Bad news from Beta

Discussion in 'Ranger' started by ARCHIVED-Visay1, Feb 14, 2006.

  1. ARCHIVED-TwistedFaith Guest


    I disagree here I personally think the change has a LOT more to do with PvP then people think.

    SoE see's the PVP aspect of this game as a way to claw customers back from Blizzard. If they can get this right then sales go up. Rangers on PvP were VERY popular and a awesome PvP class, which of course leads to multitudes of nerf rangers posts.

    If Wizzys get a DPS increase or at the top of the pile good luck to them. As long as the ranger class isnt destroyed by these changes I could care less.
  2. ARCHIVED-Cronon Guest


    Don't get my posts wrong. I agree completely with you and always have had the same notion. I don't care about any other class's benefits as long as mine isn't killed to get them there. We were overpowered for sure, but from the sounds of it, we are being pushed back to August of last year. As long as my class doesn't get pounded into oblivion, I could care less if Wizzie's are soloing Terrorantula.
  3. ARCHIVED-Mirdo Guest

    Like the last expansion, I was waiting to buy the digital download until release day or the day after (let the inevitable major bugs and server crashes settle down etc). With these changes I'll delay purchasing and just stick with an alt for now, maybe raid my Ranger at T6 because he's the only 60 char I have and see what happens.

    If he's gimped and looks likely to stay gimped I'll reconsider playing this game. Vanguard is drawing closer and while not the universal Panacea, a change will be as good as a rest. Hopefully there will be at least a year in that game before major game mechanics changes are necessary (and then again, oh and again later to fix what the last change broke - you get the idea).

    I expect constant tweaking and balancing - but they rarely are in this game - they are sweeping and changes, implemented too often. A lot of anti-SoE posters are always going on about 'lack of QA'. I used to put it down to dissatisfaction etc. Now I really do question the EQ2 team ability to actually dry run then analyse the effects of changes on test - particularly something as far ranging as the proc changes.

    And, although this clearly affects Rangers the most, I have sympathy for any other class these changes affect. It will reduce the DPS of classes that are currentyl balance, in itself creating an imbalance.

    Also, to me, it looks like this expansion is going the way of the DoF and the Combat revamp - massive changes going in just prior to release without adequate time to fully explore the direct and knock on effects of them.

    Mirdo.
  4. ARCHIVED-Terdrigar Guest

    Where is the balancing? Do you know what balanced means? As far as I can see very little thought went into this change apart from someone read some posts about ranger's having to much dps and decided lower it without any thought to the extent or effect it would have. Yes Ranger dps was unfairly high, but this is by no means bringing it down to where it should be, it's lowering it too much. 300dps at lv 60 negates the point of the class even existing, rangers will not get groups will have the applications rejected to guilds and thrown on the scrapheap...lv 70 700dps with all abilities...what's the point in leveling, will take 2-3 times longer with the lower dps=p. There's an advantage in pvp with us being able to shoot and run at the same time, hmm oversight there couldn't see that coming doesn't effect the non pvp servers but i expect some thoughtless idiot will compensate by nerfing us all by making us have to be stationary to fire....makes sense...no? Well neither do these changes!!!
  5. ARCHIVED-Bithnar Guest

    Ok to say that our procing poison was overpowered would have been an understatement. However to make it so we almost never proc anymore is rediculas. I have an idea why not fox the way procs go off period for all weapons. In other words if its listed as a 5% chance to proc off an imbuded weapon then it should proc, on average, 1 in 20 for EVERY hit that the wielder performs whether its in auto attack or from a CA. Same things for poisons, on average, 1 in 4 chance of procing of ANY attack made, whether auto attack or multiple attack CA'a. It should also include the extra attacks that come from our offensive stances.

    Forget the whole weapons delay issue thats whats causing the problem. How do you compensate for slower weapons? Easy you scale the proc damage based upon the weapons delay. Slower weapon bigger damage from the proc. They already do this with normal weapon damage, can anyone say "damage rating?" They also do this somewhat with by scaling spell/proc damage based upon Intellegence

    Would this be harder to code? Possibly, but shouldn't be too hard they already have the code structure in place with the two afore mentioned examples.
  6. ARCHIVED-Garlicyesterday Guest

    Guys the ranger is unplayable on the beta , they are putting us back pre-lu#13 is not worst ....

    Good job SoE on going to a direction where you gonna loose [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] loads of customers !!!!