Guild Wars 2

I think they would claim that the skirt has a sheer panel at the top, and that is what you’re seeing there?

Personally, I’m more concerned about the visible tattooed shorts, underneath.

They look OK with your choice of dyes, but they obviously don’t with all of them.

serenke.4806:

I bet it’s a tattoo and not even underwear.

It is.

Tried it on my Asura and the outfit itself is actually surprisingly cute in pastel colours.

However, as you can see, not only does it have the same brick red “underwear”, which clashes; but also, you can see it even if she’s just standing still!

It’s really not good, at all.

I can live with it on my human, but it’s very dubious looking on my Asura.

The underwear should have been made more like the skirt – uneven edged (like leaves) cut-off leggings, in the same dye-able colour as one of the dye channels.

Probably the same one as the main body of the skirt.

In fact, given how obvious and wrong the tattoo looks on certain races, they should really still take the time to do that now.

TPMN.1483:

It resizes based upon your character model.

A size 18 model looks differently wearing the same dress compared to a size 0 model.

Actually, although this would be true IRL, it isn’t true in the game.

The hip/bottom area doesn’t resize properly, according to your char’s proportions – that is the entire problem.

I’ve noticed that what happens with long jackets, coats and skirts, on human females (and I think all females with a female human type shape) in the game, is that the area below the waist flares/puffs out, in the same way it would on the largest body/hip-type, on ALL body/hip types.

So, they flare out way beyond your char’s actual hips/bottom, unless your char has the largest hips/bottom available to its race.

Of course, it’s not shown like that in the promotional artwork, where the skirt is represented as actually fitting the “model”.

Another thing is that, in the promotional artwork, the female human appears to have slightly broader shoulders than any (or at least most) of the human female body types, in the game, without having very wide hips.

So, she looks better (or, at least, differently) proportioned, anyway.

It’s possible it’s just a flattering angle, though…

As I say, it’s still a very pretty outfit, but it does seem to suffer from the same issues other female clothing items of this type have.

Solitaire.3680:

I love this outfit BUT after I tried it on my norn female I am again dissapointed what they do to skirts on norn females=( It’s wayy too poofy and doesn’t sit on her hips properly at all. It sits very nice on human females and sylvari but I go look at my norn and YIKES. She doesn’t even have big hips.. in fact I think her hip to waist ratio is even less than most humans. I wouldnt play a light armor class female norn just because of this skirt problem but I wish they would fit the outfits better on them =(

TBH, there is something very wrong with a lot of the female hips in this game.

They come out far too gradually.

So, the lower hips are quite big, generally (too big, in many cases), but they have no upper hip at all.

This is definitely the case with the slimmest Norn body type, but it’s certainly not the only one.

In reality, I’m not even sure they would have (vertical) room for a female pelvis.

What I would like is an outfit in a very similar Art Nouveau style to the Daydreamer’s Finery, but with leggings and flat (or flat-ish), thigh-high boots; instead of a skirt and heels.

Then it would still be feminine and organic looking, but the bottom half would be slightly sleeker and less impractical looking, especially for something like a Ranger.

Well, in my case, I wouldn’t even be able to wear this, on my Ranger, if it wasn’t an outfit.

As, presumably, it would be light armour classes only?

They both (i.e. outfits and armour sets) have a place in the game.

Perhaps what they should do is try to make an armour set version of all the existing outfits (and vice versa), if possible?

That way, people who played the armour class they were aimed at could buy the armour set version and people who didn’t (or wanted something for their chars to wear while levelling), but still liked the look, could buy the outfit version.

dietzero.3514:

The female outfit is pretty weak. Seems like a more generic version of human cultural armour.

I can’t really remember what the human cultural light armour is like – you may well be right.

But even if it’s similar, the difference is that this is an outfit, so all armour classes can wear it.

Yeah, it’s a bit weird, TBH.

When you swim (for example), you can see these brick red, kind of raggedy looking shorts (on human female).

The raggedy part is fine, as it goes with the generally organic look fairly well, but it seems kind of odd that they don’t share the dye colour of the main part of the outfit.

Torsailr.8456:

…why are you looking at people’s underwear?

You can’t help but see them when you swim (and even when you run, to an extent).

Duke Darkwood.4237:

Tigaseye.2047:

If there’s a double standard employed, it’s not true feminism.

Feminism is just supposed to be about equality.

I’m not going to get into this, just because it’s too charged of a subject, but technically, feminism simply is anyone promoting womens’ rights. It’s there in the name; it doesn’t say anything one way or the other about the guys. (This is why a great many well-known feminists sport views that don’t seem very “equal” – but that’s the part I don’t plan to get into.) For equality, you’d need a neutral term, like egalitarianism.

It’s a semantic quibble, sure, but it still is what it is.

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/feminism

Definition of feminism in English:

noun
[mass noun]

The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

DarksunG.9537:

Haha, don’t you understand the double-standard of feminism?

If there’s a double standard employed, it’s not true feminism.

Feminism is just supposed to be about equality.

Really like the outfit on the male Charr, BTW.

I love it on female chars.

It’s very Art Nouveau (or wood nymph, as my BF called it) and I love that.

Ideally, the lower skirt would be slightly more drapey and less bulky, but I’ve kind of got used to the bustle type thing going on with light armour styles in this game and this is such a gorgeous design, I can live with it.

Love it.

Don’t really use focuses, ATM, so haven’t bought it yet, but still.

Yeah, I’ve noticed that, quite often, there is a queue, but then hardly anyone actually active on the map.

It would make sense if this is what people are doing.

On the other hand, sometimes I’m just innocently AFK myself; so, as you say, you can’t just assume that is what everyone is doing.

But, I’m sure ANet could look into it, if they wanted to.

Dayra.7405:

There is only 1 solution: Give people control over their team, i.e. get rid of open servers and replace them by

• closed alliances i.e. large guilds of guilds (where people can play serious)
• random teams (where you just hop in to play a bit)

I think that would be a shame, though.

It’s really nice that it’s completely open and you can jump in and out of play, as you like.

As soon as you make everything team-based and allow people to kick each other etc., it takes away that feeling of open-to-all and makes it a far more intense type of activity.

Yes, you need to make sure people aren’t intentionally abusing the system, but I think ideally you would leave it the way it is.

After all, the game kicks you after 10 mins AFK, anyway and it might take the other players almost that long to do the same thing, in a large team situation.

DeadlySynz.3471:

Given this is a WvW forum and you rarely ever see Ranger QQ post’s on it, a better question would be..

What exact use does a Ranger have in WvW outside of a of a surprise burst that can’t kill anyone unless their made of glass? Not to mention it’s easily avoidable.

Start there before taking away what 1 use they have, which really isn’t useful to begin with.

Yep.

Rangers are constantly being told to switch to other “good” classes, in WvW, by commanders.

Not saying that we don’t have our occasional uses, or that we don’t need reworking (as I think we do).

However, if we were considered OP, in any meaningful, or more generally useful way, commanders etc. would be telling other classes to switch to Ranger; not the other way around.

Dark Saviour.9410:

Tigaseye.2047:

But, if you started listing what some (especially) male humans do, it wouldn’t be a pretty read either, would it?

Wars, physical (and other hostile and/or highly inappropriate) attacks on women and children, serial killings, shootings, slavery, racism (and other isms), organised crime, cruelty to animals, endless unnecessary greed (even if it causes other people to suffer and die)…

The list goes on and on.

For everything you can accuse (some) dolphins of doing, you can almost certainly accuse (some) humans of doing something at least as bad (and probably even worse).

…and yet, you wouldn’t refuse to hang around any other humans, would you?

I mean, really, if it was a question of hanging around a random human male, or a random dolphin male, you would quite possibly be safer around the dolphin.

Assuming you weren’t a porpoise, maybe…

So… As I choose to interpret this…. Human pets gogogo? >_>

:D

Guess you could have a new class with a human sidekick?

Might be quite interesting, actually.

FrouFrou.4958:

Killer whales aren’t whales, they are dolphins and killer whales are the second most efficient spieces when it comes to killing right after humans . WHY WON’T ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!1!

I think it’s already too late for the children, sadly…

They would have already been killed by all the drakes, jaguars and bears constantly roaming the cities.

Killer whales are indeed one species of dolphin, but I don’t think most people think killer whale when they think dolphin?

They think bottlenose.

Killer whale/Orca dolphins would another nice option, as well, IMO.

Cant imagine it would be too much work to have both?

Both could share the same animations and have a similar ability.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Are you guys talking IRL or just in game, because I doubt it would be possible at all to tame a shark under any circumstances, even if you had multiple generations of offspring over a long period of time.

Yeah, the drama with a shark attack, is it only takes a tiny bite to mortally injure us, although a lot of people survive, either way, it would not be a fun way to go.

Sharks are not particularly intelligent, like dolphins, but those instincts combined with that perfect symmetry make for a deadly combination.

I think a Dolphin is the way to go….

Well, quite.

Vizardlorde.8243:

Dolphins have been documented to beat porpoises to death and then play ball with their corpses, and i dont have much other than hearsay for this one but I heard that they use their phallus as an arm to hold a victim and drown them among darker things.

But, if you started listing what some (especially) male humans do, it wouldn’t be a pretty read either, would it?

Wars, physical (and other hostile and/or highly inappropriate) attacks on women and children, serial killings, shootings, slavery, racism (and other isms), organised crime, cruelty to animals, endless unnecessary greed (even if it causes other people to suffer and die)…

The list goes on and on.

For everything you can accuse (some) dolphins of doing, you can almost certainly accuse (some) humans of doing something at least as bad (and probably even worse).

…and yet, you wouldn’t refuse to hang around any other humans, would you?

I mean, really, if it was a question of hanging around a random human male, or a random dolphin male, you would quite possibly be safer around the dolphin.

Assuming you weren’t a porpoise, maybe…

Vizardlorde.8243:

Tigaseye.2047:

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Most shark attacks on humans are mistaken identity and the shark stops after it starts chewing on all those bones, fish/seals etc don’t have bone/meat ratios like we do.

Yeah, that is probably true, but the fact that a large chunk of your leg may have been spat out, after it’s been bitten off, isn’t too much consolation is it? xD

Especially if you’re bleeding profusely and that is putting your life at risk and possibly attracting any other sharks in the area to have an experimental bite, as well.

Having said that, it is possible that if you had a shark as a pet, so it recognised you (and didn’t view you as food), it wouldn’t be much of a risk.

But, what if you accidentally surprised it, or something?

That’s how I feel about big cats – they’re lovely, but if you think of domestic cats, even the very friendly ones can occasionally bite and/or scratch and if that was a lion, or a tiger, that one mistake could be fatal.

Whereas, with dolphins, I think they would be less likely to accidentally hurt you badly and you would generally have more warning that you had a bad tempered/hormonal one (if you did) and the other, more gentle, ones would probably be relatively reliable.

Again, more like humans.

Idk bleeding out vs drowning, call me a wuss but ive heard bleeding out is far more peaceful than gasping for your last breath.

Most dolphins don’t drown people – in fact there are documented cases of them having helped people and animals to breathe, by taking them to the surface to do so.

I really don’t know where you guys are getting this idea that all (or even most) dolphins are hostile murderers from?

I know there was a documentary on British TV showing their darker side, but that is the point; it is a generally nice, empathetic, creature’s darker side.

As opposed to something like a great white shark, which is pretty much all darker (or, at least, totally non-caring) side.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_white_shark

Thought I should just add that that’s not to say sharks shouldn’t be equally protected, or should be harmed in any way, by humans.

They can’t help that they’re not as obviously sociable and/or empathetic as some other animals are (they’re fish, after all, rather than mammals, so you wouldn’t really expect them to be overly demonstrative) and they have just as much right to exist as any other animal does.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Most shark attacks on humans are mistaken identity and the shark stops after it starts chewing on all those bones, fish/seals etc don’t have bone/meat ratios like we do.

Yeah, that is probably true, but the fact that a large chunk of your leg may have been spat out, after it’s been bitten off, isn’t too much consolation is it? xD

Especially if you’re bleeding profusely and that is putting your life at risk and possibly attracting any other sharks in the area to have an experimental bite, as well.

Having said that, it is possible that if you had a shark as a pet, so it recognised you (and didn’t view you as food), it wouldn’t be much of a risk.

But, what if you accidentally surprised it, or something?

That’s how I feel about big cats – they’re lovely, but if you think of domestic cats, even the very friendly ones can occasionally bite and/or scratch and if that was a lion, or a tiger, that one mistake could be fatal.

Whereas, with dolphins, I think they would be less likely to accidentally hurt you badly and you would generally have more warning that you had a bad tempered/hormonal one (if you did) and the other, more gentle, ones would probably be relatively reliable.

Again, more like humans.

I’m not going to continue this conversation with you, as it is clear that it will go absolutely nowhere and it is, after all, completely off topic.

Vizardlorde.8243:

Tigaseye.2047:

Aylpse.6280:

Dolphins are amount the most violent and dangerous sea creatures (among other things I wont get into)

Trust me when I say the Shark is a safer option for a pet. Thats not saying much becuse the ocean is a horrible place filled with demon spawn that science has passed as “Wildlife”. If it doesn’t sting or bite, it most likely will suck your soul out.

Not saying dolphins are harmless (I know they’re not), but I’m still pretty sure you would be safer with a dolphin pet than a great white shark one.

It’s more that dolphins are surprisingly (to some people), potentially, dangerous; as opposed to sharks being predictably so.

But dolphins murder and kitten for fun, while sharks kill for food.

Some do, but so do some humans.

They also show empathy and help other animals; not just members of their own species.

Judging them based solely on the behaviour of some young males is as unfair as it would be to judge all humans on that basis.

Most sharks kill for food, but some attack humans, even though they apparently don’t really rate us as food.

I don’t know about you, but I know I would feel far safer around a female (or in fact, virtually any) dolphin than I would any shark.

Not that I dislike sharks, at all – I’m just wary of them, in the same way I would be of a tiger, or whatever.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Tigaseye.2047:

BTW, your latest post is a great example of yet another brief complaint.

Was that intentional?

Please scan through the rest of my posts and you shall see your assumption is totally baseless.

Yeah, I was teasing.

I already have, hence my comment.

Teasing is only one word for what you’re doing.

Internet “teasing” is normally known as something else, as I’m sure you’re aware.

Aylpse.6280:

Dolphins are amount the most violent and dangerous sea creatures (among other things I wont get into)

Trust me when I say the Shark is a safer option for a pet. Thats not saying much becuse the ocean is a horrible place filled with demon spawn that science has passed as “Wildlife”. If it doesn’t sting or bite, it most likely will suck your soul out.

Not saying dolphins are harmless (I know they’re not), but I’m still pretty sure you would be safer with a dolphin pet than a great white shark one.

It’s more that dolphins are surprisingly (to some people), potentially, dangerous; as opposed to sharks being predictably so.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Tigaseye.2047:

OK, I’ll answer you, even though all you seem to do, on here, is briefly complain about everything people say.

Lol, what?

Hello pot, this is kettle.

I think we can safely say that I haven’t complained about any genuine (and/or fair)opinion about the game anyone has had and that I rarely say anything briefly.

So, no, I don’t think so.

Of course I will complain, if people are just being unnecessarily hostile to other people’s opinions about the game, but that is not the same thing, at all.

BTW, your latest post is a great example of yet another brief complaint.

Was that intentional?

Sebrent.3625:

Life-tip:
If you get to a point where nothing will change your mind about something that isn’t a moral… you’ve dug yourself a bad hole and are honestly just being stubborn/ignorant.

Your post shows a perception where you think everything should have been already thought up by the developers and the players just led by the hand the whole way.

I’m sorry, but welcome to the real world where what you’re asking for is largely infeasible given the sheer complexity, resource constraints, etc.

Not to mention actual good game design.

Did you even watch the bloody video?

That is often touted as one of the best explanations of this topic … and your reaction is “nothing is ever going to change my mind on this.”

Which begs me to ask … are you some experienced game developer? Or an experienced developer at all? Or even some sort of engineer with experience with construction/development?

What exactly makes you feel so qualified in your belief in how things should be? I’d love to know.

---

As far as it being “bad design” that a given choice is worse than another choice in differing situations … seriously?!

Knowing the ins-and-outs of when the different choices are [sub-]optimal is part of becoming a good player in a game.

They are part of that “knowledge” and “skill” that separate an experienced player from a new player. They are what a new player generally aspires to acquire.

Have I stepped off into the twilight zone?

Are you wanting them to just say “here’s a board with a nail in it… it’s all you’ll ever need because it’s optimal in all situations … and your only option”.

Or are you wanting them to say “hey, you just stepped into PvE where people often stack and cleave down groups of mobs, I’m going to force you to make the right decision because I assume you’re not smart enough to do it on your own”.

Just good grief.

No Sebrent, I am not saying they should say “here’s a board with a nail in it”,

Far, far, from it.

As you would already know, if you had actually read (and understood) what I have said (both here and elsewhere); instead of trying to undermine everything you think other people are thinking, without even bothering to find out exactly what that is, or why they’re thinking it.

I find it pretty disturbing that you are a game developer, with your general attitude towards game players/customers, apparent complete lack of attention to detail and lack of understanding of balance.

I just hope I don’t ever, accidentally, end up playing any games you have designed, as I am pretty sure it would not be a good experience.

Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582:

Please, please, don’t start with the WoW talk…

OK, I’ll answer you, even though all you seem to do, on here, is briefly complain about everything people say.

I view it as very relevant, as hunter in WoW was also viewed as inferior and was everyone’s favourite target in Cata (around the time this game was being developed…).

Rangers in GW2 are more than somewhat reminiscent of WoW Cata hunters, quite frankly.

They’re WoW Cata hunters, with far too much focus on melee (to the complete detriment of their far more class-appropriate starting weapon), a worse pet and a glitchy, mage-style AOE.

Then, some changes were made to WoW hunter and it became far less bad, but is (or was, last time I checked) still only mid-pack in PVP (proving those changes were not overdone).

There was a certain ability which people initially abused in PVP, but that was quickly changed so they couldn’t.

WoW is still far from perfect, as it is (or was, until fairly recently) still far, far, easier to roll something like a DK and casually faceroll virtually anyone in a BG, but still.

That points to the fact that those other heavy armour classes need a nerf, in PVP, to become more on a level with hunter.

The point is, classes can be changed for the better (without being made OP), if devs choose to buckle down and do it and WoW hunters are proof of that.

Games are not designed in a vacuum, it would be naïve to think they were.

Therefore, it is not surprising that ranger in this and hunter in Cata WoW have things in common.

It’s just that, as hunter was improved in WoW, about three years ago, whereas ranger in this game is still stuck where it was, it makes ranger in this game look even more inadequate than it otherwise would.

Sebrent.3625:

@Tigaseye:
Look through the forums … dig through the past several years.

You’ll find this little situation occurs:
(1) The community is largely saying “X” sucks so bad.
(2) Someone tries X and loves it … masters it.
(3) That someone makes videos showing how good they can be with it and how awesome it is.
(4) The community suddenly accepts it.

It’s not always the case with every skill / trait / etc. but it has happened plenty of times.

In WvW, I’d say it depends on what I’m doing and what I need as far as if I want a Ranger or another class. If people still haven’t figured out which classes are ideal for which roles … that’s their own deficiency. GWEN isn’t ideal everywhere. It just has a large enough success rate that the bandwagon has jumped on it.

Thinking is apparently hard … so some/many don’t do it and just go with the bandwagon.

I’m not saying some people can’t master a harder class/spec/traitline/weapon type/whatever and/or find a place in the game in which these harder to master (and/or inferior) things are more suited (or less not suited).

I’m just saying that some of these things are regarded by players as far harder to play, or far less suited to a certain environment, than others (normally, with very good reason) and so, the general consensus is to just avoid them and avoid running with people who use them.

Even if a few of the people, who use them anyway, have managed to master them, against the odds.

It’s still, generally, the view of most people that that person, who is managing pretty well with a hard (or inferior) thing, would do even better if they used an easy (or superior) one.

…and let’s face it, they’re probably, generally, right, aren’t they?

We’re never going to agree here, as (rather worryingly, given the profession stated in your sig, IMO) you think the way to challenge players is to create intentional imbalance between classes and specs and so on and allow players to choose the harder things, only if they want to rise to that challenge.

Whereas, I simply don’t think that, as you know.

I think everything should be properly balanced and fair, especially in a game that involves PVP and any challenge, for more experienced players, should be equally provided within each thing.

I also don’t think players should be forced to abandon their favourite class, or spec, in order to play a certain part of the game optimally.

All classes and specs should work equally well in all game modes.

That may be a pipe dream, to an extent, but that is what the aim should be.

As we have such differing views, I can’t see us getting anywhere.

Also, while I can agree that viewing players who (intentionally, or unintentionally) choose the harder/inferior thing as bad (as some people seem to do) is totally unfair, I can’t agree with you that it is stupid of people to view harder choices as bad choices, in a team situation.

Selfish, quite possibly, but not stupid.

That is just normal and natural, as they are thinking about what is almost certainly going to work out best for the team (and therefore, ultimately, for themselves).

While you think like this about your players and blame them for anything they think and feel, that you don’t happen to agree with, you will never reach your full potential as a developer (or anything else).

Understanding the way your customer base thinks and not blaming them for their views, especially when those views are formed by your own (quite possibly mistaken, sometimes) decisions, is everything.

Yes some people can be sheep-like, we all know that, but just dismissing everyone’s opinions as being sheep-like, just because they don’t happen to fit in with your own views, is a mistake.

Cuchullain.3104:

PS If you do go into WvW as a ranger, get used to being called a ’rallybot" meaning every time the enemy rallies from the downed state due to the death of a player that fired at them, it will be blamed on you. Get used to people bypassing everyone else to dogpile on you because you are correctly considered an easy kill.

Very true, sadly.

Sebrent, I’m not sure what your problem is, but unless you are a developer of this game and of Rangers in particular (in which case, you should really just come clean and say so), I think it is safe to say you are taking all this way, way, too personally.

This is a feedback forum and we are giving feedback.

No one is “crying”, we (or, at least, most of us) are just trying to tell the truth, as we see it.

Sebrent.3625:

@Tigaseye.2047:
Before you continue making such long posts about how everything should be just as easy / “noob friendly” / etc..

… please take look at this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EitZRLt2G3w

Also, while you want the devs to “remove red herrings” … that assumes they know what all of those are and how to remove them without inhibiting the abilities of those at the higher skill levels.

What is so wrong with letting players have a bit more control? Letting players make mistakes? Let players make choices even if some of those choices are less optimal than others.

Let people us their brains however they want and reap the results.

I didn’t make a post just saying that everything should be “noob friendly”, I made a post saying that they should be equal in other ways, too.

So, everything should also have the same scope for improvement, as well.

I know it was a long post – I said as much myself, but I was trying to directly answer the other poster and also give a more general idea where I was coming from to him/her, specifically.

You didn’t need to read it all, as it clearly wasn’t a general comment, or aimed at you.

Sorry, but nothing will change my mind, on this.

I know exactly where I stand on this subject (and where I have always stood) and that is that choices, in a game, should be equal ones and based on personal preferences.

Not based on “Which will make it easiest for me to win, all the time?”, or “How can I intentionally kitten myself, so I probably lose most of the time?”.

Not based on “Am I a new player?”, or “Am I an experienced player?”.

Your experience (or lack of it) should be expressed via how well you actually play and whether you use your skills at optimal times, or not.

For one thing, most newer players won’t even know that is how it is “designed” to be and will be drawn into making mistakes without even realising it, just to be disappointed later.

That’s not “using your brain”, or having “control”, it’s not even being left to make your own “mistakes”.

That’s just being badly misled by the game, pure and simple – because it presents all the “choices” as equal ones.

There is nothing telling a new player “Don’t pick this, or that class (or traitline, or whatever) if you’re new, because it’s inferior and/or far harder than the others.”.

There is nothing saying “You know we gave you that bow when you started? Well, forget the idea of using that in most group PVE later, as it does far less damage in the stack you will be permanently in.”.

So, most will just pick what they like and then feel at least somewhat betrayed, when they later find out they’re all totally uneven and the supposed “choices” aren’t fair ones.

That is bad design, whichever way you look at it.

Oh and if the devs involved don’t know which are the red herrings, it’s about time they did.

It’s their specific job to know all that stuff.

…and if it’s so overcomplicated that even the people who designed it and are supposed to manage it don’t know what is going on, then really…?

Leo G.4501:

Tigaseye.2047:

If you reduce a game to “noob friendly class a)”, or “hard to play class b)” and expect people to pick accordingly (and ignore their personal preferences), you are removing so much of the potential fun, it’s borderline criminal.

Same goes (to a slightly lesser extent) for things like weapon, spec and even pet choices.

If you’re stuck using classes, specs, weapons and/or pets you don’t like very much, that will reduce the potential fun you could have otherwise had by a heck of a lot.

I can hear where you’re coming from and in some respects, I agree. However that’s just not how the game is made or built. I’d like the game to be changed in various ways and think it could definitely be improved but at the end of the day I also accept the game for what it does right despite its flaws.

You can’t expect the game to be as simple as Axe Signet Warrior. It’s just not going to happen across all professions and specs. Some professions and specs will be harder to play than others while others are drop-dead easy. That’s kind of how the game is designed in a way that if you aren’t that great of a player, you can gravitate to the easier styles. Usually every profession has those types of builds to make play as simple to grasp as possible, but then you also have the more complex and tougher to manage builds like a glass rifle Warrior (by comparison to your Axe sig warrior) which has its own strengths and weaknesses and is tougher to get better performance from. Does that make gameplay bad? (yeah, I know rifle is bad but it can do some crazy ranged sniping which you cannot do with axe/bow) Or does it just provide challenge?

It’s honestly up to the player, I suppose. As for the context of the topic, Ranger does have an easy mode playstyle. It won’t be optimal, just like many other easy mode styles.

You may be right but, in which case, it may well be that I will just have to part company with the game, sooner or later.

I’m already down to just doing WvW – although, I have been doing a lot of it, but I doubt my interest in even that will last forever.

In that case, it’s more that I’m quite interested in gradually learning the strategy (without “cheating” and looking anything up) more than anything.

I’m just not a theorycrafter, or an avid follower of other people’s theorycrafting.

I like games where you choose what you want to play for the right reasons and learn as you play – not just choose the easy/OP choice and try to learn everything before you play, like doing boring homework.

When I first started playing WoW, it had very unequal specs and a complicated talent tree, with so many red herrings it was like a bear trap for new players.

Same with glyphs, to an extent – some were far more useful than others.

Then they gave it an overhaul and all the specs became far more equal and viable, but still retained (or even increased) their individual flavour.

The talent choices became true choices, between equally valid equivalents, with no wrong choices available.

Some people thought that was less interesting and I guess it was in some ways (and/or for the occasional class), but most people thought it was an improvement, for most classes.

So, at that point, the real challenge, for a newer player, was really learning to use all the spells in their spell book.

That was still a challenge and a longer term goal, in itself, as there were a lot of spells to learn and even then, you still had to figure out when best to use them.

That, to me, is far more fun.

As I say, I’m not a theory crafter and I dislike looking stuff up online.

I like learning for myself.

I probably could do it, if my life depended on it, but I’m just not really interested in that side of things.

That’s the side of things I want done for me, in advance.

That is the side I don’t want newer players to have to worry about and older players to feel they have to lecture newer players on.

The whole having to lecture thing just breeds contempt and removes fun, on both sides.

It makes many newer and older players avoid each other, in small PVE groups, whenever possible.

I want equal, interesting, viable choices and to be able to choose what I prefer to play; not what I am forced to choose out of total necessity.

I don’t want to have to work out which is the red herring – I want the devs to get rid of any red herrings for me.

To me, that is their job, not mine (or any other player’s).

Most people just end up looking all these things up, anyway.

So unless you (not you, specifically – anyone) are one of the very few who does it all themselves, with a spreadsheet (and thoroughly enjoys it), what is the point, other than to unnecessarily confuse newer players?

I would say there is none.

I feel like I’ve rambled slightly off topic here…

But, you get the general gist.

Leo G.4501:

TheFantasticGman.9451:

I’m sorry, did I say they work just fine in high level fractals? Nope. I didn’t. They are far from perfect. I have to work much harder on my Ranger to keep the profession mechanic up than I do on say, my guaridan, warrior, thief, or ele.

But nice try.

So you’re saying you want easy-cheeze like Ele camping fire attunement, Warrior hoarding adrenaline or skill spam + stealth + steal.

Not belittling those professions, but Ranger doesn’t get nothing from his profession mechanic. Even if it requires more performance-wise, it doesn’t make the profession or the mechanic bad. It just means it’s not for everyone. Not everybody can manage to play a Mesmer either.

In an ideal game, all the profs would be roughly the same difficulty, have the same new player friendliness and scope for improvement.

This is a game with PVP, after all.

It shouldn’t be far harder to play one class than another, especially in PVP, as that isn’t fair is it?

It might be OK if everyone was only interested in playing classes according to how easy, or hard, they were; but that is not why most people pick a class, in games.

Most people pick a class because they are interested in it.

So, they might have an affinity with pets, or an affinity with magic, for example.

Or they might like archery, or staves.

Or they might like the idea of being a valiant knight, or a barbaric warrior, or a mechanical expert, or whatever…

If you reduce a game to “noob friendly class a)”, or “hard to play class b)” and expect people to pick accordingly (and ignore their personal preferences), you are removing so much of the potential fun, it’s borderline criminal.

Same goes (to a slightly lesser extent) for things like weapon, spec and even pet choices.

If you’re stuck using classes, specs, weapons and/or pets you don’t like very much, that will reduce the potential fun you could have otherwise had by a heck of a lot.

Leo G.4501:

TheFantasticGman.9451:

Actually, I never said I couldn’t keep pets alive. Feel free to reread my posts. I said they die faster in melee, which is true. Not to mention just because you don’t get why people like to play Ranger without the pet doesn’t mean anything. If I was a betting man I’d wager there are players that play Guardian and don’t want to use Virtues. To repeat myself: I can micro manage my pets just fine. If you want to see for yourself, please feel free to come run a lvl 50 fract with me.

Then what’s the problem? lol

So Ranger pets work just fine in high fractals. Scratch that off of the pet “problem” which only leaves WvW zergs. That is definitely a plus for Rangers + pet.

I don’t know, as I have never done a high level fractal, but I doubt very much that they do…

I think it’s safe to say that they, almost certainly, just give the group their buff and then die almost immediately.

The problem is, like someone else was saying, people are letting their egos get in the way, here.

If one person says their pets don’t die, almost everyone else suddenly thinks they have to say it, otherwise they will look like they are a less good player, or something.

Fortunately, I have so little ego in this department that it’s virtually unmeasurable.

I’m more than happy to say I’m still a new to this game and I’m more that happy to tell the whole truth about anything I have noticed about it, including my general observations on pet life spans.

You can ignore me if you want, but I’m not lying.

Why would I lie?

What would I have to gain?

I would not, currently, choose to play Ranger in this game, if I wasn’t just someone who happens to prefer playing hunter in any game, due to liking animals.

People don’t like Rangers in group PVE (and say so, constantly), Rangers are regularly asked to swap to other cases in WvW and when certain WvW guilds advertise for new members, they list a bunch of classes they will accept, but never Ranger.

I don’t do PVP so I can’t comment on that, but I also haven’t found them to be great for soloing, personally.

Not that I have done a lot of it, but still.

I’m still fairly new to this game (as you have probably gathered), but I am a fairly experienced WoW BM hunter and I can tell you that BM Ranger in this game, for me so far, has been far inferior to that.

Admittedly, I’m almost certainly not set-up and/or geared right, but I’m not even referring to that, here.

I’m just talking about the pets.

As I said before, it’s possible that if I slung on a load of healing gear it would be better, as that would stop my pets dying as much, but it wouldn’t make them suddenly get aggro over more than one mob at a time, would it?

I would say it’s perfectly adequate for soloing openworld stuff (assuming you’re a half decent player and/or don’t pull too much at once), but I didn’t enjoy trying to solo a dungeon on it, due to the pet.

Elendur.9342:

Sebrent.3625:

Take a look at the Mesmer Chronomancer.

It has the same illusion and shatter mechanics, but it added an additional F5 shatter as well as adds a new minor trait that gives Alacrity (opposite of Chill for cooldowns).

So it’s fairly safe to assume that we’ll be keeping our pets.

If you look at the article where they discuss the creation of the Chronomancer, they make a single comment about Ranger’s Druid Elite Specialization.

https://www.guildwars2.com/en/news/hidden-arcana-creating-the-chronomancer/

While the ranger’s druid elite specialization was designed around its ability to wield a staff, the chronomancer’s concept and flavor were developed ahead of its weapon choice

So our specialization will need an equipped staff to work?

wow, that really sucks… And now I am afraid that the staff skills will be pet commanding skills… I hope they don’t do that.

I know.

I absolutely hate the way they tie specific weapons and gear into specific traitlines in this game.

That’s not true flexibility, or choice; it’s inflexibility, false choice and a virtual dictatorship.

“If you like the look of x traitline/spec, you must use y weapon(s) and z gear.”.

That’s if you’re even given that “choice”, at all, as in things like group dungeon paths it’s basically Zerker gear and melee weaps (and whatever traitline and utility build suits that best), or go home, most of the time.

It’s awful, frankly.

At least in WoW, you can only choose bow, or gun and either works fine for any set-up and you know that going in.

So, if you don’t like guns, or bows, you just pick another class.

Whereas, in this, you think you will be able to use a bow, as you get one from the start and then it later transpires that you can’t (or shouldn’t) for many things.

So disappointing.

No, Sebrent, I’m saying that all the classes and specs should have equal accessibility and scope for both new players and more experienced ones.

You should never have to move classes, or specs, according to your level of skill.

Sorry for the brief reply, I will try to reply more later – don’t have enough time, now.

ETA: Also, just quickly – I’m not talking about gear here, I’m just talking about specs/traitlines.

I get that very glassy gear won’t be for everyone (or for all situations).

Sebrent.3625:

I have the same hope as you when it comes to the Specializations. Hopefully we can get to the point where an (A,B,C) spec’d Ranger has a low skill floor and low skill ceiling designed for beginners while an (A,B,D) or (X,Y,Z) spec’d Ranger has a high skill floor and high skill ceiling … unfriendly to beginners but much more conducive to higher levels of play.

No, that would be awful.

All specs should be as equal, viable and “noob” friendly and “pro” friendly as possible.

A “noob” spec, or a “pro” spec, would be a total disaster for so many reasons…

Teladis.1309:

Sebrent.3625:

My pet tanks stuff just fine for me … but the thing is, you need to be able to handle the times when mobs decide to still go for you. This isn’t wow where your pet spams a taunt on auto-cast.

There is a lot more work required in order to properly micromanage the pet in GW2 and play off of it.

It helps to understand the AI in the game too.
AI targeting takes into account proximity, toughness, and (I believe) vitality of available targets to pick its target. So if your pet is tankier than you and closer, they are much more likely to be targeted … also better at tanking. However, the tradeoff is that your tanky pets don’t do as much as the non-tanky pets.

A nice middle-ground is the drakes and canines. They aren’t super glassy, but they have solid Power. Drakes are great in PvE because they can cleave. Their AOE applies weakness as well which further improves their survivability.

That sounds nice, like i don’t want it to be mind boring easy like wow hunters. Having to think, stop attacking, let pet damage, play passive for a bit. Sounds like a ton of fun to me.

I am about to hit 30 with my ranger, (ya for nothing but free time).

A challenge is fine, but be warned:

If there are 8 mobs, at least 7 of them will go straight for you and keep going for you, while your pet maybe hits one of them, or maybe runs around slowly and mindlessly hitting nothing, for what feels like ages.

Teladis.1309:

If that is the case it just sounds like this game is not for me. I already struggle with necromancer pets not working.

But i seem to get mix answers on this.

Well, yes, this is kind of where I found myself, as well.

The pet AI is really pretty bad (it’s just mob AI, apparently) and it’s not even been made up for with increased pet stats; so, anything other than tanky pets normally drop dead within about 2 or 3 secs.

You can probably tank bosses, in dungeons where you can get to them without having to fight too many mobs first.

Some people say pets don’t drop dead quickly, but I have no idea how they manage it?

By calling the pet back 24/7?

In which case, that isn’t going to help much for soloing, is it?

If you spec BM, you can lessen the delay on pet swaps (which is, obviously, useful for soloing), but other than that, it doesn’t seem to make much difference.

Maybe if you wear a ton of healing gear it helps?

But, as I only did a few dungeons and then gave up and just did WvW, I only have Zerker gear (and now, finally, Soldier), so I wouldn’t know about that.

If it really is just about the gear, it’s annoying, frankly.

How many gear and weapon sets are we expected to have to buy and store for one class?

It just feels like lazy, sub-par design (if you’re used to better).

Teladis.1309:

wait so the pet can’t become a super tank for you if you spec into beast?

No, definitely not, from what I have seen.

It can’t even tank one mob properly, half the time.

I get that you are probably trying to say that it shouldn’t be able to, but I am seriously struggling to see where Ranger’s strength does lie, in this game, if anywhere?

Because, so far (both from my own observations and other people’s [non-rangers] general comments), it would appear pretty much nowhere.

Pin sniping aside…

Hyper Cutter.9376:

DeadlySynz.3471:

In PvP this is true; however, in PvE and WvW this is not. PvE bosses could care less whether your pet has 6 into BM, they’ll one shot them none the less. The same goes with WvW zergs, the pet is mere cannon fodder. Remember, any time you have to call your pet back to avoid damage, your losing “40%” of your damage. That is why they suck.

I take 6 in beast mastery and Natural Healing on several of my rangers (including the one that I exclusively do dungeons/fractals with), and my pets very seldom die unless I get careless and don’t pay attention to their HP.

I like having the axe and greatsword traits in beast mastery (I generally run axe/horn and greatsword in dungeons), if only the greatsword trait wasn’t in the same tier as Natural Healing.

I also take 6 in BM, because I played BM hunter in WoW (so, wanted to stick with that, partly to compare) and my pets still die way too fast.

I don’t really do dungeons, anymore (didn’t enjoy the way the game design makes most people play them, or some people’s attitudes), but anything except the tankier pets still die(d) way too easily to even bother with (aside from for initial buffs), in both dungeons and WvW.

I just use drakes in WvW.

I agree, in general, but my main reason for bothering with ranger, at all, is the pet; so, I don’t want it removed.

I want it improved (or, at the very least, sped up and toughened up).

LB skill 4 should be swapped out for a regular, player/mob targeted multishot.

ProtoMarcus.7649:

Lack of AoE
Axes, Torch, TRAPS, SPIRITS, Muddy Terrain, Entangle, GS is a PBAoE

Shouldn’t have to use specific weaps for a decent AOE.

Bows should be our go-to weaps, as rangers and longbow should have a player/mob targeted AOE.

Not just a buggy, ground targeted, one.

Bad Pet AI
*Bad player micro-management

Rubbish.

It’s far worse than pet AI is in WoW and even ANet have said it is just based on mob AI (so, very basic).

If our pet is dead
Bad player micro-management (again)

Again, rubbish.

If some of your pets die within 2 or 3 secs, that is not the ranger’s fault.

Rangers would do virtually zero DPS, if they tried to micro manage their pets, like they’re delicate 2 year old children in a busy supermarket.

Again, WoW pets are far superior in this way, as they have AOE damage reduction (and the hunter has Heal and Revive Pet [including an instant one on a CD, on a certain pet spec/all pets on BM hunter]) and everyone knows it, including ANet.

I would say avoid ranger ATM, if I were you, unless you have a strong affinity for the class and/or pet that will make up, somewhat, for their deficiencies and other people’s (general) lack of appreciation of them.

I may be missing something, but I’m not sure they’re even that good for soloing dungeons?

As the pet only seems to be able to hold the aggro of one mob at a time (if that…) and not all mobs are skippable.

Ehecatl.9172:

Bran.7425:

It is playing to that ‘strength’ of the ranger that got the pets an across the board nerf in damage (which they didn’t really need in PvE/WvW, spvp was arguable) and with the addition defense they are looking at giving to both ranger and the pet they might very well do it again.

Oh, at this rate I’m almost positive it’ll get nerfed into the ground. Anet caved hard to the tears of the community about turrets and obliterated that build to the point it’s not usable in any game mode. According to quite a few responses to the different threads on the matter the community is targeting us next.

We shouldn’t dwell too much on possible future nerfs. I’d rather try to be optimistic.

“The community”, in most games that have them, seem to try to target hunters/rangers, because we’re an easy target and/or they want us to remain so.

I’ve said this before, but if rangers are OP, how come in WvW, everyone tells you to switch to other profs, all the time?

How come they NEVER tell you to switch to ranger?

How come they target ranger, before most other profs around the ranger, to casually burn down?

How come, when I see another ranger, when I’m in a group, I know it will be a quick kill?

People want it every way.

They don’t like rangers (and want them nerfed) when they’re being sniped by one, but view them as virtually useless, when a ranger is on their own team.

If I didn’t like pets, I wouldn’t even be bothering with ranger, at all, in this game.

Because it’s rubbish, in most situations and everyone tells you they view it as such.

Doesn’t sound like a class that needs nerfing, does it?

Reworking to be better and more flexible, yes; but not nerfing.

Even in WoW, where hunter is far better than ranger is here, it’s still only mid-pack in PVP…

If the problem would be fitting it all into the traitline, some of the benefits could just come passively by choosing the spec.

Or putting enough points into the BM traitline, or however they’re doing this…

I think it’s their job to work out the maths and make everything fair and balanced.

It’s only our job (if we have a job at all, as customers) to come up with the general ideas.

ITA it should be improved and be made far more pet-focussed.

lordkrall.7241:

Of course it is possible. But should they really have focused on rebuilding the whole profession from the ground up, rather than giving it some new stuff? It is highly unlikely that they would do both after all, seeing as that would mean putting way more time and effort into a single profession, which isn’t really all that smart.

Actually, it kind of is, in the case of a class like hunter/ranger, as (from what I understand) they are the most attractive first class for new players (mainly because of the pet).

More (happy) new players, presumably = more money for ANet.

TheFantasticGman.9451:

Cuddy.6247:

Pets don’t suck. Ranger players, on the other hand, do. With specializations it will be easier to spec into Beast Mastery line. Anyone who’s ever kittened about their pet has obviously never specced 6 into Beast Mastery and saw the results of giving love to your pet. Or they refuse to use the Heel/Stow function in trying to manage combat/ooc scenarios.

Cool story, bro. Yeah, pet’s suck. That’s why so many complain. Sure, if it was just a few, then we could write them off as bads, but it’s been legions of people complaining in the Ranger subforum and in the CDI over the past 2+ years. You missed the CDI you say? Perhaps you should go read through the 66 pages. And perhaps, while you’re at it, go back through the Ranger subforum and read all the threads about Pet Suckage. They acknowledge it in the CDI and admitted (Jon Peters did if IIRC) they won’t/can’t make them better because they’re tied (meaning they use the same code) to general Mob AI. So, that means they have to be decoupled (use diffrerent code) from Mob AI and they said, again in the CDI, that it would simply be too much work to do that so they will continue to band-aid it. I’m not holding my breath it is going to be any better in HoT…. What I do believe is possible is to have an Elite Specialization that outright replaces our F1-F4 with pet specific buffs. Meaning, you chose a bear for F1 you get toughness buff, jugar for f2 you get a damage buff, etc. That I do see happening… At least I see it happening after certain Devs leave Anet.

Surely all they need to do is give (all of) them more vitality and/or toughness and a little more self healing?

I would say give the ranger a heal pet ability, instead of upping the pet’s self heal, but I’m not sure where you would put it, with the current set-up?

Then we could choose which pet we wanted to use based on preference and/or the other abilities it brings; rather than either bringing a tanking pet, constantly, or just expecting pets to die, almost immediately.

It’s all very well saying remove the pet entirely, or limit it only to the BM line, but the former would upset a lot of people who chose ranger for the pet and the latter would just force all rangers, who like pets, to spec BM and would also mean the devs probably wouldn’t even bother to try to improve pets.

As it would be too tempting to just sweep BM and its pet under the proverbial carpet…

BM should give you an even stronger pet, on top of the perfectly adequate pet that the other specs/traitlines should give you.

It shouldn’t be the only way to have a decent pet, let alone the only way to have a pet, at all.

Of course, in WoW, they have reduced damage from AOE effects (and hunter has both Heal Pet and Revive Pet).

That is really what they should have in this game, too.

But, upping their general resilience and healing ability would still help a lot.

I don’t like it. :/

Think I would prefer a fully bare chest, with more rugged clothes (skins and furs, or whatever), in a kind of barbaric style, than this.

This just looks like he forgot a piece of his armour while getting dressed, or had to leave the house suddenly, due to a fire…

ETA: Knew I’d seen something like it somewhere before…

Robbie Williams, Let Me Entertain You (decided not to link to it, as some people might not like it).

Don’t get me wrong, Robbie was pretty hilarious in that video, but still.

Jkar.5329:

Personally, my complaints are not based on the traits themselves, as a lot of the previous ones have been merged and new ones have been added, and I don’t mind having only 3 traits per tier either, if they are meaningful.
What I’m REALLY mad about is how they plan to cut out SO MANY options for character customization with the new system.

Example: if they would just reduce the number of traits to 3 per tier in the current system, the possible combinations for each specialization would be 105.
JUST by locking the tier of traits (can only choose 1 adept/1 master/1 grandmaster) the combinations fall down to 18 for each specialization.

From 105 to 18 options.
For each specialization.
And without counting all the choices that will get cut off by the new limit of 3 active specializations (down from the current 5).

Seems a pretty legit reason to complain to me.

I get what you’re saying, but if they’re not able to properly balance a large number of options/combinations of options, then surely it would be better to have fewer, more balanced, ones?

Remember, they not only have to try to balance these options/combinations with each other, but also with all the other options/combinations the other specs and classes have.

I mean, how many possible combinations is that? A lot…

I haven’t watched the video of them discussing it and I am certainly no expert in how all this works (far from it), but I am slightly concerned (from what other people have said) that people will, basically, be forced to use certain weapon types to get the full use out of any traitline.

I hate that idea.

I don’t think you should have to choose a traitline based on your weapon choice (or vice/versa).

I think all weapon choices should, ideally, be equally valid in all traitlines.

I may have misunderstood what people were saying (or they may have misunderstood, I guess), but still.

The problem is that it is clear that some people view the main skill, in a game like this, as being in the choices you make before you even actually start (physically) playing.

So, of course, some of these type of people will try to cling-on to the advantages they have from the existing imbalances, even though other people can just look up the metas and copy, if they want to, anyway.

It depends what people are complaining about.

What really matters, in a multi-player game, is that all the classes, specs, traitlines, individual traits, skills, utilities and weapon type choices are as fair and equal as it is humanly possible to make them.

The last thing you want is for any one of those things to be viewed the “meta” (or as virtually useless), as that is not real choice.

So, if people are complaining that a certain class, or spec, or traitline, or trait, looks as though it will be OP, or virtually useless, compared with the other equivalent choices, then that is a very good thing.

If, however, they are just insisting that people should be allowed to make sub-par choices and/or that their OP choice should continue to exist as the optimum (so they can continue to have an unfair advantage over everyone else), then those complaints are obviously not fair, or valid and should, therefore, be ignored.

Pockethole.5031:

Tigaseye.2047:

But, even beautiful gets boring, eventually, if there is no real substance under the surface.

so it’s easy to hop from playing one game to another.
guess why im not in gw2 right now?
im playing maplestory. because they got new damage skin at an event, so i made an angelic buster, prepared her with nx (about 50 euros in my phonebill to come, and depending on wednesday cash shop update, +50 euros more. fun has a cost. SECRET TRUTH: GW2 IS TOO DARK GAME – like graphically dark. games are traditionally CONTRASTIC. thats what gw2 is missing. WoW is dark as well but still flashier than GW2. (just think about draenei, orc, goblin skin colors. mounts. contrast.)

so yea im just playing maple its not hard to leave 3d and do 2d. reasons above.
THIS, IS WHAT IM DOING

Well, I don’t really view GW2 as dark.

I think it’s pretty colourful, in fact.

WoW is probably darker, ATM, as the latest xpac is quite masculine (snow, lava, purplish tinted zones, Orcs…).

But, I guess GW2 is darker than a very cartoony game, yes.

Lazaar.9123:

Tigaseye.2047:

Kal Spiro.9745:

Whatever they play, it’s not Ranger.

They probably do, but in nice little private PVE groups, where they are “allowed” to play ranged and not forced to permastack and melee.

It’s probably a lot of fun.

You have the power to do that too by creating your own nice little private PVE group.

I guess I have the power, but unfortunately not the inclination.

My point was really that you simply won’t learn a lot about how the group elements of this game and its various classes etc. feel in them, to newer players, without running a lot of PUGs (that others have made).

As most new players probably don’t make their own groups.

Made mine slightly larger than min size – can’t remember exactly where on the scale it was, though?

I know she’s bigger than a lot of the other Asura I see around, though.

Also, chose the “normal” type build, rather than the thinner one.

I kind of think of her as a humanoid version of a small dog (like a Bichon Frise, or something) and didn’t want her to be the kind of extremely small, delicate dog you have to worry about accidentally treading on. xD

Kal Spiro.9745:

Whatever they play, it’s not Ranger.

They probably do, but in nice little private PVE groups, where they are “allowed” to play ranged and not forced to permastack and melee.

It’s probably a lot of fun.

tramwajarz.2369:

After reading all the posts filled with no respect to anyone, people entitled to have a spot in parties even though they don’t match requirements, people that demand to cater to new/bad players like it’s a job I get the feeling nothing is going to change. The mentality of so many people is broken to the level of socialism.

Do you even know what socialism is?

I doubt it.

Try at least googling it, before you mention it again, please.