Guild Wars 2

Blude.6812:

Yep. They said it was a storage issue and won’t be addressing it.

Unbelievable.

Literally.

Hepatolith.6389:

Because you need an insane amount of storage to safe 40 pet names from every ranger ever created

Seriously?!

Have you ever played WoW?

It’s 10 years old, for goodness sake and there has never been an issue with this.

Yeah, it’s ridiculous.

Maybe ANet need to hire a few more staff, if they can’t even keep on top of something as (presumably) simple as this?

When Commanders in WvW start telling people to switch to their Rangers from their other profs, then I will entertain the idea that Rangers are overpowered.

As we all know, the opposite is the case, ATM.

That means we’re underpowered/lacking in survivability; NOT overpowered.

ETA: Right this second, yet another Commander on TS3 is instructing people to dump their Rangers and switch to practically any other prof they have.

That says it all.

Bran.7425:

SirWarriant.2319:

“nerfs we could tolerate”

Really, we are already one of the worst off classes and finally buffed up to semi usefulness after 2 years of being in the gutter. We have like 2 reliable builds and you want us nerfed. K then

Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit is it? Either that or you just skim an feel the need to be part of the discuss, only you really haven’t added anything.

How did he show he didn’t comprehend the OP properly?

Seems like a perfectly reasonable reply, to me.

Too reasonable, in fact.

BTW, if you’re actually for real (which I doubt), you should learn that the way to counter totally unreasonable demands is to not capitulate and in this case, to make some (reasonable) demands of your own.

Not to try to figure out how best to capitulate…

To be fair to the OP, at least s/he’s not playing a heavy armour class, saying that rangers are a “bad” class when they are on his/her side and then still whining when an enemy one manages to kill him/her, as most of these people are.

DaShi.1368:

Anything to reduce the negative consequences to teammates from Point Blank Shot would be great. Overall, I’d like to see less reliance on Longbow and an improvement of melee weapons. Getting rangers to use their melee weapons more, might make them more desirable for dungeon groups.

No, they should un-nerf the damage of ranged weapons to make them “desirable for dungeon groups” and also, ideally, design the dungeons and/or general mechanics to be far less stack reliant.

Stacking for everything is a horrible, restrictive, boring design.

Honestly, I find it utterly unbelievable that anyone would even suggest that Rangers shouldn’t use bows.

Ranger – the clue is in the name, for goodness sake.

We should be able to use them all the time, with no penalty, just as we can in other games.

Vinegaroon.4369:

Get rid of the pet and turn Ranger into a stand alone class, instead of having a garbage class mechanic.

I would leave the game if they did this.

I play Ranger/Hunter for 2 things: pets and bows.

If I can’t use either of those, I would rather either give up, or (somewhat reluctantly) go back to a game where I can.

jcbroe.4329:

The game isn’t balanced around knuckledraggers and mouthbreathers that complain the loudest.

Unfortunately, I suspect that it is.

In WoW, for example, hunters wear mail (not leather), we have a proper disengage (not a 2 foot joke one) and our damage with ranged weaps is not nerfed.

…and yet, still, playing a DK in PVP is like falling off a log (i.e. super easy) compared with playing hunter.

So, I can only imagine the utter joke that is, supposedly, “balance” in this game.

Yeah, isn’t it funny how enemy rangers are, supposedly, OP and yet, when you try to do WvW, you virtually always get (normally politely) asked to retire your Ranger (as they’re, apparently, virtually useless) and bring virtually any other prof (ideally, heavy armour) instead.

Isn’t it funny how enemy Rangers are, supposedly, OP and yet, when you do a dungeon you get told that “Rangers aren’t meant for dungeons.” and that “New players shouldn’t play Ranger.”.

Isn’t it funny how enemy Rangers are, supposedly, OP due to using ranged weapons and yet, you are told by people on your own side that ranged weapons are virtually useless, in most situations, due to them having far worse damage than melee weaps and that you should, therefore, use melee weaps whenever possible.

Isn’t it funny how enemy Rangers are, supposedly, OP and yet, by all accounts, Rangers on your own side are so underpowered and lacking in survivability that they should go home/switch to another prof whenever possible.

Isn’t it funny…

Seems to me (and it’s exactly the same situation in WoW with Warriors and DKs), that people who never like to lose, obviously, choose to play profs which are OP and have high survivability.

Then, because they are people who can’t handle ever losing, if they do occasionally lose to a Ranger, they simply whine to high heaven and demand endless nerfs.

All the while, these very same people still see nothing wrong in, simultaneously, telling everyone on their own side that Rangers are useless and that they should swap to a “good” prof.

ANet, wake up and smell the coffee, for goodness sake.

We’re not OP, we’re severely underpowered, especially when we use bows.

Otherwise, why are we constantly being told by people on our own side to not use bows (our natural weapon of choice) and to switch to another “good” prof, if possible?

My recent guides on Ranger have been “Forget bows, just use melee weaps.”, “Don’t bring a Ranger to WvW, they’re virtually useless, bring another class.”, “Rangers aren’t meant for dungeons.”, “New players shouldn’t play Ranger.” and a few other comments on map chat/TS3 that are too offensive to mention here…

Obviously, these aren’t actual guides, just other player’s opinions, but especially given that the official GW2 guide specifically says we are bow specialists, I’m not a happy bunny, at all, to learn that that is incorrect (in most people’s opinions) and that we are considered virtually useless in virtually all situations, apart from possibly soloing.

Test.8734:

When making grind, they don’t have to worry about making content fun. When making grind, they don’t really have to worry about making it polished. They can just give people stuff to grind for, and that’s it.

Yeah, except if they do, some people will just say “No thanks.” and either leave, or play far less, or only play on a certain (lower) level.

I don’t really have a problem with grinding for purely cosmetic rewards, as long as the grind is open to all.

I do have a problem with grinding for stat, or enhancement upgrades, as that is just pure gear grind (however much ANet may try to say it isn’t) which some people will inevitably view as compulsory (even if ANet say it isn’t).

The problem is, from what I have observed as a relatively new player, a portion of the playerbase have turned dungeons into a horrendous borefest of skip>stack>melee>skip>stack>melee and simply won’t allow anyone to try to play them differently, even if their prof and weaps suggest that they should.

As that is deemed to be less efficient (whether it actually is, or not).

That is what grinding for stuff does to some people and sadly, as the most grind-obsessed (and therefore, experienced), they are the ones who end up setting the rules.

It makes them look for the most efficient way, or more likely a way that one person has at one point decided is most efficient for them (whether it actually is for everyone, or not); rather than the ways which are the most enjoyable to play/replay.

If the first time you try to play a path you find it boring, due to the repetitive and totally predictable way other people force you to play it, there is something seriously wrong somewhere…

No content should be boring and predictable the first time you play it.

Seems to me that the real challenge for ANet is to create interesting content, where it is simply not possible for players to reduce it to this level of exclusivity and dictatorial, repetitive, tedium.

The content alone should dictate how it should be played (hopefully, in an interesting and varied way); not a few bullish, overly obsessed players.

1. A far bigger selection of weapon skins, which are directly buyable with gems (as opposed to a low RNG chance from chests).

2. A bigger selection of outfits and armour skins.

3. Baby animal minis.

I find it quite surprising that there are none currently available (even on the TP), as I think almost everyone likes baby animal pets; whereas, miniature versions of NPCs etc. are possibly slightly more of a niche market.

You could bring back the ones that were available last spring (I think?) and add a couple more for those who already have them.

4. More separate pieces of clothing and accessories (like boots and backpack covers etc.).

Outfits and full armour skins are great, as they create an often themed and/or cohesive look, but I think people are more likely to buy a reasonably priced piece of clothing, or an accessory, than a whole outfit, or even a full armour skin.

Not only are they more affordable, but with a whole outfit there may be elements of it you don’t so much like (and can’t hide) and even with a full armour skin, which you can break up into pieces if you want, people may feel it is not worth buying the whole skin just for the boots (for example).

Also, separate accessories obviously allow people to be more creative with mixing and matching individual pieces in their own way.

Race: Human (/any)

Gender: Female (/any)

Profession: Ranger

Weapon: Crimson Lion Short Bow Skin (probably also some other short bows)

Issue : Beautiful skin but, unfortunately, the top of the bow cuts deeply into the back of the char’s head as she runs.

Comments: I think this is a fairly important issue, as far as this kind of thing goes, as it breaks the feeling of “immersion” if you constantly see a weapon cutting into your char’s head in such an obvious way.

I know some people think stuff like this is trivial, in general.

But this is after all an extremely visual/style-based game, which charges us real money for gold to buy these vanity skins (or for keys to open chests in the hope of getting one).

As such, they could reasonably be viewed as a product in their own right, which we have purchased separately from the game itself.

Therefore, I would imagine quite a lot of other people would think it matters that they have been properly designed and tested, at least to basic standards, before being put on sale.

Possible Solutions: Maybe you could angle the bow a little more, so that the top of it ends over the char’s shoulder, rather than directly above his, or her, head?

Alternatively, maybe it would be possible for the bow to be made to not lean as far forward as it currently does, as the char runs?

Thank you for your time.

Tree.3916:

@OP
Problem: “I spend too much gold”

Solution: Stop spending gold. Write down things that you impulsively want to buy and the date you discovered the item. Wait 1 week, if you still want that item, buy it.

Edit: I see people talking about his gold earning rate. This is besides the point the OP made. Their problem is not earning gold. Their problem is the lack of restraint when posed with an impulse desire.

It’s not entirely beside the point, because if he could earn more gold, his spending would obviously not be as much of an issue.

The real point, as I say, is this is a non sub-based game, so of course they will try to tempt people to spend more real money and the way you do that is by cash-starving people in-game and dangling shiny baubles in front of them.

Seishiro.7468:

Tigaseye.2047:

eithinan.9841:

I noticed three things here. First is 50 heavy bags is kinda low for 5-8 hours of WvW play, maybe reroll Guardian or Necro. Second, don’t spend if you want to save. Third, 5-8 hours per day is a lot of time spent in game.

I would only really worry about that last thing.

Shouldn’t have to reroll to play a game effectively.

All profs should be equally viable.

all profs are viable, just at other things. If they were all exactly equal, they wouldn’t be 8, but rather 1 profession ;P

Simply not true.

Other games manage to make all classes/profs viable in every type of play.

No, you will never have complete equality, where you have differences, but the inequality in this game is bad, comparatively speaking.

For example, I was never, ever told that hunters “aren’t for dungeons” in WoW; whereas, I have been told exactly that, re. rangers, in GW2.

….and then, I do WvW and hear that rangers are bad for that, too, most of the time (from a reasonable-sounding guy).

It’s shoddy design and that is not good enough.

eithinan.9841:

I noticed three things here. First is 50 heavy bags is kinda low for 5-8 hours of WvW play, maybe reroll Guardian or Necro. Second, don’t spend if you want to save. Third, 5-8 hours per day is a lot of time spent in game.

I would only really worry about that last thing.

Shouldn’t have to reroll to play a game effectively.

All profs should be equally viable.

Well, to be fair, we don’t pay a sub, so inevitably they will try to cash starve us for everything other than the necessities (and perhaps, the occasional luxury).

Otherwise, how else do they make money?

Having said that, as a new player (to this – not to MMOs in general) I absolutely loathe doing dungeons in this game, as they are either speed runs (skip>stack>melee>skip>stack>melee>commit suicide out of complete frustration and/or boredom) full of rude, obnoxious, opinionated idiots; or “everyone welcome” affairs full of well-meaning, but ultimately misguided, people trying to “teach” new players how to play in that very boring, restrictive way…

So, I feel excluded from PVE and as I have no interest in full-on PVP, especially as a ranger in this game (where ranged damage is penalised), that leaves me with WvW and world bosses, which are not going to keep me engaged for long.

…and if I already know I won’t be engaged for much longer, why would I want to pour much more cash into the game?

Arkinos.7245:

Black Lion Chests are basically Anet way to cash in on stupidity.

There is nothing in these chests that is actually worth the price of the keys considering the average drop rates.

But since some people dont bother researching that and/or just like to gamble Anet gets to make some easy money without exploiting the majority of customers that is semi intelligent.

Basically: Fools pay the game for not so foolish people and get some fun with the lottery.

I call that a win for everybody.

Really?

I call it a lose for everybody – except, possibly, ANet (and even that is arguable, IMO).

I am happy to spend a reasonable amount of money on a game I play frequently and have already spent quite a lot.

Although, admittedly, that was with the idea of an initial investment, to an extent.

However, I am not prepared to gamble with bad odds and I am not happy that others are being tempted to.

It’s obvious why it is a lose for the gamblers – but the reason I feel it is also a lose for someone like me, is that (perhaps, because they feel they can make more from gambling?) there is a lack of choice of items to buy outright in the gemstore.

I wish they would just offer a bigger range of items and sell everything for a (reasonable) set price.

For example, I would love to be able to buy some baby animal minis, but there are none available ATM and I would love a good selection of bow skins and things like boot skins (on their own – not necessarily in an outfit).

But, again, there are either none, or virtually none (in the case of boots).

I understand that they may feel that if they provide a lot of different items, at the same time, that may mean more work for less money per item; but I think they’re a long way from that situation, currently.

TBH, I would prefer a sub model, plus a vanity item store, as opposed to feeling they are trying to scam people like this.

Tigaseye.2047:

Race: Human (/any)

Gender: Female (/any)

Profession: Ranger (probably also /any)

Weapon: Zenith Recurve Bow (but probably also applies to many others)

Issue : Smoky/cloudy weapon effect cuts, very obviously, through to the front of character; both in the face area and also in the thigh area.

Possible Solutions: Maybe it is possible to, somehow, make character models take precedence over weapon effects?

Alternatively, limiting the weapon effect to the side facing away from the character (at least when the weapon is stowed) would, presumably, also work.