Guild Wars 2

misterdevious.6482:

Aveneo.2068:

Also, have you guys ever considered removing the ‘Pet Swap’ and instead building the Ranger around having just a single pet? That way Pet Swap could become something like a Revive Pet channel effect in case the pet goes down.

I always found Pet Swap a rather awkward mechanic and I’d much prefer having to choose a single pet as my lifelong companion with the ability to revive it on occassion instead of pulling pets out of my quiver like I’m some kind of magician.

Early on you could only own 3 pets, only have one active at a time, couldn’t change pets in combat, you could level your active pet up to unlock more than its auto-attack, and then you could handpick which skills you wanted to put in those other pet skill slots with several pet skills that no longer exist.

They changed all that.

That’s a shame. Well, not the part about only owning 3 pets but the other things like only having one active pet, levelling (training) it and choosing its abilities sounds a lot more interesting. Sounds a bit like how pets behaved/evolved in GW1.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Thighum.7295:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

Thank goodness. I am confused about something though, why would perma stow make pets op? I figured that something like a damage boost would only occur while the pet was stowed. I don’t think that the skills themselves would need to be changed, just a %stat boost that would give the approximate damage that the pet gave.

Allie Murdock.8152:

The reason why I latched onto the aspect idea was because it was an option that seemed we could maybe work around. Rather than having to rebalance the whole class, we’d just have to balance the aspects to be similar to what the pet does damage-wise. That seemed a little more viable.

I thought that aspects was basically the equivalent of perma-stowing with a stat boost, an F2 skill by family and glowing particles to show which aspect you were in. I don’t really understand how this is dramatically different from perma stowing with a damage boost while stowed.

Perma stow wouldn’t make pets OP. In rebalancing for permastow, it would make those that still want to play with the pet op. THAT IS, unless we design something that gives the player a boost to balance it out.

The aspects I think were a little different. They talked about having specific bonuses based on the pet that the player was using. That is different from just giving a damage boost, which could end up being difficult to balance.

So if you don’t want to shift the damage to “Ranger 100% damage + Pet additional damage”, which could be partly shifted back by investing points into beastmastery, you better have a smart solution. Personally I like to have a pet around since it draws the aggresion. The only thing I want more than having a pet tanking for me is having my damage back. With my suggestion, I could have both. If you want to give us our damage back if we’ve our pet stowed, I would have to decide.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Perma stow wouldn’t make pets OP. In rebalancing for permastow, it would make those that still want to play with the pet op. THAT IS, unless we design something that gives the player a boost to balance it out.

The aspects I think were a little different. They talked about having specific bonuses based on the pet that the player was using. That is different from just giving a damage boost, which could end up being difficult to balance.

Make the BM trait line act as a new kind of multiplier for weapons and pets. Like each trait therein is worth 5%.

Trait 0 into BM, damage goes up 30% on your toon. (Or whatever percentage value you deemed it to be fair on avg)

The deeper you trait into BM, the weaker your weapons get, to the point that, people can do a 90/10, 95/5, split or the supposed 70/30 split when fully traited into BM.

Revert the pet damage to pre nerf lvl when they’re 30 deep into BM to account for Ascended equipment.

THEN play with the numbers on the pets to fine tune the balance. Every proposal that doesn’t involve folding potential lost damage back into the toon is a lost cause because that BM line makes it like trying to build a house on shifting sands.

If the team insists in allowing the pet to do automated dps, then they should offer a sliding option as mentioned above so players can find the happy medium and playstyle that they want.

I’m going to ask a taboo question: when are we supposed to see the first changes? I mean, do we have to expect a balance over the next few weeks? This summer maybe? Next year?

Iason Evan.3806:

Thanks for all the hard work Allie! My biggest concern outside the pet situation is the traits. I will give a few examples. Traps are in the Precision/Crit line. Problem? They do condition damage. Traps should be in the trait line that affects condition damage.

There are pet skills through out all the lines. Shouts for Ranger only affect pets doing things but are in the healing/vitality line. The GM trait in the Vitality Line number XII is for a shout. I have to spend 30 points in the vitality line if I want effects for my shouts. It renders a high damage build useless because of it.

Speed for pets is in the crit line but should be in the beast mastery line. Rangers are skirmishers, but if I want to add range to my longbow I have to spec into a master trait and it is in a wholly different line than the recharge reduction trait for Longbow.

What I am getting at is that the traits don’t feel focused enough. There are myriad other examples too. Those are just the ones off the top of my head as I am not at a place where I can log in to the game to give more focused feedback atm.

As per your comment about stowing pets not being off the table, I would at the end of the day really like to see the ability to stow pets. I really think the AI is a liability.

I think this is a good point – perhaps if the trait lines were less scattered it would reduce the feeling of having to trait to make things useful. You’d have more “spare” trait points to create build diversity, rather than having to trait 20-30 into two lines to focus on one thing.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Also, I don’t want this thread to be entirely about pets. We’ve seen a ton of great feedback about them, and I would like to hear more about utilities that need help (and aren’t viable unless spec’d into) as I haven’t seen as much on that front!

Thanks all

Thanks for all the hard work Allie! My biggest concern outside the pet situation is the traits. I will give a few examples. Traps are in the Precision/Crit line. Problem? They do condition damage. Traps should be in the trait line that affects condition damage.

There are pet skills through out all the lines. Shouts for Ranger only affect pets doing things but are in the healing/vitality line. The GM trait in the Vitality Line number XII is for a shout. I have to spend 30 points in the vitality line if I want effects for my shouts. It renders a high damage build useless because of it.

Speed for pets is in the crit line but should be in the beast mastery line. Rangers are skirmishers, but if I want to add range to my longbow I have to spec into a master trait and it is in a wholly different line than the recharge reduction trait for Longbow.

What I am getting at is that the traits don’t feel focused enough. There are myriad other examples too. Those are just the ones off the top of my head as I am not at a place where I can log in to the game to give more focused feedback atm.

As per your comment about stowing pets not being off the table, I would at the end of the day really like to see the ability to stow pets. I really think the AI is a liability.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Thighum.7295:

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

Thank goodness. I am confused about something though, why would perma stow make pets op? I figured that something like a damage boost would only occur while the pet was stowed. I don’t think that the skills themselves would need to be changed, just a %stat boost that would give the approximate damage that the pet gave.

Allie Murdock.8152:

The reason why I latched onto the aspect idea was because it was an option that seemed we could maybe work around. Rather than having to rebalance the whole class, we’d just have to balance the aspects to be similar to what the pet does damage-wise. That seemed a little more viable.

I thought that aspects was basically the equivalent of perma-stowing with a stat boost, an F2 skill by family and glowing particles to show which aspect you were in. I don’t really understand how this is dramatically different from perma stowing with a damage boost while stowed.

Perma stow wouldn’t make pets OP. In rebalancing for permastow, it would make those that still want to play with the pet op. THAT IS, unless we design something that gives the player a boost to balance it out.

The aspects I think were a little different. They talked about having specific bonuses based on the pet that the player was using. That is different from just giving a damage boost, which could end up being difficult to balance.

I think what he meant was that if you gave the ranger an appropriate stat boost only while the pet was stowed, then there would be no need to rebalance in the first place.

Fancy Fool.1743:

Specific Game Mode
PvE

Proposal Overview
Make greatsword more attractive while giving rangers more blast finisher options.

Goal of Proposal
*Remove the evade from the auto-attack chain and put it on “Swoop,” as one developer once suggested. This takes some power away from that chain while giving us a timed evade.
*Add either an AoE might stack at the end of the chain, or make the first two strikes stack one vuln and the last stack 2-3.
*Remove the vuln from Maul, maybe add two seconds to its cooldown, and make it a blast finisher.

Proposal Functionality
Adding evade to the movement skill would be similar to whirlwind on other greatswords, the short cooldown blast finisher would be similar to Lightning Hammer. The AoE might stack on chain would be new, but I think it would be an interesting supportive ability that would make greatsword ranger more desirable.

Associated Risks
Depending on how this was done, it could make greatsword too strong or too weak

Not a fan of moving the evade. The greatsword has a role currently as a defensive weapon, but its auto attack damage has been over nerfed. Also note that guardian hammer skill 2 has a better damage coefficient, a 300 range leap, and a blast finisher on a shorter cooldown than maul. We shouldn’t need a longer cooldown to get a blast finisher on maul.

oiseau.6481:

I know I am going to make myself hated, but I have a single question:
Do you care so badly about non English-speaking people that no one dare at least inform us that a CDI is running on other subforums

I mean, I barely can understand than the language makes it harder to transfer information to dev while you are doing pretty well here, but there is no way for me to understand why we don’t deserve any information at all.

I’m talking about French sub forum only:
#We were not informed at all a CDI about Ranger was running here (or an other subject by the way)

1. When we started to create something that way by our own we did not get any remarks about it
2. When the debate here came to have some clues about what is on process, we had to find that by ourself and traduce it.
3. For now we did not have any FR community manager post about Ranger CDI

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

I totally agree with that.

I’m not sure the game really strives for or benefits from countering counters ad infinitum.

Hmm.
I think he’s more going for the notion of making sure your suggestions have Soft Counters, not asking for a Hard Counter to counter your counter.

That is to say;
This is less a case of you asking for access to rock to defeat their scissors, and then you’re being asked to make sure the opponent has access to paper.

And more;
acknowledging you should have a clear advantage, but how you and your foe are both playing should be able to swing the outcome of you using the skill. For example; giving them a reasonably skillful means to avoid some of rock’s applications or doing something difficult that can reduce it’s impact. Something that gives them a means to respond to your action.

What about a unique mechanic that builds damage with consecutive hits? The stack would be reset if the enemy evades one of your attacks. Are dodges still too prevalent for a mechanic like that to be worthwhile?

Game-mode WvW

proposal overview: the design philosophy do not support ranger in WvW zerg

Goal of proposal: empowering ranger AoE capability to support a zerg-busting situation in WvW.

Proposal functionality:
in the design philosophy, it says “best single target and sustained damage”. i think that is the problem why ranger is the worst WvW zerg profession. with this philosophy, ranger did not even get “best” single target damage because it need to be sustained. so this philosophy that Anet has. only works for PVE. why? because people in WvW moves rapidly. and you cannot sustain your damage. longbow is a good example for this. LB is a good sustained damage for PVE. but in WvW, you will be interrupted over and over (forced by situation). so there is no utility for ranger in a WvW zerg.

so to increase ranger support capability, we can:
1. decrease the AoE skill cooldown in Longbow
2. or make new AoE skill in longbow.
3. make longbow’s arrows pierce without a trait.
4. muddy terrain causes cripple plus some other effect.

but… actually… , with this change, Anet can keep hold to the idea of a single target sustained damage. the solution is to make AoE skill not doing much damage. but it have other utility such as stack vulnerability, combo-field, knockdown, etc

Associated Risk:
1. its against the first ranger design philosophy (nvm, actually its not against anything).
2. overpowered ranger AoE support

And on a final note, don’t make me bring up the reaction timing and “instinct” arguments. There’s a reason that even with mere sharpened rocks and sticks in their hands as weapons, human being stood far above everything else and conquered the lands. Humans were prospering even while living in tents on the food chain for creatures like lions, tigers, crocodiles and all the most fearsome creatures that exist and even more fearsome ones that are no longer with us.. and not only did we survive and flourish, we outperformed in every way with a superior body design and intelligence and made these into our footstool, and even in some cases put THEM on the menu. And yet the intelligence and capacity of these AIs cannot even compare to those animals we conquered with the bare minimum of weaponry.

How do you think a class that is 30% based on such incapable functions can ever succeed when its pitted against characters controlled by the mightiest existence that currently roams the Earth? In PvP environment if we come up across a petless class with 30% invested in these AIs’ we’re toast before the fight begins with this handicap if our foe has any amount of fighting instinct. Just as someone else so fondly put it, human controlled characters can negate 85-100% of a pet’s damage output even when these are operated under the best rangers in the community.. by merely doing an L-step! Pathetic!

That’s the source of the hatred here. These AIs are severely overrated. Just imagine for example what a human would do to the giant zergfests if they controlled the boss characters that are currently managed by AI, with the same skillsets available? Nobody would even complete a single dungeon, let alone a Living World end boss. Can the AIs see some improvements and would it help the class? Sure. Can the class become powerful with other positive changes added in addition such? Sure. Will it be enough to compete on equal footing with the top tier players operating petless classes or classes with pets that are not “Always on” deadlocked? No, it will never do such.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

The reason why I latched onto the aspect idea was because it was an option that seemed we could maybe work around. Rather than having to rebalance the whole class, we’d just have to balance the aspects to be similar to what the pet does damage-wise. That seemed a little more viable.

Your choice of wording here is most surprising, Allie. With all due respect I’m sure you must know by now as well as I do that the majority of perma-stow suggestions don’t rotate around a mere tool to avoid aggro in dungeons but an alternate feasible playstyle. This usually revolves around the idea that ranger weapon skill damage coefficients are currently set 30% lower than every other classes to accomodate for the pet. People are not asking for the ability to put the pet away for good and lose their entire F-bar and that 30% damage basically remaining the same but without a pet, but rather they’re asking for the ability to not only put the pet away but upon the pet being stowed having ALL ranger weapon skill coefficients refunded to standard value reflecting damage potentials seen on other petless classes and an “Alternative” F-key set of skills thrown into the mix upon stow to make such play styles viable.

I hope that clears things up. In other words, pet builds could still play with the pet and remain the same. Less pet dependent builds could play without the pet and see drastic improvements while not becoming OP. Everybody happy. That’s the theory. Granted, there are some major programming challenges but with so many of the community playing rangers it should be a worthwhile investment with some promise of monetary returns following increased customer satisfaction, no? (After all when players are happy with their characters, they are much more set on purchasing enhancements through the Gem store.)

Now, I’m sorry for rearing away from the utility discussion you desire Allie, however it’s kind of warranted. What we of the ranger community feel you and the developers need you and the devs to understand is that in an PvP/WvW environment, it’s not fair to have a AI dependent class because no matter what tweaks are made, if we’re honest the AI WILL NEVER keep up with players. Are we clear with that?

Or, let me ask you: Can an AI controlled pet predict player movements based on past experiences and human patterns and plot an intercept course in the most efficient manner when a player starts kiting around while fighting you?

Can an AI hold back its AI controlled skills for the “perfect moment” while its stuck following presets and script conditions?

Can an AI controlled pet even avoid AoE damages like mines while simultaneously closing the distance to their opponent like players can? (Ie. dodging through mines TOWARD your foe).

Can an AI controlled pet activate its skills with considering to combos and synergistic with the player himself? Can it detect that upon that “Stunlock” is the time we want to unleash our bursts including the pet skills like drake’s tail swipe? Can moas run to us and unleash their heal in our most dire needs of it?

Let’s be honest Allie, rangers will always lagg behind in competitive environment outside the inclusion of skills that would be considered “OP” on other classes due completely to the pets. Enhance and augment those AIs all you want but they will still always lagg FAR behind the ranger and hold us back. AI development is still centuries behind what it needs to be if you want pets to contribute competitively in player vs player environments. These are not matters you can fix with more player control while still retaining AI, or adding on new skills. But also note in that department, the pets are VERY poorly equipped. Not a single melee pet even has one distance closer skill to use against kiting enemies.. but the sad reality is even if they did, they wouldn’t contribute enough.

oiseau.6481:

Allie’s good job here shows we can have somethig else than a direct player to dev collaboration, it might be a good idea to figurate a way to work like that

You mean direct player to PR person. She’s not a dev. She’s a middle (wo)man between us and the devs.

oiseau.6481:

I know I am going to make myself hated, but I have a single question:
Do you care so badly about non English-speaking people that no one dare at least inform us that a CDI is running on other subforums

I mean, I barely can understand than the language makes it harder to transfer information to dev while you are doing pretty well here, but there is no way for me to understand why we don’t deserve any information at all.

I’m talking about French sub forum only:
#We were not informed at all a CDI about Ranger was running here (or an other subject by the way)

1. When we started to create something that way by our own we did not get any remarks about it
2. When the debate here came to have some clues about what is on process, we had to find that by ourself and traduce it.
3. For now we did not have any FR community manager post about Ranger CDI

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

I can’t agree more with you, and I don’t think such a behavior from Anet can help the overall community to progress.

Flytrap.8075:

Please, no more pet talk.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Also, I don’t want this thread to be entirely about pets. We’ve seen a ton of great feedback about them, and I would like to hear more about utilities that need help (and aren’t viable unless spec’d into) as I haven’t seen as much on that front!

Thanks all

We’ve talked the pet to death at this point.

30% of our damage is tied to the pet so…. it’s the single biggest item to attack. When the pets start working or go away, I’ll stop.

Aveneo.2068:

Yeah, seemed like it as he/she specifically stated Europe; but that was probably meant to be France then.

At any rate, I also agree that it would have been nice of the devs to mention the CDI’s in the non-english forums.

Sure, sorry for the misunderstanding i was responsible for, to be fair let’s make a check of other forums.

• German CDI post, created by player, no red post in here
• Spanish CDI post, created by player, no red post in here
• French one created by player, no red post in here

I don’t blame CM for that as far as i guess they where not requested to work on it. But we were even not told Ranger CDI were opened.

Allie’s good job here shows we can have somethig else than a direct player to dev collaboration, it might be a good idea to figurate a way to work like that

Markus.9084:

Aveneo.2068:

oiseau.6481:

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

While I agree that it would have been nice to have a post regarding the CDI in the french and german subforums, I have to stop and wonder at the last part of your post.

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

I think you misunderstood him…. he wanted to point out that non english speaking players have the right to express their point of view and he used the french forum as an example.

Btw I agree with him.

Yeah, seemed like it as he/she specifically stated Europe; but that was probably meant to be France then.

At any rate, I also agree that it would have been nice of the devs to mention the CDI’s in the non-english forums.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Ok guys, just wanted to clarify a few things.

Permastow is not impossible. I never meant to give that impression, so I apologize if I did. However, as far as priorities go for the Ranger, it is not high on the list. Why? Because it would require an entire re-balance of Ranger, but if we re-balanced, then the players that do play with the pet would be OP. See the dilemma there?

Oh, it is possible. Enough resources and it is more than possible. Y’all don’t want to, understandable, but a large portion of the Ranger player base doesn’t want the class mechanic because it does not work as intended (hence the band-aids from the start).

That just settles that the class will forever be handicapped because it’s going to take at least or more work to make the pet work as intended as it would be to give the option out of it.

Thanks for putting the final nail in the coffin of my hope for the Ranger to be truly fixed.

Aveneo.2068:

oiseau.6481:

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

While I agree that it would have been nice to have a post regarding the CDI in the french and german subforums, I have to stop and wonder at the last part of your post.

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

I think you misunderstood him…. he wanted to point out that non english speaking players have the right to express their point of view and he used the french forum as an example.

Btw I agree with him.

oiseau.6481:

Aveneo.2068:

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

Yeah, I know a lot of people are posting here from all over the world.
My point was every server has it’s own way of going, specifically in WvsW and most french, spanish or german people would have a better time posting on the official forum dedicated to them.

No offense if i made my self unclear, i just wanted to point the fact that it is understanable not to comunicate directly to the devs, but as far as here, it’s basically lead by a CC who is doing a pretty nice job, why shouldn’t we use the same concept here and there.

That’s not such a huge job if you take in account the fact people are less on thoses officials subforums… And it shouldn’t hurt anyway

I have been wondering the same… Then I thought about it being 4 CDI going on at the same time here… french forum has (as far as I know), only Stephanie acting as CC, with a few mods…
Yes, looking at commader CDI, we had it nice, but dealing with 4 at the same time, even with few affluence, would be quite a big workload for her… since she would still have to do her regular workload…

Your original question, though, would be better asked in the language-specific subforum, might be directly to Stephanie…

I imagine a future where Rangers are wanted in WvW because of their ability to track… but how would it work?

• Red Dots on the minimap (Rangers could sense enemies.)
• Red Dots on the minimap when using a skill (Rangers could check for enemies.)
• Rangers see visible footprints and/or red dot on minimap when enemies stealth (Rangers could follow stealthed foes.)
• Crippling Shot grants a Debuff called “Tracked,” and while that debuff is active the target appears as a red dot on the minimap and leaves visible footprints while stealthed. (Shortbow Rangers could track a single target).

And how much would it upset PvP balance?

Aveneo.2068:

There are a lot more countries in Europe than just France. So claiming that ANet is only interested in what NA thinks is a rather ignorant and selfcentered perspective. I’m from the Netherlands and last time I checked we are one of many countries that make up Europe.

Yeah, I know a lot of people are posting here from all over the world.
My point was every server has it’s own way of going, specifically in WvsW and most french, spanish or german people would have a better time posting on the official forum dedicated to them.

No offense if i made my self unclear, i just wanted to point the fact that it is understanable not to comunicate directly to the devs, but as far as here, it’s basically lead by a CC who is doing a pretty nice job, why shouldn’t we use the same concept here and there.

That’s not such a huge job if you take in account the fact people are less on thoses officials subforums… And it shouldn’t hurt anyway

I know I am going to make myself hated, but I have a single question:
Do you care so badly about non English-speaking people that no one dare at least inform us that a CDI is running on other subforums

I mean, I barely can understand than the language makes it harder to transfer information to dev while you are doing pretty well here, but there is no way for me to understand why we don’t deserve any information at all.

I’m talking about French sub forum only:
#We were not informed at all a CDI about Ranger was running here (or an other subject by the way)

1. When we started to create something that way by our own we did not get any remarks about it
2. When the debate here came to have some clues about what is on process, we had to find that by ourself and traduce it.
3. For now we did not have any FR community manager post about Ranger CDI

So,
Don’t you really care about what European people thinks about rangers?
The Meta is slightly different on our servers than NA, don’t you think a feedback could be interesting giving a different sight of view?

Frostfang.5109:

Arghore

U’r suggestion on Permastowing the pets and making them utility-skills….

NO thank u. That would ruin the entire class for me.

Then don’t stow your pet. The pet stow mechanic that is already built into the game changes the UI to remove F1-F4 completely. What is proposed is that the pet UI F1-F4 become something else when the pet is stowed, such as traps (my idea), and that the 30% base damage given to the pet be given to the ranger.

Again, if you don’t want to stow your pet, don’t. Permastow adds to the ranger if you stow, or plays exactly like what we have now if you like your ranger as it is now.

We are trying to get changes to the ranger that are both meaningful and easy to code because I for one don’t want to wait 6 months for a fix to a problem that is already 1.5 years old.

kccviva.6741:

Concerning the survivability of pet in dungeon/boss fight,
it would be great if the pet dodge as you do. This makes ranger playable in dungeon like COE. In addition, it will be super cool to see my kitty dodging with me. It can also be by chance, e.g. your pet dodge with you 50% of time, and can be improved by trait. To compromise, the death penalty of pets can be increased.

And for pet controlling, i hope there is an option to control the maximum distance between you and your pet. In particular, always next to you, 300, 600, and unlimited would be great. With this, we can manage the pet without pressing F3 and F1 hundreds of times while in dungeon.

I wouldn’t mind a ‘Dodge as One’, but I’d rather want ANet to give some actual AI to the pet so it can judge for itself when to dodge that highly telegraphed attack (for instance by having its own dodge bar).

However, I disagree with “To compromise, the death penalty of pets can be increased”. Please no, we have already had too many compromises where every 5-10% buff came with a 25-50% nerf to something else.

Also; why should we be punished because some stupid AI had to die. That is why other classes hate us so much; because of our useless pet that’s dead all the time. No more compromises! If anything the death penalty should be shortened not lengthened or Rangers being given an ability with which to revive their pets when they come limping back.

I believe we are due some significant buffs and improvements without having to ‘compromise’ any longer. As far as I can see we don’t have anything left as we’re at the bottom of the barrel after all the empty promises that turned out to be either tooltip fixes, blatant nerfs or an Aquaman suit.

Concerning the survivability of pet in dungeon/boss fight,
it would be great if the pet dodge as you do. This makes ranger playable in dungeon like COE. In addition, it will be super cool to see my kitty dodging with me. It can also be by chance, e.g. your pet dodge with you 50% of time, and can be improved by trait. To compromise, the death penalty of pets can be increased.

And for pet controlling, i hope there is an option to control the maximum distance between you and your pet. In particular, always next to you, 300, 600, and unlimited would be great. With this, we can manage the pet without pressing F3 and F1 hundreds of times while in dungeon.

WAY OF THE SKIRMISHER: TIME IS ON MY SIDE
As skirmishers, Rangers need to maintain consistent pressure over time. Recharge traits should be key to their performance but often lack secondary “flavor” effects. This is an attempt to update or combine traits to give recharge choices more flavor. New traits filling the resulting gaps are intended to enhance Ranger effectiveness as skirmishers by making it difficult to ignore or recover from pressure applied by Ranger attacks rather than increasing their raw damage. They focus on striping or countering boons that allow the enemy to endure the Ranger’s steady assault.

Marksmanship IV: Perfect Aim (NEW) – The damage from your attacks is not reduced by protection. (fills slot vacated by Signet Mastery; coding note – equivalent to +50% damage against targets with protection)

Marksmanship IX: Mighty Signets – Activating signets grants might and signet recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Signet Mastery & Beastmaster’s Might)

Marksmanship X: Marksman’s Speed – Longbow and short bow attacks pierce and recharge time is reduced 20%. (combines Piercing Arrows & Quickdraw)

Skirmishing VI: Hunter’s Horn (NEW) – Horn skills also randomly remove one of Retaliation/Swiftness/Vigor from up to 5 foes in range. (fills slot vacated by Agility Training)

Skirmishing X: Nature’s Venoms (NEW) – Each time you or your pet poison a foe, that foe loses regeneration. (fills slot vacated by Quickdraw)

Wilderness Survival VI: Wilderness Knowledge – Using a survival skill removes a condition from both you and your pet and survival skill recharge time is reduced by 20%.

Wilderness Survival X: Martial Mastery – Critical hits with sword, greatsword, and spear attacks apply vulnerability (3 stacks; 5 seconds duration; 5 second cooldown) and recharge time for these skills is reduced by 20%.

Beastmastery I: Speed Training – Pets move faster and their basic skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (combines Agility Training and Speed Training)

Beastmastery III: Hunter’s Call – Using a shout reveals up to 3 foes within 600 (15 second cooldown) and shout skill recharge time is reduced by 20%. (renamed Shout Mastery)

Beastmastery VI: Commanding Voice – Pets gain stability for 4 seconds when you press f2 and f2 skill recharge time is reduced 20%.

Thank you for reading!