Guild Wars 2

Jackums.3496:

John Corpening.9847:

Would you keep rank acquisition the same as it is now?

If not, what would you do to improve rank acquisition?

I’d keep the rank system in place, but no longer have rewards reliant on ranks (ie. armor/weapons). Basically, it would remain as a way of tracking your personal long-term progression but would no longer be necessary in attaining certain armors and weapons. It would be a sort of personal background feature.

However, having a way of obtaining permanent finishers (ie. phoenix/dragon) is still important, and I’d still keep that tied to rank. I know plenty of people that play PvP (myself included), and have been for a while, in large part due to the long-term goal of attaining those final two finishers. The implication that they are/were being removed was the primary part of this preview that stood out negatively for me. I’ve read an ANet post from another topic saying that finishers aren’t going away, but they will no longer be “earned”. Do not give us limited finishers as a substitute. I’ve invested in nearly 50 ranks with the near sole purpose of attaining a dragon finisher in the future, and there’s no way I’m going to be able to get those last 30 or so ranks before these changes are implemented. Being given the poor substitute that is a limited finisher for all that effort would be a slap in the face. I’ve spent more time on this than I have my legendary.

Yes. This is my main concern. This, and making sure we keep those glory vendor rewards rewarding, without having to add time limited exclusives to the pool.

Iason Evan.3806:

Eilanzer.7523:

little.6509:

Removing ranks from the game is a terrible idea. I know myself included with many friends are considering leaving the game if this change is implemented. We have been playing pvp since launch and are proud of all our ranks, and now we will no longer be able to work on it, and all we have to show is a finisher? Jokes. On top of that you’re making the gear we earned through high ranks available to everyone from pve who did nothing in pvp. Great job on destroying the gw2 pvp community or what was left of it

^THIS

what anet doing is alienating one community in exchange of another…Guess what…In the end this game gonna lose both…

I have talked about this before too. We have been putting hundreds and some people thousands of hours into trying to get the dragon finisher. We knew it would take years. We have already put forth a year and a half’s worth of effort and now we have no way of getting to it ever? For a lot of us it’s the rank that matters. For others we were working on the rank emote.

I will repeat what I said earlier for emphasis: I am at my Tiger Emote. I am working toward at least my Phoenix. Many people are MUCH further along than me but I have invested hundreds of hours into PvP just to try and get that Phoenix emote.

This is akin to you guys saying you are going to remove Legendaries except for the people that already have them. That’s what this is to the PvP community. It’s like some guy doing map completion, getting all his gifts and precursor and being some T6 mats short and then you take away the ability to make Legendaries. The only part that is different is that the time investment for sPvP emotes and ranks is on a MUCH larger scale. Please reconsider locking the rank emotes. In my opinion it is a terrible waste of so many people’s efforts and time.

Agreed. We don’t need finisher removal. It’s a kick in the teeth to anyone who ever dares try for long term goals.

And no, exclusivity is no reward or excuse. Exclusivity in games is a sickness we tend to fall into to feed our ego, while shutting out players, and diminishing available content.

ADD to the system! It seems like now you are deleting one set of progression for another while BOTH forms are valid. Casuals LOVE to see rank and progress, while the hardcore LOVE ladders. Why not both?

Rozbuska.5263:

Jamais vu.5284:

Let grinding be the domain of PvE.

Its not about grinding its about some sort of progression. Ladders arent progression. Progression is something where you still going forward. Ladder is more like rollercoaster where you arent rewarded for your work but all your work is about to stay on one place and its for most players more frustrating than fun. Rewards based on this are also frustrating. Anet made this game for some sort of audience (for players what want to play how they want without pushing more relax than hardcore) but now they do everything to destroy that idea.
Only few players want be super hardcore competetive for all coast. All other plays it just for fun and ranks are one of things what keep them playing. They dont do it for ranks itself but vision of titles/finishers what make that difference.

This exactly. That’s why removal of such rewards and finishers is such a big deal. Especially for something that could very well still exist after any such progression changes.

Oni Link.4621:

As I wrote in CDI topic:

Ranks will be removed imho because they are unnecessary considering what PVP is supposed to be.
There is no competitive game (afaik) out there where you are rewarded for how long you play. Rewards are based on how good you play.
Let’s take LoL as example, since it is the most played competitive game: you have an account level, from 1 to 30, which only purpose is to be an entry barrier to ranked matches. And that is exactly how it should be in GW2 imho.

Players need skill-based rewards, not farm-based ones.

I agree! But is there any reason that current rewards and finishers couldn’t be implemented in such a system as well?

I think most of the resistance stems from having long term goals ripped away with no ability to continue in the future.

I’d argue that “farm-based” rewards also have their place when you consider a wide audience that may not be in it all to win the leaderboard game. What rewards for them? I believe that these two could go hand in hand only if lines of progression and achievement are kept open on ALL levels of play, and without unnecessary time gating.

Justin ODell.9517:

Admiral Zombie.8624:

A lot of people are misunderstanding what is happening. People who have earned their rank emotes and finishers will get to keep them as they are.

If I understand what people are saying, and I may be wrong, many people are treating ranks as more of a lifetime achievement. That is certainly something to consider in regards to the future reward system replacing them.

Many people use finishers/rewards as a long term goal, of course. Having that long term goal ripped out of content will understandably be met with some resistance — this is how I feel as well.

I get that going forward you wanted to give this exclusivity as a means to make up for removing ranks, but I don’t really see that method helping either group. Can’t we instead focus on ways to keep existing unlocks and blend them with future progression?

In my opinion, the more exclusivity a games sees with its rewards, the more and more you separate yourself from your target audience, new players. I know feeling left behind in rewards or unavailable achievement has left me more often than not broken, and less willing to play in the future.

Let’s build on what we have, not tear it all down and build new walls.

PS: I also love, love, love those cape unlock ideas!

MithranArkanere.8957:

You should keep the rank finishers at least as a measure of time spent in PvP with no effect in matchmaking or rewards.

It’s not nice removing something that people may have tried harder to get if they knew it was going to be removed. Specially when there’s people who has been getting them without playing in one of those farming arenas.
Let people still look forward to unlock the next finisher, in addition to the other stuff.

Agreed. It seems like an added on thing honestly. You could just keep them there and add to it.

Nike.2631:

Justin ODell.9517:

Although ladder rewards will be time gated, PvP will also likely have other rewards that are not time gated as well rewards relevant to living story and holiday events. It depends on what you guys would like to see.

I’d like to see an overall “Rank” that unlocks various permanent finishers as I advance.

Just think how easy it will be to code it…

(Leave the Rank system in place and ADD divisions and ladders to it!)

I agree. I like the idea that you want to reward old time pvpers — I get that. I’ve played a lot of pvp in my day and lived for the purple experience in many a mmo. I’d like to, if the community would fly with it, open a discussion on possible reward alternatives that don’t cut off our already achievable milestones.

I feel that with the more content that gets time gated, no matter how much you have to replace it, it really deters a certain demographic of player who place importance on long term goals — be hardcore or casual. I know one of the main detractors for me personally in getting into something is how far behind I might feel when it comes to milestones or rewards.

Any open pathway for communication on this front would greatly be appreciated by me.

I’d love to hear others’ ideas as well.

Do not like the finisher changes as I like my achievement not being time gated, but that’s a personal thing, I admit.

Please focus future achievement structure on permanent achievement; comparing stickers for how many days you showed up is nice and all, but please keep these things open. Achievement in my mind is not time gated. Once again, personal opinion.

I have to say I didn’t like the initial feeling in my gut either as it seems everything worth earning is being taken away update after update with no real inclination towards permanent achievement.

If its a good ways out, I’m glad they gave forewarning. I hope there is time.

Katreyn.4218:

I have to say its a great way to get people to buy some gems every month. Won’t be surprised if this becomes a trend.

God I hope not; that type of marketing over a long declining trend is what finally killed me off of Runescape as a kid.

Yup, the lack of bow talk in general makes me sad.

To realize that my playstyle of circle kiting and primary bow dps is not accepted in any way shape or form is kind of disheartening.

It doesn’t even look like future concern will be placed on consolidating the MM traits for bows, improving general skills on bows, or even improving something that should be integral to the shortbow, moment of clarity either, because all the talk I’ve seen is all melee or pets.

People don’t view a ranger as a primary bow wielder at all anymore, and that is saddening.

JonPeters.5630:

Evade on swoop was just an idea to give that build a second on demand defensive skill. It would certainly help close/escape as well because not being able to be bit while closing/escaping is going to improve your chances of doing so. Also gives you a reason to use that skill outside of those situations which would help with rotations IMO. That being said you are correct that removing evade from 1 is probably too harsh so this is a change that will probably have to wait a while for proper testing if it happens at all.

Jon

I respect that you are at least willing to put some personal ideas out there. I know it can be tough to do so where criticism is pretty high, especially when you have to contend with being a marked target already for being a lead.

No matter how tough some of the criticism may be, I want you to know that for a majority of people who actually enjoy a meaningful and respectful conversation and exchange, you will never be looked down on for putting your ideas out there. Quite the opposite actually.

My only point, which I may have been a little rough on, was that for me personally, coming in to say others’ ideas doesn’t jive with a vision without also putting some questions or seeding some ideas into minds seems a little post-factum.

Also: bows! =>

I like the charrs’ lore enough to definitely envision something like a charr who wants to rebel against the machines to a certain degree. This charr could think that machines take the place of good combat and make the user weak and out of practice. By getting in touch with the natural side of things, and with his trusty carrion by his side, he sets out to let everyone know just what it means to put your faith in anything but personal skill. I could see him allying with the ogres to learn their ways of mastering beasts like rock dogs and the like.

For the norn, I can envision a fiercely loyal crusader of the homeland, sworn to protect his ancestral hunting grounds and the spirits of the wild that dwell within. He would be the more natural leader of the two, and would always strive to think before action. The vigil could learn a thing or two from him. He’d be very interested in culture and history relating to the grawl.

As far as aesthetics go, the norn will have more variation in armor, while the charr will mostly keep the duster look.

Holland.9351:

One of the major issues with Longbow is it requiring 50 trait points to grab its traits:
30 in Marksmanship for Piercing Arrows and Eagle Eye
20 in Skirmishing for Quick Draw

The Shortbow has the same problem:
20 in Marksmanship for Piercing Arrows
20 in Skirmishing for Quick Draw

Both Quick Draw and Piercing Arrows only affect the Longbow and the Shortbow. So both the Longbow and the Shortbow need to spend at least 40 trait points to get their relevant traits.

The solution is quite obvious if you see it:

Longbow Mastery (replaces Piercing Arrows – 20 point into Marksmanship)
Longbow arrows pierce and Longbow skills have 20% less cooldown

Shortbow Mastery (replaces Quick Draw – 20 points into Skirmishing)
Shortbow arrows pierce and Shortbow skills have 20% less cooldown

With this both the Shortbow and the Longbow only need 20 points to get piercing arrows and less cooldown on their skills instead of 40. Talk about improving build diversity!

With this change, If you still want to use both Longbow AND Shortbow together and want both to pierce AND have 20% less cooldown, then it’ll cost you 40 points. Which is exactly the same amount as before the change.

Currently the game basically tells you to go dual bow with how the Piercing Arrows and Quick Draw are set up.

Agreed completely.

We need some more talk on where Bows are currently, because I’m very disappointed that they are so far back on everyone’s backburner now. Class defined by its mastery of bows: yea.

The MM trait line is simply too diluted to do any good for anything but melee weapons. It seems that balance wants everyone to main melee. GW2 hates circle kiters and ranged professions, as evidenced by the pure ineffectiveness of kiting, and missing out on vital group buffing when in ranged combat.

Longbow needs a real focus, and the shortbow needs moment of clarity to actually bring something useful to the table.

An unbreakable evade on a freaking auto attack chain which takes very little time to complete is a poor design decision. When an auto attack has to be set to off to function even halfway decent, there’s an underlying problem, regardless of how many ‘master’ its inconsistencies.

Rooted evades should stick to activations, not on something like an auto attack.

OR, Why not allow an evade directly after the sword evade?

My response on the other thread:

Jon,

As far as your sword comments, I just disagree with your satisfaction of its performance.

The playstyle can remain, but you need to realize that this is not some skill activation on a 30 cooldown. We’re talking about a super fast auto-attack locking a player out of evades based on where they are in the chain. With your attention to evade mechanics in every dungeon I think this should still be a consideration. I don’t mind the premise, just question its place on an auto-attack.

Once again, with all due respect:

I’m questioning just how collaborative all these changes are, when we bring up so so very many suggestions on the forums just to have one voice tell us how it’s not going to happen because it goes against some vision.

That’s the way I feel; no ill-harm meant to anyone. The whole process just seems so inflexible and predetermined.

ipan.4356:

I made two prediction during beta, and I’ve been right about both:

The Ranger and the Thief would be the worst classes, Ranger because pet AI stinks, and Thief because Steal is stupid (and Rogues are always the hardest to balance class in an MMO).

Right on both counts.

Two of the hardest mechanics to balance in game, so we over nerf to be safe rather than sorry. Also, when it comes to balance around these parts, the squeeky wheel placed over the fence on the PvP side of things gets the oil, while the PvE wheel just falls off entirely.

If you are looking to use bows, you came to the wrong profession — hell, the wrong game even. Everything is balanced around what is doing well in PvP, and centered almost entirely around forcing players into melee range.

If you want to use sword or a more defensive greatsword role, you can do ok. Think of the current ranger as a tough character designed to play within the range of healing spring. Conditions will eat you alive.

As far as builds go, you have the standard sword/warhorn combo:

http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fMAQJBMhNSUVZXVJZxaHIWK2z+5MOUi8MKFqS5VnYqVA-jECBpQFRjtEMaFMhtKKIqJYaUER1OEYeEER1CBsYNA-w

With full respect due:

I want to main a BOW while being of some other use to a group than a slightly more safe loss of dps.

For a class all about BOWs, most PvE builds shy away from them entirely and we are WAY too dependent on MM line bow traits to make them even baseline viable.

I want to use a greatBOW, but what’s so great about it? Uninspired stealth changes and a still dps crippled auto-attack? Bows have suffered tremendously due to a PvP only mindset.

Jon,

As far as your sword comments, I just disagree with your satisfaction of its performance.

The playstyle can remain, but you need to realize that this is not some skill activation on a 30 cooldown. We’re talking about a super fast auto-attack locking a player out of evades based on where they are in the chain. With your attention to evade mechanics in every dungeon I think this should still be a consideration. I don’t mind the premise, just question its place on an auto-attack.

Bows are now in a good place you feel? There’s more to a power build than greatsword crits. The majority of signets just aren’t worth using; same with shouts. No one talks about builds with bows as a main focus in them anymore — that’s something to be proud of.

I want to main a bow while being of some other use to a group than a slightly more safe loss of dps.

For a class all about bows, most PvE builds shy away from them entirely and we are WAY too dependent on MM line bow traits to make them even baseline viable.

I WANT to use greatbow, but what’s so great about it? Uninspired stealth changes and a still dps crippled auto-attack?

Longbow is still a hindrance, no matter how you cut it in many game modes.

Marksman trait line has too many vital traits for someone who wants to make bows even remotely viable.

No attention still to sword auto-attack. Some may have grown to deal with it, but it can still be done better.

Nice up for greatsword; it’s nice to have a defensive power option.

Overall, I still think we need a few more considerations:

- A review of active condition removal
- Review of pretty much mandatory traits for bows, and consolidation
- Bow love, bow love, bow love!
- Mainhand Axe is still a weapon. What’s its role?

nottsgman.8206:

costs the same this year as it did last year. here’s a page listing the price from last year (there are also vids on youtube from last year that have the price in the description):
http://www.airbornegamer.com/2012/10/guild-wars-2-mad-king-starts/

Good; glad to be wrong. Looks like the wiki needs some updating.

All the potshots about players and their habits aside, ANet sure isn’t helping the situation any by producing such a crazy amount of gem store content.

See that as you will; I know why it’s happening, I just wish more weight would be placed in in game achievement — uninspired back pieces don’t compare.

Glad to see that we got some very much needed weapon updates like improving overall flow of our sword and general ranged bow love; not to mention those MM trait consolidations.

Oh…

Solomon Darkfury.3729:

It better not come back… I don’t mind if they offer new weapons but in no way shape or form should the old ones come back… They should be limited edition to be owned by the priviledged few who were there for the original event and busted their tails to get it…

This type of thought denies content to the majority for the sake of a few. I get the premise of having something special, and that with it, also comes a certain sense of ego, but I would implore others to find joy in achieving the difficult — not I was here on x date.

I’ve been around since the beginning too, but I don’t value all my special little items to the point where I would deny them to others based on how special I feel they are. It’s a difference in opinion, and I respect that, but I feel this type of thought does more to separate players than bring them together.

For Soulbound on use, 800 is simply too high. Either make it account bound, or a more reasonable price of 400-500 gems per tool.

I get supporting ArenaNet, but these bi-monthly updates at $10+ is pushing the generosity factor just a bit. Calm down with the time limited exclusives for a bit.

A bow worth using.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Killsmith.8169:

JonathanSharp.7094:

The 3 different game types and splitting skills. Splitting skills between all 3 of our game types (PvE, PvP, WvW) is very costly – it takes more time to split the skills, and then upkeep the split skills. Instead of upkeeping 1 version of a skill, whenever you make future changes, you now have to make sure all 3 are appropriately balanced for their respective game types. This is very powerful, and something we did in GW1 when we felt we needed it. We just need to be careful not to do it too much, or it means the balance team is literally balancing 3 entire games. As Freamon (from “The Wire”, btw if you haven’t seen “The Wire”, stop whatever it is you’re doing and go watch it. Unless you’re giving birth. In that case…wait until you’re done, then watch it immediately afterwards. Oh, and get your new son/daughter to watch it when they’re old enough.) usually reminded the other members of the cast, “All the pieces matter.” The different pieces of GW2 all impact the other pieces, and it’s something we must always bear in mind.

Chap’s woefully ill-conceived attempt at a metaphor on why we don’t spilt all skills off the bat: Imagine you’re in school, and in order to make sure you learn languages at an even pace, you have to split everything you do into 3 languages. For me, let’s say it’s English, Japanese and Latin (No, Greek, I liked learning Greek more than Latin). You start off answering a question on a test in 3 different languages. You rock. But then you do it more and more often. For every note you take in a lecture, you have to write it in 3 different languages. For every paper you write, you have to write it in 3 languages. For all homework, you have to do it in 3 languages. Every test. Every quiz. It may seem small at first, but if you’re not careful, you’re doing three times the work as normal.

Whether you like it or not, you guys already have 3 different games. Each game type has a different structure, different rules, and different goals. I get where you’re going with your analogy, but it’s flawed. You aren’t answering the same question in three languages. You’re answering English questions in English, Japanese questions in Japanese, and Greek questions in Greek.

The way you’re doing it now, you have to come up with a fix for one game type that doesn’t effect the other two too badly. I would argue thakittentakes more work to do that than it does to split the skills and balance to solve issues unique to each game type. The upkeep shouldn’t be costly at all, you just don’t fix what isn’t broken. What could be more cost effective than that?

You can argue it’s different all you want to. But as the people actually DOING the work, you’re wrong. Nice theory crafting though!

We have 3 major factors impacting all work we do for balance: time, scope (the amount of balance work we have to do), and resources (in this case, available work hours). All 3 of these pull from a finite pool of resources, and all 3 have direct causal relationships. If you increase scope (do more splitting of skills), then you can increase scope. Period. This means you’re now putting more stress on the other 2 pieces of this puzzle: time and resources. You’ve made more work. So until we extend the normal day to 26 or 27 hours, or put more days in the year (which isn’t going to happen with the earth’s current distance from the sun and rotation) it’s simply not going to happen, or it’s going to degrade the quality of work you DO get out of your hours.

And it’s more work to balance the game types differently. It still takes time to implement those changes. It doesn’t save time just by not worrying about how the changes will impact the various game types.

Ignoring the edginess of the comment — While I see your view, just saying it’s more work doesn’t make the opinion wrong.

We do definitely have three different games here; I guess the main thing to take away from the dissenters is that maybe a little more time should be put into prioritizing which changes should and shouldn’t be split, but that’s a matter of opinion mostly.

Having the balancing be a little more transparent and being given more time to chew things over should go a long way in ironing out these details, so I’m happy that you value that link. We need it.

Fun factor doesn’t care about how many hours you have in a week to do balancing separately, though.

While I agree with the basic premise, I can’t see the argument against just not changing something in PvE when it literally requires a separation, and not separate balance. Worrying about future balancing, I guess?

Most of the split balancing issues occur from when something is changed from its current form, not that (i)t isn’t being changed. As a rule, sPvP mechanic changes do benefit PvE too, it’s just the edge cases.

I guess it’s all up to interpretation as to what ‘beneficial’ means.

Just make Ranger more engaging and rewarding to play.

I know, I know, I’m a balancing master.

Couple of things:

1. Consideration to condense MM traits.
2. More love to bows, especially power.
3. Pet pathing – especially when circle kiting; ie: pet running at tangents.

ryston.7640:

no no this is no troll, staff ele do so much aoe damage, if you multiply their damage by 5 because there 5 on enemy team they hit like twice as hard per second as other classes.

pp thief and mantra mesmer are op 2 yes.

long bow is so obviously better than short bow, rangers scale with power too well, obviously.

I see wut u did thar.

I think they were talking mostly about condition durations on skills; if it hits rangers… well… yea.

As long as we have at least one viable build in sPvP we won’t be considered.

Durzlla.6295:

You know what’d be awesome? If Honed Axes actually made it so when you crit your axe bounces back to you, granting might, and then back at the guy it crit with a limit of once per axe.

I like the might idea. I’d like to see it do more damage up front to it’s first target, then bounce around and apply might on return.

Good points ilr.

Let’s all start a ranger guild, lol.

One thing is for sure, there is waaaaaaaaay too much hate on rangers in the sPvP forum. They go on about how balance isn’t needed right now, and how they’d like to see extra functionality; that’s sure as hell easy to say when your sitting on a necro/warrior/engineer.

All rangers are imature cry babies that let the game play itself, says most pvpers. I considered myself a die hard pvper before this mmo came along. I’ve played DAoC and WAR religiously for years — to have my beloved ranged dps class go down the kittenter while they are here championing esports is sad. You know, the best pvp MMOs never gave a kitten about esports.

It still saddens me that ranger meta is all melee. GG.

Just remember that balancing is a give and take, and isn’t exclusive to any one individual class. To get best results you gotta put away the ego and at least try to see others’ views.

Exile.8160:

And there’s this freaking mess it was 1 spirit ranger and 2 MM necros

The first thing I see when I look at that is the “You are now entering the twilight zone” opening.

If I had my way, the SB would be the power weapon focusing on evades and interrupts for survival in medium ranged encounters and the LB would be the best for traps and conditions where a ranger could set up, lie in wait, and attack from the “shadows” so to speak. Enemy player to corner pocket with LB 4. The entire bow balancing is reversed.

You could argue that they are both really power weapons, but neither excel at that job.

The real problem is with the lackluster weapons and passive traiting.

Lighter.5631:

hate to break it for you, but this game is made for casuals, same in pve and wvw.
its easy to get started and play.

if you want extreme e sport, maybe try something that is not an mmo next time, not a casual mmo at least.

I’m pretty simple actually — I want it to be challenging and rewarding (ie: fun), and for the Devs to view players as capable human beings able to grow their skills with time. We have, on some classes, way too much emphasis on passive effects and by the sound of it, a total disconnect between actually wanting the same skill cap between all classes. I want the ranger to be more active for heavens sake, if for nothing but getting some real discussion on these sPvP forums.

waka.9826:

Miflett.3472:

Ranger ranger ranger ranger ranger ranger.

Ranger Danger!

Needs more ranger.

~ Paid for by rangers for a more skillful tomorrow.™

every class in this game doesn’t take a lot of skill. the difference is that some classes work while being easy to play while some others don’t work very well even though you are playing properly / still easy to play.

I agree, and that saddens me. I guess I’m looking for a match where there is none to be made. I guess I really am too much of a keybind lover for my own good – classes like Squig Herder from WAR and Bard from FF14 ARR are what I think of when I think ranger/archer. Those are classes which are punishing for non skilled play, but beautiful when mastered.

This base game is just too different, I know, but thinking players are dumb is a bad way to cap a class’ ability. So great, the class is playable for everyone, but there’s nothing to master other than placing points into a trait line.

Ranger ranger ranger ranger ranger ranger.

Ranger Danger!

Needs more ranger.

~ Paid for by rangers for a more skillful tomorrow.™

HS is just too good to give up in any scenario but 1v1’s with low TTK.

Master of Timespace.2548:

People have to realise that high skill ceiling does not imply that the game is unfriendly to casuals. For gods sake, take for example Chess. That game is easy for a new person to learn and for a casual player to enjoy, yet it still has almost limitless skill ceiling.

He also says this pve players, don’t properly use attunement swap because they stay in an attunement and spam (like they are in fire attunement to do damage and they only change water to heal).

The devs are so incredibely stupid. Why in the hell would you bother swapping attuments in pve? Autoattack on, alt tab to Facebook, alt tab back, loot. People don’t swap attuments because they are lazy and because they don’t have to, not because they were too stupid to do so.

I really think the devs don’t play their own game. Swapping attuments like hell and thinking on your foot (you know, d/d ele pvp style) is simply not effective in PvE. Sitting on fire and focusing on timing your dodges just has better effort/reward ratio.

While I’m sure they don’t appreciate the tone, I agree with all your points. Why am I not swapping in PvE? Because your PvE content doesn’t demand it. I tend not to swap just for the hell of it.

They consider the ranger class a new player class; all of us can’t play a class with more than 2 things to do at once apparently.

The skill ceiling on other classes can go up, but hell if you change diaper mode ranger passives.

They don’t get that ranged dps fighters WANT to be very active in fights. Instead, the skillfull ranger community is passed off as new players with no ability.

They take an already passive role, and through traits and pet AI make it even worse.

Indoles.1467:

Two big problems right now are A ) Most top pvp players don’t play ranger because they don’t like the idea of the pet. B ) Most top pvp players are very sick of seeing the low skill floor and ceiling spirit ranger (even after the nerf).

If you talk to any of the top pvpers, they know nothing, absolutely nothing, about ranger. All they know is that ranger relies heavily upon passive ai (something very high skilled players despise) and that rangers are super easy to play (even though they aren’t, they only see the builds that are the strongest, which happen to be extrememly simple while effective).

I couldn’t agree more. The Ego of some of these guys is off the charts. They don’t get that ranged dps fighters WANT to be very active in fights. Instead, the skillfull ranger community is passed off as new players with no ability.

The problem is that they are perfecting their so called skillfull builds while denying any of that to ranger. Are they afraid of having the ranger be based on skill, rather than passives and terrible AI?

They consider the ranger class a new player class; all of us can’t play a class with more than 2 things to do at once apparently.

The skill ceiling on other classes can go up, but hell if you change diaper mode ranger passives.