Rangers getting jack for updates

Discussion in 'Ranger' started by ARCHIVED-akaglty, Jun 1, 2010.

  1. ARCHIVED-Toball Tokor Guest

    Proud_Silence wrote:
    Yup stay proud but mostly .... stay silent, at least till you know something about how to DPS as a ranger, it is clearly evident you don't.
  2. ARCHIVED-Nevao Guest

    Jack@Lucan DLere wrote:
    Well I suppose we can take solace in two things.
    1) Our threads weren't merged "to focus the discussion".
    2) We got some attention!!!! But still no answers...
    Yeah, no better off than before, just concentrated in one area to limit the noise.
  3. ARCHIVED-Katsi Guest

    Ok, this is probably a stupid question, but it's been bugging me...
    As one who has far too often seen my arrows fly over the tank's head when he switches target from the dead mob to the next a little too quickly, and consequently gets chewed out more often than I like (although the tanks have been getting more understanding lately, I don't know why)...
    Why do people want uncontrolled (auto attack based) AoEs?
    I could understand wanting a couple more blue ranged CAs, but why would you want to have the chance of randomly (or even constantly) pulling nearby mobs, that you cannot turn off?
    ~ Cerilynn
  4. ARCHIVED-akaglty Guest

    Cerilynn@Lucan DLere wrote:
    With a 10m radius the mobs would be aggro whether you hit them with an arrow or not.
  5. ARCHIVED-Katsi Guest

    akaglty wrote:
    Not that it's needed lately, but not if they've been mezzed, and hitting them would break the mez.
    And, assuming your 10m AoE radius, if it centers on your target (or assumed target) that wouldn't be within 10m of you, but 10m beyond the mob, which sometimes is beyond the tank, sometimes to the side, and thus might hit mobs normally out of aggro range. ... not to mention that walls often don't block AoEs, and then you pull from a whole other room.. and the non-agressive mobs that you might not want to hit, but are nearby...
    I still don't see the benifit of having AoEs attached to autoattack.
    ~ Cerilynn
  6. ARCHIVED-kartikeya Guest

    If it's treated like a blue AOE, it won't break mez. Those haven't broken mez in a long long long time. It would be annoying on fights like, say, Waansu, where AEs end up being a huge detriment if they go off at the wrong time, but every non-spell casting DPS class has to deal with that.
    Frankly, I just want DPS. I don't care how they do it. I don't care if it involves giving me flurry or AE autoattack (though honestly we should at LEAST get flurry, because there's no way the coding somehow doesn't exist for that when it exists for doubleattack). I want to be able to compete. I should be doing comparable damage to a same skilled, similarly geared assassin, warlock, and wizard. I should be doing MORE DPS than swashbucklers, unless they have a massive gear advantage over me.
    If we don't get AE auto attack, we really should have more AE capabilities though (or shorter recast timers on our current AEs, which are nice but the recast is very long and thus the AE damage is not sustainable). Part of the reason swashy DPS is so insane at the high end right now is because of their AE capabilities, and warlocks likewise. There are too many AE fights in the game now to be limited on it.
  7. ARCHIVED-akaglty Guest

    If they put our AE's on 10-30 second recast timers I wouldn't care about AE auto attack. As it is right now though, we burn through our AE's and have to wait 1-2 minutes before we can cast them again.
    I don't think most rangers would mind if we AE dps and assassins single target dps. As it is right now we fail in both.
    It should be something like this:
    Exploding Arrow - 10 second recast
    Arrow Barrage - 30 second recast
    Storm of Arrows - 25 second recast
    Natural Selection - 15 second recast
    Stream of Arrows - 20 second recast
    If they lowered our recast timers it would fix the issue with having to stand in to use melee CA's because we wouldn't run out of ranged CA's so fast and melee could be situational, like for PvP when someone gets in close to you, which is what it should be.
    If they even just tried this in test to see how it works I would be thrilled but, they aren't even testing solutions.
  8. ARCHIVED-Nevao Guest

    Cerilynn@Lucan DLere wrote:
    When it was primarly just Swashies that had this, and only Swashies that could use it effectively, it wasn't a big deal. But now that Auto Attack damage is higher across the board, AA buffs (some for self, other like Arms of Imagination available to pass out) and Adorns we're in a situation where all non-caster classes have a chance to effectively use this, except for Rangers. As the DPS gap continues to grow the last thing we need is this type of "ability" that is completely shut off from our class.
    But as to your point about not being able to turn off, that's a complete assumption on your part, at least with the exception of the Adornments. All of the DPS class related abilities/AA's that grant this can be toggled. That would be even more necessary for Rangers. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss an idea just becuase you haven't thought of all the implementation options.
    That said I really don't think this alone, or this and Ranged Flurry, is going to fix the problems we have. However it is something we were told they were going to look into and had ideas about when this first blew up during Beta. They need to either follow through or say "sorry off the table".
  9. ARCHIVED-FearDiadh Guest

    I went to vigx2 tonight. I have AAs into increasing my auto attack damage, I have an enervated buff that increases auto attack damage and my crit bonus was at about 90. My crits and double attack were both over 100. I was using the wyrm tendon bow (172dr) and t9 field points. I timed my combat arts with my auto attacks so I would not lose auto attack.
    The dirge did over 1k more auto attack damage than me on the zw. During this time he was also running around rezzing and doing... I don't know... whatever else a dirge does. The dirge has 1.3 crit? I have 1.5 +.45 from aa and buff, +.9 from CB. I am not saying the dirge doesn't have CB but he doesn't have more than 90... I have AA for CB too...
    So ranger auto attack damage sucks. Of course it does, dual wielders are carrying a pair of 130 dr weaps and we get 1 weap at 172. It does not take a mathematician to see the problem there.
    Now bear in mind that our combat art damage is not as high as sorc spell damage and is not as high as assassin CA damage.
    So our auto attack is lower than other melee classes. Our combat arts are lower damage than other T1 dps classes and we bring the least amount of utility of any of them. Oh and we get to pay for every auto attack. Nice.
  10. ARCHIVED-Katsi Guest

    Nevao wrote:
    At this point, I feel I need to point out that I'm a stickler for word usage. By making this a "class related ability" or "AA" means that it is not the autoattack itself. It would be a buff or stance that affects the autoattack. In my mind, this is a significant difference.
    I can understand a buff or stance that I can toggle, that would produce an AoE proc off my autoattack. I do not understand making my autoattack AoE.
    On a side note, I also wish that they had stayed consistent with the color coding of the icons. For the longest time I thought that I only had one true AoE, and ended up learning the hard way about some of the others. Consider me a curmudgeon of an old lady who likes things organized properly. The teacups have to be on their matching saucers and their handles all pointing the same way.
    ~ Cerilynn
  11. ARCHIVED-glowsinthedark Guest

    as far as I know, all AE auto attack except for the stuff from adorns comes from a toggelable buff, so it is something you can turn on or off at will
  12. ARCHIVED-Sydares Guest

    Gungo wrote:
    That would be the most graceful way of doing it, and the coding already exists in Exploding Arrow. For them to say it 'just doesn't exist in the code' has always been little more than a stalling tactic for "We don't feel like dealing with Ranger class balance right now."
  13. ARCHIVED-feldon30 Guest

    Lethe5683 wrote:
    Lethe plays an assassin not a ranger.
    We've got an imposter.
  14. ARCHIVED-Neiloch Guest

    akaglty wrote:
    I've suggested something similar. Just making it so we can be more solid with our ae DPS with CA's also has some appeal that having auto ae on bow doesn't. Rangers wouldn't need to adjust as much to it, wouldn't have to worry about the auto ae stat itself, could AE in very controlled manner opposed to the random chance auto AE, and it would be extremely easy to implement once values are decided on. Simply modifiing some values on some CA's opposed to suposedly having to code in new mecanics for bows.
    Right now when it comes to AE fights, our choices are to unload ALL of our AE's on one fight and keep up, but then lose horribly on following AE fights until Stream and/or Barrage are up, and still not do that well. Or try to ae in 'moderation' which again just gets us trounced on the parse. Because of this I think if you put the AE CA's on a faster recast, even if you lowered the damage on them to scale our zonewide DPS would still go up. Not by a whole lot though since not every fight is AE.
    So again, rangers want increased DPS through ranged CA's. I know I do at least heh.
  15. ARCHIVED-HarlequinJD Guest

    I recently returned to the game and I've started trying to do shard runs. Things must have gotten much worse in the last year or two, because for the first time I am very often getting shut-out of PUGs who posted in chat they were looking for DPS to join a group doing a shard run. I know this isn't a surprise to many of you, but when I tell the group leader my class and level, very often I'll get one of two responses -- sorry, we're looking for something else, or, let me see if anyone else responds and I'll get back to you. The other night I actually had someone tell me how their guild actually had to "carry" a ranger in the guild through shard runs.
    In any case, I'm almost at the point where I'd accept UTILITY over even DPS. Just give me something that groups would like to have. I don't even find us all that great solo. Sure, given nice clear space between us and a mob we can take down most non-heroic things, but most of the solo zones consist of quests in very crowded areas where firing an arrow will provoke the entire area to attack, or where there is very little room to maneuver for the very precise positioning we require. Frankly, as a start, I think they should get rid of minimum attack range on bows for rangers altogether and balance from there. It doesn't make any sense.
  16. ARCHIVED-Hedah Guest

    Say no to ranged AE Auto Attack and yes to ranged Auto Attack flurry.

    Give Focus Aim a 20-25% flurry buff for ranged. Make the buff itself raidwide.

    Just my thoughts.

  17. ARCHIVED-Sydares Guest

    Hedah wrote:
  18. ARCHIVED-Neiloch Guest

    Can't really understand the argument of ranged auto AE would pull more extra mobs than the melee version if it radiates from the target. Just make the range it radiates the same as melee auto AE. In any event given a choice I would rather have faster recasting AE CA's then auto AE anyway. At that point auto AE auto wouldn't be a stat we are missing out on, would be a stat we don't have to worry about. Which is the way it should be, if we can't use a stat at all or even close to fully it should be because it wouldn't be much use to us, not because we were purposely excluded from it.
  19. ARCHIVED-Hedah Guest

    What's your reasoning behind wanting AE over flurry?

  20. ARCHIVED-Sydares Guest

    Hedah wrote:
    What's your reasoning for assuming that we shouldn't have access to both?

Share This Page