Curse

Tahlia Tane · Aug 07, 2009, 12:47 PM // 12:47

What I loved most about GW the first time I played was the ranger combat. It was exceptional. It was basically the first time a MMO-style game had done ranger combat right, in my opinion. So many other games have done it so poorly (shoot... awkward pause... shoot... awkward pause). Playing as a ranger made me feel like Robin Hood and Legolas put together.

My love of ranged combat grew still after I found out that range and damage increases if you take the higher ground. That's just so awesome. But there does seem to be a problem here. In the game, this little fact is rarely exploited. On occasion, I would see a fellow party member (ranger) actively take the higher ground, and that's great to see. But looking at the formation of some mobs I have encountered, it's quite clear this aspect of combat has not been put to use, fully. For example, I would come across a bunch of dwarf mobs, and I never see the ranger dwarves take the higher ground. Instead opting to simply stay back a little while the warrior dwarves take my party head-on. It seems obvious that they at least try to stand on a hill or ridge of some sort, and show some tactical prowess while going on the offensive (and, as me and my fellow party members would rip into those dirty-damned dwarves, subsequently go on the defensive).

It is true, and a pity, that Guild Wars does not fully and completely nail the aspect of ranged combat (or, at least, the aspect which is most fun), yet it has all things considered done a marvelous job. There are no games that do a better job, very simply put. It makes me even more hopeful of Guild Wars 2.

Pikey · Aug 07, 2009, 12:52 PM // 12:52

have you also noticed that you can dodge arrows unlike other games where they seem to have heat-seeking lock-on arrows :P

Tahlia Tane · Aug 07, 2009, 01:07 PM // 13:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikey

have you also noticed that you can dodge arrows unlike other games where they seem to have heat-seeking lock-on arrows :P

Absolutely! It's awesome when you're the one doing the dodging, but terrible if you're the one shooting those arrows.

The element of speed of the arrow becomes important because of this. Slow-moving projects can be dodged by side-stepping. 'Called Shot', for example, is a lightning fast arrow that can't be dodged easily.

Ichabod The Ranger · Aug 07, 2009, 01:14 PM // 13:14

I also like how the game increases your range depending on your type of bow, and also how it calculates the difference in elevation.

Dronte · Aug 07, 2009, 01:15 PM // 13:15

I have to agree that GW got ranger combat almost perfectly. Really fun to play ^^

Bug John · Aug 07, 2009, 01:19 PM // 13:19

Ranger is one of my favorite classes in GW, not just for marksmanship, but for the whole concept.

I tried playing a ranger in other games, but it's really nothing like GW.

englitdaudelin · Aug 07, 2009, 01:32 PM // 13:32

Different refire rates for bows, too, which you must trade off for range or flight of the arrow. I love the speed of the half-moon, but that requires getting nearly into melee range--which isn't so bad in NM--while flatbows allow the same refire rate at long distance, but create an easily dodged flight.

The "obstructed" mechanic gets a little annoying sometimes, when you can't arc arrows over things, or when a bridge ALLEGEDLY blocks the arrows. But all in all, great fun.

subarucar · Aug 07, 2009, 01:34 PM // 13:34

Bows are a very well done mechanic, the only thing I dislike is they have no strings.
In terms of you comment earlier about the enemies not taking higher ground, this is AI we are talking about here, they will either miserably at it. If you have seen the way AI reacts with AoE damage over the years, (Its pretty dodgy), you will realise that attempting to include this in-game could cause all kinds of AI issues.

Arduin · Aug 07, 2009, 01:50 PM // 13:50

Anyone knows how much bonus damage gets added when you are on an elevated position? Any calculations? Never really bothered to test it

EDIT: Wow, LESS damage against targets above you?! Never knew that. Thanks, Tenebrae.

Tenebrae · Aug 07, 2009, 01:54 PM // 13:54

Projectile weapons inflict more damage against foes at lower elevation and less damage against foes at higher elevation.

* Testing has yielded attacks that can do up to 200% of the listed maximum damage (not including modifiers)
* Critical hits are not affected by elevation. If the elevation bonus is higher than a critical can achieve that value is used instead.

Tahlia Tane · Aug 07, 2009, 02:15 PM // 14:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by subarucar

Bows are a very well done mechanic, the only thing I dislike is they have no strings.
In terms of you comment earlier about the enemies not taking higher ground, this is AI we are talking about here, they will either miserably at it. If you have seen the way AI reacts with AoE damage over the years, (Its pretty dodgy), you will realise that attempting to include this in-game could cause all kinds of AI issues.

It's AI, but something at least should be done about enemy placement. When foes patrol, you can't change much. But if there are some stationary foes, at some sort of an enemy outpost, rangers should take the higher ground at some sort of a ledge not too far away. I think it's like that in a particular mission @ Tyria, but that's an exception.

Quote:

Originally Posted by englitdaudelin

The "obstructed" mechanic gets a little annoying sometimes, when you can't arc arrows over things, or when a bridge ALLEGEDLY blocks the arrows. But all in all, great fun.

I think that has more to do with the fact that you can't see the enemy from the character's perspective, while you can from your third-person point of view. You can't shoot arrows at a foe you can't see.

Fay Vert · Aug 07, 2009, 02:15 PM // 14:15

hmm, well GW has certainly made bows easyer to use than most other games, but basically it is probably more wrong than most other game implementations.

Fire rate is way too high, should be more like 5 seconds.
Range is way too low
Accuracy at range is too high
Damage is way way too low, these things were one-shot lethal, in GW they are pathetic pew pew.
Bows in close combat? er just no.

Mix the ease and usability of GW with some of the realism of DAoC and you would be pretty close, though still not right.

GW is a game, they made the archery work as a game don't even think it comes close to real archery, or being "right" because it doesn't.

Faer · Aug 07, 2009, 02:17 PM // 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

I never see the ranger dwarves take the higher ground

This is because the Guild Wars NPC AI is rather lacking and, in many cases, terrible.

YunSooJin · Aug 07, 2009, 02:19 PM // 14:19

Yeah well warrior's aren't supposed to be able to swing their weapons for hours at a time, and I'm pretty sure people don't fire magical purple spells, or heal them by waving their wands, or call meteors that coalesce from the middle of the air..

I'd say GW did rangers just fine.

Tahlia Tane · Aug 07, 2009, 02:25 PM // 14:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

hmm, well GW has certainly made bows easyer to use than most other games, but basically it is probably more wrong than most other game implementations.

Fire rate is way too high, should be more like 5 seconds.
Range is way too low
Accuracy at range is too high
Damage is way way too low, these things were one-shot lethal, in GW they are pathetic pew pew.
Bows in close combat? er just no.

Mix the ease and usability of GW with some of the realism of DAoC and you would be pretty close, though still not right.

GW is a game, they made the archery work as a game don't even think it comes close to real archery, or being "right" because it doesn't.

So what? It's missing the point. There are so many things that aren't realistic. There's a difference between realism that is nice and realism that is just plain old dumb boring realism. It makes the world more believable and better if something is realistic, but it isn't any good if that goes at the cost of gameplay. Sword gameplay is similarly unrealistic, but still awesome. You may not have seen two people going at it in medieval times, swinging and hitting each other dozens of times with their swords and walk away. But it's the only way for a game to be enjoyable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theocrat

This is because the Guild Wars NPC AI is rather lacking and, in many cases, terrible.

People always complain about bad AI no matter the game, but in this case it's not such a difficult thing to do. I'm talking about formation and enemy position, and for the game to emphasize how height is important. I mean, 200% is even more damage than I thought.

BenjZee · Aug 07, 2009, 02:52 PM // 14:52

HAPPY TOPIC! makes me quit this awful deep groups and loads up ranger for barrage fun...oo pet buff yesterday

Arduin · Aug 07, 2009, 02:57 PM // 14:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

I think that has more to do with the fact that you can't see the enemy from the character's perspective, while you can from your third-person point of view. You can't shoot arrows at a foe you can't see.

Yet an Elementalist can blast enemies with Searing Flames, even if they are behind a wall. How does the magic gets targeted, is it homing in on the energy of the foe?

To be effective with your bow as a Ranger, you need to keep moving. This make sense when you are stupidly firing at a wall, but it gets annoying indeed when there is a clear line of sight between you and your enemy, and your Distracting Shot gets blocked by some invisible bridge or something.

Targren · Aug 07, 2009, 03:10 PM // 15:10

I agree with the other guys who think the biggest problem is the screw "obstructed" mechanic that was apparently programmed by an ostrich.

"His foot is behind a rock! He can't be seen!"

Tahlia Tane · Aug 07, 2009, 03:25 PM // 15:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arduinna

Yet an Elementalist can blast enemies with Searing Flames, even if they are behind a wall. How does the magic gets targeted, is it homing in on the energy of the foe?

To be effective with your bow as a Ranger, you need to keep moving. This make sense when you are stupidly firing at a wall, but it gets annoying indeed when there is a clear line of sight between you and your enemy, and your Distracting Shot gets blocked by some invisible bridge or something.

I don't think such problems are systematic though. I've played a lot of ranger, and never really experienced great difficulties. You seem to be describing bugs, nothing structural.

Although I do agree with another poster that it doesn't make any sense that an elementalist doesn't need to see his enemy unlike the ranger to cast his or her spells on a foe. Maybe elementalists locate their enemies using bat-like sonar?

Fay Vert · Aug 07, 2009, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

So what? It's missing the point.

No, I was replying directly to your point...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

It was basically the first time a MMO-style game had done ranger combat right

It would also help if you bothered reading what I put before replying basically what I said

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

GW is a game, they made the archery work as a game

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tahlia Tane

I don't think such problems are systematic though. I've played a lot of ranger, and never really experienced great difficulties. You seem to be describing bugs, nothing structural.

Then you haven't played ranger enough, try shooting at something on a bridge, something stood right in front of you. Same often applies to shooting down off an edge or cliff.