so much for really fixing rangers (live broadcast disapointment :( )

Any derogatory remarks made about Rangers were only made in jest, we love Rangers.
I have a Ranger on Unrest and the poor little guy is at level 80 with no Mythical so he doesn't get a lot of action lately, but I'd love to dust him off and play him some more.

Rangers like brawlers are just a class that the devs seem to be unable to comprehend. Based on the kind of changes they make they are almost always rediculous seeming to anyone who actually understands the class except for the few times they do something good which is almost always based on a suggestion made by a player.

Rothgar wrote:

I swear on EVERYTHING that is holy you are only poking the bear rothgar...

Let me ask you this one question, if you happen to find a min, what toons DO see a lot of action?

Azrael_888 wrote:

Troubadors obviously.

I always thought this was a stupid little conspiracy theory of mine but has anyone else noticed that throughout the years for all the classes the 'evil' ones tend to be more offensive/active/DPS based and the 'good' ones tend to be more defensive/passive/survivability based? Its even true for classes that are neutral but its clear one side is more offensive than the other. I'm sure people have noticed this in your deity options (best DPS deities = evil).

Some classes where its most evident are predators, crusaders, warriors and bards. For example assassins get a aggro transfer mostly done by their DPS while rangers get a aggro reducer. SK's have tons of lifetaps and debuffs while paladins just pretty much have heals. Dirges tend to do more dps since they handle the 'melee' bard stuff so they can basically buff themselves and debuff the mobs for their DPS. Guardians are just big defensive plate tanks while a lot of zerkers go around tanking while playing like a swashbuckler.

Point is if this has any merit, its a REALLY HORRIBLE way to go about adding uniqueness to classes and balance.
I'm curious almost more on a professional level to know how they go about balancing things and their inner logic. Thing is if it was good and people liked it they could tell us. The mere fact they won't tell us these specific details just shows me they are probably aware most people wouldn't like it. You'd think that would prompt them to change it where we would like it and they could tell us, rather than keeping it and keeping us in the dark.
What ever they are doing they need to start balancing things on raid demand and performance. Not off DPS to utility/heal/tank ratios, soloing or PvP. grouping would work better almost by default since groups are just smaller versions of raids.

Neiloch@Crushbone wrote:

or the fact that all good classes buff Haste and all evil classes buff DPS.

Aaramis wrote:

QFE x10 - its almost criminal what SOE has done with such a gem - even as buggy and mishandled as its been Vanguard is hands down the best MMO I ever played.

Rothgar wrote:

For all that is holy. PLEASE "dust off" your ranger and try to raid with it... PLEASE!

Rothgar wrote:

You might be in the wrong forum then. Most of us are starting to hate them.

(sadly only half in jest )

Rothgar wrote:

I hope so.
We really don't want to be a joke of the expansion class.
"ranja down" was funny in EQ1... for a bit.

Rothgar wrote:

We just stoped selling Myth updates but i'm sure we can work something out

Llyren@Kithicor wrote:

Thats not joke.. better loot drops when a ranger gets sacraficed! least thats the way its been since eq1!

Dollin@Unrest wrote:

I thought in EQ2 that was warlocks, or maybe gnomes...

Azrael_888 wrote:

Yes, only in jest...save the brainpower behind that wit and fix the problems with the class.