I’ll just be rolling a trap ranger build, that has a higher DPS than the current BM build with still good sustained healing.
Alongside that, I will running a cheese build thief that has high DPS and survival without going glass cannon, just cuz I want a break from a class that gets so little attention, and receives only detrimental updates to this point (Damage nerf from beta, Shortbow attack speed nerf, Empathic Bond Nerf, and now Pet Damage nerf).
This is a good discussion, I hope this keeps up. I would say ANet can’t ignore us forever, however we as a community have been in full agreement about certain ranger issues for awhile with no acknowledgement ever. So…. I guess all we can do is keep it up.
Anyhow, it’s the worse idea in the world, especially from a pvp standpoint. You can’t take a class with 2 viable builds (with only 1 being used) and decide to nerf it with no compensation. All they are doing is hurting the profession and the metagame.
Well this went a bit offtopic, but I’m intrigued.
Without Empathic Bond, rangers really do have extremely subpar condition removal. It isn’t that Signet of Renewal is bad, it’s that it’s function as a stun break instead of some other added utility is a hindrance. While on paper, it looks good for bar compression, but in reality, it forces a player to use the active either as a cleanse or a stun break, meaning that if it is the only stun break and cleanse you take, you have no access to either of those functions afterwards.
Basically, if you want to use SoR as a cleanse, then you have to take Lightning Reflexes as a stun break so that you don’t screw yourself over by burning SoR as a stun break. Also, conditions are so easily stacked and maintained by individual professions in this game that I’d be willing to say any cleanse longer than 20-30s in unreasonable, as condition builds are constant pressure builds.
Healing Spring is also a problem because you are now forced to choose between using it as a heal or as a cleanse, and the heal takes priority, because using the longest cooldown heal a ranger has access to as a cleanse is only going to result in getting you killed because at some point you’ll actually need that heal and it will be on cooldown because it was used as a cleanse.
And we’re talking about a meta where Guardians, Eles, and Engis, all prevalent classes, can trait and/or take full advantage of soldiers runes, and get consistent cleanses through extremely spammable, strong utility options. And/or, in the Eles case, being able to switch to a useful attunement while removing conditions (when traited properly).
Even thieves have a very consistently usable range of viable cleanses when using the right weapon sets or traited appropriately.
Necromancers have a little less access to removing conditions then the classes I mentioned, but they do have access to full cleanses, one of them being the heal that gets boosted for every condition on them, that are usable on a often enough basis with their naturally high healthpool.
So without Empathic Bond, rangers only really kind of beat Warriors and Mesmers in terms of cleanses, and for Mesmers, it’s only because the build that would utilize cleanses has been deemed not viable.
And it definitely should have NEVER gone the way it did with this most recent SoTG: “Oh yeah, BM rangers”
Devs: “We’re nerfing their pet damage”
SoTG: (paraphrased) “That’s fine, that’s exactly what that class needs. No need to discuss any further, the ranger is out of our hair and no longer relevant, continue talking about the classes we care about.”
Devs: “Moving on”That is a massive show on how unprofessional the cast is…
How unprepared and biased…I mean, if it was a small tweak, like a mild alteration to a few pets dmgs (as in the 10~% life buffs) in a cast with other larger focuses… I wouldn’t care… but I mean since complete profession bias is throughout all of the SoTGs… it’s just a badly casted show.
Granted I paraphrased a lot of that, their actual response was more so something like: “that’s a good change. the ranger build is too strong right now and that’s exactly what it needs.”
No additional follow up or anything. Sorry, I realized I may have added in a little more of what I felt their response said than what was actually said haha.
But yes I agree, it isn’t just this SoTG anyhow, and I’m to the point where I think if the SoTG continues on as it has been, that it is a complete waste of the community’s time as it will never represent a majority of what the playerbase wants discussed, and the chosen players bias is much too strong to serve as a good basis for a balance discussion.
I dont understand why the kitten sotg or game balance is based off these esport kids who only favor spvp, and the entire game is based off whats good in team vs team comp, not how it even affects players in wvwv.
State of the Game via Guild Wars 2 Guru is based off of these people because they are the ones who set it up and want to put the time in. Is the representation broad and without bias? No. And you can go back and watch April’s episode to see how Caed and Grouch get antsy about some things and steer the conversation and talking points based on things they want to bring attention to. Then and now in this episode it’s less a comprehensive objective discussion and more skewed opinions.
Is that bad? Guru has an active shared Ranger community. I know several people are active back and forth between these two forums. It’s just a matter of nobody in SPVP (and SOTG is strictly about SPVP and not any other game aspects) with a Ranger has made themselves known. I’m sure Guru would love to have you.
Just today on Guru, someone asked why SOTG didn’t cover PVE. The answer was: PVE is requested, but no one actually cares to host or organize one. So SPVP SOTG is what we get.
SOTG aside, I don’t understand why ANetcan’t just blog and interact on their own site. I haven’t touched WoW in years, but I still check MMO-Champion just because I’m amazed at the interaction and transparency and frank discussion Ghostcrawler has going.
Battosai, Symbolic, Ovi, Gasmask, and Follidus have been seen in recent tournaments playing ranger, and Battosai has been ranger focused since launch I believe (not sure about the others) as well as contributes to the Arrow to the Knee podcasts.
Follidus (zZz) won one of the last NA tournys, how come he isn’t being invited to the SoTG? What makes Team Paradigm so special that they are part of the core top team that is consistently invited for the SoTGs? Just because they have been around and have hovered around the top, it doesn’t make them the only people that play the game.
It’s almost like Anet don’t want anyone to play ranger anymore.
Things HAVE been consistently getting nerfed since beta for the ranger, with the only exception being that little boost to Maul last balance patch.
I think a strong inductive argument could be made that the devs are trying to get people as furious as they possibly can before they rage to another class, or switch to a different game.
It’s extremely frustrating to see such blatant disregard for equal representation of professions when it comes to skill balance conversations with the devs.
I honestly don’t mind a lack of equal representation, as long as what is discussed is pertinent to and explicit about where the game is headed…
Because lets face it… not every class needs the same amount of attention… and even then, not every patch should be focusing on every class equally…
I’m not defending the SoTG, I think they do a pretty mediocre job at getting passed the shallow sort of ‘we know about these problems and are magically going to fix them…. eventually’
An ideal cast would focus on goals->specifics about how they are looking to achieve it-> the effects you think it will have, positive and negative.
The ‘top tier’ players joining the cast can throw in their two cents about the biggest issues they’ve seen, how they see the dev suggestions effecting the gameplay; with occasional asides about whether they like it or not and why…
Well it’s more of specific examples I’m holding in my head.
Like for instance, just an example more than a specific:
Devs: “Okay, rangers, we’re increasing damage.”
Guests: “Okay.”
Devs: “Moving on….”
Absolutely not every class needs an equal amount of time spent on discussion. But it is a balance discussion, so for the classes that aren’t receiving a focus or aren’t being touched, just a simple statement like: “at this time we aren’t going to be making changes. We feel the class is in a good place right now, and we would like to let the metagame evolve with the changes we do make in the next patch, in order to see what happens before we decide on what to do with this class.”
And it definitely should have NEVER gone the way it did with this most recent SoTG: “Oh yeah, BM rangers”
Devs: “We’re nerfing their pet damage”
SoTG: (paraphrased) “That’s fine, that’s exactly what that class needs. No need to discuss any further, the ranger is out of our hair and no longer relevant, continue talking about the classes we care about.”
Devs: “Moving on”
There really should be one key point that was missed:
Longbow users, stop using your knock on entangled or immobilized, or currently stunned enemies.
I’ve watched so many longbow users mess up other peoples bursts and AoEs, because for whatever reason they just had to hit that 4 key. I guess it knocks the enemy around and makes them feel manly or something.
It’s extremely frustrating to see such blatant disregard for equal representation of professions when it comes to skill balance conversations with the devs.
Respect where respect is due, but Zoose and Phantaram aren’t the only players in this game, and them as well as previous guests on the SoTGs have never done a good job of pressing for more information about classes or topics that they, for all purposes, must have bias against in order to show them such disregard.
And I’m sorry but most people are watching the SoTGs for upcoming balance changes. The information provided about spectator mode changes and custom arenas and this and that could have been accomplished with a typed Q and A, as the majority of players aren’t going to show interest in watching or investing in custom arenas in a game that they don’t feel is balanced.
I think an issue was a miscommunication in beta
Nope, odds say, just like everything Anet did, it was unintentional.
Jaguars auto-critting in stealth probly was a bug.
It never made it into any tooltip and every other feline F2 is bad in comparison…That just let pets be able to be extreme sources of dmg… and since it wasn’t too OP… Anet let it be…
Basically its the story of all of GW2 balancing…
A stream of terrible concepts made it into GW2, and stayed!, because they were too kittening lazy/passionate about their design to actually fix things or realize what good PvP was…
I still don’t understand how it went from guild wars 1 to this…
They better fix the other kitten thats wrong with the class b4 they start nerfing stuff. Pets are 50% of our damage and we have around 30% control over them.Also this better be a split between pve and pvp as pets are kitten in dungeons/wvw.
I think an issue was a miscommunication in beta. Originally most of the ranger’s damage came from the ranger, the pet was like an extra weapon. But pets were pretty fragile and had trouble hitting things. Now pets are too strong, but rangers don’t really do much damage themselves unless they run conditions. I don’t really feel the players wanted a strong pet offensively, just one that wasn’t always going to die in AoE and could reliably hit targets. If they reduced damage from pets, and buffed ranger damage I feel they would have many more viable builds. Axe, greatsword, and the longbow all took big hits.
+1 for accuracy.
I don’t understand how hard it is to put together the concepts of having the damage come from the player while not having the pet mechanic be useless.
Seems like everybody but the people in charge of making the changes are on the same page.
Hahaha wow……How is this even a kittening problem? I run into maybe 1 Ranger an hour in WvW and most of the time its running a power build and just dies…
I swear the guys are Anet all just run thieves and as soon as something looks like it may be able to contend with that class they nerf the absolute kitten out of it so they can still run around and press 2 buttons>Invis
Btw my pet hasn’t been hitting kitten lately because people know whats up…..So all this means is the class will be going back to how it was when the game came out
I can see where this game is going to be in a year for now lol. Everybody ready for this:
Warriors: 2 shot class
Mesmers: 2 shot class
Thieves: 2 shot class
Engineers: AoE annoyance class
Elementalists: AoE annoyance with high evasion
Rangers: High evasion, no ability to kill
Necromancers: AoE annoyance, hard to kill
Guardians: Unkillable by solo players
The biggest problem is that if this damage is just entirely lost (and not put back on the player), then all they have essentially done is nerf rangers total power damage output, making any power based build even less viable than it already is.
I don’t care how much of the community doesn’t like rangers, you can’t look at something like that and say it is a good balance decision regarding build versatility.
Exactly. While conceptually it is good, in reality, the thing that is going to affect gameplay the most, class balance, is never addressed with the level of detail that it should be.
I don’t have the statistics in front of me, but I would be willing to bet that a super majority of people watching the SoTGs are watching to see what is coming for their class and how/if it will change their build and playstyle.
It is probably the most important topic on a broad scale, and yet it is glossed over sloppily each time, and the sample size picked from the playerbase to participate in the SoTGs is so small with such a repetition of players that it now serves as a biased sampling of the games community. This time around the ONLY redeeming quality is that they took in lists of other players questions from the community for questions/suggestions, and while the focus was of course going to be more towards warriors/necros, they should still take the time to gather concerns from the top tier playerbase of all the professions, and not just the ones that are the loudest on the forums.
I’m going to quote myself to add to the discussion:
I’m sorry, my comments seem condescending &/or flippant. I really do understand your concern. You’ve spent a lot of time on your Ranger, and you want to be able to be effective. Nerfs are always scary because companies tend to over-nerf.
That said, I encourage you to take what you heard with a grain of salt. I could equally read into it by saying, since they didn’t mention that they weren’t substantially buffing the Ranger to compensate for the reduction in pet dmg that they must be because it’s only logical that they would.
We simply don’t know, and we won’t know until they tell us. Patience.
No it’s fine, and I get it, and my OP was rantish, but I guess my main thing is this (and this incorporates all of the rest of the responses to this thread):
In a State of the Game situation, the players are representing a part of the community, and the devs are representing the voices and philosophies of their company.
It is poor on the devs part to state only negatives, without mentioning at the very least that they are aware of the other issues that plague the class. Just as it is poor for the players participating to not ask any follow up questions about classes when only negatives are mentioned, simply because it represents that they either have no idea on the state of the class, or they just don’t care about the class, so that the community that plays the class isn’t equally represented.
@Bas, I am well aware of the state of the metagame, and I fully understand the focus being towards necros and warriors. However, that doesn’t warrant giving the devs the window to announce a nerf with its respective reasoning, and then not following up with how they feel the state of that class will be after the nerf, especially when they seem to try to preach increasing versatility, and then only announce nerf.
While I am disappointed with the stagnant feel that has fallen over the ranger (and the game in lots of aspects), that isn’t what I was trying to voice, though that certainly plays a part in it.
What I am trying to voice is that I am very discontented by the lack of representation the ranger community has when communicating with the devs, which allows them to come off as unaware or uncaring towards the class simply because there is nobody to draw focus towards it that understands the issues that rangers have.
Isn’t anybody else tired of watching the devs or the top tier players that host the state of the games gloss over and/or laugh every time the ranger is brought up, with no serious effort put into analysis or deeper explanation?
I’m sorry, my comments seem condescending &/or flippant. I really do understand your concern. You’ve spent a lot of time on your Ranger, and you want to be able to be effective. Nerfs are always scary because companies tend to over-nerf.
That said, I encourage you to take what you heard with a grain of salt. I could equally read into it by saying, since they didn’t mention that they weren’t substantially buffing the Ranger to compensate for the reduction in pet dmg that they must be because it’s only logical that they would.
We simply don’t know, and we won’t know until they tell us. Patience.
No it’s fine, and I get it, and my OP was rantish, but I guess my main thing is this (and this incorporates all of the rest of the responses to this thread):
In a State of the Game situation, the players are representing a part of the community, and the devs are representing the voices and philosophies of their company.
It is poor on the devs part to state only negatives, without mentioning at the very least that they are aware of the other issues that plague the class. Just as it is poor for the players participating to not ask any follow up questions about classes when only negatives are mentioned, simply because it represents that they either have no idea on the state of the class, or they just don’t care about the class, so that the community that plays the class isn’t equally represented.
@Bas, I am well aware of the state of the metagame, and I fully understand the focus being towards necros and warriors. However, that doesn’t warrant giving the devs the window to announce a nerf with its respective reasoning, and then not following up with how they feel the state of that class will be after the nerf, especially when they seem to try to preach increasing versatility, and then only announce nerf.
While I am disappointed with the stagnant feel that has fallen over the ranger (and the game in lots of aspects), that isn’t what I was trying to voice, though that certainly plays a part in it.
What I am trying to voice is that I am very discontented by the lack of representation the ranger community has when communicating with the devs, which allows them to come off as unaware or uncaring towards the class simply because there is nobody to draw focus towards it that understands the issues that rangers have.
Isn’t anybody else tired of watching the devs or the top tier players that host the state of the games gloss over and/or laugh every time the ranger is brought up, with no serious effort put into analysis or deeper explanation?
The question more importantly needs to be asked. Do we want Esports or do we want the casual players? Because at top level play BM ranger is not as strong and trap ranger is horrible because no one stands in the traps. That means, ranger has one viable build at top level play. However, because of the ease of the s/d evade spam + jaguar F2 with perma regen combo bad players can easily outlast and kill anyone which causes nerfs, such as this, to be warranted. So, do we want competitive play or do we want 0 builds that are considered OP at noob level but that are not good at top level play?
This brings up the true essence of the core problem; what do the devs define as skilled or top tiered leveled play?
I think that blarb was just to appease the people, I doubt they really are doing anything notable.
Their talk rarely matches actions.
(you should know that by now, you’ve seen all the ranger talk before the actual patches…)
Their stance against wack-a-moling, at this point, just seems to be an excuse not to do much to the game.They wack-a-mol balance harder than any other game I’ve seen.
Never seen a tweak for the sake of better gameplay yet*
Only hits on strong specs as they keep inevitably cropping up after the last nerfs…The question more importantly needs to be asked. Do we want Esports
That’s like a five year old picking up a rocket and asking himself whether he wants to go to be an astronaut or not.
Dreamers will say yes, realists can see, quite obviously that the odds are terribly against it.GW2 does not have what it takes to be an esport.
At best it can be at the level of a work based softball league.Don’t get me wrong…
The base of the game is fine.
The population behind it is strong and fanatic.
But behind the scenes… when it comes to actually implementing all the great ideas Anet speaks of… whoever is charge of bringing them towards reality…. is utterly terrible at it.*-the quickness nerf was the only one, and they half baked that patch so hard it left an entire class in the gutter for… 3? months now…. actually making the game worse…
True, and the most notable thing that has happened was a huge nerf (the Empathic Bond nerf).
Esports, while having a nice ring to it, seems to be an unrealistic goal when the game gets left stagnant for so long that community participation deteriorates.
Expect them to take the laziest approach and destroy wvw and dungeon playing rangers in the process even further. Well, it still leaves the trapper , for now :P
Isn’t that like, every patch for rangers? Lol.
Ok, we’ll stick with “don’t over-react” then. I’ll answer your questions:
Why is that the only change mentioned?
Because there is only so much time and they can’t discuss everything they are thinking about on every issue.
Why isn’t this the same thing being discussed about the ranger?
How do you know it isn’t?
Is there going to be any other improvements for the ranger class?
We’ll have to wait and see.
Your answer is insufficient, you may stop responding now.
I’m extremely calm. If I seem irritated at all, it’s simply because that rangers were glossed over in yet another state of the game.
That still doesn’t mean these aren’t good questions, and they should be asked because we are apparently not going to be represented by a player live at a state of the game.
I felt that this, being primarily a pvp topic, deserved to be posted and discussed here. So:
I’m going to be referencing today’s state of the game discussion, which can be viewed here: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2guru/b/410812694
Particularly, at about 53:38, when the discussion for about a minute, shifts towards BM rangers.
What is mentioned is bringing down how hard the pets hit. Now, given that I can see why this change is being implemented, the thing that is concerning is this:
Why is that the only change mentioned?
Yes, the discussion did take a focus primarily towards necros and warriors, and the suggestion of using traits to improve build versatility seemed positive and good.
Why isn’t this the same thing being discussed about the ranger?
Is there not enough community representation(I think so, but still)?
Seriously, you cannot take a class with only 2 viable pvp specs and then nerf one of them with no further improvements. Improvements that were acknowledged back around November as necessary, but never saw any further discussion or implementation.
So, ultimately, it needs to be asked: Is there going to be any other improvements for the ranger class?
The question isn’t ranger specific, as many other classes do deserve to have the same questions asked, and the state of the games never really give all of the classes the representation they deserve.
Examples of specific questions:
-Is there any plan to increase the sources of cleansing so that rangers aren’t so reliable on Empathic Bond in every build if they want any sort of decent cleanse ability?
-Is there any plan to remove or rework any traits that have poor or sub par functionality? Examples: Beastmaster’s Might, Remorseless, Companions Might, Evasive Purity, Stability Training, Intimidation Training, Instinctual Bond
I’m sure there’s more but that’s a quick list.
-Is there any plan to return the damage being taken away from the pets to the players? While I personally 100% agree the pets are too strong, there are more setups than just BM bunker, and pets count as part of rangers power output, so it should be returned to the player. Then there is still counterplay because the ranger has to play well to do damage, but can still get outplayed.
-Is there any plan to differentiate the damage between the longbow from the shortbow? At the moment, the longbow has a worse damage output anywhere within 1000 range. It has poor sustain capability, and doesn’t really do anything that the shortbow doesn’t do better. Seeing as how the longbow seems to be the power weapon, and the shortbow a condition weapon, the burst/sustain on the longbow should be significant enough to make it the clear choice for a power build.
I’m sure there is more that can be asked, but there don’t seem to be many top tier, or many vocal ranger players that take part in pvp, and while every class can ask the same questions, I can only speak for playing the ranger.
I’m going to be referencing today’s state of the game discussion, which can be viewed here: http://www.twitch.tv/guildwars2guru/b/410812694
Particularly, at about 53:38, when the discussion for about a minute, shifts towards BM rangers.
What is mentioned is bringing down how hard the pets hit. Now, given that I can see why this change is being implemented, the thing that is concerning is this:
Why is that the only change mentioned?
Yes, the discussion did take a focus primarily towards necros and warriors, and the suggestion of using traits to improve build versatility seemed positive and good.
Why isn’t this the same thing being discussed about the ranger?
Is there not enough community representation(I think so, but still)?
Seriously, you cannot take a class with only 2 viable pvp specs and then nerf one of them with no further improvements. Improvements that were acknowledged back around November as necessary, but never saw any further discussion or implementation.
So, ultimately, it needs to be asked: Is there going to be any other improvements for the ranger class?
The question isn’t ranger specific, as many other classes do deserve to have the same questions asked, and the state of the games never really give all of the classes the representation they deserve.
Forgot about that, good point. Been awhile since I actually read what I have equipped lol
It’s a good question, because my Dwayna Runes give Regen to my pet on using a heal skill, so it would be strange if that’s an exclusive function to only that set of runes.
The formula for retaliation seems solid as of right now at first glance to most, until you see one thing in open combat. As of right now the formula for it is the following, with the power based on whatever gave the person retaliation.
198.45 + (0.075 * Power)
While the flaw isn’t immediate, the following should tell you where the flaw lies. Last night I wakittenting a guardian who had retaliation on. I was taking 394 damage with each hit when the hits I were dishing to said guardian with a longbow were only 280 damage.
Anybody else see the problem here? It’s that the retaliation damage can OUTDO the damage you’re inflicting to the opponent, and stays at that amount regardless of whether or not you burst them down or not. This is the main problem with retaliation, that it’s not a set percentage of damage YOU do, making it somewhat overpowered against players who have low attack, and underpowered against those with high attack.
I say make it so that you’re taking anywhere from 25% to 50% of the damage you dealt to them back at you (I’m leaning towards 33%). This can be considered a nerf and a buff to it at the same time. Condition users like myself need not worry about shooting ourselves down by getting hit with more than we’re hitting for, while at the same time making it a worry for somebody who is a glass cannon, like a thief, who pulls off a 8-9K damage burst.
+1
I never really connected that it was a flat amount before even though it was so obvious, and now that I see it, I think it’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen in my life in a game. It should have a reflect x% damage back function AT THE VERY MOST, although retaliation is already ridiculously mindnumbingly stupid, because it’s the only thing in the game where you can self buff, have no target selected, not even know an enemy is around, and still deal damage to them.
Kinda makes you sit back for a moment and think “wow, what were they thinking…”
I will say this. After a lot of thought more than 20 BM on a Condi Bunker build seems a waste.
Depends on if you want the Heal or not. I personally like it, even if its only every 3 seconds.
Well you take the heal to live longer and imho those 10 points could be put to a better use in NM.
I’ve seen quite a few people now in the tpvp environment going 0/0/30/20/20 for the “spirits activate upon death” trait choice, which is strong in the arenas environment for team play off of the elite spirit.
However, in a WvW environment, that same setup can take Nature’s Protection, which means that on crit, you AND your pet due to the minor, are going to be getting protection, which is almost like a cheaper version of Bark Skin with a less restrictive condition imo.
However, since the 25 points in BM increases power by 5% of healing power, I’m not sure how important that is for a power based build or not since I run conditions.
Awesome, love the response and the views Battosai.
For awhile now, I’ve been thinking rangers biggest issue is the source of cleansing. Empathic Bond, while having a great function, is so alone (for lack of a better word) at what it does and how effectively it does it, that it is basically imperative to take it if you want any sort of strong cleansing source.
Without it, you’re left with Signet of Renewal and Healing Spring, and both of which have outside functions that may take some priority over cleansing (Healing Spring being the heal, and SoR being the stun break).
That means that if a person chooses to not run Empathic Bond, but still wants cleanses, they are forced into a heal and utility option, and if they want a reliable stun break on top of that, they are going to be forced into taking Lightning Reflexes as well in case their SoR is on cooldown because it was used as a cleanse over a stun break.
Fortunately for rangers, Empathic Bond is in one of the most useful trait families at our dispense. But for other classes, their cleanses are in trait lines that serve little to no offensive and defensive use beyond picking up a single trait and whatever passive stats are added.
Beyond that, it’s just an issue of trait and utility cleanup, with weapon versatility. There are SO MANY traits in this game that are literally never used because of how bad their function is, or in what trait line they are placed. Same type of argument for utilities.
And by far my largest issue with weapons is how evenly matched the shortbows damage output is with the longbows. There needs to be some better role distinction, and there is no justification for Rapid Fire doing the same damage as Crossfire.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Those are the things that I personally think hinder the ranger class the most, and pigeonhole rangers into many similar but ultimately same builds. Lots of those issues, on a broader scale, are what plague every class though, and trait changes is probably the easiest way to handle that.
In fact, the best quick fix is Grandmaster Trait selection. Grandmaster Traits should be cornerstone selections that make or break builds. Rangers have such good examples of that, Signet of the Beastmaster, Trap Potency, Empathic Bond, and Spirits Unbound. They define utility choices and/or enhance the capabilities of rangers to a degree where entire builds are built around how those traits function.
If other grandmaster traits could be as defining or as game changing as some of those listed, build versatility, while still existent without utility fixes, would be a much more miniscule problem for the metagame than it currently is.
Sorry for all that, I don’t have a podcast lol.
ok…but how do you get IN to battle? just face tank till you get to them?
I feel bad cuz I keep responding to these, but I play literally the same build as the OP/vid/thread, except I run a different variation (axe/torch and sword/dagger), so I can respond from my own experience.
As a combat opener, generally, it depends if the person is paying attention to me or not. If the aren’t, I’ll open right up with a throw torch. However, if they are, I throw dagger 5 first, hoping to land it, and testing to see what they will/will not dodge. If it hits, I move in to melee, then generally, I try to go dagger 4 straight after that to avoid any of their openers/initial bursts while landing poison.
If they do dodge, or if I miss, I try to pinch them between myself or my pet to hit dagger 4 on them, still testing to see how competent they are, then go from there.
What build are you guys using runes of the forge on.
I’ve not got them, but when I do run in SPvP i tend to use them over melandru.
It’ll just be my regular BM Bunker build, though right now i run 10 skirmishing I might switch back to 10 Natures for its Protection also (plus it’ll bump me to 30% protection duration)
You’re pretty good with math, Maybe you could give me an idea on that..
Also you think i’d be better off putting it on Reyna’s or Apothecary Armor?
Forge runes for condi build? Im not a fan of giving up Regen TBH.
I remember seeing Battosai using Forge runes on a tpvp build, with a sigil of smoldering. I think it compliments a few different things the BM build has access to at the same time, like burning uptime, protection uptime, and the protection gain for 6x runes for 10s against a foe who can’t strip boons can easily be the difference of winning a skirmish.
While I can see all of the pluses, I tend to agree with not giving up Dwayna runes, since rangers regen giving and duration extension abilities are so strong.
Ahh, see i was using the GS in my condi-regen build for the gap closer and utility.
what do you use to get in and out of battle without use of the GS?
If you are looking to disengage, sword 2, detarget, 180 degree turn, then use sword 2 leap. With Signet of the Hunt on plus the distance you can gain, AND the first part of the sword 2 chain having invincibility frames (evasion in this game), it makes rangers extremely tricky to catch in a fight. Especially when you can use your pet (I use wolf/drakehound) to fear or immobilize while you can continue to run away.
Awesome, no rush lol. You guys have your schedule and are doing your thing and it’s great so far, so keep it up.
Having an “Esports” or pvp directed conversation with top players from top teams might not be as popular as it could be around next balance patch, for instance. Shoutcasting is still in it’s infancy and the metagame hasn’t changed in awhile. If the next patch goes well, the pvp in the game could see a popularity spike, and build versatility could increase for every class, making such a conversation much MUCH more relevant.
Just my thoughts, so in order to not derail for others reading, definitely check out the podcasts. They are great and informative.
I’ve had my cat face tank champs in Orr. If not for a small slip up on my part with an add (I accidentally used my pet’s F2 against the add causing my pet to leave the main boss), I could’ve solo’ed the legendary boss at the Temple of Dwayna.
However, that’s pve. In pvp, remember that the pet can be up to half our dps. Yet provided that you are at normal forward, in combat, moment speed (strafing and moving backwards is slower), then when our pet stops to attack, you will be out of range and the pet will miss. If you have a speed buff (+33%) then I’m pretty sure you can include strafing.
So half of a ranger’s damage is prone to missing at least half the time. It also takes time to go from target to target, and if both are dead and the swap is on a 1min cd, then the ranger is at half dps for that minute.
It would be better if we did 25% more damage than everyone else with the pet but then did 25% less than everyone else without it.
Instead we depend on our pet to be on par and even then most other professions are capable of out dps’ing us.
That’s actually the reason why people build BM bunker with condition damage so often, at least, there’s a logic reasoning to it. That being; because pets represent some percentage of a rangers power damage output, but little to no part of our condition damage and little ability to increase their condition damage, people stack condition on themselves to get the full benefit of stacking condition damage on the player, while increasing the amount of power damage done by the pet to the best it can be.
Logically, that represents the most optimized damage output for a lot of decisions made in regards to pvp. Whether or not stacking power with a power pet is the same is a different story, and it isn’t something I haven’t ever seen anybody put up numbers for to show equivalences or anything.
For the shortbow thing, I have to say the axe/dagger sword/torch (in my case I run axe/torch sword/dagger, but it’s a preference thing) outputs more consistent damage in a fight for me. However, I do carry a shortbow for when I’m on walls or I’m in a zerg, or I just don’t feel like being up close and personal.
As for the OP, nice vids, keep it up.
Only one? There’s so many “housecleaning” things I want to suggest lol.
Increase the Longbows autoattack speed to make it’s pressure relevant when skills are on cooldown, and increase rapid fires damage to do significantly more damage than it’s shortbow counterpart (right now, per arrow, the damage is basically the same as the shortbows autoattack).
With every other class in the game that goes class cannon, you know the setup on their build and you know what they can hit you with. The thief is going to backstab you, the mesmer is going to blurred frenzy you while shattering, and the warrior is going to CC you and 100 blades/eviscerate you.
Having mained ranger while playing consistently since beta, I can honestly say that there is nothing that scares me about going up against a glass cannon ranger. The weapon damage has fairly slow execution and is easily avoidable, and the damage is extremely manageable to the point where facing off against a glass cannon ranger doesn’t feel challenging.
I WANT to be scared of a glass cannon ranger. I WANT to see one in the distance and have the same reaction as I would seeing a thief/warrior/mesmer: “oh crap, if I’m not careful, he’ll spike me down before I can react and there will be nothing I can do. Check my cooldowns, and have my weapon evades on hand for this.”
I find my biggest gripe with the longbow (besides the speed of the autoattack vs how poor the damage is below 1000 range) is that rapid fire does equal to less damage as the shortbow autoattack until around gaining ~3000 attack rating(and even then, it isn’t much more damage), which to me gives it a pseudo-burst feeling; it isn’t truly a stronger burst weapon than the shortbow, but the function of its skills give it the feel that it is a burst weapon.
Just my thoughts on that bit from the beginning (basically, adding stronger role distinction would increase weapon viability/versatility).Overall, nice podcast, though I’ll never be convinced of going glass cannon on any class. Why play risk-reward when I can survive and thrive? haha.
Keep up the good work on the podcasts. I wish there was a more tpvp oriented podcast with a ranger from a high ranked team (other than just Battosai) to discuss rangers, although ultimately that would just be another BM bunker discussion, and would probably delve more into why BM bunker is such an effective/optimized build at what it does.
Still, seeing some top players discuss why some current high tier ranger justifies a shortbow on a BM bunker while another disagrees, and discussions of those natures (pvp weapon/build optimization) would be and extremely interesting podcast.I think we first have to get a high ranked tpvp ranger besides Battosai. The only other Ranger I really know that’s really good is Eura. I am sure Vyndetta and maybe one other guy I can’t think of the name who is in the tournaments regularly.
Follidus from zZz was playing Ranger on one of the last NA tournys, and the team has been fairing pretty well in their scrimmages, or Symbolic. Not that I’m the best judge of player skill for rangers, since 99% of the time, trying to watch these shoutcasters, there is never a focus on anything other than midfight, and the majority of the time gets spent sitting on guardian players.
I’m not sure what the criteria is for you guys on how many EU versus NA players you try to get for the show or anything though. I would have suggested Ovi, but I have my personal reservations about decisions that are made, the choice of using shortbow being one of those. Then again, maybe Ovi would be a good compliment to Battosai for that very reason, since most people have generally decided the most optimal setup, and Ovi differs in weapon selection compared to them.
You guys run the show, I’m just an avid listener/supporter than enjoys a portion of the community being focused towards the positive development of the ranger. Anything beyond that is just icing on the cake for me lol.
Edit: this is the reddit link to the teams that played with the builds, in case it helps clarify who I’m referring to: http://www.reddit.com/r/gw2esports/comments/1f4m43/builds_used_in_mmorpg_guild_wars_2_na_invitational/
Honestly, as long as pvp remains a game of point capturing/holding, and the same stat combinations from PvE are not available in PvP, it is hard for MOST classes to justify building something other than high toughness/defensive.
That being said, in PvE, you can go with some Knights Armor and Cavaliers Trinkets, etc etc, I can post a basic idea, but it won’t be as optimized as it could be, I’m just throwing it together for an example: http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fMAQFADGAWK2Lw2DNlETmiDZE-j0xAYLAyCQCsIasFyioxqYw0nER1+jioVDA-w
I find my biggest gripe with the longbow (besides the speed of the autoattack vs how poor the damage is below 1000 range) is that rapid fire does equal to less damage as the shortbow autoattack until around gaining ~3000 attack rating(and even then, it isn’t much more damage), which to me gives it a pseudo-burst feeling; it isn’t truly a stronger burst weapon than the shortbow, but the function of its skills give it the feel that it is a burst weapon.
Just my thoughts on that bit from the beginning (basically, adding stronger role distinction would increase weapon viability/versatility).
Overall, nice podcast, though I’ll never be convinced of going glass cannon on any class. Why play risk-reward when I can survive and thrive? haha.
Keep up the good work on the podcasts. I wish there was a more tpvp oriented podcast with a ranger from a high ranked team (other than just Battosai) to discuss rangers, although ultimately that would just be another BM bunker discussion, and would probably delve more into why BM bunker is such an effective/optimized build at what it does.
Still, seeing some top players discuss why some current high tier ranger justifies a shortbow on a BM bunker while another disagrees, and discussions of those natures (pvp weapon/build optimization) would be and extremely interesting podcast.
I remember reading somewhere that the pet has its own “in combat” state, so that even if the ranger is in an out of combat state, the pet, if attacking something, remains in combat and does not receive an out of combat healing. It isn’t anything I can confirm though, because it isn’t as though it’s easy to test whether or not the pet is receiving out of combat healing, with no visual buff.
What’s likely happening is that, with a necros downstate damage being so poor, the pet is literally outhealing your damage. If that damage tick is from your downed attack against the pet (the number being 139), then on a per second basis, the pet is literally outhealing the damage 4 to even 5 times over.
It doesn’t even need any comparison, it’s terrible on a stand alone basis. Increasing power and condi damage by 35 for 5s at the lowest cooldown of 24s isn’t worth the trait slot.
But trait cleanup isn’t a ranger specific issue.
I like hopping on other servers BLs and soloing all the supply camps I can. Granted that there isn’t much difficulty involved. but I still find it entertaining for the whole behind enemy lines field.
That and having those supply camps does contribute points, while making groups drop from other battlefields to return to theirs trying to intercept an attack.You’re on Crystal Dessert, right? I don’t know if you like to roam by yourself or if you prefer a companion but hit me up you ever want to tag along. I have been focusing on SC for the events and crate drops every night so I haven’t been in WvW for a while. But I am always willing to change up the pace from farming.
That would be awesome. I would love some group dynamic, since when I’m alone I find myself taking educated guesses more than making strategic decisions. I would much rather be in a small group with a more experienced WvW’er making calls (I mostly s/tpvp and have only gotten into WvW in the last 2 months or so).
I’ll be away for the weekend though, I’m headed out to live with a friend on campus and help him move.
I like hopping on other servers BLs and soloing all the supply camps I can. Granted that there isn’t much difficulty involved. but I still find it entertaining for the whole behind enemy lines field.
That and having those supply camps does contribute points, while making groups drop from other battlefields to return to theirs trying to intercept an attack.
The truth is that many classes in this game could go for more condition removal and/or more active, and therefore controllable, condition removal.
If I were to suggest even a minor change, it would be that either Empathic Bond or the active of Signet of Renewal needs to apply regen to the pet. That way, the pet is able to deal with the conditions it obtains a bit better, and doesn’t get melted because it pulled the most damaging conditions to itself with a low health pool (that you can’t control with empathic bond at least, and would probably tell it not to with low health) and insta-died.
From a basic perspective, adding 100 armor to your current armor rating (adding toughness has a 1:1 ratio to armor) reduces incoming damage by about 3.4% (this is basic and doesn’t factor in diminishing returns, but that doesn’t matter much unless you are min/maxing).
As a fraction, that’s 34/1000. Signet of the wilds base heal is 62 health per second (hps) at level 80. With poison, it is only ~43.
This means that if you are looking for a direct damage reduction, Signet of Stone is reducing all incoming damage by ~4%, while signet of the wild is taking incoming DPS and subtracting the heal from it. Meaning that with higher damage amounts, especially with multiple hits that occur within a 1 second timeframe, Signet of Stone is better. However, the lower DPS, the more significant signet of the wild is.
@Jcbroe aka Jroh
I thought that didn’t sound right when I wrote it, can’t believe i forgot to change it from the original text. I have corrected my error, and left a mention.
Thanks for noticing, major oversight on my part.@Ayden
All good points. Thanks for bringing it up.
And thanks for the support.@Everyone
Thank you very much for the continued support, for paying attention and taking the time to listen to us. Thanks for pitching in also and keeping it respectful and constructive.
We appreciate it!
It just bugged me more than anything because it reminded me of a conversation that was happening on the spvp forum a while back where some guy was claiming rangers were OP because pets got 30% additional stat bonuses and had a 6k DPS. And no amount of referenced wikis and basic arithmetic could change that persons mind lol. So trolls will be trolls is the moral of that I guess.
But thanks for changing that. Rangers been my main since beta (and 7 years prior to that in gw1), so I love the class and just want to make sure the info is correct lol.
30% more stats
I’m not sure where this number is coming from. Unless something has changed, max BM only adds 300 to each of the pets primary attributes. I mean, maybe I’m approaching the math narrow-mindedly, but adding 300 to the primary stats does not come out to a 30% increase.
You’re going to have to copy and paste this: http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fMAQRAnf8YjAV91BWKWo2Bi2DNZeM9e0qY1eXhRdxSVJB-T4Ag2CuIuRdj7GzNybs3M8Y5xuhjHTBeeA
It’s very standard and strong build, with its usual purpose in tourny play being to bunker a point while outputting more than decent condition damage, with the pet doing strong power damage.
The wolf is better against a moving target and should be considered the control pet, while the jaguar is the damage pet.
I find myself weapon swapping almost on cooldown against opponents with poor burst potential, but on an opponent who can reliably land burst, like a zerker mesmer, having the sword/dagger set available to use the weapon evade skills is almost necessary in order to maintain the upper hand.
BM trait choice is preference, since I don’t particularly find the family traits appealing, and having lowered cooldowns means more use out of the pets stronger skills. Vigorous Renewal is a stronger trait option if Healing Spring is taken over Troll Unguent, because it pulses AoE vigor for any teammates who happen to be in it, and will also provide you with longer vigor if you’re able to stay inside your spring (and aren’t forced out).
However, I choose Trolls for its higher healing potential, and just general healing over time awesome factor lol. That would change if I had a consistent team I played with I’m sure, but since I play solo usually, I run things that are more of a boon to myself since I can’t always rely on the competence of my team.
If there are any questions about the build, I’ll try to answer as best as possible.
I really dislike all of the pet family-specific traits
This.
No doubt. However, I don’t think I’ve come across a build that stacks cleanses and NOT toughness. Of course I’m sure they’re out there.
That being said, the clerics vs apothecary argument comes down to a weapon preference. Bows and the greatsword are pretty miserable damage choices in apothecary armor (note I only mentioned damage choices).
I stand by what I said. Between condition and physical dmg you will get more dps with physical. Especially if you can’t get a flank. In other words Clerics > Apothecary. I think Bunker Rangers don’t realize dps difference because pets make up the lions share of it either way.
PS Im talking about when using a SB, not GS lol. I would take a apoth SB over a power GS for dps. But would take a power sb over apoth sb or cleric gs for raw dmg.
Okay, I’m glad you clarified that it was specific to the shortbow.
Cuz I was about to say, my apothecary set is able to match/beat my knights/zerk set in terms of DPS, simply because of the combination of burning, poison, and bleeding. There are lots of people in WvW who are stacking toughness now, but it seems most people are still neglecting condition removal, so lots of times, I’m finding my apoth armor to outperform my physical damage build.
Whenever someone sees you running axe they know they can stay at 600+ ranger and crap on your damage since you need splitblade at enough a close range to get stacks, and the pet is easily kited with swiftness.
The ele I was dueling just simply walked out of the wolf’s knockdown because the wolf’s leap, like any leap, is reduced in travel distance depending on cripples/chill fields.
Axe requires too many things to go well to pay off. It’s good as a weapon to punish melee getting in your face, but that’s about it.
I feel like I’ve only ever gone up against 3 classes smart enough to do that, other rangers, mesmers, and necros.
At that point, I’m usually holding home point, and I’ll send the pet to attack and then I’ll hug the point but I’ll back off of it trying to get out of their range, or bait them in thinking they can neutralize since I’m not on the point. Then I just jump back on point with a few as necessary weapon evades if they try to knock me off point(ranger longbow, mesmer greatsword, necro fear, etc) and now they’re in axe range.
The only class I don’t feel comfortable baiting in like that is a guardian, because they can build to have massive amounts of node control and they generally have to get in your range to be effective.
This is actually the situation I can see where a shortbow would be a boon. If I was playing against the strategy I just described, I would want a shortbow to keep poking at the person on point while I sent my pet in at them, the same as they’d do to me. Eventually, I believe they would be forced to have to close the gap to be effective, most likely being baited off point, so that I could hop on it real quick and start contesting, putting them on the defensive.
Hmmm, based on my own anecdotal recreation of how I would play, I would definitely opt for shortbow and sword/torch on a more roaming oriented build in s/tpvp.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.