Guild Wars 2

style.6173:

If you think mesmer is OP, you’ve never faced a D/D cele ele.

To be fair, my apothecary bunker regen Ranger absolutely rekz d/d cele eles. I have mained Ranger since the start, but I’m by no means one of the best Rangers.

HHR LostProphet.4801:

I can’t believe this thread is still going…

I know right.

What thread boils down to, in essence, is “I activate stealth after someone has started channeling a skill on me, but instead of me slightly adjusting my gameplay to avoid this problem, I need to get all channeled skills nerfed”

It’s both QQ and an admittance of being a bad player.

To be honest it is interesting how things like this come up for debate over 2 years after they have been functioning in game.

One might suspect an alterior motive for bringing up threads like this

But no, surely not…

Anton.1769:

Bryzy.2719:

Well you could say ‘if pet dead no heals!’, but then Rangers would only have 3 downed skills, since when a ranger is downed their pet is usually dead too.

Ranger have 5 downed skills, don’t forget F2 even when downed. Wolf Fear works pretty well.

No, because you can’t use the F2 when the pet is dead. Pet dies = 3 effective downed skills.

Sandrox.9524:

Black Box.9312:

Sandrox.9524:

but when the ranger is not in your LOS you pretty much screwed.

When the ranger is not in your LoS, then that means that their rapid fire will be obstructed.

Argument dismissed.

This comment could happen for one of these reasons:
1.This user is completely ret_rd
2.This user have diffculty reading English.
3.This user maybe have a user,but never played the game.
4.This user simply a bad troll.
5.This user have 8 characters level 80,all rangers.

Maybe all,but that is very rare.

That was incredibly unnecessary and basically offensive. You could have just put forth your counter argument without resorting to ad hominem. You represent the more cancerous vein of the GW2 community.

GoogleBrandon.5073:

Bryzy.2719:

Bear in mind also that pets currently die very easily

It might be because I am sick, but unintended pun is really quite funny to me…

… /goes away

I literally JUST noticed that as I re-read through Ahaaaa

Well you could say ‘if pet dead no heals!’, but then Rangers would only have 3 downed skills, since when a ranger is downed their pet is usually dead too.

Bear in mind also that pets currently die very easily, and that Rangers already suffer numerous penalties when they do – e.g no F-skills, significant drop in DPS, some traits rendered useless and several utilities rendered useless.

It’s a shame really, because too much of the ranger profession is reliant on a terribly flawed mechanic – the pet. It’s why you see so many Longbow PewNewbs – it’s a build with higher reward with less reliance on the pet. If pets actually become viable in the future then maybe questions like yours will come up for more debate.

Kreed.2768:

Here’s one for ranger:

Signet of Cesar Millan
Passive: You become the pack leader, causing your pet’s AI to improve significantly, removing pathing issues and the requirement for non-ranged pets to stand still while performing their basic attack.
Active: “Shhht!”
Cooldown: Siesta

I can’t tell you how much I laughed :’)

I discussed this in my thread earlier but got no replies, would be great if you could have a read and see if you agree:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Anet-please-re-focus-your-efforts/first#post4560580

EDIT: since this now seems to be the main thread, OP please feel free to copy/paste what was in my thread (if you agree of course) though it all pretty much pertains to what you’re saying.

This game has so much untapped potential. It’s an odd case, because there is a lot of content, yet at the same time it feels as though the game feels somewhat ‘empty’ during day-to-day play.

Ultimately, you want to retain players. In order to retain players you need to release permanent new content that will keep end-gamers satisfied. This means giving the Living Story updates a break. Yes the content is great quality and enjoyable, but it is fleeting; once you’ve played through, that’s it – next. There are numerous players I’ve seen who are fed up of the amount of effort going into the Living Story when so many other areas of the game are left neglected.

We need bare-bones hard content. Content that will permanently change gameplay.

Here’s some examples of what I mean.

- Significant additions to WvW content. WvW is one of the main end-game outlets for players. We’ve been playing virtually the same WvW content for 2 years, with minor tweaks here and there. It’s just too empty and not engaging enough. We also need more content that will suit smaller player roaming groups and solo roamers that will allow them to contribute to the WvW battle without having to be part of a mindless zerg.

- Access to a new (existing) weapon for all professions: for over 2 years there have been no additions to weapon access. Just one new weapon would open a whole host of new content for each profession: new builds, new playstyles, new metas, new niches in group-play where previously there was none (e.g. give the staff to the ranger and bam instant potential for support shaman). The amount of potential content that giving access to just one more weapon would add is huge.

- Traits: A focus on buffing the weak rather than nerfing the strong. Balance is a very tricky issue, but it would be nice to see a season of buffs to the weakest traits and skills of every profession. Yes, nerfing will be needed in the most extreme circumstances, but the focus shouldn’t be on the negatives each patch. The whole playerbase is crying out for trait improvements. (As I only play Ranger I can only give an example from our trait line – why are trapper traits in Skirmishing?)

Naturally I understand that implementing access to a new weapon for each profession (for example) is no easy task. There are multiple balance issues, graphical and design issues that will take time to iron out. If the time and effort put into the Living Story could be re-directed to something like this temporarily, it would produce updates that would be far more welcome and appreciated. We need solid, permanent new content.

For me personally,

RRR condi apothecary Ranger build > everything

apart from stalemates with skilled eles and p/d thieves

OP, you wanted logical arguments so let’s dismantle your thread with some.

First of all, you seem to have ignored the key fact that the devs have identified this form of stealth tracking as an intended mechanic. This was and has always been an intended counter.

Onto the ‘but it doesn’t make sense in gameplay’ argument. This is a void argument; this is a fantasy game and shooting pink lasers out of swords and turning invisible make no sense either. From a balance perspective this argument holds zero weight because it is based simply on a clash of subjective opinions.

From the perspective of this being an overpowered counter to stealth – well I’m afraid you’re carrying very little weight there too; if it was truly overpowered then there would be many more threads from QQers such as yourself on the subject but as far as I can tell they are few and far between, giving the impression that the rest of the community doesn’t feel that it is a significant issue. This point is further reinforced by the fact that the devs have historically always responded to sufficient QQ with nerfs. Since this mechanic had been in place since the inception of the game, I’d say that speaks for itself.

Black Box is also correct in his above post. The claimant carries the burden of proof. Since you are claiming that stealth tracking skills are unwarranted, the onus is on you to prove why. Since all you have done so far is provide weightless arguments and dismiss those of others, you have not yet fulfilled that burden.

With regard to your dismissal of others’ arguments based on your own subjective criteria – I’ll say ignorance is bliss but it doesn’t half make you look stupid.

Anton.1769:

Bryzy.2719:

Chicago Jack.5647:

style.6173:

I take it you are newer here. The channel skill has been like that since the game launched.

Seriously. This whole thread is a l2p issue. People Shouldn’t mindlessly spam their stealth. Headshot the rapid fire, dodge it, line of sight it, evade it. Seriously, people need to think with their head and not with their rotations.

Pretty much, yeah. He probably isn’t even new, he’s probably been aware of stealth-tracking skills since day 1, however now that they pose a greater threat to his build (i.e. the LB buff – let’s not kid ourselves, this is exactly what this thread is about) he wants a nerf. Whereas previously i’d have expected a nerf to the Ranger, it ain’t gonna happen this time, kiddo.

bugfix*
thx

Wrong; the devs have asserted that channeling skills that track stealth is not a bug.

Proof:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Stealth-vs-Single-Target-Ranged-Skills/first#post3095526

Chicago Jack.5647:

style.6173:

I take it you are newer here. The channel skill has been like that since the game launched.

Seriously. This whole thread is a l2p issue. People Shouldn’t mindlessly spam their stealth. Headshot the rapid fire, dodge it, line of sight it, evade it. Seriously, people need to think with their head and not with their rotations.

Pretty much, yeah. He probably isn’t even new, he’s probably been aware of stealth-tracking skills since day 1, however now that they pose a greater threat to his build (i.e. the LB buff – let’s not kid ourselves, this is exactly what this thread is about) he wants a nerf. Whereas previously i’d have expected a nerf to the Ranger, it ain’t gonna happen this time, kiddo.

GoogleBrandon.5073:

and some might assume there is a bias towards Rangers because of it =/

That bit made me laugh out loud.

-Remembers the 2 years Rangers had to endure at the bottom of the barrel-

“Ranger LB is OP” threads are beyond a joke now.

The fact that they aren’t OP has been proven countless times, so creating these threads is basically another way of saying “pls halp I suck at player vs player combat and am too lazy to learn new counters”

@Wanderer

So your reasoning that Rangers should not have access to the staff is essentially that the GW2 Ranger should follow the archetype set by every other RPG fiction?

Well I’m sorry but you’re wrong. You’re basing that on the false precedent that this game is under an obligation to conform to what has always been done, by the book, for every profession.

If players want a Druidic or Shaman-type role in the game, then the Ranger is the closest profession to fulfilling that role given their affinity with nature and access to magical abilities (I.e summoning spirits).

J Eberle.9312:

I remember that staff craze people went though a year or so ago. err’body wanted dem staff rangers.

Most rangers still think staff should be our next weapon, including me

I agree with most responses in the thread, though looking at it objectively: what fits in with the lore of the Guild Wars 2 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.”

The rifle, as a product of ‘modern’ industry, does not fit with this description. GW2 Rangers source their weaponry and abilities from nature. Though you might argue that swords are a product of industry, they have been around for thousands of years.

OP, your reasoning may very well be sound and to me it makes sense. But not for this game.

Even just allowing each profession access to one additional existing weapon would create a LOT of additional content that would keep us busy creating new interesting builds for a while.

As a ranger you’ll definitely hear a lot of us shouting ‘errmahgerd give us staff pl0x’ because we want to be all shaman-y and feel like we can support shiz. Don’t care about rifle really but you can’t deny that The Predator looks siiiiiickkkkkk

Apothecary bunker ranger here (not BM spec before anyone calls cheese lol).
Only profession I play so I’d say I’m being quite objective here.

Just weighing in with my experiences on a wvw roaming basis – I don’t have problems whatsoever vs d/d eles, I’d say I win 90% of 1v1s with them in wvw, and the only times I have trouble are when I find ones who are specced with tons of condi removal and heals, though those fights almost always end up in a stalemate.

OP is either playing an entirely different game to the rest of us or ’she’s’ simply making things up now. Longbow range has NOT been buffed, pets have NOT been buffed and Ranger has been the bottom profession since day 1 (though as you clearly haven’t played since day 1 you won’t realise this and can’t see past your ignorance of other professions).

There is overwhelming evidence that the longbow is not OP yet you are choosing to ignore this. Hell, a Mesmer even posted a video showing exactly what techniques a MESMER can use to counter a longbow ranger. Just face it, you are a terrible player and have a completely baseless vendetta against rangers. You are doing nothing more than embarrassing yourself at this point, either that or you’re just a very good troll.

I’d be surprised if anyone actually took OP’s threads seriously considering his track record.

It is not at all evident that Ranger longbow is OP, what is evident however is that OP has a vested interest in trying to get Rangers nerfed, as he is a bad Mesmer player who has chosen to ignore the vast array of techniques that can be used to hard counter longbow Rangers. There are videos and lengthy threads explaining how to tackle the greater longbow DPS, but OP is clearly too blinded by his own personal vendetta against rangers to pay attention. I think it’s a case of, ‘Rangers are harder to defend against than they were and I am too lazy to adapt my play style to take that into account so I want them nerfed’.

Thread track record says it all.

Ranger is still basically bottom or second from bottom, ele will have moved closer to the top, engi is above necro.

I feel sorry for OP. Most of the people in here including the person above me have completely missed the point of this thread.

Looks like I’ll have to be the one to spell it out for those people (glock did already but I guess that still didn’t help).

OP isn’t actually suggesting we nerf greatswords. He’s pointing out the fact that it’s illogical to suggest (which many people have been in the profession balance forum) that we should nerf longbow just because there are far more players using them now. Just because it has entered the meta (see Guardian and Warrior use of the greatsword) doesn’t mean it’s overpowered.

@Harper – the longbow wasn’t overbuffed at all. There are several threads on the Ranger forums (see nagymbear’s post as an example), and responses to QQ threads on this forum explaining why QQers are wrong. Also, the devs agree that it wasn’t overbuffed so deal with it.

Delta Blues.8507:

exactly what happened

-the funeral of S/D thieves
-the 3+ blobs of power rangers playing ping pong with you from miles away (i’m not saying rangers are now OP just saying that as a roamer it’s extremely annoying)
-the qq of warriors that are now on the land of the mortals
-no change whatsoever in the balancing of condition meta
-the introduction of gamebreaking bugs

that’s for classes. For WvW again exactly what happened

-absolutely nothing

oh wait right colourful triangles on the map instead of blue triangles on the map

In fairness I think the Ranger blobs have now disappeared, and the sheer quantity of people testing out their LB ranger pewpew has died down now that they’ve realised it’s actually nothing special.

Also, what prysin said.

There is currently a hacker (thief profession) annihilating our Gandaran players in the Desolation borderlands around the Green/Bluebriar area. They are using permanent invisibility even when attacking, so it’s impossible to see who it is and what server they are from, though most on map chat think it’s someone/some people from Far Shiverpeaks.

IKR, I hate dark chocolate too

>Yeah, Rangers need the most help
>OMG Rangers got da buffs errmahgerd so unfair Anet, OP NEERRFF!!!11

The Ranger community expected shouts of “omfg OP ANET NEERRRFF!!@@” when this patch hit, and some of you haven’t surprised us.

After even just 1.5 hours roaming WvW, it’s easy to see the rapid fire speed increase is incredibly easy to counter. People are expecting it whenever they see a longbow ranger approach. As a result, I’ve had it reflected back in my face on numerous occasions (once when using QZ and consequently KO’d myself), and I’ve noticed that dodge management has become more of priority when people are fighting longbow rangers, especially since the bulk of rapid fire can now be negated in a single dodge.

This hype and everything coming along with it was 100% predicted. I expect it to die down eventually and hope that Anet don’t bow to the scrubs shouting “OP!!”

wrong forum, please delete

BrunoBRS.5178:

^ what he said. seriously, 1v1 specs are cool and all, but can we have some build variety? everyone else that has drastically underpowered specs gets overhauls, we get… nothing. it’s getting annoying.

Most professions want more ‘build variety’, but I think that’s just naive.

Players naturally gravitate towards the builds that are the most rewarding without being too difficult for them to learn – hence the formation of metas. They will play through all builds they think might be viable until they find the ‘best’ one for their favourite gameplay mode, whether PvE, PvP or WvW. Sure, Anet could introduce more variety by revamping existing skills and traits or adding new ones, but that won’t stop players from forming metas in each game mode after they’ve sifted through all the potential new builds looking for the most rewarding one.

Pretty solid idea OP, supporting.

@NinjaEd

Agreed. I’ve no idea where Anet stands with the idea for pets to take reduced AoE damage, but giving a direct command option for pet placement would certainly make zerging a lot less taxing on the pet and also encourage tactical gameplay. Right now pets are almost useless in zergs, unless it’s something like a jungle stalker stacking might on you in passive mode while you snipe from 1.5k range.

BrunoBRS.5178:

Bryzy.2719:

Anyone saying the Ranger “won” the balance changes couldn’t be more wrong.

Most of the changes to Rangers have been needed since day one. They should always have been an integral part of the profession. As a result, Rangers have been considered the worst whole-game profession. This isn’t a “buff” for Rangers in the sense that it’s giving them an an advantage, because it’s not. It’s an update to help bring-up-to-par the Ranger profession, and even then it doesn’t address the profession’s core problem mechanic. After this update Rangers might be on a more level playing field in the realm of power builds, however until the pet mechanic is seriously dealt with I doubt we’ll see much of a change.

buffs aren’t about giving advantages, buffs are about bringing underused playstyles into the meta.

ranger got a TON of positive changes that should open up just as many new playstyles. the fact they’re not suddenly OP is a mark of a good buff, not a bad one.

so they won.

- “Buffs” are changes to an aspect of a profession that give it an advantage over how it used to perform.

- Rangers did indeed get a “TON” of positive changes, however they most certainly will not open up just as many new playstyles, they will simply improve on metas that already exist, like the Longbow/Greatsword of WvW and PvE, and the axe-based condi metas of PvP. Shortbow and sword, two weapons that needed particular attention, received none.

- Rangers have always under-performed compared with every other profession game-wide. This update is going to bring Rangers’ power builds one step closer to being on a par with other professions, though it will still be a way off the likes of warrior, thief and elementalist. How other professions are performing now – Rangers will be one step closer to that. However, other professions have been buffed, pulling further ahead of Rangers and maintaining that gap even after the balance patch has arrived.

- The only way in which Rangers would have “won” is if Anet had spent a significantly longer amount of time completely revamping the terrible pet mechanic and thereby transforming the whole profession. Additionally, Rangers haven’t won because other professions received buffs to things which are seen as unnecessary, like torment stacks to mesmer’s scepter AA.

There is a huge array of aspects to the Ranger profession – not including pets -that are still incredibly sub-par. Until all these aspects are brought up to speed, Rangers will not be “winning” anything. And if anyone wants to be finnicky and be all like “hurr durr what aspects?” then here’s a few examples:

- Terrible set of utilities compared to other professions
- Terrible group support (spirits are mediocre and take up all your kitten utility slots, and forcing you to trait for them if you want that kind of support to be any good – though pretty much terrible regardless for use in zergs)
- Terrible Shortbow
- Poor options for survivability in power-based builds (though ultimately like with everything else it’s down to the player…)
- Poor traits in general, a whole trait line that belongs somewhere else – i.e. traps
- The most decent traits we have are all in one line – marksmanship – and you have to sacrifice so many of them.

On top of an abomination of a pet mechanic, it’s still going to be looking bleak for a long time to come. Rangers ain’t won kitten.

Anyone saying the Ranger “won” the balance changes couldn’t be more wrong.

Most of the changes to Rangers have been needed since day one. They should always have been an integral part of the profession. As a result, Rangers have been considered the worst whole-game profession. This isn’t a “buff” for Rangers in the sense that it’s giving them an an advantage, because it’s not. It’s an update to help bring-up-to-par the Ranger profession, and even then it doesn’t address the profession’s core problem mechanic. After this update Rangers might be on a more level playing field in the realm of power builds, however until the pet mechanic is seriously dealt with I doubt we’ll see much of a change.

GTOLegend.4175:

Bryzy.2719:

GTOLegend.4175:

Bryzy.2719:

@Hockmed – hahaha apologies if I’m mistaken, but is your name a reference to Team America World Police? :P

@OP – I don’t think this will ever happen. The main reason for that is because there will be certain weapon sets that are the most viable for each profession, and in the natural flow of the game new metas will form with those particular weapons. We’d be back to square one. It would also create divides between players with legendaries and those without, when currently legendaries are simply just a nice-looking figurehead for achievement.

Instead, Anet need to focus on bringing new content by adding a host of new utilities and elite skills for each profession, and also by re-vamping current skills to become both more interactive with each other (e.g. an elementalist’s weapon skillset currently interacts brilliantly between combo finishers and fields) and aesthetically pleasing.

I believe it could happen with enough support. If the community says it will spend its money for Anet to expand combat diversity and capability over skins, then yes they will do it. Again I would gladly go through the growing pains of new metas if it meant more skills were added. I’m not asking for 4.9 billion more skills I am just asking for some more diversity in each weapons skills. Lets face it after 2 years you are pretty well aware on how long your enemies CD’s on his weapons, traits and utilities are. So in that case alone I don’t fear counter play.

After 2 years it feels stale and stagnate and needs a refresh. The way I will look at is if 50 skills lasted 2 years before I put this Post up, then Anet is doing something right. So I believe if they spent the time to give players diversity by adding more skills to each profession it would be giving opportunity to let players feel different in every form of content this game has to offer.(Ex: PvE,WvW,Spvp) I would love to run into 7 rangers in this game using a longbow with 7 different weapon skill sets. The same goes for every profession.

I understand your reasoning for the change, but I think it’d be too significant a change to implement all at once. I think Anet’s resources are pretty limited and it would be an update that carried a hell of a lot of impacts across all game areas that would take a lot of balancing. Perhaps it could work if it were implemented in smaller steps but I’ve no idea how that would work.

I’m not trying to come across as they have to rework Gw2 from the ground up over night. I’m just trying to get them to start somewhere. I mean the addition of the new healing skills was a huge light in a really dark tunnel and even adding a few new traits helped. So now I just want them to update the weapons since it is the things we use 95% of the time to tackle the games content.

I can’t help but think that a more likely alternative would be giving each profession access to a weapon they were previously unable to use. This is no new idea, but I know that thieves want rifles or offhand sword, rangers want dual daggers or staff, elementalists want greatswords etc etc. Something will have to be done eventually because I agree with the main point of the thread, which is that the game’s current combat, skills and traits will just be seen by everyone as stale in another 12-18 months.

GTOLegend.4175:

Bryzy.2719:

@Hockmed – hahaha apologies if I’m mistaken, but is your name a reference to Team America World Police? :P

@OP – I don’t think this will ever happen. The main reason for that is because there will be certain weapon sets that are the most viable for each profession, and in the natural flow of the game new metas will form with those particular weapons. We’d be back to square one. It would also create divides between players with legendaries and those without, when currently legendaries are simply just a nice-looking figurehead for achievement.

Instead, Anet need to focus on bringing new content by adding a host of new utilities and elite skills for each profession, and also by re-vamping current skills to become both more interactive with each other (e.g. an elementalist’s weapon skillset currently interacts brilliantly between combo finishers and fields) and aesthetically pleasing.

I believe it could happen with enough support. If the community says it will spend its money for Anet to expand combat diversity and capability over skins, then yes they will do it. Again I would gladly go through the growing pains of new metas if it meant more skills were added. I’m not asking for 4.9 billion more skills I am just asking for some more diversity in each weapons skills. Lets face it after 2 years you are pretty well aware on how long your enemies CD’s on his weapons, traits and utilities are. So in that case alone I don’t fear counter play.

After 2 years it feels stale and stagnate and needs a refresh. The way I will look at is if 50 skills lasted 2 years before I put this Post up, then Anet is doing something right. So I believe if they spent the time to give players diversity by adding more skills to each profession it would be giving opportunity to let players feel different in every form of content this game has to offer.(Ex: PvE,WvW,Spvp) I would love to run into 7 rangers in this game using a longbow with 7 different weapon skill sets. The same goes for every profession.

I understand your reasoning for the change, but I think it’d be too significant a change to implement all at once. I think Anet’s resources are pretty limited and it would be an update that carried a hell of a lot of impacts across all game areas that would take a lot of balancing. Perhaps it could work if it were implemented in smaller steps but I’ve no idea how that would work.

Shockwave.1230:

Power Ranger will be able to keep Mesmer in check post patch.

Barely more than they can already to be honest.

The only way Rangers might be able to keep mesmers in check is if they popped QZ + signet of the wild with rapid fire, which will be a heck of a burst over 1.56 seconds (assuming read the wind trait is being used). Then again, it will be one dead Ranger if the mesmer is running projectile reflect at that time, so even that is very situational and dependent on multiple factors within the fight – what if the mesmer dodges? No damage spike taken. We’ll see how it pans out with mesmers vs rangers particularly in WvW. If mesmers are having a hard time following the patch, then they will all start running with reflect skills and will quickly learn how to counter-play the ranger buffs. It’s going to come down to who has the better reactions and who is the better player.

@Hockmed – hahaha apologies if I’m mistaken, but is your name a reference to Team America World Police? :P

@OP – I don’t think this will ever happen. The main reason for that is because there will be certain weapon sets that are the most viable for each profession, and in the natural flow of the game new metas will form with those particular weapons. We’d be back to square one. It would also create divides between players with legendaries and those without, when currently legendaries are simply just a nice-looking figurehead for achievement.

Instead, Anet need to focus on bringing new content by adding a host of new utilities and elite skills for each profession, and also by re-vamping current skills to become both more interactive with each other (e.g. an elementalist’s weapon skillset currently interacts brilliantly between combo finishers and fields) and aesthetically pleasing.

Dahkeus.8243:

cardsharp.7218:

My ranger has been sitting at level 35 for a long while, I guess I’ll be leveling by then.

Lachanche.6859:

First thing i will do will be running 5 zerker rangers in low ranked team queue.
As long as people fail to exit line of sight it should be fun.

This reminds me of the good ’ol days(GW1) when r-spike was popular in tombs.

It’d be pretty fun to see something like that played out in GW2. Have a team of longbow rangers grouped up. Target someone, then count down on the voice chat and then switch to the targetted enemy with QZ + rapid fire, lol.

I cannot wait to try QZ + rapid fire, especially with signet of the wild’s 25% damage boost and stability, not to mention the additional 10% attack speed increase from read the wind.

Now, I’m not good at maths so I could be wrong here, but on top of the new 2.5 second cast time for rapid fire, the 60% increase in attack speed from QZ + RtW will mean that that 2.5 seconds will be 60% quicker (i.e. 1.5 seconds less casting time), meaning a total cast time for rapid fire of exactly 1 second.

If this works out to be true then it’s going to be reaaalllly fun to roll in Ranger groups.

ulcimql.2516:

“Revenge is a confession of pain.”

First of all that is the most pointless quote I have ever seen as the very definition of “revenge” already implies that wrongdoing has been done to the first party.

Also, you imply that I want “revenge” when in fact it’s just a simple matter of a personal dislike for the general thief playerbase from my observation of them, and therefore a target preference in WvW.

Vague Memory.2817:

Bryzy.2719:

@OP

I’m not sure thieves will get much sympathy on the profession balance forum. Certainly not from me, that’s for sure. I personally can’t wait to start mowing them down in WvW with the post-patch rapid fire. Their QQ tears will be like a fine wine on a mild summer’s evening.

I’ll have a drink with you. As a mes who doesn’t tend to run condition builds, thieves have no problem or QQ about how easily they can mow a mes down. We can’t really handle that high mobility combined, high burst, and stealth (i.e. no target to put clones up against). I will drink long and deep after this patch from the thieves tear well.

I trust you shall be putting that change to iLeap to good use against thieves, my friend.

-Clinks glass- cheers!

@Chris ahh I’ll be sure to have a look through them, I guess naturally with different people involved in different threads they will have varying levels and styles of communication. Thanks again

@Chris

First, just to say many thanks for taking the time to respond to the players. I understand that you have to juggle actual real-life work with posting on here, alongside the fact that you clearly use your time at home to communicate with us too, which in itself is proof enough that you care about the game. Much appreciated.

In terms of CDIs, I’ve personally only been a significant part of one – the Ranger CDI which Allie took charge of some months ago. While she communicated with us relatively frequently, many players within the thread felt slightly frustrated that the devs weren’t communicating which of the suggestions were carrying the most weight with them. The thread ended up becoming very crowded and I think a little direction with semi-frequent developer summaries every ~7-10 pages would have provided a great way to keep the thread moving in directions that weren’t obvious dead-ends for the devs. I think more frequent communication from the devs as to which ideas they like and dislike – along with a ‘no promises’ disclaimer of course – would at least help keep the CDIs running in a helpful direction. The Ranger CDI I think ended up as one huge mess of repeated suggestions, arguments and lack of direction – however this can be forgiven simply due to the fact that it was one of the pioneering CDIs and therefore completely new ground for you guys. I’m confident that future ones will be improving upon these however.

From the OP of this thread, it’s understandable why you guys don’t like to talk speculatively about the game, because it can cause upset when things don’t come to fruition. However, being too afraid to speak speculatively can also be a large hindrance to your communication with the playerbase. As per my suggestion with future CDIs and semi-frequent dev summaries within the threads, as long as you give a disclaimer along the lines of “these are some possible options we’re looking into, however there are no guarantees”, the players are being made no false promises, but at least they know which suggestions to expand on and make the thread more productive.

Finally, one aspect of Allie’s communication was a little concerning to many players in the Ranger CDI. When she spoke of Anet’s “design philosophy” for the Ranger (i.e. a sustained damage-type profession with good mobility) – she seemed resolute in keeping it that way and seemed unwilling for it to be altered to address what the community felt the Ranger needed to become a more viable profession. This may very well have been a one-off case, however I think willingness to change or add-to profession philosophies should definitely be a part of the GW2 experience.

Heh. I remember the hype about stealth getting added to Hunter’s Shot. Was it 1 or 2 days it took for that hype to dissolve completely?

While these updates are probably the best Rangers have seen since the release of GW2, I can’t help but feel they are still a gimmicky way of putting off the serious changes we need, apart from perhaps the signet change – that was pretty sweet.

Pets, pets, pets. I can’t help but feel the devs are burying their heads in the sand because they know the amount of work that would have to go into re-programming the pet mechanic. Ah well let’s have fun with these updates for now and see if they devs will gives us a response about their intentions for the future of GW2 pets…

Thanks for the upload, that was some great gameplay.

Wish I didn’t suck with the GS else this’d make me want to use it a lot more often…

warriorjrd.8695:

Tribio.8531:

warriorjrd.8695:

I hope for your sake Prysin doesn’t nail you for using that very, very out of touch description of rangers.

Heh, it’s the description that ANet has given to the ranger.. Try rolling one in GW2 and see the description of the profession.. It’s fun to see players complain and kitten about a bow/bow ranger, while in the description of ANet melee isn’t even mentioned..

And yeah, it probably isn’t the best cheese out there, but heh: I hate cheese! I rather have fun and experiment/create a build I enjoy playing the most then I’d head of to gw2skills and go for a cheesy build..

Prysin seems to be doing other things so I guess I will nail you for using that very out of touch description. Did you honestly just tell me to roll a ranger? You must be new to these forums. You also must lack the very basic knowledge that despite that very poor description of the ranger, our melee out DPS’s our ranged by quite a margin. Like you have to be trolling now, if you really have faith in that description so much, fight a ranger with your two bows while they use a proper build, and see how that goes. The fact you think ranger is only bows because of some description says enough about your knowledge of rangers, so I recommend you play the class for longer than two hours to get a better understanding of it. Until then, stop talking nonsense.

Tad arrogant there weren’t we, War? I get the impression Prysin has been in a bad mood lately with his pretty patronising and impatient posts :P

I do agree with everything you’ve said about the Ranger, however I believe you misinterpreted the purpose of the whole quoting-Anet’s-Ranger-description.

I think the point he was trying to make is the irony in that Anet themselves have described what would appear to be a profession designed around optimal bow usage when in fact the profession is far from it. From the perspective of someone brand new to the game who wanted to roll a character with whom he could pew-pew effectively using dual bows, the wiki description would [misleadingly] point him towards a Ranger.

Leolas.6273:

You hate thief that say all, you can’t view objective over balance.Go Pew Pew some guys then you will be a Hero.

1. Not trying to offer any objective views on balancing, as I’ve now stated THREE times
2. I will
3. I know

Bye bye

Grebcol.5984:

This Post is right here,because the balance patch is unfair in therm that nothing new is coming for this class besides a buff of dagger and some useless traits and Nervs.

Yes, exactly. In other words it’s pure QQ, just like what you’ve done. My post was explaining that this post won’t receive much sympathy, so, as I will now say for the third time, don’t expect any on the profession balance forums.

BrunoBRS.5178:

Bryzy.2719:

@OP

I’m not sure thieves will get much sympathy on the profession balance forum. Certainly not from me, that’s for sure. I personally can’t wait to start mowing them down in WvW with the post-patch rapid fire. Their QQ tears will be like a fine wine on a mild summer’s evening.

and that’s why you’re not in the balance team. “i just want thieves to be useless to i can mow them down easily in literally the only area they aren’t useless”

This is why I dislike the thief playerbase. I’ll be adding jumping to conclusions and inferring/quoting things that haven’t been said to my list of your traits.

First of all, thieves aren’t useless, and they’ll still be far from useless post-patch. I’ve read the thief forums and many are fairly nonchalant, indifferent or even positive about the changes. Just funny how there’s always those who can’t resist a little QQ, such as yourself. What I said was nothing to do with the state of thief balance, and everything to do with my dislike for them in WvW and the fact that I will be savouring the Rapid Fire buff by targeting thieves the most. I offer no suggestions as to how they should be balanced; I am merely pointing out that OP’s attempt to fish for thief sympathy in the profession balance forum isn’t the best idea given the fact that thief is incredibly unpopular due to the nature of their assassination gameplay and highly dislikeable playerbase. The only players I receive incredibly rude messages from (following my victory in either a 1v1 or a small group match) in WvW are those who play thieves.