Guild Wars 2

I think that the statement I am about to make is a blanket statement for what most pvp classes/players are experiencing (I main ranger myself).

Most classes right now are pigeonholed into particular weapon sets, trait setups, and utility choices. It is more of an apex predator (that the choices that are made are made because they are the most useful and viable options available) problem than anything else, and the issue that is making the game stagnant is the lack of build versatility.

If this is an agreeable statement, I hope to see it addressed in the state of the game and that the attention is held on the topic so that the devs don’t try to use avoidance and misdirection to stray away from answering in some way that lets us know that they are aware of the specific issues and working to provide necessary changes.

I would use the format but I have nothing specific. I will use the format with any example suggestions and be concise however:

1) Utility function and balance. Most of the rangers utilities are fairly subpar and provide little to nothing for the overall builds they are being used on.

Type: Spirits
Short: Either the benefits need to be applied to every ally in the radius, or the internal cooldown needs to be reduced.
Urgency: Rangers lack the ability to provide and maintain high stacks of boons for themselves, so it would be important that if spirits are to retain their current level of survival that they are made an option worth slotting for that actually provides its benefits enough to be worth it, competitive with other classes in the game with similar self/group boon options.

Type: Signets
Short: Improve the passive/active effect of some signets, as well as reducing recharges to make them competitive with other classes signets with similar/same functions.
Urgency: Most of rangers active effects are garbage, because you have to trait 30 points for half of them to be effective, and then either the effects are not long enough or not available enough due to long recharge times to make activating signets even useful. Some of the passives simply aren’t strong enough to even deserve the slot, and then the actives take too long to recharge (see Signet of Stone).

Type: Shouts
Short: These were supposed to be our pet synergy type skills and highlight a strength of the class when they were implemented
Urgency: Shouts effects are just plain subpar, especially for their recharges. Rampage as One is the best pet skill we get, and its an elite. There should definitely be stronger functionality and synergy between pet and player, and shouts would be the way to accomplish this. One only needs to look to the guild wars 1 beastmastery skills for ideas.

2) Trait cleanup and rework that blanket covers pet issues.

Type: Traits
Short: There are many many many useless traits or inefficient traits (1s of might for activating a signet… -.-). Change them for rangers to make pets better and weapon options and damages potentially better.
Urgency: Traits can be used to solve many of these problems. There must be a number close to about 80% that represents the unused traits in this game because of how bad or inefficient they are. The family traits for pets are fairly useless in most of their effects, and could be combined to remove the family tree requirement, and then incoming damage reductions could be implemented, and that sort of thing. Look at all the traits that affect other classes with pet-like skills, and then look at rangers with how little they get that positively affects their class mechanic in comparison, and then change accordingly.

3) Weapon Skills (there isn’t much)

Type: Shortbow auto attack and poison fan
Short: For a condition based weapon, the conditional bleed application is a bit too strict when compared to other classes condition applying options on auto attack. Also, the poison fan is just counter intuitive to a 1200 ranged weapon. It works in pvp, but loses effect in other places where you would want that 1200 range to mean more.
Urgency: Everything in the game should have balanced options. It is strange that a rangers shortbow is the only weapon that has a condition condition application, and it loses a chunk of its competitive edge. If not removing the conditional and then adjusting the damage/bleed stacks appropriately, then make the conditional less strict, or even more pet interactive. Also, the shortbow 2 should be made to have some sort of actual potential usefulness at 1200 range.

Type: Longbow
Short: If the damage numbers are numerically fine, then the attack pace needs to be increased, or vice versa.
Urgency: The longbow is just not a competitive DPS weapon, and loses even more practicality on a moving target because it shoots too slow to out DPS the shortbow unless traited to 1500 range where a shortbow can’t hit and then attacking an AFK player who will take the hits. Either the attack pace needs a buff or the damage needs a buff to make it the clear more powerful power based weapon.

Type: Greatsword
Short: Low damage, make damage more consistent with the rangers spear is all
Urgency: It would make it a better weapon without being a gamebreaking change, and everybody would be happy about this.

@jkctmc;

But… we aren’t disagreeing? Lol. I mean that, you and I really have no disagreement on this. I’m just a little prone to go on tangents is all.

I will try to keep the summary of what I think needs to happen as briefly as I know how this time:
I think that the classes being balanced against each other right now shouldn’t even be a discussion until all the classes are balanced within themselves. When I say that, I mean that on any given class, there should be no build or weapon set that feels like it completely outperforms other options.
The options you can run each class should counterbalance against any other setup you can run on that class to provide an even amount of strengths and balances (pros/cons, etc) to any option. At this stage of my balancing theory, damage options are the only thing that can be truly balanced within themselves, as well as making utility options competitive with each other (seriously, I would be surprised if the amount of utility skills used by all the professions adds up to even 40%). This should also include trait clean up and reworks, while polishing descriptions as needed.

Then once that has occurred (because it needs to occur) for every class, the now balanced classes get performance tested up against each other to see if any class clearly outshines the others after every class has competitive build diversity that can take advantage of every tool offered to it.
Once data is gathered from that, classes can be officially balanced against each other and it would leave the possibility of clear frontrunner classes few and far between. The only issues we should see then would be unaccounted for variables, or the dev team not understanding the first thing about balancing a metagame (after playing so much guild wars 1, I already have my opinion on that, but best not to be cynical until after ANet reaches their deadline with my tolerance).

I will respect that my given plan would take a lot of time and programming to execute (I am a compuSci major after all). However, the argument could also be made that the dev team simply isn’t trying, and it could be implied that it is because the staff is too few and too spread out to put a major focus on anything, and that it is coupled with ANets incessant need to put out new content before polishing the old content.

Also, I feel the intention of the topic has been sidetracked (though not entirely derailed as I still feel I am debunking the ranger rage in a general sense) long enough, so this debate should probably die soon lol.

@jkctmc;

I’m not opposed to ranger buffs in the slightest. But I don’t think that it is a completely broken class and has no viability like a lot of people in the ranger community seem to think.
Rangers, when built correctly, have the potential to be one of the top duelists in the game in pvp. Xsorus even makes multiple videos showing the ability to duel on the class and how effective the class can be.

I think the rangers biggest issue is the general issue that the pvp community is currently discussing with eles. That is: rangers have options that are clearly better than anything else they can run, which completely pigeonholes the class and destroys a lot of the potential build versatility the class has.

Once the class is balanced within itself, then it should be performance tested in a metagame with all the other classes polished and balanced within themselves, and then another balance patch should even out the playing field after getting those test results.

The biggest changes/most gamechanging changes that need to be made are trait adjustments and utility improvements, and that isn’t even a ranger specific issue. The only other things that really need improving are the longbow (warrior longbow as well, it is too slow paced in such a fast paced game environment for the damage it outputs) and maybe making the ranger greatsword damage equal to the Spear damage.

Any pet related issues I have could be fixed with a trait reworking that provided traits the benefitted pets more, as well as utilities that have better pet synergy.

And admittedly whenever I read peoples ideas that are suggesting anything more extreme than the type of things I mentioned, I immediately dismiss it as somebody advocating for the class to be overpowered as opposed to being a balanced part of the future metagame.

People seem to forget that there should be certain things unique to certain classes (I’m making this comment in response to the people who thing ranger greatsword should be doing warrior greatsword damage). If everybody had the potential to do the same thing as everybody else aside from a unique class mechanic, then guild wars 2 might as well just have 1 class where you can choose and reroll class mechanics.

There’s nothing the community can do right now anyways except for let out their anger and hold ANet to a higher class balance expectation for the March patch. The population of game could see a potentially large decline if the March update doesn’t deliver.
So regardless of what my opinion on the class is, if anybody still has the patience left, instead of listening to me, they should just play the waiting game and quit upon further dissatisfaction.

In pvp the stated effects would be +15%, +15%, +10% and +10% from traits.

However, I just read on the wiki that the effect from runes of the groves doesn’t work -.-

How far are we from the launch of the game now, where things like this aren’t working? sigh

jkctmc.8754:

@jcbroe

The issue though is with people like even Jazenn, who have said in a round about way that if you feel there is something wrong with the Ranger, you just suck playing the Ranger. That is why things get blown out of proportions. This very thread pretty much says the same thing, just quietly so.

The issue isn’t playing the Ranger well, it is that you can do it so much easier, and better with the other classes.

I even laid out a thread with some ideas to choose from.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Changes-the-Ranger-needs-for-WVW/first

And in this thread I lay out changes I’d like to see in WvW period.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/Requesting-WvW-status-update/page/2#post1485377

I would honestly have to agree with the sentiment that a large majority of the community sucks at playing the ranger.
From posts I have read by the people I mentioned in my previous post, it seems that they have accepted that there are changes that the class needs. Factually, there is not a single class in the game that the doesn’t need balance and mechanic changes.

The majority of the issues with the ranger come from, as a generalized summary, lack of effective build versatility. I have already previously stated in full detail the issues I personally have in this very thread, people are more than welcome to disagree with me. I can only state the impressions I get from my own experiences with the class, as well as the other classes that I do play. Saying that, I can honestly say that the breakdown post (that is like 3 posts long) highlights in extremity the only things I feel are wrong with the class from a mostly pvp perspective.

There is only one person I have found on the forums that I find over-exaggerates the rangers capabilities to use their opinion and biases to insult and derail other peoples constructive criticism. Out of respect (and forum rules) I will not name that person, although it wouldn’t be overly difficult for an active forum member in the ranger section to figure out who that person is.

daydream.2938:

jcbroe.4329:

I would like to agree with the OP, but I have one major pet peeve after the patch.

With regards to rangers, they flat out nerfed Empathic Bond. While I’m not saying I agree or disagree with this, I’m making this reference in terms of the fact that in the PvP state of the game, they specifically said that they are not going to do any “whack-a-mole” style nerfing, and that they would rather increase the amount of options a class has to make builds.

However, the actual implementation of the Empathic Bond nerf shows that they are just fine with nerfing a trait that reduces effectiveness of most of rangers viable pvp builds, while in return providing no improvements to anything of significant that could provide more build versatility.
This is essentially exactly what they said they weren’t going to do in the state of the game.
So personally I see no reason to trust anything devs say until something goes live and there are patch notes. And even then the community has to go back and test everything possible to make sure there are no missing notes that weren’t typed up.

empathic bond was a bug fix more than a nerf. it wasnt intended to just wipe condis, but to transfer them.

The transferring could never be directly implied from the ambiguity of the description, although I do agree that my common sense implies that the effect was not working as intended. The nerf is that it only wipes 3 conditions now instead of all.

Now the argument can be made that that effect was overpowered. I am not in a place to disagree with that.

The issue I have with the change isn’t the change itself, but the fact that they made the change without making any changes to increase build versatility. Before the update, people were running trap rangers and BM rangers as the most viable builds. After the patch, people will be running the same exact builds with less ability to wipe conditions.
The dev team just did a nerf in the same style that they were quoted as saying they were going to avoid. That is the part that bothers me.

I would like to agree with the OP, but I have one major pet peeve after the patch.

With regards to rangers, they flat out nerfed Empathic Bond. While I’m not saying I agree or disagree with this, I’m making this reference in terms of the fact that in the PvP state of the game, they specifically said that they are not going to do any “whack-a-mole” style nerfing, and that they would rather increase the amount of options a class has to make builds.

However, the actual implementation of the Empathic Bond nerf shows that they are just fine with nerfing a trait that reduces effectiveness of most of rangers viable pvp builds, while in return providing no improvements to anything of significant that could provide more build versatility.
This is essentially exactly what they said they weren’t going to do in the state of the game.
So personally I see no reason to trust anything devs say until something goes live and there are patch notes. And even then the community has to go back and test everything possible to make sure there are no missing notes that weren’t typed up.

It isn’t really a bug with the skill itself persay, but I can’t seem to get it to increase to a 3 second duration with +50% boon duration. Does anybody else have this issue?

I’m going to recreate the scenario: +2 runes of the earth, +2 runes of the grove, +2 runes of the water, +10 Nature Magic. I’m still only getting 2 seconds of protection even though that is a numerical 50% increase.

So I’d assume this is a bug?

@Jazenn; No I’m in the same boat, I can overstate my opinion at times and be overly argumentative about my own feelings on things.

I just don’t feel that anybody comes and posts on the ranger forums with the intention to do anything other than make the class better. If anything, I get more frustrated with the amount of “fluff” arguments that get posted where people are basically just screaming things are bad, with not sort of data or figures and at times even lack anecdotal substance to their claim.
That is where I feel the voice of the ranger community gets lost. While some of us try to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the class with possible improvements we each foresee, there are those among the community that would immediately start an argument with the attempt to shut it down because they either think ranger can only ever be garbage or only ever be the most perfect class on gods green earth that requires no work whatsoever.

The biggest problem the ranger community has is the community itself. It’s good to see vocal leaders like Eurantien and Jazenn and Dante though, who can have a debate through shared experience, and even though there are some frustrations and disagreements, there is still support for arguments being used in each case and the overall goal is still to improve the class to its maximum potential.

As for myself, I’m probably more of an analytical theorycrafter than anything else. My biggest enjoyment is creating and testing builds and weapon combinations and seeing how strong things are in comparison to one another.
More than anything right now I just wish the game didn’t feel so stagnant to play. There is only so much trap ranger/BM ranger (I have tried glass but it doesn’t suit how I like to play) I can play before I want new toys.

jkctmc.8754:

jcbroe; There has been much more feedback from developers on the Thief forums, asking them how to make the Thief better, with very little on the Ranger forums. How long should we wait before we get tired of it? I’ve been playing my Mesmer, and Thief a lot lately, and quite frankly it is nonesense. I play the Ranger very well, but my GOD is it kitten easy to play the other classes in comparison.

Keep in mind, I only WvW. My friends, and guild have to literally beg me for hours before I do PvE, and sPvP is so boring, it isn’t funny. Though WvW is getting just as boring too.

They asked that months ago, and how many suggestions from that thread actually came into existence?
I’m not advocating patience either. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and such, and if people don’t want to play, they shouldn’t play.
I played guild wars 1 for almost a decade, exclusively as a ranger spending most of my time doing all forms of pvp.
I have been disappointed with the game since launch because of versatility issues. It isn’t because of what we CAN do. It’s what we CAN’T do but have the potential to do with our classes.

Point is, I could be negative as well and go on and on and on about inherent design flaws and scrapping unique skills and playstyle capabilities present in guild wars 1 to basically downgrading combat into whoever can roll their face on the keyboard better winning.
But what good does that really do? All I can do is play the game as it is presented to me while trying to get better and find enjoyment with it, while formulating my own ideas as to how things could be better and post them from time to time in the hopes that a dev actually clicks on my thread and takes an idea from my suggestion.

If I’m not having fun or enjoying guild wars 2, I play something else. My prior experience with the ANet dev team tells me that if I want to see something significant, I need to give the game 4-6 month breaks at a time if I want to avoid disappointment.

Yea, the official forums weren’t up for a while at the start.

And yea, I would love to agree with you. I always prefer logos to pathos, but sadly, it’s not working here.

Look, I would love to see a civil, rational debate to be opened with a dev, but until they’re here to listen, all we can do is shout “HEY, COME HERE AND TALK TO US! THIS MATTERS!”

I am actually just cynical to anything working particularly well after watching the Guru pvp state of the game where they even sat down with top tier pvp players to discuss the game and mechanics and balance, and then take away from that discussion the implementations put out in the last build.

In my own way I guess my idea is kind of insulting, because I feel that if things aren’t concise, formatted “pretty,” and information heavy, then they seem to pass right over the devs level of comprehension.

Dahkeus.8243:

jcbroe.4329:

It is obvious why the devs stay away from the ranger forum. It’s because not a single constructive topic can be started and continued constructively without another portion of the community attacking and dismissing it. We can’t even present ideas in a constructive formal, let alone have a constructive discussion and open criticism with agreements and disagreements about the positives and negatives of the state of the class.

There have been constructive threads here for months. You’re seeing a lot of frustration now because those threads have been ignored.

I’ve been very active on these forums since launch. The last time a dev made a post here, it was to promise something that didn’t get delivered, so it’s come to the point where many of us are realizing that calm, logical arguments aren’t going to be listened to. Sadly, we can either be the squeaky wheel, or we can be ignored.

I’ve been monitoring the forums since they launched, but initially had issues with logging in so I stuck mainly to guru until I could figure it out and had something worth saying. So yes, I am aware of that poor communication that happened with Jon Peters.
However, it doesn’t help matters when you see so much of the community arguing with each other about topics that have been argued to death since launch either. The stickied bug list at the top is probably the most compiled and constructive list of things to work on for the class that has been made so far.
The issue I was trying to address is that every single discussion the thread ends up derailing over some emotional-fueled opinion bloated argument that at the end of the day is an argument that has been had before.
The fact is is that if we could, as a community, pool our collective resources and playstyles and produce a well designed and thought out pros and cons, what works and what doesn’t, with specific example instances (instead of people going, I use it, it works for me, so its good and nobody knows what they are talking about but me), and work to factor opinions out of the equation, it would probably serve all our intentions and purposes better.
Of course, this is an unlikely scenario…

Eurantien.4632:

The pet is a huge L2P issue. Anet will never remove pet from ranger. So do what you must.

…

I don’t feel I ever advocated the removal of the pet, or that I myself lacked understanding of how to manage it. It is a balanced mechanic within itself as well. However, on the topic of profession balance, name another class in the game in which you can potentially completely disable their class mechanic for an entire minute which in turn serves to greatly reduce a rangers DPS.

If anything, all I mean to suggest is that the pet should be given more options and be more interactive. More utilities should provide synergy between pet and player performance (similar to Rampage as Ones effect). Traits should do more for the pets, of effect more of the pet mechanic itself. Simple things that could be implemented too, like “at x amount of player HP, your pet is healed to full.” To take that a step towards being overpowered, a Protect Me effect could be added, but the suggested effect already readies your pet for healing through a cycle of lick wounds if you are downed by making sure it can take a few hits while healing.
Some sort of high trait cost trait that reduces the cooldown of petswap if the pet dies would be a justifiable mechanic as well.

The ranger doesn’t need huge changes like removing pets like people seem to think. All it needs is some love to open up some more build versatility.

As a summary, this is the type of thing I would love to see: http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Strike_as_One

In the end I guess you are right jcbroe. This wasn’t the initial intention of this post. Too bad I probably can’t help out with others camping the forums declaring a witchhunt on the ranger.

It isn’t just the ranger forums right now at least. The sPvP community in general is pretty up in arms about this update and the lack of content.

Jazenn.7526:

Just heard on another thread that the radius of Bonfire is increased when this trait is slotted.

It does, but that is also a direct effect of the description. However, that brings the question to mind, does it make the radius/hit range for offhand axe 5 larger as well?

contd…

-Traits. I’m not going to argue that things need to be moved around, and this definitely isn’t a ranger specific issue but; how did so many useless or meaningless traits make it out of beta? Every class to some degree has slots they want to use but then find are filled with useless or underwhelming options. The game needs a serious trait reorganization for everybody.

-Longbow in general needs a speed boost, or something. Not just for ranger, but warriors too. I keep seeing people argue for the longbow with things like “my rapid fire does x damage to an opponent in just 10 seconds, I don’t know what you guys are saying, its strong.” The fact is, with the same stat distribution, the shortbow does basically the same amount of damage per hit as rapid fire, but can accomplish it in potentially less time and at a more sustained rate. Longbow and Greatsword damage were both nerfed coming out of beta, but it was a bit too harsh and now the weapons suffer because of it. Specifically, the longbow more than the greatsword because the greatsword at least has some utility uses, but the longbow, if it is going to keep the current damage it does, needs a better pacing, because when you factor in somebody who can kite and dodge, the speed that the longbow attacks is pitiful and it really starts to lose any competitive potential that it could have had.

-Utilities. This isn’t ranger specific either but there are lots of useless/outclassed utility skills in the game that seriously need to be reworked. It amazes me that with rangers in particular, the dev team decided to scrap all of the innovative and unique skill ideas for ranger synergy with pets. The signets for rangers in particular have a terrible cooldown rate for what the active provides. In many cases, other signets on other classes that have similar, or even better effects, have half the cooldown rate that ranger signets do. That isn’t even an issue of game balance, that goes all the way back to an issue of algebra and arithmetic. A good example is warrior Endure Pain for 90s with not traits necessary versus rangers Signet of Stone with 120s and a necessary 30 trait point to apply it to the player. Now, I’m not mathematician, but I don’t think that the equation balances out there at the end.

At the end of the day though, none of these things are major changes that are needed. They really are just polishing up the game. Every class in the game has something they can say needs to be changed, but the ranger community is the only one I get frustrated with because of all the people who so readily put on their blinders and shut down anybodies criticism who doesn’t agree with their own because they enjoy their class. At the end of the day, everybody just wants to have the best experience they feel they could be having, so really, every single one of us has the same intention. People just need to learn to be more tolerant of each others opinions and criticisms.

It is obvious why the devs stay away from the ranger forum. It’s because not a single constructive topic can be started and continued constructively without another portion of the community attacking and dismissing it. We can’t even present ideas in a constructive formal, let alone have a constructive discussion and open criticism with agreements and disagreements about the positives and negatives of the state of the class.

contd….

Some general points that people are making that remain true:
-the implementation of pets is poor when viewing the game as a whole. rangers are the only class in the entire game that can be crippled by their own class mechanic. It doesn’t make it any better than pets, in certain situations, are useless no matter what the player does because of the instant death issues. Regardless of how much damage the pet does or does not do, the ranger is the only class that can be crippled by its class mechanic. It’s a design flaw, and unfortunately its something that most ranger advocates will just snicker at, then using that ignorance and arrogance they have been practicing say “well that’s a L2P issue. The class isn’t for you.” In fact, it is an issue with balanced design, and if the architecture is meant to hold in place, there needs to be much better traiting options implemented for pets to make up for the hindrance they can potentially cause.

-Dante mentioned it earlier, and it is a shame it got lost in the depths of an argument, but: rangers sacrifice more survival going glass cannon than almost every other class in the game. This stems from poor utility choices. Other classes, untraited, have damage mitigation on their burst skills, stealth, teleports, and vulnerabilities, as well as decent escape options. Rangers have to trait just to get a true invulnerability, and Protect Me deliberately forces you to sacrifice your class mechanic, which would line up with some other classes in the game if the pet didn’t hold such a large percentage of the rangers overall damage output. Most of the evades rangers have access to are on utility or condition based weapons, and the evades themselves don’t have much damage output potential, especially when compared to Blurred Frenzy and Pistol Whip, so traiting full glass cannon doesn’t net the same potential that it does on almost, if not every other class in the game.

-Spirits are pretty much useless, and the people that claim success with them must not play other classes to understand the potential that spirits could have but don’t. If the benefits, when activated, provided the benefit to every ally in a certain effective radius, the tune would be changed. But affecting 1 person every 10s with mostly useless effects (unless they could stack more than once every 10s) is pretty underwhelming.

Before the thread went extremely overboard with emotion (not to say it shouldn’t have, it was the exact reactions that were to be expected based on some of the ignorant things people say) there were a few good points made.
First of all, outside of high level/high end PvE content, nobody is arguing the ranger isn’t balanced. People who argue game balance from a purely PvE experience should, in the definition of the that doesn’t equate to an insult, be considered casual gamers that are speaking from a casual perspective where classes aren’t pitted up directly against each other to see which can outperform the other to secure a victory (with the given factor of player skill in that base description of PvP).
WvW is more competitive than PvE, but much more gear based, so a balance argument can be… “misinformed” coming purely from that perspective as well simply because of the unattainable distributions as well as stat numbers.
Once that basic idea is out of the way, the next thing is:

The point of the OP. Now, I personally understand what you are trying to accomplish with the thread. There are quite a few emotion fueled exaggerations being flung around, and the goal was to try to share what experience you had to see if it could solve problems the community was having. However, and this is even more geared at Jazenn than you; it should be noted that even if you both can give positive and advice and opinions, it shouldn’t turn into using your positive experiences to express other peoples criticisms of the mechanics of the class.

Lightning Reflexes over sickem, if you are talking purely out-surviving :P

A lot of high damage, class cannon style classes rely on stuns and knockdowns to ensure their burst lands, and Lightning Reflexes can counter popular setups like Bulls → hundred blades and basilisk venom → steal/CnD/backstab.

It isn’t the most game changing option ever, but there are situations where the build will gain more survival from doing this.

Joey.3928:

transferring conditions to your pet is not dooming your pet to death as it is the same to you. 3 conditions is still very good.

Imagine combining all conditions wiped off you every 10 seconds, get that food buff/melandru runes to make conditions shorter duration, signet of renewal, healing spring. Conditions would be no issue at all. Since this is a 30 pt trait in toughness, it will likely mean you have high armor too. Too powerful.

That doesn’t change the fact that it was “whack-a-mole” balancing and that nothing was improved to provide any more versatility or viability to the class. Spirit Rangers were “too powerful” in beta as well, and now look at their position.
This is the same type of balancing that they were recorded as saying they were going to avoid, then turned around, floored the accelerator, and went right for it.

I’m not arguing that it wasn’t too powerful, I’m arguing that you can’t nerf everything rangers get that is a powerful option and then expect anything less than outrage from the community when nothing is changed to be more competitive in contrast.

A summary of the ranger section of the balance changes is that all they significantly altered for the class was making rangers less effective without making anything significantly more effective to warrant competitive viability. It was a bad decision to release this change for the rangers now, and it could have been pushed back to a point in time where rangers would have received some other beneficial changes that would open up some build diversity, which is the major complaint from the ranger community in terms of pvp (lack of build diversity).

Electro.4173:

Spirit Weapons were terribly frail after the last patch and getting killed far too easily, especially considering they spend most of their time in melee range of enemies. The buff was perfectly justified, and I don’t really know if even thats going to make enough of a difference. I’ll have to actually test them out.

I hate the mentality of “Well if we don’t get buffed no one else deserves to either”. Buffs should be given where needed, not given out only if other professions can get buffs too.

Not to say Ranger spirits don’t need improvement (personally I’d prefer a reduction of that bothersome internal cooldown over health, but exactly what needs to be improved is another matter), but complaining about something that needed a buff getting improved just because ours didn’t get buffed too is just petty.

Not a single person in this thread has complained that guardians got a buff (unless I legitimately missed that person post scrolling though). People are only complaining that on a class that has a similar mechanic that is just as in need of work as another classes received the work it needed, and that it wasn’t an across the board improvement in something that is lackluster for more than just 1 class.

Joey.3928:

Regarding the trait, in all honesty, pulling all conditions off you every 10 seconds seemed a bit…much. I think it is a fair change.

Not when ANet acknowledged that rangers suffer from an apex predator syndrome when it comes to build viability, and then after that acknowledgement, instead of increasing factors that would significantly benefit other builds, the decrease the effectiveness of a trait that decreased the effectiveness of some of the only viable builds rangers can run.
Essentially, they just participated in the “whack-a-mole” style nerfing they claimed they were attempting to avoid, especially because nothing was increased in competitive viability in return.

Uncle Salty.6342:

jcbroe.4329:

Uncle Salty.6342:

I have a ranger, as i do a guardian.

You’re missing one important point. We all know how squish these are. For example in higher lvl fractals or certain boss fights, it still wouldn’t change any outcome.

Maybe within an aoe it lasts another 2 ticks but still dies within one skill cast. What really is the point of it.

This is insignificant. There are more pressing issues with the class.

But you missed the point that it is a pvp oriented update and that there is content that exists outside of fractals.

Not to belittle the point that there are more pressing issues, because that fact still stands.

Well if you say pvp then it’s a side i won’t step into. My stance is Anet needs to separate values between PVP and PVE like most action MMOs already have. This isn’t even a wow reference.

Until they do so, they’ll never achieve the balance players desire. It’s just like condition ion damage. The only reason why condition damage can be so much more effective in PVP contrary to PVE is in the vast difference of health pools we’re dealing with.

They did that in guild wars 1, and it was effective.
In guild wars 2, they went with the decision of content over quality, then released the game in beta, and are now taking naps at work instead of fixing the game, and not implementing the same things that made guild wars 1 pvp a success like split skills and observer mode.

Uncle Salty.6342:

I have a ranger, as i do a guardian.

You’re missing one important point. We all know how squish these are. For example in higher lvl fractals or certain boss fights, it still wouldn’t change any outcome.

Maybe within an aoe it lasts another 2 ticks but still dies within one skill cast. What really is the point of it.

This is insignificant. There are more pressing issues with the class.

But you missed the point that it is a pvp oriented update and that there is content that exists outside of fractals.

Not to belittle the point that there are more pressing issues, because that fact still stands.

I’d just like to echo and support the sentiments and ideas being presented in this thread.

Boomstin.3460:

General

- Using stealth no longer resets NPC aggression tables.

Hmm, could this mean that pet resumes missing moving targets that drop out of stealth that it was attacking previously? Maybe a slight ranger buff by accident?

I fixed this for you to make it a more accurate description of what could potentially happen now haha.

rylark.3418:

Just use 3 traps and you can literally kill anyone 1v1, even a bunker guardian.
And about the 60-75% spells being useless, that’s the same for many classes bro. This patch is just going to make a lot of people go to TERA and leave this embarassing “balance team” working on this game. How’s this even a “huge balance pvp update”?

It isn’t a huge update and you’re right, useless skills isn’t a ranger specific problem.

That statement alone highlights the issue within itself, how is the fact that 60-75% of ALL utility skills in this game being useless not a GLARING balance issue.
The classes need their mechanics fixed and utilities reworked to make everything work and everything have a function that is competitive with any other choice you could slot in its position. Then, once the classes are balanced inside themselves, they should be faced off against each other to get results to then balance the metagame.

All of this should have happened prior to launch. Instead, the community is still continuing to test an unfinished game. The devs however, instead of being grateful, are choosing to ignore feedback and push their own agenda which equates to content over quality.

Dardamaniac.1295:

no actually nerfs and just a major buff…i cant see a reason to be sad for the rangers..As for the pvp community,i can sense some saddness

The change to the skill is insignificant to the overall performance of the class, both within itself as well as its performance within the current metagame.

It’s like taking the limit of 1/x as x approaches infinity. No matter what the value of x is, the limit is still going to approach the same value.

The “balance change” is disappointing because all it is saying is that ranger gameplay will continue to be stagnant until another potential update, which, with the current record, will result in nothing significant again except maybe becoming better underwater or having one of our weapons autoattack speeds nerfed.

rylark.3418:

dmbucs.1367:

Leaf.3156:

Every profession gets massive buffs while Ranger is ignored, what’s left to discuss? This is basically every single balance patch.

I wouldn’t say every profession got massive buffs, but for the most part they all got minor buffs and maybe some minor nerfs like RTL for ele’s. The problem is that Rangers need a big buff and were told to be getting one that hasn’t come in months… I would say Guardians probably got a bigger buff this patch and already were pretty solid in PVE and PVP. Little love for the Ranger this patch again…

You kidding right? Have you seen gasmask playing as a trap ranger? He can solo 3 guys and kill them, if you think rangers needs a buff I’ve bad news for you mate.

When 60-75% of potential utilities on a class are ignored because of the remaining being more useful and viable, then yes, those 60-75% not being used need a buff to make them more competitive options to choose for slotting utilities.
1 build with 1 basic trait setup working well =/= a class not having the need for buffs.

awe extender.1908:

this thread will selfdestruct in 3…2…..

[Anet dont like naming devs!]

ANet doesn’t like “naming” anything. They don’t name buffs/nerfs/mechanic changes in advance, etc.
Any rage they receive is self-invoked on their part, and when they can’t even be adult enough to have open discussions with the community about mechanic and balance issues (and instead choose to keep everybody in the dark until the day of the patch), then when they shut down threads like this that don’t even have a flaming nature to them yet, then it just reaffirms all the rage induced opinions people have of them, which eventually leads to the loss of numbers in the player community.

Discuss?
They nerfed 1/3 of rangers grandmaster traits actually worth traiting to, while buffing a skill on a weapon that still has almost zero synergy or viability with any weapon set.

The only thing left to discuss is what game I’ll be playing instead of guild wars 2.

Not to confuse this with me saying ranger is bad, since it is my main. It’s just that gameplay is stagnant, repetitive, and boring, and when there is still the question of the game needing mechanic fixes and ACTUAL balance fixes and all that gets changed for a class is a few minor discrepancies accompanying a nerf that affects all of rangers viable competitive builds, then I see no reason to log in until something about the game actually gets changed that merits the potential to find enjoyment with the game again.

The entire section named “balance changes” should be renamed to “profession tweaks,” because changes implies that something actually changed. In fact, all the just happened was that a trait was nerfed that made trap builds less effective, and then nothing was buffed to provide more viable builds, after the devs clears stated that rangers suffer from an apex predator issue with their builds.
Acknowledgement =/= change. There should be no new content additions to the game until the mechanic issues on EVERY profession page are addressed and taken care of, and THEN balanced accordingly.
Once that is taken care of, then it is time to move on to putting out new content.

Eurantien.4632:

Dante Dragonhand.2538:

Lol no, not even in the right hands. Its still a crappy weapon. If it was good, Id be on my ranger all day, instead Im on my engineer. No its not a learn to play issue either, Im actually good.

I use LB in Paids. Your argument is invalid.

Usage does not equate to effectiveness or being an optimal choice. So technically, neither argument is truly logically valid.

Although based on my own experience and testing with the longbow, inside of 1000 range there is no point at which the longbow ever outperforms the shortbow. This was confirmed numerically showing that rapid fire outputs an almost equivalent amount of damage to the shortbow autoattack.
This also means that unless somehow a person can keep an opponent at farther than 1000 range and then force them to eat auto attacks over a fairly mediocre time-to-kill period, the longbow doesn’t have a real purpose other than being a preference.

Cypheric Knight.9076:

I don’t know if many people have noticed it, but Rangers are not necessarily meant for mass damage. If you look at the majority of the skills, they all apply conditions. I do not understand why so many people complain about the damage and speed of a ranger. My main is currently a Shortbow/Longbow Ranger. I love to pay WvW, and due to the many conditions and debuffs I can apply, I rarely ever have a problem in a 1v1 fight while I am running around solo. Sure thieves and other glass cannons hit me hard, but I can hit them hard back, while having decent defense. I don’t have any upgrades on anything and I rarely end up face down in a 1v1 (not saying I win, but I can get half way across the map at least with a group of 4 or 5 chasing me). I will too admit there are some bugs and things that could be different for rangers, but people complain to much about rangers not being able to do something that they weren’t meant to do. At this moment, I see/have only 2 problems with the ranger:
-The bug/problem with the Lick Wounds skill while downed.
-The fact that every class has a range that is as good as a rangers longbow(without traits applied)

With that said I believe that rangers are really great as they are and that Anet has done a pretty good job at keeping things balanced. Thank you Anet.

I play mainly pvp, and I’ve tested this, but you are welcome to do it as well to see for yourself that if you build for power of any kind, glass cannon, sustain, whatever, you will have less DPS than any other classes builds when mirrored with those stats.
I understand what you mean by the ranger being centered more around conditions and such, but that doesn’t mean that the ranger should be pigeonholed into running a certain type of build.
This is again, from a pvp exclusive standpoint, where the stat combinations you can reach in pve are not available to you. I wouldn’t take the super negative stance that the ranger is terrible like some people do (although that mostly just reflects a jaded community). But I would say that the longbow should be able to consistently outdamage the shortbow to differentiate itself and make it the more viable power weapon. This could be done be either increasing the attack pace of the longbow or increasing the damage each hit does, or both.
Lots of ranger utilities are subpar as well. Traps are probably the best mix of refinement, uniqueness, and effectiveness that rangers can add to their bar, which doesn’t help people feel like they are being pigeonholed any less.
Signets could be a bit stronger of an effect and have lesser cooldowns.
Shouts could do more (not all, mostly just guard).
Spirits could use anything positive. Better effect and survival as a generic blanket for the type of improvement they need.
Even rampage as one is pretty lackluster (the warrior elite signet essentially does the same thing with half the cooldown).
Rangers could use a heal that is affected directly by a trait (every other class has a trait that affects the cooldown of their heal, or provides some extremely unique feature. Rangers also healing their pets shouldn’t count as a unique feature, that should be a given. Healing Spring being effected by Trap Potency would be more along what I am mentioning).

Most of what I mentioned is pretty straightforward and it resembles the type of fixes that every class needs right now, on top of the mechanic bugs that are still in the game.

Columba.9730:

Obsidian.1328:

kidbs.8920:

Daddydeath.9371:

well fact of the matter is eles and rangers r getting nerfs soon so enjoy

I can only hope they nerf thieves at some point so you scrubs actually have to learn to play rather than facerolling.

lulz

I highly doubt it though. Thieves are the devs’ darling class.

How getting hit while stealthed doesn’t break stealth will forever be beyond my rational mind.

Indeed. Single most opd skill I’ve ever seen. Anet should be ashamed of this.

I just want to echo this opinion because it’s something I’ve been thinking since day one.
“Nerf the trap rangers whose traps do OMG 4k total damage in about 8s so that I can walk around stealth, press one button, and do 7k damage, without anybody being able to break my stealth. That would make the game more balanced.”

I main ranger but I do have a thief I also pvp on, and I’m not sure why the thief community complains so much about rangers. The ability to constantly stealth and remove conditions is something almost every thief build has access to, and I personally run sword so I have a constant shadow step the removes conditions on my weapon set. As long as thieves don’t run pure glass cannon there is no reason why they have trouble, other than it being a factor of player skill.

glock.2089:

jcbroe.4329:

There are diminishing returns in the game. A good way to see this is to add 100 power to a build that has 3k attack already versus adding 100 power to a build with only 2k attack and noticing how much the damage scales (you should see less of an increase adding to the 3k than the 2k).

This is incorrect. There are no diminishing returns to adding Power in GW2.

Power to damage is a set ratio according to Anet’s published equation:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Damage

“Base direct damage is given by the following equation:
Damage done = (weapon damage) * Power * (skill-specific coefficient) / (target’s Armor)”

The LACK of diminishing returns specifically related to power has been discussed on multiple threads such as this one:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/I-think-we-might-need-Diminishing-Returns

“Going from 1000 Power to 2000 Power will double your DPS, and going to 3000 Power will increase it again by the same amount.”

Power of course does not increase the condition portion of those skills/weapons that do both direct damage and condition damage (condition damage is determined by another equation which does not contain power as a variable).

I only know what I can test, and there is a chance I might be testing it wrong, or with not enough data points.
But what I’m doing to get the result I’m about to post at the end is this:
(I am not using a steady weapon because it can not reach the 3k attack range)
So, because I am not using a steady weapon, I am taking the average of 10 non-critical hits and am averaging them together. Then I add 100 power and repeat the process. I did this for 2k to 2.1k attack and for 3k to 3.1k attack.
2k average: 175.7
2.1k average: 187.3
difference: 11.6
3k average: 301.4
3.1k average: 310.8
difference: 9.4
I have repeated this test numerous times. Sometimes I get a variance closer to 1 and sometimes I get a variance closer to 3. Overall though, this seems to be a consistent pattern.
I also tested what you quoted: “Going from 1000 Power to 2000 Power will double your DPS, and going to 3000 Power will increase it again by the same amount.”
You can see the above being tested with a doubled attack rating. So that first:
2k: 175.7 * 2 = 351.4 != 3k: 301.4
But onto power, since that is specifically what it is quoting. Result:
1k power average: 184.8
2k power average: 331.6
184.8 * 2 = 369.6 != 331.6
I tested this multiple times to the same or similar effect, never really seeing a much closer difference than 30 damage.
I’m not able to reach 3k power in pvp so I’m unable to test that range, though I already disproved the quote using a logical argument form( p = doubling power, q = doubling DPS;
p → q (p implies q) given,
~q (not q; shown),
therefore: ~p (not p; modus tollens))

So, while testing diminishing returns definitely didn’t return a large enough variance to conclusively determine whether or not it exists in the scaling of power, I have definitely been able to test and conclude that doubling your power does not double your DPS. If I was able to test from 2k power to 3k power, I would be able to give a more conclusive result on whether there is diminishing returns by comparing the differences of the increases to DPS.

Nobody has to believe me even though I tested and retested over and over. If I had a video recording device and a youtube channel (which I don’t wish to make) I would definitely upload all the testing I do all the time so that I could just link videos and not waste forum space with this stuff.
But anybody else is more than welcome to do their own testing and bring their own results to the table. I just wanted to show that I was speaking from a place of observation as opposed to opinion.

Xsorus.2507:

jcbroe.4329:

I haven’t seen this build since release month. 0/0/30/25/15 used to be a common setup and regarded as one of the better bunker style builds for rangers back in release month heading into October.
The 0/0/30/10/30 build actually evolved from some of the ideas of this build based on meta shifts. As people started building more and more towards survival, the build was not able to output enough damage fast enough. People observed that the pet could output consistently high enough damage to warrant dropping 15 in Nature Magic and adding to Beastmastery in order to maximize damage potential while retaining decent survival abilities.
I’m not really sure as to why the thread immediately received so much hate. I also think it’s humorous that people immediately attacked a build with their opinions without knowing the first thing about the build.
I’m not going to sift through every thread to find every reference, but a few quick ones:

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/68735-tpvp-ranger-pov-taking-suggestions-build-00302515/

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/69115-looking-for-survivability-shortsword-torch-build/

If you read these, remember what dates they were posted and at what point the community mindsets were at when the discussions were happening. There isn’t much to them, but it was at a point where trap builds were regarded as the only competitively viable build (the community mindset hasn’t really changed that much then, has it haha).

I couldn’t even find a thread were 0/0/30/10/30 existed during those dates, so I’m sticking to the idea that it evolved from the original 0/0/30/25/15 build. Which does not at all translate to one being more viable than the other by the way, as the evolution took place with a changing metagame and community.
Regardless, the build was an evasion tank/bunker then, and should function the same, if not better now that we have explored trait/sigil/rune/weapon options more thoroughly.

I believe I was the first person to come up with the 0/0/30/10/30 build.

I made sure to check back in old threads to find someone using it before November when i developed it, i could not (but that doesn’t mean someone wasn’t using it)

As for evolving it from the /0/0/30/25/15 build.

Not really, the way I evolved it was simple.

I use to use 0/30/10/0/30 as a Shortbow ranger

After the shortbow nerf, I decided to try out new weapon sets, and decided on Axe/Torch with Sword/Dagger after looking at Pain Inverter, I actually used close to the same setup now in terms of Skills (signet of wild/lightning/PI)

The reason I dropped the 20 points in Skirmishing for WS is I wanted to be beefy and I wanted Barkskin at the time as well (I was using Superior Rune of Hoelbrek at the time, because once you hit 20% life or whatever, you became a block of ice, I learned that you could pop QZ at the time and your pet would kill a thief standing next to you)

Eventually I read that EB actually removed all conditions so I dropped Barkskin.

At the time I was using a combination of Rabid Gear and Carrion Gear.

and using 0/10/30/0/30

I adopted 0/0/30/10/30 when Apothecary came out as a gear set, as I wanted more healing at the time.

That’s how that spec got developed.

This is one of the first posts I actually made on the build

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Thoughts-on-my-World-vs-World-Ranger-Build-i-ve-been-running/first#post608398

As you can see, I was using 0/10/30/0/30 at the time, because Apothecary was like 1-2 weeks away

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/Anyone-else-tempted-to-get-Apoth-Gear/first#post812400

This is the first post I made about the idea of 0/0/30/10/30

Sorry, I didn’t mean this as a literal one came from the other type thing. I just meant that at some point, somebody made a bunker/tank out of a 0/0/30/25/15 that was part of the metagame for awhile, but then as the community and meta evolved, the build no longer worked with the meta/community. Then, your build came along with a similar playstyle to the previous one with similar player tactics, damage source, and weapon choice, but performing in areas that the first one lacked performance in, and so now the 0/0/30/10/30 is replacing the prior build.
I only meant to say that idealistically, one evolved from the other, not literally.

Some things to consider when comparing these two builds:

How does the Bountiful Hunter trait compare to Nature’s Wrath trait for damage?
How much survivability/added damage can Fortifying Bond bring to your pet?
How big of an impact does loosing out on the second major BM trait bring?
1500 more health vs 150 more healing power? 1500 more health = a bigger buffer, but loosing out on regen from the signet + lower heals/regeneration
Survivability/damage of pets?

To answer these questions to the best of my ability.
1. The first one is a toss up and is really based on how much power you have to begin with. I’m going to assume it is the base power + healing. I’m also going to assume the for bountiful hunter, the boon being used isn’t might since aside from the elite and the warhorn, rangers don’t really have a lot of access to might on their own. In this scenario with Shamans Gear, the 0/0/30/10/30 build does do more damage. However, I never said the 0/0/30/25/15 build outdamaged the 0/0/30/10/30 build, so I find this argument irrelevant to survival (I am aware that surviving but making no progress in a fight isn’t useful, but that is a different discussion, I was talking only survival)
2. It actually depends on the pet. There are diminishing returns in the game. A good way to see this is to add 100 power to a build that has 3k attack already versus adding 100 power to a build with only 2k attack and noticing how much the damage scales (you should see less of an increase adding to the 3k than the 2k). To put that into perspective of a pet, a pet with high power like a drake or wolf should about even out with their counterpart with 30 BM in terms of damage. High crit pets are going to benefit more because of the way crits and damage scaling work. But in general, again, the pet is going to be doing more DPS, but see above why it is irrelevant to survival.
Survival of the pet is a different story, and dependent on whether or not you are keeping constant regen on your pet with fortifying bond and healing spring/other sources or not. Crazily enough, if you are keeping constant regen on your pet, it can actually basically keep pace with the 0/0/30/10/30 build, assuming no regen is on the pet in that latter build. If it is though, then yes, the pet does have about 2xx more healing per second.
3. Depends on the pet. Again, I never made a DPS argument but rather a survival argument so this is still irrelevant. I am going to re-reference the link that answers DPS type questions: http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/79991-beastmastery-math-breakdown/
4. I actually have tested this one frequently, and I performed it again just to give some fresh, hard numbers. Both tests were performed in full Dwaynas with Shamans Amulet/Jewel.
0/0/30/10/30: Regen-269 Natural Healing 133(going to divide by 3 to get heal per second) SotW-129 269+44+129 = 442 health per second.
0/0/30/25/15: Regen-250 SotW-120 250+120 = 370 health per second. You lose 72 health per second to gain 1500 health. Natural healing would have to tick 7 times to make up for the raw survivability an extra 1500 health provides. That doesn’t count the +15% boon duration the 0/0/30/25/15 also has.
4. Survival of the pets is boon dependent in the 0/0/30/25/15 build. In general though, the 0/0/30/10/30 build adds 1.5k vitality and 150 toughness to the prior build, meaning raw number wise, and for the most part in every circumstance, the pet will survive better. This still doesn’t affect player survivability though, which is the only argument I believe I made.

I hope this helps. Yes, the 0/0/30/10/30 build has higher DPS, and I don’t believe I ever claimed otherwise, but in terms of pure survival, the 0/0/30/25/15 build performs better. I wasted a glory booster(haha) doing some testing to put some numbers out, but it is all for the sake of the community, as we strive to play the best ranger we can play.

Wanderer.5471:

Thanks for the info jcbroe! v.interesting. I can definitely see the thinking behind moving from 0/0/30/25/15 to 0/0/30/10/30 – i.e. getting more damage output from pets, and could certainly believe that’s how the build evolved. Interesting to have the history, haven’t been active on forums etc until recently.

Personally I like the (permanent from perma-regen) +5% damage i get from NM tree, i think it’s almost as good as the extra pet dmg you’d get from + 15 in BM since pets don’t actually land that many hits vs skilled opponents. Factor in the improved survivability and that’s why i prefer 30/25/15.

And you’re right, i absolutely use it as an evasion bunker build, the reason i have sword on one set and dagger on the other is so i always have a weapon evade no matter which set i’m in.

@ glock – some interesting ideas, unfortunately i only play spvp not WvW so my options are more limitted, but that apothecary set sounds like a good idea, especially since other bunker condition builds are the biggest threat, so you won’t lose much from the lower toughness.

No problem. The way I understand the choice to go 30 into BM is for the extra healing from Natural Healing and the 300 total points in healing. However, what many people fail to realize is that, along with not gaining much DPS on the pet overall (it is only 300 points total to each of their attributes, is isn’t doing as much as people think. Reference: http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/79991-beastmastery-math-breakdown/)

Another thing they don’t realize is that with 0/0/30/25/15 you gain +15% more boon duration and +1500 health. This actually works to directly increase survival better than the 0/0/30/10/30 version.

Just food for though, I’m glad you are enjoying your build and success with everybody. Hope you keep having fun (a lot of the community is jaded right now, it’s good to see people still having fun and success).

SerRolandStark.2758:

Arekai.5698:

This is a ranger only problem because 90% of the traits and skills make no sense or are completely useless. I’m sorry you leveled one to 80.
Either way, search for trap or regen Ranger. These are the only 2 viable Ranger builds.

Well, I admit I am very limited on my experience. But right now I’m running with a build that focuses little on traps but has some points into Beast Mastery with the +healing. So far I seem to be easily be the top DPS in instances, I have to reeeeally try to not pull aggro.

On a related note, why is it the ranger ALWAYS has major problems in every MMORPG? I played a hunter heavily in WoW Burning Crusade when they were extremely broken. I played a Bounty Hunter on SW:TOR and they were laughable compared to melee and sorcerers. Seems like no game can ever get the ranger right.

I’ll get to your OP, but to give an answer to this; ranger in guild wars 1 was very efficient. Guild Wars 1 was a very different game, but rangers essentially served the role of interrupter/condition pressure in PvP. With access to long lasting cripples and lots of block stances and good condition removal, rangers could split from a group and pressure an objective runner or start to solo a base, while keeping good pressure on a team and disabling key skills on the enemy team (think disabling healers or condition spells, or the mesmer, who shared the interrupter role but didn’t provide as much damage pressure, while being able to provide a stronger shutdown on casters).

With the transition to guild wars 2, lots of specific class roles either disappeared entirely or got meshed together and shared amongst a majority of the classes. With no dedicated healer and much more skill spam gameplay, on top of a UI change (you used to be able to see what skill a player was using under their name), interrupts the way they were in gw1 lost their place entirely, and because there is a damage focus in the game, rangers and mesmers had to evolve from utility classed into something new.

With mesmers, they went with clones and avoid-ability with high damage. With rangers, in beta, they were nature based with high damage. They decided to all but destroy the spirit build transitioning into release, and nerf longbow and greatsword damage to the ground (comparatively to the way it is now).

To try and help with your OP, I did this a little while back with the shortbow: http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/80146-heres-some-math-for-you-dps-comparisons/

In general, and I will admit that while I support my opinion with as much fact as I can produce, it is still opinion, that power/crit builds sacrifice more survival to do more burst damage, while condition builds have a strong enough sustain damage without sacrificing nearly as much survival for me to say that as this point, my preference is condition based builds. Note the I almost exclusively PvP though, so that plays a part in my decision as well.
As far as utilities, the most unique and most useful (again, opinion) are traps. Lightning Reflexes has its place in PvP, as does Signet of the Wild does on a healing based build. But overall, until I can see a more even tradeoff in PvP from survival to direct damage, I stick with a condition/toughness/precision trap build (rabid amulet/knights jewel 0/30/30/5/5 with sigil of earth shortbow and sword/torch sigil of energy/sigil of corruption and 5x runes of the lich +1x +25 vitality rune) that capitalizes on increasing vitality alongside the already decent armor rating so that dealing with the ever so popular burst damage in PvP is easier while still outputting great damage.

As far as PvE and gearing, I wouldn’t know, but I would be willing to gamble that with the stats you can achieve in PvE, there is a point where you can build power/crit build very effectively, without such a high survival tradeoff while still maintaining good damage. Unfortunately, a lot of traits and utility choices aren’t as supportive of power builds as you see on some other classes (20% damage on targets with less than 50% health, for example) so it gets left more up to player preference than it does being a better option. Certain traits obviously benefit certain weapons better than others, so that is also up to what weapon you choose and then the application of common sense.

Ryan.8367:

“1) Make traps aoe viewable like the rest of the aoe in the game
2)buff other rangers builds so people have more than one or two ways to be a viable class”

1. Why? Confused on this, if you make em visible or invisible , doesnt matter… They will still do their job when you run over them.

2. I beat numerous classes with condi build, sword / torch and gs bunker build, trapper builds of numerous types. – I’m just confused why the ranger has only 2 good builds? If we’re grasping straws here, what about the ele , which has only one viable build that could be considered overpowered due to the stats they’re able to generate.

It seems like you got outplayed and you’re just complaining that they’re overpowered because you yourself haven’t found a counter to it yet. That’s all I see here…. In games like this you WILL meet people who are better than you , regardless of the build so that’s just something you’re going to have to get used to, bottom line.

Traps don’t need to be visible. It is a balancing factor to make up for how few CC options rangers have. We shouldn’t have to gimp our class so that people who don’t want to build for any survival or condition counters have an easier time against us. Animations for a ranger throwing traps is obvious as well.

To all those snobby thieves (and any other class who used a similar argument to their high damage CC builds) who said “you can tell when a thief is about to backstab you, all you need to do is dodge,” rangers can now say: “it is obvious when a ranger is trying to walk you into traps or throw traps at you, all you have to do is avoid them and dodge them.”

I say, if rangers are FINALLY being regarded as somewhat viable and competitive, then good. Hopefully it draws some dev attention to the class to get some of the bugged mechanics, useless traits (all classes have both of these to an extent), and pet issues/quality of life examined.

I haven’t seen this build since release month. 0/0/30/25/15 used to be a common setup and regarded as one of the better bunker style builds for rangers back in release month heading into October.
The 0/0/30/10/30 build actually evolved from some of the ideas of this build based on meta shifts. As people started building more and more towards survival, the build was not able to output enough damage fast enough. People observed that the pet could output consistently high enough damage to warrant dropping 15 in Nature Magic and adding to Beastmastery in order to maximize damage potential while retaining decent survival abilities.
I’m not really sure as to why the thread immediately received so much hate. I also think it’s humorous that people immediately attacked a build with their opinions without knowing the first thing about the build.
I’m not going to sift through every thread to find every reference, but a few quick ones:

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/68735-tpvp-ranger-pov-taking-suggestions-build-00302515/

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/69115-looking-for-survivability-shortsword-torch-build/

If you read these, remember what dates they were posted and at what point the community mindsets were at when the discussions were happening. There isn’t much to them, but it was at a point where trap builds were regarded as the only competitively viable build (the community mindset hasn’t really changed that much then, has it haha).

I couldn’t even find a thread were 0/0/30/10/30 existed during those dates, so I’m sticking to the idea that it evolved from the original 0/0/30/25/15 build. Which does not at all translate to one being more viable than the other by the way, as the evolution took place with a changing metagame and community.
Regardless, the build was an evasion tank/bunker then, and should function the same, if not better now that we have explored trait/sigil/rune/weapon options more thoroughly.

The overall tone of the state of the game was ridiculous at times. Like the aforementioned ranger underwater jokes, or how they don’t know about the state of the balance of the game because they run a 5 man engineer team.
There’s a line between a vow of silence on future updates, and then just spitting in peoples faces. Maybe let’s be more careful about some of our condescending remarks next state of the game.

I acknowledged your comment. No animosity, I appreciate opinions, I was just trying to make a point. Some people think the things they do are right and everything else sucks or is wrong. I see you aren’t one of those people. I apologize to you.

I do appreciate that. The community could use more people discerning fact from opinion since I am noticing that a portion of the guild wars 2 community equates their anecdotal experiences to fact, which in turn creates circular debates that do nothing to add to the knowledge base of the rest of the community, or progress of the game as a whole. It’s why I was keeping away from the official forums and staying on guru to begin with, however, the guru ranger pvp community is very dead as of lately.
I got fed up with the stagnation and decided to be more vocal here on the official forums, by helping when I can, be educated by other players, and by adding whatever I can to the progress of the ranger community.
I also understand that people who have had success with ranger are jaded with the rest of the people on forums from all the constant opinionated arguments and overall complaining. It is a two way street however, and even though the devs aren’t required to tell the community anything, the lack of acknowledgement of the bugs people find and issues people have, or even an update thread every once in awhile, doesn’t encourage people to be positive and is probably serving to throw more fuel on the fire that is the dissatisfaction of people who express their negativity constantly.

I have definitely gone on too long however, and it is probably time to get this thread on topic.

kidbs.8920:

Just curious, why has no one mentioned the carrion amulet? It seems to me that it gives you a much needed boost to your hp pool while also boosting both your power and condition damage. Sure you’re giving up crit-based proc abilities but you’re beefing up the direct damage of all of your attacks in return.

I’m thinking in terms of a more hybrid trap/BM build along the lines of this:
http://gw2skills.net/editor/?fMAQNAnfVnAVEXZbFWBxaZgo9gSm/8MFHyRPFoX9nskoJB;TgAgyCuoay0koJbTumkNB

Well whenever I am making builds, I keep this in mind, particular, the bottom quick way using the survival hierarchy to calculate survival. I also compare DPS, but in my comparisons I’ve done in the past that I don’t feel like linking from guru right now, the DPS difference between carrion and rabid is negligible, though the Rabid does slightly outdamage carrion, even though it isn’t significant.

However, back to the point about survivability, on a typical 0/30/30/5/5 trap build (I will bold the best armor rating amongst the group, and I am personally well aware that this is against direct damage and that there is more to survival than this, but this is a good reference point):

These are all pvp items:

Carrion Amulet/Carrion Jewel:
(22022*2280)/10000 = 5021 rating
Carrion Amulet/Shamans Jewel:
(21272*2405)/10000 = 5115.9 rounded to 5116 rating
Carrion Amulet/Shamans Jewel/6x toughness rune set (lets say 6x Melandrus):
(21272*2570)/10000 = 5466.9 rounded to 5467 rating
for some more quick mixed:
Carrion Amulet/Rabid jewel/vitality runes (5x + 1x different): 5457
Carrion Amulet/Rabid jewel/toughness runes(6x): 5361
Carrion Amulet/Knights Jewel/vitality runes (5x + 1x different): 5568
Carrion Amulet/Knights Jewel/toughness runes(6x): 5507

Rabid Amulet/Rabid Jewel:
(15582*2924)/10000 = 4556 rating
Rabid Amulet/Knights Jewel:
(16832*2849)/10000 = 4795 rating
Rabid Amulet/Knights Jewel/5x vitality set + 1x different vitality set:
(18732*2849)/10000 = 5336.7 rounded to 5337
for some more quick mixed:
Rabid/Carrion/Vitality (5x + 1x): 5194
Rabid/Carrion/Toughness(6x): 4922
Rabid/Shaman/Vitality (5x +1x): 5199
Rabid/Shaman/Toughness(6x): 4891

Shamans Amulet/Shamans Jewel:
(15582*3203)/10000 = 4990.9 rounded to 4991
Shamans Amulet/Shamans Jewel/Vitality runes (5x + 1x):
(17482*3203)/10000 = 5599
Shamans Amulet/Knights Jewel/Vitality Runes(5x = 1x):
(18732*3078)/10000 = 5765.7 rounded to 5768
Shamans Amulet/Knights Jewel/Toughness(6x):
(16832*3243)/10000 = 5458.6 rounded to 5459
quick ones now:
Shaman/rabid/vitality: 5512
Shaman/rabid/toughness: 5170
Shaman/carrion/vitality: 5612
Shaman/carrion/toughness: 5296

What to take away from this. Well, it should be obvious that the combinations that provide that largest focus on defensive stats (shaman + vitality stuff) also add the least to the damage stats.
The most damaging combinations with the highest armor rating:
1st. Carrion/Rabid/Vitality = 5457
2nd. Carrion/Rabid/Toughness = 5361
3rd. Rabid/Carrion/Vitality = 5194

As to why people don’t use carrion more, it is because they either desire other stats or effects, don’t need that much survivability to suit their playstyle, or don’t know any better.

Jazenn.7526:

jcbroe.4329:

Jazenn.7526:

jcbroe.4329:

Not sure why you would run with rampagers instead of rabid (PvP gearing wise) on a trap build.
Anywho, it would be a long fight if we assume they are equally skilled players. The trap build wins if they can keep constant poison on the BM while whittling away conditions. The BM is at a disadvantage the whole time really because even though the pets will eat the traps, they will be crippled and taking lots of damage, which could result in a loss of damage from both sides.

In the end I still say trap ranger wins, simply because the BM has to rely on AI to do damage, which, regardless of how well people can micro the pet, pet pathing and AI is more of a random factor to be using to deal damage, as compared to traps where the damage is more in the hands of the player. In the end, player skill beats AI.

Rampagers gives more power than rabid, that’s a reason. Pet swap usually comes at the same time as trap cd, so pets could be swapped after eating traps. Pet AI is fine if you know how to use the pet, I never find it a problem, it is player skill as well. Also, BM doesn’t have to depend on pet for damage, I just use my pet for burst really, its a supplement, not all I have.

I can see the gain in power, but that’s like sacrificing 600+ toughness (569 if not running rabid jewel or toughness jewel) for 150 extra DPS. Some people may be able to justify that and see success with that, and I’m not saying its bad, I guess it just doesn’t fit my playstyle.
Going back to player skill though, if 2 highly, equally skilled rangers are playing, then I would expect them to know how pets function well enough to be able to take as little damage from them as possible because of how well they know their own profession and how pets work.
The same can be said for the BM ranger, as they should know and be able to avoid traps, especially since throwing traps on the ground is an obvious animation.
Most likely it would end as a stalemate. But, if I really had to choose a winner, I still believe the trap ranger is going to out DPS the BM to the point where it may be significant enough to give them the edge.
However, if the trap ranger is the healing variant, I say it’s a total stalemate. Forcing me to choose though, the BM has the edge in that scenario because the healing trap build sacrifices its crit procs so now the BM build will be the one doing more damage.

Well there you go, it doesn’t fit your play style, it is damage chosen over survivability. I’m glad you have an opinion, just don’t assume that because you don’t like something, then it isn’t good or viable. Like you say, I think it will be a close fight regardless, just because they are two of the same class. I think this can go for any matchup.

I didn’t say I didn’t like it in general, it just isn’t my preference on a trap build. Very big difference, because I would go as far as to say that rangers are one of the best users of the rampagers amulet in pvp.
However, I do remember saying my opinion while admitting it was opinion and claiming it was viable, though albeit indirectly :

…I’m not saying its bad…

though I guess that could be read with a sarcastic undertone, so I apologize if that is the way that was taken. I never meant to insinuate the viability of things, and was only trying to add to what I think is a very interesting topic of discussion.

If looking at greatsword for damage alone, then I say it isn’t viable at all.

It does bring utility to the table that can be used in lots of different ways though. An easy to use leap to leap through healing spring and other combo fields, a fairly hard hitting bleed that’s easy to use, a block/knockback.
Could some of the skills be better, yes. But I feel greatsword is a good compliment for builds lacking certain utilities that the greatsword offers, but I would never argue that it has a good damage output and I would never use it as a primary weapon because of that factor right there.
If the auto attack damage was increased though…

Jazenn.7526:

jcbroe.4329:

Not sure why you would run with rampagers instead of rabid (PvP gearing wise) on a trap build.
Anywho, it would be a long fight if we assume they are equally skilled players. The trap build wins if they can keep constant poison on the BM while whittling away conditions. The BM is at a disadvantage the whole time really because even though the pets will eat the traps, they will be crippled and taking lots of damage, which could result in a loss of damage from both sides.

In the end I still say trap ranger wins, simply because the BM has to rely on AI to do damage, which, regardless of how well people can micro the pet, pet pathing and AI is more of a random factor to be using to deal damage, as compared to traps where the damage is more in the hands of the player. In the end, player skill beats AI.

Rampagers gives more power than rabid, that’s a reason. Pet swap usually comes at the same time as trap cd, so pets could be swapped after eating traps. Pet AI is fine if you know how to use the pet, I never find it a problem, it is player skill as well. Also, BM doesn’t have to depend on pet for damage, I just use my pet for burst really, its a supplement, not all I have.

I can see the gain in power, but that’s like sacrificing 600+ toughness (569 if not running rabid jewel or toughness jewel) for 150 extra DPS. Some people may be able to justify that and see success with that, and I’m not saying its bad, I guess it just doesn’t fit my playstyle.
Going back to player skill though, if 2 highly, equally skilled rangers are playing, then I would expect them to know how pets function well enough to be able to take as little damage from them as possible because of how well they know their own profession and how pets work.
The same can be said for the BM ranger, as they should know and be able to avoid traps, especially since throwing traps on the ground is an obvious animation.
Most likely it would end as a stalemate. But, if I really had to choose a winner, I still believe the trap ranger is going to out DPS the BM to the point where it may be significant enough to give them the edge.
However, if the trap ranger is the healing variant, I say it’s a total stalemate. Forcing me to choose though, the BM has the edge in that scenario because the healing trap build sacrifices its crit procs so now the BM build will be the one doing more damage.

Stealth could be as fixed as easily as: “taking damage during stealth ends stealth,” since it is the only thing the game truly offers no hard counter for.

As far as rangers having access to an on demand stealth skill….
there are literally a million other things I would rather see happen first with the ranger class before something like a stealth ranger skill is implemented, since rangers would gain literally nothing from being able to go stealth, other than just to do it.

Not sure why you would run with rampagers instead of rabid (PvP gearing wise) on a trap build.
Anywho, it would be a long fight if we assume they are equally skilled players. The trap build wins if they can keep constant poison on the BM while whittling away conditions. The BM is at a disadvantage the whole time really because even though the pets will eat the traps, they will be crippled and taking lots of damage, which could result in a loss of damage from both sides.

In the end I still say trap ranger wins, simply because the BM has to rely on AI to do damage, which, regardless of how well people can micro the pet, pet pathing and AI is more of a random factor to be using to deal damage, as compared to traps where the damage is more in the hands of the player. In the end, player skill beats AI.

Resouled.5614:

Metashift.

Rangers are a counter to bunkers. Both ele and guardian and apparantly just now people figured out how to use the ranger.

My thoughts exactly, although the biggest thing rangers really have going for them is access to long lasting poison.
Shortbow 2, if all 5 hit, 10s of poison. Dagger 4, 10s of poison, and with trap potency Viper’s Nest pulses 6s of poison 3 times.
Bunker build sustainability comes a lot from the constant healing their builds can provide.

That being said, traps have been used since launch, and the main shift in ranger usage probably comes from a “challenge accepted” mentality from people who haven’t played rangers and seen complaints on the forums, coupled with the popularity that occurs when tpvp teams that seen success (look at Java’s team) decide to use a particular build.
Besides the shortbow attack speed getting slower, rangers haven’t really changed at all since launch.
Actually, I would go as far as to say that trap builds are rangers “one-trick pony” type build. It is easy to spec for and is one dimensional in the mentality it requires to use it: throw traps and win. Not to say that the build itself brings a one dimensional tactic, as the build can be used offensively and defensively and can be built in multiple ways so that there are even healing based trap builds.

Personally I enjoy the influx of people to the ranger community, even if it means more complaining on the forums. Feedback is how you develop and evolve your product, so to the ranger players that shutdown people who you consider to “QQ” or complain, it really isn’t your place. Just because you have success with something doesn’t mean that it can’t be given more options to be more successful in ways that you don’t choose to play it, and the game is going to evolve based on the positive AND negative feedback, so that the game retains players and encourages them to enjoy their time playing it as well as play it in a versatile manner.
Sorry about the mini-rant, just had to get that out of my system because threads like this always spawn somebody responding with a negative view and then somebody inevitably trying to tell them to “L2P” or some such nonsense when all they were doing was giving their honest opinion about how they would enjoy the game better. Really, nobody has the right to tell somebody else that that person is wrong and that they are playing the wrong way, and that a different way is the right way to play.

We will never develop versatility as a community that way.