I am reminded of the beta week ends right before launch when the pets didn’t work.
Anet famously does not give a crap about Rangers…
Funny that I keep reading this about every class on every forum.
I do think that there is a potential problem of the ranger community not getting adequate time to give feedback that will make a difference.
They have already stated that it is working as intended, so there is nothing to fix in their minds.
I thought Peters changed his view on that once (might have been last year) when he found it interacting poorly with some of their anti-cheat functions, and after not being able to fix it (on what I am only guess was his own time) had to pass it along.
Most often ‘ranger’ problems seems to be ingrained in others systems to the point that they can not be quickly corrected and so go beyond the ‘low hanging’ fruit method they prefer for bug/design fixes.
Another major issue with pet performance is the perception that the ‘AI’ is doing all the work or that the profession was given an ‘I win button’ which are still bascially being used with the pets being the general handicap of the profession. Unless they are prepared to deal with the backlash ranger will remain in the state it is in only receiving just enough band aid fixes to ‘prove’ that they are listening and trying for improvements.
If the problem is largely only found in d/d elementalist while not being present in other weapon sets using nearly the same traits then the weapon set need looked at as a whole.
While they are doing that they might want to look at the random obstruction that are seeming caused by grass in otherwise open areas.
Not to derail, but if it is generally known that boon share is as needed (as it seems in the limited target system) how is it not a baseline thing?
Not sure if this is only happening to ranger, but I have been having issues with my skill icons not showing the skill is on cooldown, nor displaying the countdown.
If that is the case could ranger please get a designer that is in touch with reality.
If pets hit 100% of the time, then and only then, can Ranger deal 100% of it’s actual damage. Since now you can just run in circles and avoid 30% of Ranger’s total damage very very easily, I cannot see how pets actually hitting their targets instead of just chasing them around the map is OP.
Pets hitting 100% = asking your weapon to be nerfed. I don’t know how you don’t realize this. There’s no way they’ll make each fight into a real 2 vs 1 in favor of the ranger.
That kind of depends on whether or not the developers balanced on something less than 100% potential uptime and hit rate. Somehow I could see them balancing around that perfect improbably set of moments in time.
So exactly what sort of compensation would be given to the ranger if your change happens? It isn’t like they ranger profession gets to keep any nice things for long anyway.
After reading this thread, one question comes to mind exactly how much pet uptime does anet balance the ranger with?
No need as the definition is already there, as quoted by ANet:
“Unparalleled archers, rangers are capable of bringing down foes from a distance with their bows.”
- https://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/professions/ranger/
They can equip either or both of the bows in the game, so there you go. If they went by the flavor text alone the game would never get anywhere as Ranger would bring up the archer quote, followed by warrior stating that bows are weapons and they are the masters of weapons.
I think a lot of the issue with ranger comes from it being a ‘cutting room floor’ profession they had numerous professions that did not make the cut including a warden and archery. So ranger got stuck with the salvagable parts of them with a beastmaster focus which they did not do nearly enough work on (so much so that it feel years later like a rush job that no one want any part of). And so by the time they get to creating a ‘Ranger’ many of the aspect from the previous game had already been handed out and Ranger is stuck with this kind of woodland Warrior-Thief with a animal companion that must never step on Warrior or Thief’s toes.
What I want to know is how the ONLY offhand weapon in game that does NO damage is getting nerfed?
The ‘nerf’ normalized the skills which had a strange number of targets when compared to basically the entire rest of the game it was coming sooner or later.
Makes the Ranger forum look positively ecstatic by comparison.
It might be that the general ranger community is used to setting their standards lower.
Seems a bit backward design after all the talk of skillful use of dodge/evades to have a trait function in that way, but a lot of time they say one thing that they are trying to avoid then go right back to making the same/similar ‘mistake*’ somewhere else.
*I call it a mistake only because of their own competes stating something being poorly designed/implemented example being the original venom trait that added a charge and what that meant for them in balance then still making difficult to balance traited compared to untraited.
I don’t think the skills choices for the comparison are good a weapon skill ( a channeled one at that) compared to a utility might be better to compare it to ‘For Great Justice’ instead. But in theory it would be best if the profession and their aspects could be balanced without the direct need of comparisons.
Back on topic the fact that someone in the developmental stage allowed for the pets ( which I recalled were not even full functional during the first beta weekend) to be completely chained to the general behavioral mechanic of the PvE side of the game was completely short sighted and if the ‘tech’ wasn’t ready they should have reconsidered shipping ranger out at launch. That one call has set up a chain of whack-a-mole balancing and bandaid fixes combining with a focus on developing for a community that is quick to call foul on anything scripted (for lack of a better term as I think AI build is not accurate use of language) being used in PvP. Look at the uproar the ‘petting zoo’ comment caused even though spirits were closer to banners in design than other ‘summons’.
So if Anet wants ranger to be a ‘pet class’ there needs to be an overhaul of there pet systems and mechanics that is just as much if not more effort intensive as the rebuilding of engineers traits.
I have not trashed talked anyone you are choosing to view it that way and that is all. If that is fine then it is not much of a step to view actions and changes in that like as it is better to have a ‘intend all along’ than being viewed as caving in. You think I am calling someone a liar when I have in fact not done so only pointed out that the timing and presentation of the announcement could be taken poorly or viewed differently by each person. So could this needless back a forth stop here and be taken elsewhere as it has long since abandon the topic of this thread.
Take what I’ve presented however you want, what you think about my opinion/ perceptions matters not a bit to me. What matters is the general message Anet has sent and perception of what it could mean. It is basic PR, but why am I bother to explain this to you, a player of the profession that benefited from the change/fix/buff/whatever you want to call it.
The only question I have is really why you feel the need to come to this subforum which will have no effect on engineer?
If you’re going to accuse an ArenaNet developer of lying in the face of evidence to the contrary, offering something more than dodgy innuendo and vague allegations would help establish some credibility.
Odd you go straight to accusing me of calling anyone a liar. Statements of intension have to be take (especial after the fact) with a bit of good faith however oven the course of the games history that relationship is more than a little strained between the developers and the (forum based) ranger community. So call it what you like fix, buff, or ‘stop your tears’ bribe, I really don’t care but don’t again make blatent assumption on what I’ve type it is more than a little hypocritical.
To put it plainly the change/clarification done to the permanent swiftness can easily be seen as engineer whined and they caved (but needed to make themselves not look weak). Whether or not it is the truth is of no consequence, the perception of that possibility does enough damage.
Just to define what a trap is.
If you are putting down a trap – it needs to feel like setting one.I personally didn’t like that traps now (before HoT changes) were literally grenade bombing abilities. It didn’t feel like a trap – it wasn’t used as a trap – it didn’t have anything in common with the term at all.
I can see some potential in them now – but mostly as a defender. That exactly is the point of trap anyways.
Basically he has the thoughts of the change right, but there is probably a bit of the standard ‘too similar to x’ which seems to be the issue with the development of the ranger in general and this particular case it was engineer.
Mesmer complaining about hiding that’s pure comedy. I won’t tell you to l2p I think at this point ‘u bad’ might be the only why to describe this if the pet alone can kill you. Here’s a tip for free the pet has a leash range so you can just escape from Fluffy-eater-of-face.
As for the presentation it isn’t like it was the first time they’ve had a person who didn’t work on the changes talk about them while it doesn’t feel good at least they do not center most of their ‘banter’ around jokes about elementalist so that is something.
(edited by Bran.7425)
I kind of dislike the whole direction they are taking with the spirits as it feels that it runs counter to the mobility focus of the game’s combat. As for what they said during the first livestream my first thought was ‘they (spirits) will be good at not moving and not much else’
(edited by Bran.7425)
Sound like someone has hurts of the butt kind.
There is red in the engi forum. kittening engis get buffed to god status and complain ever so slightly about speedy kits being nerfed and Anet BUFFS it. I mean WTF.
It was a bug fix, not a buff.
Keep believing that and the attack speed reduction on shortbow (from early In the game’s history) was just an ‘animation’ fix. At this point just saying ‘that wasn’t intended’ now counts as a fix hmmm….
Knee jerk reaction from Peters most likely.
You might be overvaluing Beastly Warden as the first live taunt it has that shiny new mechanic smell, but only time will tell on how good it is. Remember torment was originally presented in a similar way to the necromancers and that did really turn out the expected way(from the player point of view).
After finally getting to watch the stream (as reading the notes can be lacking), here is some things that I found odd.
Predator’s Intinct, a trait so bad they didn’t even bother talking about it. Next is the time they wasted on on evade trait activation being more skill (while it may be the case) then leaving LoYF and companion’s defense in the ‘unskilled’ just dodge to use.lastly is the use of the word ‘interesting’ as in traits changed to be more interesting that is a very subjective term and until they define it more clearly it leaves me wondering what is the overall plan is.
The next thought is meant as a joke, I repeat a joke, with all this focus on tankiness on ranger they might as well just increase its health pool to the high rating then there would be medium armored profession with that rating. Joke has ended carry on.
I still think they could also have a knee jerk reaction to Quickdraw and suddening it is down to 33% or perhaps 25% would it still seem so good then?
Before these finalized versions I was (for PvE at least) having trouble choicing a second tree, but now anything after marksmanship is kind of blah
Either ranger players will adapt or they will move on, just as the past has shown. Will ranger be in a good spot in the game? Probably no better than in live. The changes seem unfocused and overly cautious, but I kind of expect further reductions before the chance for improvements.
Even if the ranger community could find common ground I doubt we could get changes as other profession communities have managed. Too much effort has went into longbow and the open in strikes set.
At this point I can only guess the design philosophy of ranger has been reworked again and they have yet to get around to letting anyone know which direction the profession. Is going this cycle.
Polish excrement is still excrement. I’d like to say I was disappointed with what they’ve decided on, but after more than two years all I can think is how much worst could they make things before launch.
Also note I am fairly certain the pet name issue would need less work than the engineer kit rework that made the honey-do list.
Kind of sad when they seem to cave in to the other professions where balance is in questioned, but simple quality of experience change that has next to zero balance effect and has been asked for just as long if not longer than the kit art is ignored.
Malicious Training as shown now is pointless as they are changing the a mount of condition damage needed for conditions to be effective so substandard design as ususal where ranger is concerned.
Also as it needs mentioning again why is the radius increase on traps still part of the trap trait it is like they didn’t know what else to do with the trait and left in a part that shoul have been baseline.
We still don’t know what the changes will be to spirits. All we do know is that spirits will be good at not moving.
Merge all 3 opening strike traits into minor GM and give us something on both minor adept and master.
Merge on weapon swap gain swiftness and fury into one.
Merge all revive traits into one.
Am I asking for too much? xD
Won’t happen, but it would be funny for tail wind and furious grip to be merged and that would make room for fast hands to be the master minor. Warrior would excrete cows.
Just looking at the before and after lists of traits makes me think that whoever is working on ranger has little to know clue what to do with the profession as the original system was filled with bloated options designed around he pet and it’s seperate stats. Then look at the choice to merge a weaker version of strength of spirit with what should have been a minor trait in beastmastery. Who is even working I be profession at this point?
The required amount of condition damage really makes expertise training seem like a trait bloat illusion of choice as the pets without base secondary stats are only getting 350 which while better than base zero is far from functioning well in their new vision of mechanics.
I would say we will have to see it seems like most o the effort hat went into ranger so far was to make opening strikes have better functionality while most of he rest of he changes are lack luster. Also why are there still two major traits effecting revival?
It could be worst you could still have multiple revive based majors and he class mechanic selection as a major in place of a minor.
Pepperidge Farm remembers
When people say viable are they actually meaning optimal? The forums tend to confuse the terms. If that isn’t the case there may need to be a clarification of meaning.
I don’t really understand what you mean by this ? I mean moving Fast Hands to be a major trait wouldn’t matter one bit for when the Specialization system comes out we are compelled to take entire traitlines anyway, so wherever they put it doesn’t matter at all.
Besides, Fast Hands will always be a better choice anyway than any other major trait we already have.
Nothing hard to understand they could have treated (and still could) Fast Hand in a similar way as Elemental Attunement. And most of the argument that are not ‘baseline because I want it without cost’ are more or less coming for the same way of thinking.
While Sebrent has shown bias by looking at his post history that does not add anything to the argument. Post if all the poster that are completely for the idea are just as bias, only their bias is focused on warrior.
If we look at what could happen you realize that they could very well move fast hand to be a major trait and where would that leave warrior?
The general arguments that have been shown here all boil down to you choose not to go without traiting Discpline and that is fine as you have weighs your options and made a choice that is what builds are about. Base lining a trait as strong as fast hands would have to come with adjustments across both weapon skills and the remaining trait line, but I do not think the ones wanting this change have even given that much thought so long as they receive one of the strongest minor traits in the game a a freebee.
You’d take a shout that did nothing at all if it was on 20 sec or lower recharge (trained) so this isn’t about the balance on ‘On my mark’ it is about getting more use out of a hyper focused build.
I can only gather from his reasoning that he doesn’t know what he is talking about either.
If he perchance finds some some of actual argument for this change then maybe there could be some sort of discussion. Otherwise nothing to see here.
So you want to remove what little variety exist in the shoutbow build. Correct?
Read the argument it still sound like want not need.