But I won’t make that point because I’m not here to compare sword sizes on who’s class is worst. I want AN’s design promises to manifest given how long this games been released and I want that for all classess. Every day certain classes are left out of content is a day AN are failing to deliver on their core gameplay promises.

To Summarise:

It is extremely clear that the GW2 Ranger class was supposed to incorporate a heavy use of the bow

Yet the meta dictates a strong bias toward the melee builds. Sometimes completely leaving out Ranged possibilities.

When people defend this option they might think to say “well the class wasn’t intended a solely ranged”

This is true, but people are asking for a Viable bow build in all content. That’s not the same as asking to be the best ranged class, nor is it asking to be better DPS than melee necessarily.

These are the misunderstandings I wish to dispel. Please feel free to add your own clarity or interpretations.

This thread is an attempt to address one of the most frequent discussions/arguments I see on this forum. To whether the “bow ranger” is/was intended inside the Ranger class. The reason I want to address this is because for AN to do their job and take the communities opinions on board, it helps if the community agree where possible or have coherent actionable suggestions for the dev team.

I wont copy and paste AN’s summary of the ranger where it makes multiple “bow” or “archer” references. Because I shouldn’t need to.

It is extremely clear that the GW2 Ranger class was supposed to incorporate a heavy use of the bow.

1. GW2 Ranger is classified as a “Returning profession” from GW1 which was primarily (but not limited to) bow use. There were a number of bows available to use and a strong focus on ranged skills to chose from.

2. Clearly new MMO’s try to add their own twist on things and GW2 did this very well. However there’s a huge market segment of players that like “Archer” professions. And AN obviously wanted to continue to provide a class in the game that caught that target audience.

3. The Devs were active in the GW1 forums taking feedback from the Ranger community on what they’d like to see in GW2’s Ranger class.

Compromises:

1. While predominantly a ranged class. The GW2 ranger is obviously looking to incorporate a melee option. Where W.O.W might have had a melee option when enemies reached a range. GW2 want to go beyond that and allow players to have a melee weapon as their main weapon in a build. That’s clear to see.

2. Classess in this game (given the loss of the trinity) were very clearly intended to be less cohesive and more open to adaptation. So it’s a valid argument to suggest that Ranger for this reason is not exclusively supposed to be dps. When you consider the “jack of all trades” despite not being so in GW1 it does make sense to provide a melee option in GW2 to fulfill that role.

Conclusion

Ranger is primarily the ranged focused class in the game. This is extremely clear in the classess promotion, it’s history in GW1, it’s lore in the game and it’s official summary. Also it makes abundant sense to appeal to the “ranger” players that part make the MMO sea of players.

However the class is not exclusively ranged it is inclusively ranged.

But the important point, the most crucial point in this thread and one of the root causes between players having this discussion is.. We do NOT have as viable ranged builds for all content as we do melee builds. Even in core mechanics and meta such as dungeons/fractals the only viable builds are melee focused.

That’s the bottom line. Our melee capabilities are way more viable than our ranged.

AN have options, do they fix broken class or do they make a new Ranged class which features viable bow builds?

Nemic.8341:

Also, if you want to put out as much bleed as possible from the shortbow with autoattack, wouldn’t it suit ranger to have a trait that removes the slow “penalty” while straifing?

This needs to be seriously considered. In a 1v1 situation you need to invest SO heavily in traits/skills/pets to keep your enemy in position in order for this basic skill to provide any use.

As for your question, there are both condi/bunker builds and also crit builds available in WvW at least.

The Game Slayer.7632:

As much as it pains me to say it, I’d rather have 9.5k backstabs than the brainless, rampant condi bunkers on almost every class we have now.

As a ranger who’s annoyed at only having to play condi bunker in WvW I would be overjoyed to see anything CLOSE to 9k damage in any of my attacks.

To summarise:

1. This thread happens a lot.
2. In the CDI an AN representative said it’s not an option.
3. But by all means feel free to keep posting it (serious). At the very least it’s a constant reminder to AN to either fix pets (viable in top content) or remove them. Or even make an “archer” class without them while keeping Ranger.

/thread

shadowpass – got any SB roam builds?

Dolt.2731:

6/0/2/6/0 wrecks with LB… especially in wvw. You’re rocking 2500 attack with food coupled with air/ fire sigil’s, pin point accuracy (want to LB get read the wind) at 1500 range… and you think our damage is bad? You can roll up on glass cannon in a valley below you and three shot them before they know wtf is going on. Not to mention very short cd on stealth/ kb and a decent aoe cleave.

SB is an amazing wep with the right set up as well, (what i play) Get to flanking with earth/ agony sigils.

Not trying to hate but seems like you didn’t even try… play 2 games get wrecked then come here by chance?

Can I hear more about this WvW SB build? I take it you roam? What tips do you have?

I am absolutely dumbfounded.

As a long time ranger throughout GW1 and GW2’s lifetime I have the utmost confusion with which direction the Ranger is going in.

The best Rangers have ever had was an extremely specific teamcomp BM Barrage pet for FoW. And the ability to solo farm using traps in “some” areas, though this was always considered an exploit. That’s it. No place in UW HM, no place in DoA HM, and even when Rangers were invited into top tier content, it was using a specific build that revolved around another weaponset or second profession.

Coming into GW2..

I won’t even go into the changes that the ranger has gone through in GW2 – because it will remind me of when the short-bow was viable (quicker shots and longer reach) and that would just tear me up. We all know the current state of them:

- Weapon sets don’t mix (you have to go GS if you go LS e.g.)
- Traits need a revamp. Warrior has one trait that gives both 20% cooldown on rifle and piercing projectiles.. we have to separate traits for this….
- Our bows have little use in dungeons or fractals and therefore anyone wanting to use them have little use in comparison to another class.
- It still completely baffles me that to utilise the rangers mobility we need to… put bows away and get out the melee weapon. ?? You can legitimately kite better with a melee set up that a ranged one.
- Will pets ever be viable in top tier content

I mean the changes we want arent to improve things, to make the fun, more fun. And it’s not. There’s nothing fun about being kicked out of dungeon parties or searching for ages, there’s nothing fun about bringing nothing to zergs, there’s nothing fun about roaming with bows and getting your kitten handed to you. We want to be VIABLE. It’s not like we’ve ordered a medium-rare steak at a restaurant and been given a medium and are demanding our money back. We’ve been given a wet noodle on a plate and want a VIABLE meal. This isn’t an unfair request.

I want a viable build (where at least one weapon is a bow) for WvW, PvP and Dungeons/Frac. The reason I made this post is, looking at the history of the ranger I am extremely pessimistic they can deliver on what I consider to me a basic requirement. Can anyone else see things getting better?

trunks.5249:

i was tired of seeing all these negative posts about rangers being bad.so i decided to posts some videos of some really good rangers in pvp ,WvW,Pve and let them know i had the same build has one of the guys in the videos. ….

Hello, I am someone who’s disappointed at the balance of the ranger compared to other classes. I am specifically annoyed that we don’t have that many viable ranged builds with bows.

I noticed that the last few videos/builds you’ve shared are sword and axe.

Do you have any viable ranged builds to share with me? I am particularly interested in dungeons/WvW.

I think the bow ranger right now is bad.

Black Teagan.9215:

Base the whole thread on one picture and that a group downed another group?

Not just downed but annihilated. On top of that, we’ve deduced from the image that there’s a lot of arrows falling on the bodies… coincidence? or OP long bow.. you decide.

A small part of me wants to insist that we should keep the forum content serious, helpful and concise.

However, ranger is the exception. No matter what kind of serious, useful, vital feedback or idea I see on the forums it will have no or minimal chances of being recognised by AN. So go nuts guys, #Nerf_Ranger #op #pls #BowsAreInstaKills #AFKBagging

In the last CDI this was confirmed as “not an option” by a representative of AN.

It will require a rebalance of the class & also be unfair for those in favour of Pet (despite being optional).

I wait for an Archer class or something. Because the alternative is to wait for Ranger to provide a viable ranged build for all content. And given AN’s history in GW1 and GW2 – this is extremely unlikely.

For PVE high content such as dungeons and fractals you’ll be harming your potential damage output if you use short bow and will not be getting the effects of the group if you chose long bow.

This game’s community are cold against players who think they might to use a bow on a ranger and kicks from group for having either bows still happens.

As for WvW amazingly you need the swords for manoeuvrability rather than bows (wtf).
There’s some viability in LB-GS roaming builds thought you’re still at the bottom of the roaming food chain. As for zergs (of any kind) you have extremely little you can contribute with at all.

To summarise, bows are not really viable – and every day that continues AN are emphatically failing to deliver on a core game mechanic. And it’s a joke – just look at the warrior they have 20% cooldown AND piercing arrows on ONE trait that we need TWO for. (source: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/ranger-lb-traits-vs-warrior-rifle-trait/first#post4059217).

By no standards can AN say that bows are even remotely balanced. And the lack of communication/recognition on the subject makes me sour.

TheKillerAngel.3596:

Ranger has very good sustained condition cleanse but doesn’t have very convenient heavy condition removal on demand without heavy trait investment.

What scenarios do you see this being useful?

I don’t mean to put a downer on things further. But there’s absolutely no evidence or hope that the Ranger class will get picked up.

The Ranger in GW1 was consistently underpowered and left out of top-tier content like DaO HM. Often if you wanted to play in top tier content you had to use a build that focused on your second profession.

Further to that, the CDI mentioned things like “…we can’t do this…” “…it would mean we need to rebalance the whole class if we did that…”.

Lastly, I feel AN are using Ranger melee as a scape goat. Melee is very easy to focus on for them and they can completely ignore the fact that we have no viable ranged builds in high level content. So unfortunately I feel the balance team will just want a quick and easy fix as possible and just bump that melee aspect of things up.

Fair points on the knockback. Maybe something that stopped them, actually I like that idea more. A very mini stun with a cooldown so it can’t be applied more than every 3 seconds.

I’d LOVE to have just general higher speeds while wielding bows, but I would still want back peddling to be included. Problem is I think it might be considered too OP and unfair by some.

If our DPS is revolved around our 1 skills.
One way to spice that up is to involve flanking a little more (for short bow) and kiting a little more (for long bow).
That way, despite just spamming 1, we’re using skill in our positioning.

As far as I am concerned dungeon stacking is a joke of a mechanic and needs to be addressed. But for WvW, PVP and PVE – otherwise mobility is ideal.

I’m happy to just put that forward as a suggestion and see your feedback/ideas. But two such examples could be:

Shortbow – while wielding, back peddling is normal speed (or a little hop backwards)
Longbow – every so many n hits (3?) push the enemy back a minimal distance

Very simple subtle stuff.

Chrispy.5641:

Lace.9472:

This is one of the most pressing criteria asked for in the Collab thread.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/page/54#post3746046

Yet other than the read the wind trait and a minimal boost to pet AI nothing in any change since has scraped the surface.

The main question now is, do they know that?

And the CDI was two months ago. so? How much stuff has come out of the other CDI threads in two months or less?

I don’t know how these things work. I left the game after the shortbow nerf and have never been active on these forums. To be honest I was very active on gw2/1guru forums throughout GW1 and GW2’s testing and “post release” phase as I saw these periods as the critical periods to provide feedback.

Are you insinuating that they’re still going to work on CDI feedback and that they don’t consider it to have been all addressed in the april release? Because that would be good to hear, though I’m really losing faith at this stage

Soilder.3607:

… and am only posting it because I actually am tired of all the negativity associated with power rangers.

If you want this borderline depressed player – to stop feeling negative. Then tell me this not only works with bows, but works well with bows.

The shortbow attack speed and distance nerf are what made me leave the game.

In the last Ranger balance collaboration AN again recognised people enjoy Archer classes.

Link: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/page/54#post3746046

However despite the latest update I am struggling to find a build for an “archer” that is viable for high level content such as dungeons.

What are peoples thoughts on how this might progress whether it’s ranger, theif, warrior tweaks or a new profession. Or do people think AN think this one’s case closed since the update?

I’ve been playing the GW franchise since it came out and have constantly found a Ranger with a bow is often left out of high level content – and am wondering if my desire to play an archer-class is better suited in another game.

Disclaimer: I will completely ignore any talk about the class “Ranger” in GW2 not meaning ranged class. If you think (having read my post & link) that I don’t understand that – we’re not the type to hold constructive discussion.

This is one of the most pressing criteria asked for in the Collab thread.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/Collaborative-Development-Ranger-Profession/page/54#post3746046

Yet other than the read the wind trait and a minimal boost to pet AI nothing in any change since has scraped the surface.

The main question now is, do they know that?

I’m a little confused with what direction AN are taking with the Ranger. Is there a way to view all dev responses on the forum’s specific to ranger questions/threads? I know there are some tools to see dev responses and they can link to threads but those threads are massive and I can’t seem to narrow it down.

Thanks

What are rangers for?

An easy mode for world exploration and leveling.

So bots, rangers are for bots.

urdriel.8496:

The current ranger is the combination of 2 classes that Anet had in mind for GW2 ,a Beastmaster and a Marksman, Anet had not enough time to develop both classes so, they make a mix with both , that mix is called ranger.

You can use bows, but the best dps is with melee weapons.

Am I allowed to be frustrated?
This exact issue was bought up heavily in both the GW2 official forums during testing and also GW2Guru/GW1Guru before and during test – which AN devs read and commented.

The community were very heavily suggesting an option to stow the forced pet mechanic for a “boost”. But AN unwavering in their confidence that hey could fix the pet AI. They have*1. But they have not made it very viable for high level content (dungeons, wvw zergs, fractals etc). But basically the community weren’t convinced in the design AN seemed to be aiming for with Ranger and gave very useful feedback in that regard.

What’s more is throughout GW1 the Ranger was one of the worst classes for high level content. With the exception of Barrage/Pet FoW you either got left out of Hardmode high level content completely – or had to run a build focused heavily around 2nd profession (and no bow). Years later we’re talking about the exact same thing, you need to avoid bows and hit melee builds to be viable – I can’t believe it.

I just feel like I’ve been waiting GW’s whole lifetime for a viable ranged build for high level content and to be honest I have little hope it will ever change. By any standards, AN to deliver a ranged high level content build have emphatically failed.

Maybe a theif shortbow would be better?
Or maybe an Archer/Marksman class in the future?
If you want a viable ranged build for high level content do you need to find a new game?
If a dev was here right now I’d ask the following:

1. What is the intended “design” for the Ranger considering high lvl content?
2. If that excludes bows, why is that in their design?
3. If you can’t play high lvl content as an archer with existing classess is a new one in the pipe line?
4. Do you recognise the overwhelming desire for players to play as an archer in MMO’s?

*1 Lets just say they’re fixed for my argument. But even then, it’s only JUST well after release. I don’t want to get into a pet thing discussion.

Fluffball.8307:

Read this: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Guide-PvE-Meta-Ranger/first#post3868491

The idea that rangers are poor at the end-game PvE or WvW comes from people using bows and bears, commonly known as “bearbows”. Bearbows are generally kicked from any party in any game mode on sight.

First question, do you mean people using bows AND bears together. Or people who EITHER bows OR bears?

Second question, if our meta dictates a melee only focus in high level content and any ranged weapons are not ideal or balanced – then would you not agree that warrants negativity within the community?

Third, almost every mmo has a “archer” profession. These tend to be very popular. Do you agree it’s excusable to assume some players would chose the Ranger profession (being the closest profession to Archer) and would be negatively impressed at the inability to used ranged weapons in high level content?

Disclaimers (I find it annoying that I have to specify these, but meh): I hereby state I do not assume nor expect the Ranger class to mean “ranged”. On that basis I do not expect the ranger to be exclusively ranged. However I do expect the ranger to be inclusively ranged. So I expect a VIABLE ranged build in high level content. Of course, I would expect a viable build for ALL weapon sets, classing all weapon sets for all professions that aren’t ‘viable’ in high level content – as a on going failure to deliver on core gameplay mechanics by AN.

I’ve made subtle changes

http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/?fNAQNBjYDbkRlWW7XxgFqWDsHUrDgC4sbNEszgOYEGwB-TlCBwAQ3fwoyvGHEAIPAAcq/A4CAkS3QCzfTUCu5IAQKgIGDA-w

The idea is situational bursts mostly on LB-2 with fury/quickness from pets. I’ve taken some condi damage negation out because you pretty much need to LReflex or Sword Leap out of there if anyone’s paying you enough attention to apply conditions.

From there you can either continue to kite them with muddy terrain and entangle and DPS or you can reposition and continue situational bursts.

There’s also a tiny bit more general survivability with the trait changes to improve toughness and get protection on rolls.

I am looking forward to testing this.
I’m quite comfortable spamming my GS 3 skill to leap around WvW.
But is there a trick to doing the SW 2 skill?
e.g. If I am running away from a nasty zerg with smoke coming out their noses
Would I attempt to turn and face them, then use the 2, then turn around again and use 2 again?
If so, is there a trick from you regulars on how to do this well/quick?

Just a general note more on Rapid Fire than anything but a good block can negate a lot of that. Not to suggest you are suggesting this – but ideally I would avoid creating a build around 1 skill.

Jocksy.3415:

Lace.9472:

SB and GS are my two favourite weapons. So I’m glad to read these comments, but if I join a PUG dungeon group with a short bow and LS will I be kicked? (assume I’m taking frost and the ferocity trait)

LS?

Sorry I meant GS so the set is Great Sword and Short Bow. Waited all day for a reply and just noticed my typo ¬_¬

Is there any way a speed run would take any bow?

SB and GS are my two favourite weapons. So I’m glad to read these comments, but if I join a PUG dungeon group with a short bow and LS will I be kicked? (assume I’m taking frost and the ferocity trait)

Is there a trick to getting the Great Sword 3 leap to always go forward and ignore targets (even if you don’t have a target selected by mouse) ?

VendettaDFA.9368:

I have only found that to occur if I lose my targeting ring. I dont think it’s a true bug. If I lose line of sight or only “look” in the mob direction to fire then I lose or never establish my auto-attack.

Just to clarify, when I then click ‘1’ again, it will do one single shot and not continue to auto attack. So I’m reduced to clicking for each attack after that.

Very important:

Auto attack with short bow sometimes stops and you need to press ‘1’ to make it attack but it just shoots one – so you need to spam ‘1’ as it won’t auto any more.

It’s mobs of any type and also players in PVP

I was unable to find anything using the search.

My problem is sometimes I’ll be attacking something (usually with ranger short bow) but this is happening on other class/weapons too.

My auto attack will stop attacking, then I’ll click ‘1’ again and it will shoot once. Then I click ‘1’ again and it will shoot once again. It’s like my AK-47’s gone from automatic to single fire – and is very annoying.

There’s an option in the settings to not stop auto attacking when a target is changed or something – I’ve tried that but still getting this issue.

If anyone has any info on this please let me know.

Regarding this topic – why did AN make this change with the patch notes saying it was because of the animation timing?

Since when is it good practice to change the function to match the animation?

If they just wanted to nerf the attack because it was ‘too fast’ then say so!?
Just comes across confusing