Guild Wars 2

style.6173:

@OP:

At least there is ANET participation in the ranger CDI. Go visit the WvW one and then you’ll really be disappointed.

I saw more meaningful daily posts from Devon in the WvW CDI (though that one is pretty dead since a few days) than Devs/CM comments in the ranger’s one…

Forzani.2584:

Why do people get so uptight because Allie isn’t posting here lately? She is a freaking PR person. She won’t be deciding anything when it comes to any class. It’s like phoning your cable or wireless company with complaints. The person on the other end of the line will let you rant….give you a few “I understands” and promise to look into it. Their entire job is to diffuse the situation and let you blow off a little steam.

Placate – make (someone) less angry or hostile. pacify, calm, appease, mollify, soothe, win over, conciliate, propitiate, make peace with, humor

“Their entire job is to diffuse the situation and let you blow off a little steam.”
Then let her do it here?
What you wrote is just like what people would expect to happen in this thread, with the little addition of “giving directions”, would it only be in the way of “I feel this is something that would help the class” or “I feel this idea has some merits, but needs elaborations”.
The PR cable guy in your example would also make you do some things at your end, not just listen, stating, “i am listening”…
Even if some people want Anet’s direction, all I ask is for someone to give a direction to the thread… not "Anet’s view is’, but “my view is”.

last post that’s been flamed was the one about sustained skirmisher… PR would have come saying “As a person, I agree that it’s awkward given the current direction of the game, maybe we can move on and try to give a new definition of the ranger? how would you like to see it’s definition evolve from this point, while keeping it unique?”

This does not engage Anet, yet it gives players the impression someone is caring… Which is exactly what I expect from a PR person…

I understand she’s been sick pretty much at that point, but either Anet should have temporarily appointed an other PR while she’s away, or she might have dropped a little note stating “I will be away for a few days for personal reasons – will catch up as soon as I get back – devs will keep reading the posts, though they might not answer, so keep it constructive!”.

When I was moderator in a forum, though not as big/complex, as this one, any time I saw a “noone cares” post, I’d step in with a little “I do, I read though I don’t comment, now get back on topic” kind of comment, which works wonder to diffuse situations.

TL;DR
I don’t expect Allie to tell us where rangers would go, but I expect her to animate the discussion…

It wouldn’t be toxic if it would have devs answers like other topics…
Would it only be “as a player I feel that”…
It is normal that Anet’s design would be discussed also, since the stated design does not fits in with whatever the game is about…

The “sustained damage skirmisher” model (the last direction we have) does not even fits in their latest update… Any forum that had no devs interactions gets toxic… the more red post interactions there are, the less toxic it becomes… saw it in the WvW subforum, when devs started to post regularly, the athmosphere grew back to nice, then, when it stopped, it grew back to bad…

(nota: I didn’t say Allie wasn’t sick, but that she is back, and still not caring about the thread she’s supposed to own)

The ranger’s CDI have been badlyy thought of from the start…. It was obvious it would turn as a sea of proposals… Just stating from the beginning “we know about this and that issue, we want to bring ranger this way, what do you think?”, Then “okay, we noted your opinion on that, now, what do you think about this”, then “now, let’s discuss this hot issue. What is your stance on this?” Would have kept the discussion focussed.

Just some post “I know, as I player I agree this is awckard”, “as a player, I’d rather see this coming”, would have made people see they care… it’s not much, but it would have kept discussions focussed, and mostly respectful (we all know hater’s gonna hate).

What we had is : discuss rangers.
Woah! what a broad topic! Anyone is really surprise it went anywhere and nowhere?

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Touche Amore.2083:

Plus, it didn’t help that they postponed it for about a week and a half without notice.

…probably hoping we’d forget and sweep it under the rug.

Or, just maybe, the person running it got sick and nobody stepped in because they want it to remain consistent? I dunno, that doesn’t have enough tinfoil hat going on, forget I said anything.

The person running it is actually having a discussion with thieves…
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Re-Pistol-Whip/first#post3721002
:(

A thing they could have done to avoid the CDI getting out of had would have been to make a main CDI thread linking to sub-CDI threads on different issues (eg: pet, traits, utilities, weapons), all with different thread owners…

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Jocksy.3415:

Not a design flaw…
This is what I like about ranger, that secondary attacks are situational (except for gs#2)
It’s not a “I spam all my attacks in a certain order, then wait for CD”, it’s a “I AA until the situation calls for another attack”.
I do agree power weapons should have burst skills, but I think they should also keep the situational attacks of our weapons…

That’s true but I would like to see the secondary skills beeing as good as the AA.
For example: If Sword #3 is a damageloss compared to the AA, you would want to not use it, even if it would be necessary. That would only promote the “stacking and #1 mashing” tactic.

Still less of a damage loss to use #3 than to do a complete dodge…
(I’m not much a theorycrafter, though, so maybe damage loss from a full dodge and coming back on target with sword is less of a loss of DPS than using#3?)

Seeing the CD of some of those situational / loss of DPS, I agree some have something missing – would it be damage / evade abilities / control abilities or else.
But if getting higher DPS on situational attacks means losing DPS on AA (looking at GS), DPS that is already lackluster on ranger (given its survivability, that is not great either) really gets down the drain…

urdriel.8496:

misterdevious.6482:

When people simply say “the pet,” I wonder how much was invested in that pet.

The default pets have 0 traits, 0 bonus stats, 0 condition damage, 0 movement speed buff, 0 regen, 0 pet utility skills, and 0 support from the ranger or the ranger’s gear.

The most powerful pets benefit from most of the ranger’s traits, up to 4100 bonus stats (Beastmastery 300×4, Master’s Bond 200×4, Might 875×2, Trait 350×1), up to 1225 condition damage, +50% condition duration, 25-40% movement speed buff, massive regen, 3 pet-related utility skills, and full support from the ranger, and the ranger’s healing, precision, and boon duration gear. (Giving the pet 25 stacks of might can be done with a single key using the right build.)

I can keep pets alive in 30v30 zerg fights (map-blob vs map-blob is another story), but it requires building specifically for that purpose (a bit different from the most lethal pet) and making a compromise with my own safety. With the upcoming change to F2 activation, I may play this way more often.

• Should there be less difference between the min and max pets?
• Should it be easier to spec for a good pet?
• Should pets have more utility by default that isn’t heavily dependent on their stats?

Thieves and mesmer will laugh hard at your pet , all other classes will kite it until the end of the fight

phys.7689:

urdriel.8496:

Aioros.4862:

Now we are skirmishers, not archers. I think it’s a “Go melee or get out” thingy.

Yes, common sense, we will give you Shortbow and Longbow but you must go melee…….

they also gave you daggers swords greatswords and axes.

this game isnt designed where one of a professions weaponsets is supposed to better than others, each set is supposed to serve different needs.
ranger is meant to be able to go in and out of range, and have good options from any range. They actually did that fairly decently, my main beef is LB/SB is boring. I wouldnt mind aimed shots and charged attacks, but i dont know if thats what yall want

Oh yes, without traits, max LB range 1200 SB 900, gap closers have 600-1200 range, you hit 1 time and in 1 second your enemy is at melee distance, it is really stupid, on the other side a warrior can hit like a truck and run like the roadrunner ( WITH HEAVY ARMOR…)

LB/SB are boring because the best dps is always the AutoAttack, this is a DESIGN FLAW.

SB is supposed to be a condition weapon.

And LB is supposed to be a Power weapon, but DOESNT HAVE a real burst skill.

Not a design flaw…
This is what I like about ranger, that secondary attacks are situational (except for gs#2)
It’s not a “I spam all my attacks in a certain order, then wait for CD”, it’s a “I AA until the situation calls for another attack”.
I do agree power weapons should have burst skills, but I think they should also keep the situational attacks of our weapons…

kaid.7695:

I think this weeks live event is a good demonstration of why rangers need a way to stow pets and reclaim damage lost for having the pet out. Against the big fights and prime hologram there is so much huge area ground effect damage happening that it is just about impossible to keep your pet alive during it. I have tried ranged pets I have tried tanky pets but they are just so lacking in responsiveness that they just go poof constantly and there is no amount of skill that would keep them alive while also allowing them to be useful in any way to warrant the micromanaging.

You forgot to mention the fact that they don’t get the buff that allows to make damage, so, you can just keep it on passive beside you and use it to send out buffs… it’s the pet’s only use there (yeah, really losing 30% of my damage there…)
Though, since they do not get the buffs (they make us deal damage, but take more damage also), I found that even fragile pets (passive) stay alive pretty easy, even when on 60 sec CD, in the first parts of the encounter, where the buff is needed…

Ranger’s not supposed to be a bursty class, according to Anet’s view of it, but this encounter is about dealing damages fast, especially by the end, when you have to kill the holograms that boost the middle one, then burst the middle hologram in the tiny window of time when it does not have the buff... pretty much the only time where pet might be usefull, but at that time, there are so many AoE’s that it’s dead before it reaches the target… when it didn't get killed by the lasers...

Novalitus.7382:

3. Time slots. To combat the problems above, you could make WvW only accesible during certain hours of the day and night. That allows for bigger groups to enter so you have at least a big zerg vs another big zerg. You could have the portal open up at 8 PM till midnight for example and then the next morning from 9 AM till noon and from 2PM till 4 PM. That allows 8 hours of WvW pvp during the day. Which is more than enough

What do I do if I can only play from 2 to 4? No WvW for me?
Game is 24h because not everyone is playing at the same time as you are…

Cantur Soulfyre.5409:

Offair.2563:

ghost.3208:

Vylor.3276:

If you are dying 1v1 to them. I don’t know what to tell you.

Why? Can’t you share some tactics to help us against the ranger pets? Because I swear I’m sick of that krytan hound that keeps fearing me, way more annoying than a necro.

Everyone keeps underestimating the rangers, just you wait and see.

I have a very nice tactic to share with all those people that cant deal with pet, i posted it before here but well, im not to lazy to do it again, ok here it comes:

I G N O R E P E T

oh and btw, krytan hound does not fear but immobilize duh

I have looked but I can not find the IGNORE PET skill. Is this class or race based? Or an Elite skill???

Risen’s skills… they’re pretty good at it, most of the time…

Luna.9640:

The bug have nothing to do with Garrison being contested or not.

I was entering this morning our home border i clicked to Garrison waypoint and end up in Citadel again.

After this i ran around a bit but whole map was ours than used Garrison WP from ruins and again ended up in Citadel.

This must be a bug…

The map hopping prevention is not a bug…
(have to be on map to use map WP other than spawn)

How are we suppose to use our pets in the new update if it’s unable to hit the targets because there is no way to give any of the buff to it?
Ranger might be nice to play, it does not fit in the game…

(we need a trait “you and your pet share boons from different sources”)
(and we need more “you and your pet” traits, and less “your pet gets OR you get…”)
Makes the pet not feel like a burden, if I do not have to choose to take traits for it instead of for me

Yoh.8469:

So what if the pet wasn’t always on, but rater a summon?
You summon them, they do their thing while also giving you a pet skill, then they go away. Sort of like a Phantasm that can change targets, and a great deal tougher.
You could have up to 4 pets this way bound to each of the F1-F4 keys, and once summoned the bar changes to what we have now, with F4 recalling your pet and putting it on cooldown so you can summon another pet.

Love it!
Though it would demand a nice rework of the traits – maybe to encourage calling the pet – by putting in “me and the pet” options (that wouldn’t be detrimental to “me or the pet”)?

:D

Might also need to work around CD (how long between pet summons? how to avoid a ranger choosing 4 buffing pets to use them before battle?
Maybe a 5 seconds lock on each pet upon summon before player is able to press F4 to go back to pet selection?
And a 20-30 seconds CD per pet summon?

Apparently

Kryta
     Bloodtide Coast
     Sanguine Bay (Between Grand Barrier Isle and Dredgehat Isle)
Sea of Sorrows
     Sanguine Bay
     South of Barrier Camp Waypoint (Between Grand Barrier Isle and Dredgehat Isle)
Blazeridge Mountains
     Blazeridge Steppes
     Behem Gauntlet In a hidden series of caves behind the waterfall.
Steamspur Mountains
    Mount Maelstrom
    Whitland Flats South of Lonatl Grounds
The Mists
    Eternal Battlegrounds
    Water, east side of Green World Hill

Source: http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Juvenile_Armor_Fish

Talk about what?
There’s been numerous posts about signet rework, shouts rework, traits rework, many proposals for weapon, many discussion about class orientation and the ranged problem, some on synergy or the lack thereof, some on spirits, some on traps, and back to traits…

Waiting for a new light or new subject, but I think pretty much everything has been stated…

Playstyle
Point of view – Group WvW.
Used as MH :
Crit build for WvW zerg.

MH:
Better option than sword in a multi-target setting, when I want to use an off-hand (warhorn).
- Each bounce has a chance to crit, which means 3 chances/AA, and even more on #2 (though there is a bug in power scaling with #2, doesn’t work )
- I almost don’t use #3, because it’s single target

OH
- I only take OH while sieging… the pull is nice, but not that strong (does not pull from all the travel distance, only on half, when it comes back, and only one target).
- I don’t take it for fights because #5 roots me, and skills that roots in melee means death…

I don’t use axes for solo roaming, because AA is bad against one target.

xallever.1874:

nagymbear.5280:

xallever.1874:

As Allie didn’t want this CDI to be all about the permastow option (or turning it into an aspect), I’d just like to come up with a poll:

http://poll.pollcode.com/38561745

Obviously, a significant majority will be telling factor (not close to 50-50), but even without the percentage, if there are enough participants, I think the numbers also will show some weight.

The point of this is to lessen speculative statements for future discussions.

I hope everyone who has an opinion would take part in this short ‘yes’ or ‘no’ poll. I’d also post this in the Aspect thread.

Dev: You will not have 3 arms in this game. Please don’t talk about that on this thread so we can focus on other things instead.
Player: OK I made this poll on wanting 3 arms instead of 2. All go and vote!

That’s what the dev said but obviously people will continue bringing this up again and again from time to time.

The poll serves to:

• Provide a way to express your opinion without needlessly cluttering the thread
• Provide a data to back up people’s expressed arguments (vs counting on the total number of participating unique users who have expressed their opinions on this matter and manually tally it up)

The “maybe” is missing in that poll:
If they can get the pet to work: no; if they can’t; yes

thefantasticg.3984:

Jocksy.3415:

QoL
- why does the pet needs to be in combat for traits to work on it (like boons duration)
- why can’t I see it’s buffs/alterations?
- why can’t the pet jump with me?
- why can’t they remember their names?

You forgot the most important one:
- why isn’t active/passive on a keybind?

lol!
Can also add:
- Why is the pet on aggressive unable to stay on the target I set for it? Why does it feel compelled to get on my target before finishing it’s target?

Sumashu.4168:

DiogoSilva.7089:

Think of how much fun it would be for rangers, if the other pet’s skills had to be manually triggered.

I was thinking of maybe (due to the limited slot F1 to F4) bond the other non-auto attack of our pet with our own skills (weapon or utilities skills) ?
Two skills will be launched (from the ranger and his pet) from a single input. This could allow some synergy, and combos.

PS : Sorry for my bad english xD

I like the idea, but I don’t see it being implemented – unless we get to chose on what attack the pet uses which skills. And hard to design for the pet to either stay on it’s target or be close to us, depending on the skill :s

Atherakhia.4086:

Jocksy.3415:

snip

This is why I still think the better solution is to simply give the pet aegis on Ranger dodge or evade.

This way the Ranger doesn’t need to dodge for himself and a second time for the pet. Simply dodging once will grant the pet enough protection from 1 hit mechanics. It would also give the pet much needed surviability in WvW.

A short internal cooldown of one aegis every 5 seconds to ensure the pet doesn’t get one every GS cycle is all it would take to keep it balanced.

Give the aegis a reasonable duration and call it aday.

Reason why I marked dodge and not aegis is that dodging usually gets you out of AoE, while aegis blocks one attack.
Many AoE are pulsing, or else, there is a pack of AoE in one spot. Aegis would block one, but not any other.
Pet dodging would be in the same direction as ranger, making it possible to somewhat control where the pet will end up.
Aegis would be good with a “get out of there” control; that would allow the pet to move out of danger pretty nicely.
But despite the loss of DPS – more would be gain from an alive pet in the long run, imho…

A few comments:
Pet-auto-dodge when hit for x% of it’s life
Problem is that you want pet to dodge before it get hits…
So overall AoE reduction OR pet dodge on master’s dodge would be better…
Problem, if we have to dodge for two, we need some more evades…
Here, risk would balance itself out… if we lose the pet, we lose damage, but we still able to be “resilient”…
Other solution:
-System knows when AoE/strong spell is cast; make the pet avoid it/move out of it without master’s input…
-have a built-in pet repositionning tool (go there fast and stay until I tell you otherwise)

On pet hitting:
- Pet should have perma quickness built-in (not just speed of movement, but speed of attack also. Even forgetting about responsiveness issue, F2 is just too long to cast
- and cleave attacks

QoL
- why does the pet needs to be in combat for traits to work on it (like boons duration)
- why can’t I see it’s buffs/alterations?
- why can’t the pet jump with me?
- why can’t they remember their names?

runeblade.7514:

Jocksy.3415:

runeblade.7514:

Arghore.8340:

Specific Game Mode
PvX

Proposal Overview
Any amount of healing a pet receives is enough to resurrect it with the amount of health it gained from that healing

Goal of Proposal
The goal of this proposal is a work around for the pet reliability. By having the pet be ressed by any amount of healing means that the ranger can actively res a pet by using various healing skills.

But also, similar to how the pet dies from random AE, it now also benefits from random AE healing.

Proposal Functionality
If a pet receives any healing from any source, and the pet is dead, it is resurrected with the amount of health it would have gained from the healing source would it not have been dead.

Associated Risks
Non that I can think of, the pet will become somewhat more of a reliable source, and the ranger will have the option to resurrect their dead pet by using a healing skill, instead of using a swap. It actually reduces the risk of putting a res on a specific ranger healing skill and ‘bombarding it’ to the ‘must have heal for the ranger’.

sorry for interrupting the shouts discussion, this just popped in my head while going over the ranger skills for specific shout issues/improvements/sollutions, and seeing I think this can work in concurrence with other pet solutions I thought it best to just post it anyways, SHOUTS !!

Risk:

• Signet of the wild will make the pet immortal.
• Pet becomes impossible to kill.
• Doesn’t make the pet reliable. It just make the pet immortal.

But if we just make it to be direct heals, and not regens or passive heals, might be a good idea… (if alive, takes regen, if dead, don’t, needs an active heal, like a burst on water field or an activated master’s heal… not just from Ele’s fields, Gard’s traited dodge or other source)

I just hate when my pet is about to die, I have 3 sec CD on heal, 2 sec on pet swap, I spam F3 for it to get out of there, but Bam! dead, 60 sec CD…

Okay, risk:

• Pet becomes impossible to kill.
• Doesn’t make the pet reliable. It just make the pet immortal.

Point still stand.

Pets have high health and rarely ever focused on so pets shouldn’t die within 3 seconds. With pet swap in a 20 second skill and healing skill on a 20-30 second cooldown. It is still overpowered strong.

Pet’s higher health is only in PvE…
PvP, WvW, it’s low…
spamming f3 does not get it out of that AoE that’ll kill it, or out of the way of an upcoming burst, or whatever… calling it back to try to save it is already a DPS loss…

Second one has to stay alive 60 seconds when first die, thus ranger has to keep it on passive if he want to get back to a 20 sec swap CD.
We have nothing to revive our pets, unless we get out of combat, wait for it’s health to come back up, then go back in the fight.

Lets say a War missing it’kitten with adrenalin would suffer a 30% DPS loss for 60 sec, with no possibility to get it back… would it be fair? or for necros, when they are forced out of DS, instead of willingly getting out, would have a 60 sec DS CD + 30% less DPS… or if revealed would apply 60 sec to thiefs, on a missed hit? or if mesmers couldn’t summon more clones for 60 secs if they die instead of being shattered?

Rangers is the only class (appart from mesmer in large encounters) that have a DPS loss because of their class mecanics… and a pet’s revive on heal skill use would not make a permanently alive pet, it would just allow to rez the pet while in combat in melee heavy fights/fights with lots of AoE, or anything else…

The class mechanic should be reworked so that it’s not working against the rangers in any other setting than PvP… It should be my companion, yet it’s dead most of the time… and there is, most of the time nothing that I can do to save it.
No instant “get out of there” command, no instant “heal yourself” command, no instant “dodge” command… nothing.

Since they stated they are not going to rework the pet mechanic to make pet smarter, that they are not going to rework it to give us better control on it, what is left?

Allow a way to get pet back on it’s feet in the midst of battle…

runeblade.7514:

Arghore.8340:

Specific Game Mode
PvX

Proposal Overview
Any amount of healing a pet receives is enough to resurrect it with the amount of health it gained from that healing

Goal of Proposal
The goal of this proposal is a work around for the pet reliability. By having the pet be ressed by any amount of healing means that the ranger can actively res a pet by using various healing skills.

But also, similar to how the pet dies from random AE, it now also benefits from random AE healing.

Proposal Functionality
If a pet receives any healing from any source, and the pet is dead, it is resurrected with the amount of health it would have gained from the healing source would it not have been dead.

Associated Risks
Non that I can think of, the pet will become somewhat more of a reliable source, and the ranger will have the option to resurrect their dead pet by using a healing skill, instead of using a swap. It actually reduces the risk of putting a res on a specific ranger healing skill and ‘bombarding it’ to the ‘must have heal for the ranger’.

sorry for interrupting the shouts discussion, this just popped in my head while going over the ranger skills for specific shout issues/improvements/sollutions, and seeing I think this can work in concurrence with other pet solutions I thought it best to just post it anyways, SHOUTS !!

Risk:

• Signet of the wild will make the pet immortal.
• Pet becomes impossible to kill.
• Doesn’t make the pet reliable. It just make the pet immortal.

But if we just make it to be direct heals, and not regens or passive heals, might be a good idea… (if alive, takes regen, if dead, don’t, needs an active heal, like a burst on water field or an activated master’s heal… not just from Ele’s fields, Gard’s traited dodge or other source)

I just hate when my pet is about to die, I have 3 sec CD on heal, 2 sec on pet swap, I spam F3 for it to get out of there, but Bam! dead, 60 sec CD…

hunterkiller.5419:

been thinking that rangers need a redistribution in power. give rangers CC/condi for all weapon skills and have only 1 of each where all the damages go into (maul for GS, perhaps remove auto attack and make LB a chargeble attack rooting the player down).

increase utility. make rangers a partial guard because reliance on nature to give boons, or giving boons to pets to allow the lil one to make the finishing blow. should be interesting, maybe give rangers more weapon choices, hammer and shield should be okay.

No…
Ranger is about mobile combat, IMHO… We don’t need more skills that roots us, but more that allow us to kite…

I have nothing against power weapon/burst, but, once again, “no” to give all our weapons a burst possibility… See GS has burst possibility, and AA does no damage. It is basically “oh, #2 is off CD, use it!”.
I like how, lets say SB, is: AA until foe gets close, then 2, then either change weapon or get away with 3. It means being reactive with weapons skills, which is the thing I love about rangers, the thing that makes this profession different…

Power weapon (GS/LB) can get bursty to fit in burst meta, but I hope to keep the situational gameplay of the rest…

SkiTz.4590:

Flytrap.8075:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

CrossFire.8037:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Abrilete.1439:

xXxOrcaxXx.9328:

Abrilete.1439:

Regarding the 30% DPS lost becasuse our pets never hit…
It’s been tested by several players that the “30% faster pets trait” (Agility Training) helps a lot improving pet’s DPS.

Giving our pets that speed increase by default, and also increasing the range for their mele attacks, could be an easy-to-implement patch until ANet decides to fix pet’s AI.

Doesn’t make the pet any better.

At least, they would hit more consistently against moving targets (be it players or NPC’s). ANet has said many times that they don’t plan to fix pet’s AI soon, so until then (if they ever do, and I don’t think so) we must find ways to make them work within current constraints.

Delete them. If they can’t fix them I want them deleted.

But but…rangers are the pet class…even though the pet mechanic is broken, unreliable and an actual hindrance in most game modes, the pets must stay because we need a pet class! /anet

It’s pathetic at this point. If you want to stick with pets, either fix them or allow them to become an option through a beast-master trait.

Minor Trait: “You get a pet.”

I like how CrossFire’s post got deleted yet it speaks the truth.

I guess I just don’t understand why ANet is so fixated on keeping the pet mechanic. I mean, where is the logic behind trying to fix a broken class while at the same time remaining adamant that the very thing that is breaking it needs to stay?

So many interesting, innovative ideas have been suggested so far and all ANet has given us in the past few days is a post about signets. I’d love to see Ranger become the class that it should have been, but I can’t help but feel that the devs are being too narrow-minded.

It’s honestly more to blame with NCsoft since they command anet on how to spend their resources in terms of development.

I guess an entire broken class is OK with them so long as the others are somewhat stable

Not saying Anet/NCSoft work that way, but most companies will work from stats to know what needs work.
One weapon is never used? It needs fix. One class is never played? Lets work on it. One build is never/always used? let’s see how make others more desirable…

As long as rangers is the most played profession, in a system that uses statistics to know what to work on, rangers will hardly get the needed fix…

Archon.6480:

The range on Greatsword Skill 5, Hilt Bash, is too short. It should be increased to 400, from 300.

I can rarely ever land a hit on a fleeing opponent as they simply walk away from the short range that it has. In addition, Knockback pushes opponents out of range—most of the time—so one can’t follow up with Hilt Bash effectively. This combo rarely works for me. The skills seem kind of disjointed as they currently are.

Any thoughts? Am I missing something?

As it is, knockback, imho, is better for people who’d switch to a ranged weapon afterward…

Though I never saw mention of a knockback/hilt bash combo? most of the time, seems to be GS 3-5-2-(few1’s, maybe a 2)-4 / switch… Migh be missing something, though

been discussed plenty
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/balance/PvX-My-blasts-prioritize-my-combo-fields/first
where, at the end, most seemed to find statu quo was the most skillful play and the most fair…

wolfyrik.2017:

Permastow isn’t the same thing as getting rid of all pets. It would be an advantage to many players in certain environments and wouldn’t affect people like you at all. It wouldn’t harm your gameplay, it wouldn’t affect how you play, it wouldn’t prevent you from using the pet. It would only grant people the option of not using the pet, when the pet is a liability.

Risk: People expect rangers to stow their pets, thus playing with pets might be seen a lesser playstyle…

urdriel.8496:

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

OFC, fight with pet in passive and lost 30% of your damage, THIS is the problem of this class, pet have 30% of our damage and is random, a “put any class here” will hit you with 100% of his damage in each hit, we hit with 70% of our damage because pet have the other 30%, so, if pet cant land a hit in your opponent we have a nice 30% damage lost, it is a BIG handicap, ofc you can outplay your opponent, but a Good player with ranger will be probably a GOD player with another class, because we must fight against our core mechanic each fight.

Not only in each fight, but also, in each traits…
In too many instances, we have to choose “us or the pet”; A better synergy of “us and the pet” would be great…

Why do we need the pet to take over our alterations? Why do we always have to choose between buffing us OR the pet? Giving and advantage (damage/crit/alterations) to us OR the pet, having us OR the pet survive.

I wish there was more synergy in traits/competencies between rangers and the pet.
Like pretty much everything should do something for ranger AND pet (like guard might also give something to rangers, would it only be swiftness – without being traited)

Consolidated in CDI, Thanks all!

I asked here and in the ranger subforum what people liked about rangers that made them play the profession, so what shouldn’t change :

In short:

• Reactive/mobile gameplay
• Animations
• Use of two characters

In long:

• outplaying opponents by watching what they are doing and having the tools on my ranger to avoid / counter what they are doing.
• I dont use many on my weapon skills, LR or my elite in many fights, simply because I use them when needed not because they are off CD, and in most fights LR and elite are not needed.
• I just really like the mobile gameplay with the weapons abilities. It’s the most fun I have on any toon.
• having a profession mechanic that I get to customize.
• having a wide range of game mechanics to choose from, being a jack of all trades.
• having widely varied playstyles… melee tank, beastmaster, or pew-pew spirit support
• the mobile active melee combat.
• that I can take camps, towers, champions, and some dungeons alone.
• strategic thinking. (pet tanking & blocking projectiles, trap & spirit placement, cooperation)
• I am epic with the sword. Visually at least
• The weapon skills are so friggen cool.
• the reactive gameplay, that weapons have built in defense/offense on demand,
• that in PvE, I can switch aggro with the pet,
• in WvW, that I can take camps and towers alone,
• my water fields and my control in zergs,
• the support I can give when the spirits and the pet don’t die…
• to stop thieves from stelthing, particularly when we swipe a structure (WvW)
• I like the defensive/offensive on-demand abilities (SB#3, GS#4)…
• like the fact that we don’t have a mechanism that is overly abused and make the class to simple to play. Spirit ranger are close but the build in general is ok at best.
• Ranger have to create opportunities with skillful play rather than using one skill to win.
• That said, I love how hard they are to play if you REALLY want to pull out their maximum. How you’re playing for 2, you AND your pet.
• watching my s/d lightning reflex ranger fly across the screen makes other classes seem boring

snow.8097:

i cant understand why People like to permastow the pet with no buff.
Okay i am against the idea of permastow for a dmg buff, then no one would like to use his pet because that buff would be probably too strong and most rangers will only run the “Aura” of one pet because its the strongest.
But i can understand when they dont like to fight with the pet but kitten it then let the pet on passive what is the Problem?
A permastow is a nerf for themselfes, EB cant Trigger, random benefits like a knockdown and conditions on foe are gone. Even when the pet is on passive Body blocking of projectiles are a nice benefit
I think some ranger here are overdramatic.

Because even on passive, the pet draws aggro…

Forzani.2584:

Jocksy.3415:

Terravos.4059:

Reading that thread makes me angry..

Because its filled with a lot of players who honestly shouldn’t be making suggestions about the class, Because they are freakin clueless about it in the first place.

Everyone has the right to have a idea of where the class might go… just because it’s not your idea don’t make it less valuable.
Some ideas I don’t agree with (looks like these players want to make a lesser war out of the ranger), some ideas I agree with (though I think they would need tweeking), and some are just crazy (in both the good or bad way). But they are all visions of what rangers can be / of what their definition/their role might be… because, right now, we have none…

This thread, as I see it, was made to let out some steam, instead of polluting the CDI. It achieved its purpose…

No, they don’t. It’s like when people say everyone has a right to their opinion. That little cliche should be changed to everyone has a right to their informed opinion. People that don’t have a clue what they are talking about yet still open their piehole to bless us with their opinion.

Let out some steam as in…let the kids vent a little and get some stuff off their chest… we already know what we are going to do kinda thing?

Laughable

I stand by it… Everyone has right to their opinion…
just in this subforum, there’s a thread that discuss gard…
Some say that, as a shout, it shouldn’t have a cast time, others, that for the short CD it has, it’s ok…
None are wrong, none are right… We are not in a kid’s world where all is white/all is black… there are too many nuance for only one solution to exist… and it won’t be up to us, the players, to decide of the course of action…
In the end, whatever proposals are made, devs will take out of it what they will.

Some seem to think devs stopped following the CDI because it got overwhelming… I’d say it got overwhelming for the lack of directions… Not because of clueless people, but because no clue was given beforehand… Just an indication by thread owner at the beginning that “we saw the ranger’s thread with a red post; to start getting the discussion going, why not discuss point abc”.
It was obvious that that CDI thread would get “flooded” with ideas…
No fixed limits from the start, no real discussion between proposal… bah. It’s all it can be in the circumstances…

I use entangle on random match and friendly duels… I’m always surprised that people actually stay in my roots?
The other day, I was making a “reactivity improvement” duel with a guildie… first time I cast my roots, he stays in them… so I ask him if his build has condi cleans or teleport, or something, he looks at his skills, an other necro tells him about his possibilities… so we get on… second time I use entangle… he stays in them… so I announce “you’re entangled”, almost dead, he finally gets out…
Third time entangle, he dodge the skill, fourth time, stays in them for a few seconds…

Now, I agree that high damage/reactive players won’t fall for entangle in skirmishes… but always fun to see someone die in them, or get out of them, and get stuck in them again because he passed on them on a pulse…

Terravos.4059:

Reading that thread makes me angry..

Because its filled with a lot of players who honestly shouldn’t be making suggestions about the class, Because they are freakin clueless about it in the first place.

Everyone has the right to have a idea of where the class might go… just because it’s not your idea don’t make it less valuable.
Some ideas I don’t agree with (looks like these players want to make a lesser war out of the ranger), some ideas I agree with (though I think they would need tweeking), and some are just crazy (in both the good or bad way). But they are all visions of what rangers can be / of what their definition/their role might be… because, right now, we have none…

This thread, as I see it, was made to let out some steam, instead of polluting the CDI. It achieved its purpose…

Terravos.4059:

…….

Why am I continuing to read about Rangers wanting Traps moved out of the Skirmishing Line?

Precision is not a bad stat for Traps, Crit Damage is..But then again, I’m not basing my spec off what Stats the line actually gets, I’m basing it off the traits…

Every time I see a Ranger say something like “Traps don’t belong in Skirmishing, they should be in Wilderness Survival” I facepalm because it shows what a complete lack of understanding a lot of Rangers have about the class.

If you move the Trap traits to Wilderness, You’re just going to nerf yourself, Because its a line you’re going to pick up anyway if you’re a Trap Ranger..Because it has all your bloody defensive traits… The only thing moving those traits will do, Is make it so you lose all your defensive traits picking up Trap Traits..

There is also nothing in the other lines that you could remotely pickup that would be as good as those defensive traits that you’d be losing..NOTHING…There is nothing in Marksman, nothing in Natures, Nothing in Beast…NOTHING….

So please for the love of god, quit making silly suggestions like that..

Traps in skirmishing should have a better direct damage option.
And most of the suggestions I saw about those traits was to move them in the condi duration line (though I don’t see traps in marksmanship in a thematic view) or to move the condi duration or condi damage to skirmishing (not saying it all makes sense, just saying there is not just one proposal about those traits).
I would personally like to have them deal more direct damage (and have increased ranged), but I know this would mean lowering their base condi-damage, thus might not be a good thing overall for condi-build. And they would still not be so good in direct damages builds, because of their conditions.

But, if they were in the condi duration branch, one would only need to go get 20% more condi duration to have the traited versions be correct control options in zergs…

Your statement “Precision is not a bad stat for Traps, Crit Damage is.” is interesting, but I really don’t see how precision works with traps? None of these two stats do anaything for traps, as far as I know…

If they are off line, one usually can’t whisper back… Though I’m sometimes able to whisp people who are off line… go figure :p
(like some people off line see people chatting in guild chat, while I don’t)

I love how there are more narrative and lore and story overall, and that the way it,s implemented makes us grasp some parts at a time, but the way it’s all over the place, I have the impression I’m missing on some, while it’s easy to come back to read short story, and animations makes it so it’s harder to miss…
And, if possible, I would love it if all npc’s chat was written in chat, not just over their head? (some are, but not all)

Anyway, Great job; love the mix of cinematics, instanced dialogues, and living world glimpses.

Might have been someone who knew you, I you have special skin or something…

blud.8174:

Here’s a goal for the devs: make the ranger class something that you would want to main.

Besides Hrouda (RIP in piece) I don’t think any of the Devs main ranger. If they do, I’d love to know and for them to be a voice for us.

Correction : “If they do out of PvP, I’d love to know and for them to be a voice for us”

:p

Darksteel.8412:

In my honest opinion…the ranger doesn’t need any buffs at all, in general it’s pve player that complains about the ranger… but that’s only due to tunnelvision. in pvp/wvw the ranger is a very good class, and has some if not one the best condi removal traits in game and is quite capable of soloing any class. It might not be a toptier pve class…but it’s up to par with the so called toptier classes in pvp/wvw….imo stop the crying and play a little better

Ever tried to get a ranger in a WvW guild?
Try and come back to tell me ranger is doing good in WvW…
(hint : on 20+ WvW guilds (from 5 – 35 members) recruiting on my server, only two accept exceptional ranger, all the other indicate “no rangers” or need “high:War/Guard/necro; med:Elem/mesmer; Low:Engineer/thief”…)

Rangers are not to bad in SPvP… that’s it…
It’s enjoyable in other game modes, but not good… and certainly not desired…

Chrispy.5641:

Jocksy.3415:

Chokolata.1870:

The players are not at fault here. There was no developer interaction or discussion here. Only one developer ever posted and her posts were few and far in between. We had no positive discussion steering towards the things the developers want discussed. No wonder it was a random suggestion posting bonanza.

CDI’s were first postponed because Chris (and maybe others) didn’t have time to manage their thread…
I stated I’d rather have a postponed thread than one with no dev interractions…
Still stand by it and hope the CDI was launched at a time at which it could get attention…

Allie logged in yesterday, for maybe an hour, posted in PvP forums, but nothing in our thread… that made me sad. She could just have dropped by and say she was busy but would try to catch up later… would have made us feel less let down

Or, maybe,….you know….developers, whose job it is to balance the Ranger profession, could make a post or two in there as well. I don’t think every balance decision is made by Allie.

At this point, anyone with a red tag could post in it to try and stir discussion in a positive way…
But as the thread owner, obviously, the weight is more on Allie’s shoulder…
Every time there is more than 2 CDI at the same time, some are just players’ comments.

Ranger’s CDI was sure to stir up lot of attention… to give it to just one person who is real busy with her normal function was sure to be a miss….
I like ranger, and love the possibilities it has, but I sure do hope any possibilities we see in it can be developed… that the caterpillar can become a butterfly…

Chokolata.1870:

The players are not at fault here. There was no developer interaction or discussion here. Only one developer ever posted and her posts were few and far in between. We had no positive discussion steering towards the things the developers want discussed. No wonder it was a random suggestion posting bonanza.

CDI’s were first postponed because Chris (and maybe others) didn’t have time to manage their thread…
I stated I’d rather have a postponed thread than one with no dev interractions…
Still stand by it and hope the CDI was launched at a time at which it could get attention…

Allie logged in yesterday, for maybe an hour, posted in PvP forums, but nothing in our thread… that made me sad. She could just have dropped by and say she was busy but would try to catch up later… would have made us feel less let down

They are just making fun :p some of them posts got me laughing so hard my coworkers looked at me as if I was crazy (maybe I am)…

What do you like about rangers? What makes you come back to it? In which situations do you choose it over another profession? What would you not want to see changed?

I like

• the reactive gameplay, that weapons have built in defense/offense on demand,
• that in PvE, I can switch aggro with the pet,
• in WvW, that I can take camps and towers alone,
• my water fields and my control in zergs,
• the support I can give when the spirits and the pet don’t die…
• to stop thieves from stelthing, particularly when we swipe a structure (WvW)
• I like the defensive/offensive on-demand abilities (SB#3, GS#4)…

(might consolidate answers in CDI at a later time)

Hello!
It seems to me that rangers using spirits are more often direct damages than condi dealers…

Am I wrong? Are spirits used in condi builds?

Something to get the thread going back to positive!

What do you like about rangers? What makes you come back to it? In which situations do you choose it over another profession? What would you not want to see changed?
(Edit: Reason for these questions is that we know what we want changed, but it’s interesting and might be useful for devs to know what shouldn’t change / what makes the class unique from the players’ point of view)

I like the reactive gameplay, that weapons have built in defense/offense on demand, that in PvE, I can switch aggro with the pet, in WvW, that I can take camps and towers alone, I like my water fields and my control in zergs, and the support I can give when the spirits and the pet don’t die… I like to stop thieves from stelthing, particularly when we swipe a structure.
I like the defensive/offensive on-demand abilities (SB#3, GS#4)…

Chrispy.5641:

Jocksy.3415:

misterdevious.6482:

Atherakhia.4086:

Perhaps we should move away from the burst and damage discussion while we wait for Allie to check in and discuss some of the other issues plagueing this class?

I think now would be a good time to discuss the issues with our utility skills and why many of them don’t seem worth taking until we’ve first invested well over 20 or 30 points in various trees.

Signets for example; their activated portions have no impact on the Ranger as a whole with only a few exceptions unless we first get Signet of the Beastmaster in the Marksmanship line. We have similar issues with Spike trap not being useful without 30points in Skirmishing. Spirits not being useful unless they’re mobile. Guard not having any functional use without Nature’s Voice.

I would rather them not mess up signets. Untraited Signet of the Hunt and Signet of the Wild provide a passive baseline of mobility and survivability for WvW. Many people use them for that.

But the point of a signet is that it should be worth activating… Allowing the untraited active to affect the ranger would not “mess up” with signet, it would allow more build diversity by taking off the obligation to have a GM trait for them to work like what one expect from a signet…

You need to consider just how powerful the actives of some of our signets are to start out, which is why we have to take a grandmaster trait just for them to work on us.

For example, if Signet of Stone were to be untraited, it gives us 6 seconds of taking no physical damage, us and our pets. (Its automatically better than Endure pain because of that, which gives the warrior, 4 seconds, even though endure pain is a stunbreaker and our cooldown is longer).

Also, Signet of the Wild gives us 8 seconds of stability, and +25% damage. What equal skill does that without traits?

If Signets are to be changed to affect Rangers to start, then their active effects will most likely have to be toned down, and then the grandmaster trait would only increase their active effects back to where they originally were, (which is something that Anet should consider)

I believe (if comparing class signets) that war’s 10 seconds of unblockable attacks on a 25 seconds CD is pretty good, especially in a burst rotation… And our 8s stability and 25% damage on 60 sec CD – taking in consideration we give up 60 seconds of regeneration (and given the pet’s inability to hit moving targets, and given our ranged options are easy to kite, meaning we have to go melee, where we are more at risk than the war) – is making it all pretty much on par with their 60 sec CD signet that’s a break stun and that grants 8 sec of stability – against a loss of reduction of incoming damage (not sure the amount, but usually it’s either 10% or 33% protection – if they lose 33% reduction, it’s more a sacrifice, but at 10 %, it really is nothing).
But, you can also compare it to their balanced stance – 8 sec stability and swiftness on a 40 sec cool down, that is also a break stun… or, you can compare their 60 sec CD stance that is a break stun and give them 4 seconds immunity, allowing them to safely do a burst, to our 80 sec CD signet that protects us for 6 seconds.
Ours might give us more protection, but we also are more squishy to start with, and given Anet’s comment that we should do damage over time- is something we need to stay alive long enough to deal damages…. while war does not have too much survivability issues, in the current meta…
If we did have war’s ability to kill foes fast enough to not take the damage they would deal us over time, signets active on pet and ranger would be op, and their base active effect would need to be reduced, with maybe a trait to bring them back to where they are…
But, given the state of our damage and of our survival abilities… not sure they would be op enough to warrant a GM trait…

TL;DR
The less damage output a class has, the more protection it needs to last – would it be through regen, breakstun, protection, condi removal, etc.
So given our current damage output, signets don’t feel overpowered

misterdevious.6482:

Atherakhia.4086:

Perhaps we should move away from the burst and damage discussion while we wait for Allie to check in and discuss some of the other issues plagueing this class?

I think now would be a good time to discuss the issues with our utility skills and why many of them don’t seem worth taking until we’ve first invested well over 20 or 30 points in various trees.

Signets for example; their activated portions have no impact on the Ranger as a whole with only a few exceptions unless we first get Signet of the Beastmaster in the Marksmanship line. We have similar issues with Spike trap not being useful without 30points in Skirmishing. Spirits not being useful unless they’re mobile. Guard not having any functional use without Nature’s Voice.

I would rather them not mess up signets. Untraited Signet of the Hunt and Signet of the Wild provide a passive baseline of mobility and survivability for WvW. Many people use them for that.

But the point of a signet is that it should be worth activating… Allowing the untraited active to affect the ranger would not “mess up” with signet, it would allow more build diversity by taking off the obligation to have a GM trait for them to work like what one expect from a signet…

misterdevious.6482:

I would rather them not mess up Guard either as I use it often. As I posted earlier in this thread, Guard 1. Gives protection and stealth to the pet which is very useful in keeping it alive in wvw fights… 2. Allows the pet to automatically attack targets in the area without the target having to interact with you first which means less time waiting and more time hitting… 3. Prevents the pet from leaving the specified area, which can be used strategically. While you man the ac on the second floor, your pet can be guarding down in the garrison circle.

Most people who speak about changing gard want to take off the cast time… that is a great repositioning tool, but, if you have it in your bar, it’s not an advantage for you… Shouts in general are a mess. The ress one is not working most of the time, “protect me” hurts the pet…
A pet repositioning thing should be a base mechanic of the pet class, not a utility skill… by adding gard to pet mechanic, we can get a shout that would be useful in more situation, and not just a “trait trigger for buff”.

Too much things in the ranger class is about “ranger or pet”, not enough about “ranger and pet”. So anything I choose, I choose for only part of me.
We need more real synergy, even if it brings more limits (eg, pet and ranger could share boon (addition of ranger), but only from different sources, (while, as it is today, the pet can stack them twice by directly getting them and getting them again from the ranger).

Adding more ranger AND pet effects to pretty much everything (instead of ranger OR pet) would make it less feel like as if we would be better off without the pet…

But shared traits and competency is useless before a rework of the pet AI… (eg: guard could make ranger invisible for 3 seconds too, which would scale with a few traits, and give rangers a reason to equip that skill – BUT, it would then be too op for a 15 sec CD, so either pets benefits would be lowered / or CD, increased). Non working AI with such implementations would just hurt the class more

jcbroe.4329:

Atherakhia.4086:

jcbroe.4329:

snip

snip

…

For instance, when a thief sets up and uses backstab, more than likely, they would have achieved the same damage output by just autoattacking for sustained DPS during the time frame it takes to stealth, position, and then actually land backstab, not to mention that backstab is a much more avoidable skill than sustained, zero cooldown autoattacks.

Again, burst skills are large damage values that are done in a given instant that do not increase DPS, due to burst skills having positional requirements, setup requirements, activation times, channel times, and aftercasts. During this instant, burst is going to do more damage, but over a time interval (DPS is calculated over time, and is not a calculation of instantaneous damage), the damage outputs are going to end up equal (let’s take a dagger/pistol thief, and assume that setting up a backstab combo takes 5 seconds. The combo will do 5k damage at the 5th second plus the damage of the pistol shot, where as autoattacking will be doing approximately 1k damage per second
for 5 seconds).

But, while thief is getting ready for it’s backstab, we cannot reliably attack it…
So burst end up being better, because it’s low-risk/high reward in your example, while being unstealthed is higher risk for the same reward…

And the example of thief is not so much a good one… take Warrior bursts and warrior damage over time, and tell me how it equals up… or mesmer’s… or all other professions that have great burst.

Burst give too much advantages compared with sustained. It would be OK if sustained was somewhat higher in the same timeframe as a full burst rotation, it would balance the risk/reward, but it is not in the current meta given how fast bursts can be chained…

They might think about changing the burst meta – it will not change the fact that the game designs is encouraging bursts specs… and that the new content makes it even more important to have bursts abilities… I do not understand why they would add content that demands bursts if their point is to somewhat phase out bursts…

Durzlla.6295:

Aioros.4862:

jcbroe.4329:

I haven’t ever seen anything that was nerfed unnecessarily, and for the most part, this a perception that is shared by people who play every other single class.

Pet damage for non beastmaster builds?
Shortbow range?
Shortbow “animation fix” mega nerf?

Key word is bolded, when SB had same range as longbow there was literally 0 reason to use the longbow, pet damage was nerfed because you could go bunker with literally 0 drawback, and SB animation fix was to make the weapon not ungodly OP, after that “mega nerf” it continued to be, and still is, one of our best weapons.

Balance is not about balancing a class with itself, but with the whole game. They wanted to make longbow more desired, so instead of adding to it, to bring it to a point equal to similar possibilities of other classes, they chose to nerf a weapon that was on par with other classes possibilities….

I do understand that it is hard to find a good balance for all game modes, but balancing everything on one game mode that is not representative of what most people do is far from the solution.

If the SB would have been really overpowered – which I don’t think it was – they wouldn’t have nerfed it to balance out with longbow, they would have nerfed it to balance with general professions’ abilities. (Pretty much everybody say they nerfed it to make longbow more wanted… I don’t remember reading that they nerfed it because it was, in itself, overpowered).
Since that nerf, they did boost longbow somewhat, guess the SB nerf was not enough to get people to use LB…

Not sure if it makes sense; English is not my main language.

TL;DR
Balance should not be only within one profession, but have to take into account all that one profession is doing (CC, Damage, healing, damage reduction) compared with all that other professions are doing.

Lol! Love it!