Guild Wars 2

Right now most, if not all, gap closing/gap creation based skills are bugged or interact poorly with terrain so singling out Rush to be fixed has nothing to do with the discussion of whether or not the skill needs to be punished (cool down increase on miss) for being used as gap creation.

That being said the discussion may need to expand to cover all gap creation/closing skills and their effects on the game as a whole.

Not to be too negative, but with the current track record of Ranger development the simple answer is:

Lower standards and expectations.

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

nope. warrior’s optional mobility is fine and balanced.
further adjustments no necessary.

The developer disagree with you there:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qD9Tvfk1pjk&list=UUP_FgMqOxp_VsM0UfrL-DxA
1:12 ish for the exact “little too much mobility now”

Carighan.6758:

Harper.4173:

Sadly there’s a dichotomy when it comes to passive play in this game : anything that’s not warrior passive play is alright.
Warrior passive sustain, or traits, or anything is bad.

But mesmers having phantasms doing all the work or engis spamming turrets is considered ok.

Sad but true.

Well that escalated quickly.

But you make a false comparison, the difference being that warrior passive components work. :P

And are for the most part in that untouchable “good place”.

The ranger came out fairly well (at least by normal ranger standards). I wasn’t really expecting much profession-wise this patch, but being ignored was sometime the best possible outcome.

Any speculation on what the next one will bring? Has anyone found any stealth nerfs?

Slightly off topic the mesmers seem to be in a uproar. Will their tear sway the developers?

Aitadis.8269:

That sword 3 ability was also very useful as a stun break in wvw and spvp, now they complete destroy it, I guess they want every mesmer to play PU condi in WvW and I hate playing condi classes. This nerf was completely unwarranted.

To be honest it is surprising that the ability wasn’t normalized when they took the stun break off of infiltrator’s strike.

That being said these things happen just means time to adapt or cry enough that the developers give in, but that is a slippery slope.

Almost want to say a Healing Signet Asuran Mace/shield/hammer warrior.

I disagree with barracuda as they would just end up the hyena of the sea with lower stats based on the worst A.I. in the game.

Out of stuff we could have I would like the eagle and hawk to be different pets not just a reskin.

Addition pets within the current families would be nice
Fern (insert family here) could be interesting additions especially with the focus on Maguuma.

djunior.4187:

The problem is the player, not the ranger class.
But people should stop the “no ranger” block and start a “no bearbow” block. I guess more people would learn how to play in group with a ranger then.

http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/28hd5h/why_the_prejudice_against_rangers/

Would not help in the slighted, the problem is the output to effort on the ranger is no were near where it needs to be which put a poorly played warrior (or guardian really) at a unacceptable level of output/effectiveness where the poorly played ranger is at a very noticeable level of ineffectiveness.

This is compounded by Anet encounter design with numerous situation that will in fact flatten the pet not amount of micromanagement will fix this. So the developer know the problem exist, but take a stance of “We can not design content around one profession” when they seem to forget the range denial that they place in mesmer and guardian that can (when timed well) trivializes content.

Cufufalating.8479:

@jcbroe

It’s then not helped by the different play modes.. For example I will admit to having no clue who these “famous” PvP rangers people are talking about are.. because PvP combat is so far removed from WvW Roaming (which is all I do) I really couldn’t care less what PvP rangers are doing, or PvE ranger for that matter.

This general view is all in all detrimental to the profession as a whole it basically states that “As long as what I do is unaffected, the rest (of the profession) can go to skritt.”

Without some unity ranger will continue to be at the mercy of the developers listening to masses of angry pvp players who ask for the whole sale destruction of the profession.

TheBlackHanzo.5028:

scerevisiae.1972:

Sarision.6347:

I would like it to affect both the pet and the Ranger, so I don’t have to rely on the signet.

• signets only affecting pet is really bad, should affect ranger by default and GM trait should make it both.

This is one of the things about rangers i have always hated. Not to mention that not every signet passive works for our pet. What i mean is Signet of Renewal passive gives no benefit to our pet while the active only does harm. Last i checked the whole idea behind ranger was a “Two fighting as one” approach. SoR should cleanse a condition per tick on the pet as well and not just the player. Not asking for too much is it? Do that and make heal as one do something other than simply healing.

At least half of the ranger’s condition removal is based on the harm of the pet so design wise that whole “two as one” is mostly flavor text garbage like (I am going there) “unparalleled…”

Sevans.4619:

Poison Master is about the only thing I’ve seen that incorporated CDI suggestions.

And it is actually a pretty kitten good trait.

That is probably because the trait was already in existance before the CDI and with there volume of suggestion at least one would hit on something that the designer had already decided on.

I saw a similar problem with the Champion Spider Queen event during the NIghtmare is Over chapter of the LS right after breaking out of the cocoon (which being it locks out your pet) the pet got insta-gibbd and the next swaps were all dead on arrival (I wish I had been recording during that) and after the event the pet eventually healed back up out of combat and I parked my sylvari ranger in the Grove and played alts only for a week or so.

RoyalPredator.9163:

Overhaul? https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/iR-Ranger-Redesign-v2-NEW-Mechanism

But I fear we’ll get just some minor upgrade…

I doubt even that probably some more tool tip corrections, silence on the progression of integrating sword with the rest of the game, and at least one unwarranted nerf.

Belzebu.3912:

The reason Guard has a CD to cast is because it needs to interrupt the current AI state of the pet to start the Guard effect, and for that the server side need to check the current state of the pet and change it to start the Guard and all that takes time, other shouts doesn’t need all that verification, that is the reason that almost every F2 skill takes a time to be used.

Or to put it simply ranger is get poorly designed to interact with the game.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

Nike.2631:

So, do folks feel Warriors would have condition counters more proportionate to the trait cost if Cleansing Ire cleared only one condition regardless of adrenaline ranks when a burst skill is used?

So it would read like~

“Cleansing Ire: Using a burst skill removes 1 condition.”

I’d say leave it as it is now, but give it a good ICD to bring it in line with other active cleanses. It’s not exactly a passive trait, (at least, that part isn’t) so why treat it as such?

Actually it would for trait value probably only clear up to two very specific conditions as it would be viewed similar to, fleet of foot, stop drop and roll and evasive purity?

Could we perhaps get a few questions together here and perhaps get some answers?

Here are some of mine.

• How does ‘spike’ damage differ from the sustained damage focus mentioned in the Ranger CDI?

• When determining the damage output that is reduced from the player which pet number were used the highest damage, the lowest, or an average; do points in beast mastery come into that design?

• How much uptime is the pet’s contribution balanced around?

Feel free to add to the list try to keep the questioned bullet pointed.

Could aways merge the effects of skirmishing 1 and 3 as a ’new’1 trait and, give a weapon swap cool down reduction as the 3 trait

An additional questions which pets damage output is the reduction of player number the high damage, the lowers, an average? Does points in beast mastery come into the design?

Problem there is that isn’t Lupi a classic example of content in which the pet under performs?

Looking at the direction the thread is going it seems that this ‘solution’ that is being asked for is ‘please allow necromancers for the investment of one slot mitigate two of the professions weak points, but the cool down would be too long so please cut it by a third (traits not being taken into account).’

While the lack of stability might be an issue, but the solution, lacks purity of purpose it would become a right answer. Yes I know that warrior has be handed right answer hand oven fist, but what can anyone do. Developer and some of the player base wanted the warrior to be a presence in pvp so they overtuned them they same way they over tuned necromancers to make sure they were a presence in the PAX tournament, they are still making adjustment, but that is off topic and there are tons of threads with that focus.

Don’t the marks, even with a condition aspect, have decent coefficients?

Maybe not the correct place for this question, but here goes. Can any or he designers please inform us, the community how much uptime is the pet balances around?

I would think that it would be set to be a base to create the skill floor/ceiling. That could be problematic as the factors effecting uptime of pets vary between content and mods of play.

Tim.6450:

What is the dps of a full dps ranged ranger including pet? I’m quite curious.

Not entirely sure of the exact number, however I think that the ranger is balanced around mythical 100% pet uptime so in content that the developers themselves admit are problematic (read completely designed without considering the pet’s base limitations).

Also with more and more content revolving around multitarget the elementalist will be the king of ranged combat.

Slightly off-topic but would the macro to use both the dodge and the jump together to produce the ‘Dodge Roll’ be a no go as it is still only one action, but is one that requires two button used in concert/close sequence.

Also they are overvaluing the contribution that the pet is providing all the while giving the player’s portion of the load-out an unfair reduction when played at 100% in both skill and circumstances.

If the class mechanics that are quote “the strength and the weakness” the profession were equal then they would increase the damage (both base and coefficients) by at least 30-40% and cooldowns on most the warrior burst skills (probably either reduce the adrenaline production rate or cause full loss on a counter) and then reduce the damage their other weapons skills produce by at least 50-60% as the cost of that perfectly perform eviscerate or placement of combustive shot.

shadowpass.4236:

@Royal

I completely agree with you on your third and fourth bullets.

What does ROF mean?

and… I just thought of a sick idea =D

have the 1 point minor trait in the Beastmastery tree changed to:
__________________________________________________________________

Instinctual Bond
– Gain access to a pet.
– Minus 30% physical damage to all skills.
__________________________________________________________________

If they made this change, they have to increase our damage first to make up for if we don’t take the trait.

So, move all BM related traits (merge a few of them first), into the Beastmastery tree.
This way, if someone did want to run a Beastmaster spec, all they have to do is put 1 point in Beastmastery to achieve it.

He probably meant Rate Of Fire.

Actually thinking on what they were saying in the last Ready Up ranger basically can’t have nice things because of the existence of other profession. Can’t have mobility that is a thief thing, can’t have much stealth that is a mesmer/thief thing, can’t be too hearty that is a warrior thing, can’t be great group support that is a guardian/elementalist thing and so on. All ranger got is a pet that they can not balance correctly nor program and a single target focus in the world of Tag Wars 2 for 2/3 of the game.

At this point I would rather just be given the option to without penalty exit the match and reenter the match making, probably too likely as that option would get abused. But what option would not at some point.

Slippery slope there. Necromancers are vulnerable to hard control, very likely that is by design.

You’ve learned nothing from the CDI don’t ask for additional things ask for them to take away from the other profession as ranger is closer to where they want it to be.

urdriel.8496:

Sigmoid.7082:

Not sure if complaint about long range shot is legit…

Ranger is the King of Autoattack in GW2, is our best weapon “skill”….

More the probably being that almost every other ranger weapon skill is for conditional uses and even then at best the skill is not a damage loss, more often than not it is though.

Yet there is this constant complaint that all ranger does is “spam 1”
With the developer’s current stance of ranger being a resilient, sustain damage based profession I really don’t see any real improvement on that auto attack heaviness of ranger.

Carighan.6758:

Eh… I still don’t quite see how that nerf was specifically targeted at decap engis.

Other than way it was worded on the State of the Game (right before the change IIRC) that made it pretty clear to me.

Basic game design and engine is set for 5v5 look a target limits, AoE effects designed/rebalanced around nodes capture. The fact that most of the streams Anet produces are pvp-centric with a few (poorly done or quickly outdated) developer how to pve with a class (usually Cartwright [I do appreciate the attempt though])

But really Carighan can you prove otherwise?

theodor.3480:

he class isn’t bad in itself, it’s just the players. rue i could use some tweaks, buffs, but overall we’re in a pretty good spot right now.

Every class has it’s bad players, on ranger it’s more noticeable, thats all

While this is not unlikely it is not the entire problem. One the game itself devalues a lot of what the ranger was designed to do. Two the effort to effect across all the profession, not just ranger needs to be evaluated (example at skill X the potential effectiveness of player on a ranger is not the same as it would be on any of the other professions). Lastly if would seem that the develops themselves have a hate-hate relationship with the profession, example they despise passive play style, but do basically nothing to improve the matter all for fear of power creep.

pessimist.7294:

Worldbosses are able to be done with a brainless zerg. For the pavillon bosses you need organization. Every player (from 4 up) the boss gains 20% of his basic health (They normally have between 1kk and 1,4kk hp). And when 5 of 11 people are afk its getting really hard to kill him (+140%). Also its unfair for those who are actulaing “working” to get the reward. All we are asking for is a report function for “slacking” or inappropiate behaviour against other players.

If would be to easy of a feature to be abused so there isn’t a chance it would be added. It would be an easy step for people to start reporting anyone for anything: New to an encounter miss the tell get downed (reported for ‘inappropriate behavior) ressing an ally in a dps race encounter (reported for ’inappropriate behavior), didn’t get a tag on during a event (report everyone else for ’inappropriate behavior).

For that option to exist there would have to unprecedented level of punishment for false reports. Something like 1 day suspension for the first up to deletion of the account for repeat abuser so that would not be good for a business model.

Dusty Moon.4382:

You cannot balance just PvE in this game. PvE, WvW and PvP are linked. You cannot balance one without thinking of the other.

What you want is an OP PvE – NO

So it is ok for them to balance PvP without thinking of any other mode of play though?

ArmageddonAsh.6430:

Imagi.4561:

ArmageddonAsh.6430:

I think you will find that Ele are bound by the same cool downs as every other class. So no we don’t proc them more often because they still have an internal cool down and the last time i checked that wasn’t removed for ele.

As I said before, the ICD on sigils is 9 seconds. The cooldown for a normal weapon swap is 10 seconds.

9 < 10.

Is there something inherently complicated about this, or something that I’m not clarifying?

ArmageddonAsh.6430:

Ele also have to spend 6 trait points in Arcane to get attunement swap down to 10 seconds like everyone else. Even if we had 0 cool down on attunement swap, the fact that sigils have an ICD means it doesnt matter how often we could swap they would still only proc when they come off cool down.

Also. Lets not forget that Ele has 2 Sigil slots Vs 4 like everyone else (except Engineer)

To quote the Wikipedia page for attunements:

“Attunements activate instantly and can be activated mid-cast. When one is activated, the previous attunement recharges for 13 seconds, while other attunements which are ready to use will recharge for 1.625 seconds. "

1.625 < 9 < 10.

Warrior: 3 Trait points for a FIVE second reduction on weapon swap
Elementalist: SIX trait points for a THREE second reduction on attunements

So you think having access to TWO sigils ONE second before others is good enough reason? What about the fact that they have TWO less Sigil slots? Hell, increase Sigils cool downs for ele by one second and give us 2 extra Sigil slots and i would be fine with that.

The we get into Chill, why should ONE class be more punished by having Chill affect what is pretty much our weapon swap. Just because we can use 2 sigils every 9 seconds, that is assuming you time it EXACTLY right.

In before warrior fanatics claim you can’t compare traits between classes (unless the warrior one is inferior in that case nerf the non-warrior).

The accursed, council or human tier 2 gloves could be workable options.

Just take it as a sign that the community is accepting the sword to be a battle not worth the effort of arguing for, after all ANet did admit that it is not working with the basic game systems, but as for a fix…. No one is holding their breathe on that.

I think you are asking for a two handed axe weapon, but I can not be sure, so I would think that the developers would also have similar difficulty with your request.

Blood Red Arachnid.2493:

The whole thing just wreaks of bad design. If you make a boss with projectiles, then specifically make those projectiles avoid reflection, then maybe you shouldn’t have made the boss with projectiles in the first place.

Consistency is pretty important. When you have a skill that blocks attacks, but then throw a whole bunch of unblockable attacks into the game, then what good is the skill? Why not balance around people having blocks, instead of just making an attack unblockable?

Problem is there were already inconsistencies before this, some range non projectile attack reflect others do not.

Might be best to have reflect work like retaliation, but have attacks that are subject to reflection not subject to retaliation.

Something I have been saying since launch:

Guild Wars 2 with it’s sPvP being the main focus of balance and its dream of e-sport had ultimately done the Ranger and the professions players a disservice. The Ranger was design to have a profession mechanic that is the major focus of the profession performance, but that aspect uses AI function. This feel that the Ranger is now painted in the corner so to speak. If the pet function at the level it was designed to do then the Ranger can be criticized as a “easy-mode” profession or that the pet does all the work.

Most of the pet related traits are basically trait tax on the ranger that should be reworked into traits that effect both the ranger and the pet or the ranger, the pet and their allies in some cases.

Jaysin X.6740:

I remember a discussion (dev’s commented on it) in the CDI about Rangers being the master’s of poison because of their knowledge of the wilderness. It was the first thing I thought of when I saw the poison master trait. That was a player’s idea that actually made it into the game in some form. Of course there’s a lot more work to be done, but at least that’s something.

More likely someone final threw out an idea that they had already had finished and bam… “The Devs are listening to us”. Only time will tell with that feedback, but I for one am not expecting much out the team at all, as long as at least on build works for sPvP then they will probably let the rest of the aspects of the profession rot.

I can usually get to the character select screen, but after that once I select a character and get past the loading screen ~3 seconds in the computer will black screen in reboot.
This just started a couple of days ago, only Guild Wars 2 does this. If I am tabbed out on the loading screen then it will not reboot until I tabbed back in.

Becka Williams.4978:

Rauderi.8706:

Becka Williams.4978:

Why not server merges, than? That would make more sense than completely destroying the concept of servers.

It always did baffle me why they don’t do this, not just in GW2, but in lots MMOs. Though I figure it’s got a lot to do with server identities, much like how we lost a lot of that identity when megaservers hit.

Though, there’s going to be no new idea that shows up in this thread that hasn’t been hit on in https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Feedback-Questions-MegaServer
Suppose 40 pages is tl;dr though. :\

Yes, but instead of removing server identity from a few servers, they destroyed the concept of servers for all of them. That’s better?

Server merger has the bad reputation in and of itself, often labeled by critics as the a sign of a dying game.

They could normalize the damage based on range and then give the armor pierce that varies with range instead.

I can not really see many good things in the future of the profession as ANet is terrified of both power creep and losing players. The first mean that they’ve hinted (more or less) that the ranger closer to the place they want it in and the other profession are the ones needed back in line. The later causes problems as negative impact balancing (nerfs if you are convinced [insert class/trait/skill] is not an issue) can lead to a loss of players.
We keep getting mixed messages from Anet like “The strength of the ranger being able to build himself one way (offensively or defensively), while have a pet that goes the other way” (paraphrasing Mr. Cartwrights summary video) then receiving nearly complete reduction of all pet damage.

I do not want to be so pessimistic, but the past year has basically showed me that:

1) Anet vision of the ranger entirely different from (at least a portion of) the player base.
2) The (entire maybe) balance team has been replace since the original design and the current team is at a lost of what to do with ranger or dislike most of the existing framework while knowing that it is not possible to redesign the profession from the ground up

I can very well say that the AoE on the ranger is poor, as is most of the design of the ranger, the price of the versatility, the ultimate generalist in a world of specialist.

This does not mean that ranger is not fun, just that the required effort to effect is askew. My first character is a ranger and that is where I have spent the majority of my guild wars 2 time (been taking a break from him more to do additional map completion, but neither here nor there)

And if the information extracted from the CDI is correct in the direction that ranger is going then rangers AoE is poor or will be weakened in favor of this idea of the single target, sustained damage, resilient pet class.

Holland.9351:

I edited my first post a bit.

It just makes no sense why these traits require combat mode.

Ranger and thing that make sense, I have no idea where you’ve been but that concept was never part of that profession.