wariors are to powerfull!!! - Page 2 - Guild Wars Forums

MSecorsky · Jun 27, 2005, 07:53 PM // 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Amnisac, you still can't release the fact that rangers suck.
Why?
Because you're one of them. You may think and experiment with different kind of tactics but you can never kill someone in 1 vs 1, and if you can't survive in 1 vs 1 then you're weak.

If all you care about is 1v1, shouldn't you go back to Diablo?

Arvydas · Jun 27, 2005, 07:57 PM // 19:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Amnisac & Ensign, you still can't release the fact that rangers suck.
Why?
Because you're one of them. You may think and experiment with different kind of tactics but you can never kill someone in 1 vs 1, and if you can't survive in 1 vs 1 then you're weak. You'll probably get it when you get royaly owned one day and realise that you're not doing a shit to help your team. Your arguments don't make any sense.
Get yourself a monk and support your teammates orderly, that's much more better.

So how about a healing monk 1 v 1? Then you'll be the weakest?

Hentai · Jun 27, 2005, 07:57 PM // 19:57

Also played since the beta. Got some xP tho. You got the point there Paine. These guys love ya. They just can't admit it =)

ZenBoy · Jun 27, 2005, 07:58 PM // 19:58

I'm not going to get involved in this debate, but I do want to solve 1 simple math problem:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elonis

and the armor is actually the best in the game. 71 vs phsyical and 100 vs elements wars have 90ish vs physical and 81 vs elements.

71(p) + 100(e) = 171 total for ranger, or an average of 85.5
90(p) + 81(e) = 171 total for warrior, or an average of 85.5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elonis

and the armor is actually the best in the game.

Call me crazy, but if those look like they have the same value... "I'm the same as you, that means I am the best in the game" OH! I get it now, my bad.

drowningfish999 · Jun 27, 2005, 08:09 PM // 20:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Amnisac & Ensign, you still can't release the fact that rangers suck.
Why?
Because you're one of them. You may think and experiment with different kind of tactics but you can never kill someone in 1 vs 1, and if you can't survive in 1 vs 1 then you're weak. You'll probably get it when you get royaly owned one day and realise that you're not doing a shit to help your team. Your arguments don't make any sense.
Get yourself a monk and support your teammates orderly, that's much more better.

However much I want to argue that rangers CAN kill someone in 1v1, I won't.

1v1 is the worst possible comparison anyone can use. Guild Wars is a TEAM game, no class is designed to be able to win alone. I guarantee any class in this game can be defeated by any other class if they know what they're doing.

The only reason that you can't see how helpful rangers are is that they aren't flashy. Eles have huge spells that you can SEE hit enemies. Warriors are always in the fight and seem to be bringing down all the enemies. Monks are always there to heal, a visible effect. Mesmers, Necros, and Rangers have nothing flashy. Sure maybe a Well here or there, or maybe an enemy monk isn't healing as good as he can. Or mabye an Ele keeps getting interupted, but no one notices these changes as much as things like damage and healing.

I have won in an all ranger RANDOM group against a team with 2 warriors and 2 monks. No one left, we fought it out and we won fair and square. I did the same thing in Team Arenas with 3 rangers and a monk, and we won twice out of 3 matches. Sure maybe they aren't as competetive as HoH, but I know people that have won in HoH with ranger based groups.

You obviously are one of those people that have no idea what they're talking about and simply base classes on how good they look in a party.

Algren Cole · Jun 27, 2005, 08:10 PM // 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by drowningfish999

You obviously are one of those people that have no idea what they're talking about and simply base classes on how good they look in a party.

quoted for emphasis

taion · Jun 27, 2005, 08:25 PM // 20:25

Paine: You're wrong, Ensign's right. Following your lead, I will justify myself with nothing more than silly worthless handwaving --
Clan: Final Dynasty
Ladder Rank: 13

A well played ranger can give a team more trouble than you can possibly imagine. The following is not an example of something good to do with a ranger:

Psst, here's a fun way to run out of energy really fast on a ranger -- quickening zephyr, tiger's fury, quick shot spam. Even with 14 expertise and a zealous bow, I only have about 10 seconds worth of shortbow uzi-ing. Oh well )=

Amnisac · Jun 27, 2005, 09:25 PM // 21:25

Paine. You obviosly don't know what your talking about. Everyone except 1 or 2 people who posted in this have agreed rangers do not suck. I have played every class there is, my favorites remain to be Ranger, and Elementalist, But I always go back to ranger beacuse it has the BEST of every other class. It's like all classes combined.

I have to say this:
ArenaNet would not make a class if it was useless, and was downright terrible. They just wouldn't.

BTW: Mesmer sucks, mainly for the same reasons you stated in your first post. I mean fast casting, that just makes the run out of energy faster right! (this is sarcasm, please don't flame me like we have been flaming paine.)

Fye Duron · Jun 27, 2005, 09:49 PM // 21:49

Rangers require brains and skill... W/Mo's require neither... and a Ranger will laugh at the burning crippled bleeding poisoned warrior trying to chase him.... hahaha

Ensign · Jun 27, 2005, 10:56 PM // 22:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Amnisac & Ensign, you still can't release the fact that rangers suck.

I can't 'release'(?) the fact that Rangers suck because it's patently not true.

To speak of different gametypes:

Rangers are poor in low level PvE. No Expertise, no skill selection, and no complex enemies to pick apart = stuck twiddling their thumbs.

Rangers are excellent in high level PvE. Expertise gives them the staying power for longer battles, and good skill selection makes them one of the best classes to pick apart known strategies and mob AI.

Arena is probably the Ranger's strongest area, because the class is so self contained. The game is slow enough that you'll have time to work, and you can pack hate for the inevitible one on one fights you'll find yourself in.

Tombs, on the other hand, is not particularly favorable to the Ranger. Many of the gametypes there put a lot of emphesis on speed, making it so that many of the Ranger's strengths just can't keep up.

Then there's GvG, another spot where the Ranger shines. Why? Because GvG is oftentimes a siege, fighting over positioning and control and working the other team down.

The example that pops to mind is the IVEX trapper. I'm sure that a lot of people take that character into Tombs, see how poorly he functions there, and wonder what the hell the big deal was. Which is unfortunate, because from where I'm sitting the IVEX trapper is the most complex, most informative, and ultimately the most useful of the premades (the Fi Booner is in the running, though). The trick is that the trapper is not a Tombs build - it's a GvG build. While I have my personal disagreements over a couple of the skill choices, I think that looking at that character and understanding the skill choices goes a long way towards understanding how and why people win in GvG.

I've played against IVEX several times, and while I still feel that the skill of their Monks is their greatest asset, of their offensive players the trapper is probably the one with the most noticible impact. Underrate it at your own peril.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Because you're one of them.

So your argument is that my defense of the Ranger is invalid because I'm too biased to make an objective argument? Please. For the record, all things being equal I'm playing a Monk.

But I shouldn't even need to refute this. I'm one of the harshest critics of game balance there is, with a proven track record of being a thorn in the dev's sides. But even beyond that, I'm making arguments based upon merit. The fact that I'm making them, or someone with no reputation whatsoever is making them, should be irrelevant.

That Rangers are the most tactical class should not be argued. That a highly disruptive, hard to break tactical damage dealer will find use in gametypes that reward such things (high level PvE, GvG) should be obvious.

I have to wonder if people just notice that rangers suck in the beginning (when they're forming their initial judgements, and noticing that rangers suck is 100% accurate), then see that they can't dish out a 300 damage spike in Tombs or whatever and dismiss the class entirely. Of course this is so foolish it hurts. If all we cared about was usefulness in low level PvP and damage spikes, no one would use hammers, either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

You may think and experiment with different kind of tactics but you can never kill someone in 1 vs 1, and if you can't survive in 1 vs 1 then you're weak.

So this is the new standard? A class, or a build, has to be good at dueling to be considered a viable profession choice?

I don't even know where to begin with this argument. How about we just take it to the logical extreme, and declare that Mesmer is the only good class?

Or do you doubt that any 1v1 arena, if implemented, would degenerate into anything other than Mesmers getting into control duels?

What does this have to do with anything?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Your arguments don't make any sense.

Your failure to understand my arguments are not a reflection upon their strength.

I will mention, however, that I am the only one making arguments to defend my position.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

Get yourself a monk and support your teammates orderly, that's much more better.

Well as previously mentioned I do play Monk all else being equal. Still, I fail to see how that is relevant considering that this game, at least the later parts of it, is based not upon the individual character but the eight man team. Now that Monks have a monopoly on a couple of those slots is not up for debate. The question is, of course 'why are Rangers *never* the right choice for one or more of the other slots on an eight man team?'

Which, I'll wager, cannot be answered.

Peace,
-CxE

drowningfish999 · Jun 28, 2005, 12:23 AM // 00:23

Competition arenas are nothing, even though I did use them as an example in my previous post. However, I also mentioned all the classes involved in the battle. Also, killing someone means nothing. Maybe you just attacked them when they were already being slapped silly by someone else. Was that in 3 seperate arenas, or all at once. I've killed a warrior and at least 2 monks in one battle in the Tombs with my ranger, I guess that means monks and warriors suck too.

Ensign · Jun 28, 2005, 12:34 AM // 00:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

It seems that you don't understand what I truly mean. I'll make myself clear. You, and all rangers out there suck.

It seems you didn't get my point either: you're an idiot, and apparently proud of it. Thanks for playing.

Peace,
-CxE

Akilles · Jun 28, 2005, 12:44 AM // 00:44

So far at this site I have seen posts and replies regarding all professions, from what i have gathered...according to everyone, all professions suck and all skills suck. everyone has a back and forth argument about what is good and what is not.

Pick the one you think looks the coolest and sucks the least and select his/hers sucky skills and get adjusted to them till they suck less.

It is all a matter of personal prefrence. If you want to win, get in a teamspeak guild and play together for a while, see how you all play together and then see how you feel.

Ensign · Jun 28, 2005, 01:14 AM // 01:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akilles

So far at this site I have seen posts and replies regarding all professions, from what i have gathered...according to everyone, all professions suck and all skills suck.

Don't forget that everyone sucks, too. So does your guild.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akilles

It is all a matter of personal prefrence.

Can't say I agree with that. Some strategies and tactics are simply better than others. The trick, is figuring out which are the best, and with all the variety in this game it's not a simple task.

Of course closeminded name calling is a whole lot easier. =p

Peace,
-CxE

Cs Coldize · Jun 28, 2005, 01:21 AM // 01:21

wow paine I think you just opened up a world of hell for yourself ..... >_> <_< BOO PAINE!

(I had to jump on the bandwagon)

oh and yes, one more thing:

Paine, stop f****** with Ensign, he'll just pwn you over and over and over.

taion · Jun 28, 2005, 01:22 AM // 01:22

I respectfully disagree. I think every class, skill, and strategy is ludicrously overpowered, and they all deserve to be either severely nerfed or removed from the game entirely.

Kishin · Jun 28, 2005, 01:30 AM // 01:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paine

It seems that you don't understand what I truly mean. I'll make myself clear. You, and all rangers out there suck.
I'm sorry but take it personally.
Btw, I just owned 3 rangers in a row at competition arenas with my horny warrior.
*SIGNED*

Congratulations. You are the best Guild Wars player. I bet you could single handedly dispatch the top five Guilds on the ladder.

Have you watched 75% of the Rangers in the Competition Arenas play? They're terrible, and their builds are terrible. You're basically bragging that you 'owned' a one-legged man at an ass-kicking contest. The Competition Arena is not exactly the picture of Guild Wars PvP.

P.S. Your bragging about 'Owning' in the Competition Arena and thinking you know better than -Ensign- of all people pretty much destroys any credibility you have and will ever have here.

Weezer_Blue · Jun 28, 2005, 01:37 AM // 01:37

Did you try changing your build? Did you try using stances to make yourself invulnerable? Did you try ... I dunno... common sense? There's no excuses for you dying instantly. Especially to warriors who aren't all that bad. My elementalist could probably kill several at one time without sustaining any damage, and his armour sucks compared to other classes.

Oh, by the way, Ensign isn't always right... just 99.999999 percent of the time.

Sholtar · Jun 28, 2005, 02:18 AM // 02:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Can't say I agree with that. Some strategies and tactics are simply better than others. The trick, is figuring out which are the best, and with all the variety in this game it's not a simple task.

Of course closeminded name calling is a whole lot easier. =p

Peace,
-CxE

I'm not so sure that you can really say that some strategies and tactics are better, though you also can't say it's personal preference. This game is like rock, paper, scissors with thousands of options. Some of them beat more of them than others, but they can all be beaten. So while some are better than others most of the time, I don't believe that there are any that are anywhere near always better. Of course, when you combine a team of perfectly corresponding builds... then your chances improve exponetially.

Just my two cents.

Jun 28, 2005, 02:46 AM // 02:46

Nope, there are strategies that are always better than others. Just because it's an RPS system doesn't mean every build and every strategy has an equal chance of winning.

Jun 27, 2005, 09:25 PM // 21:25	#28
Amnisac Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Marhan's Grotto Guild: Running Makes It Worse [Run] Profession: R/E	Paine. You obviosly don't know what your talking about. Everyone except 1 or 2 people who posted in this have agreed rangers do not suck. I have played every class there is, my favorites remain to be Ranger, and Elementalist, But I always go back to ranger beacuse it has the BEST of every other class. It's like all classes combined. I have to say this: ArenaNet would not make a class if it was useless, and was downright terrible. They just wouldn't. BTW: Mesmer sucks, mainly for the same reasons you stated in your first post. I mean fast casting, that just makes the run out of energy faster right! (this is sarcasm, please don't flame me like we have been flaming paine.) Last edited by Amnisac; Jun 27, 2005 at 09:27 PM // 21:27..

Jun 28, 2005, 01:37 AM // 01:37	#38
Weezer_Blue Elite Guru Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Just a Box in a Cage Guild: Hurry Up The Cakes [Oven]	Did you try changing your build? Did you try using stances to make yourself invulnerable? Did you try ... I dunno... common sense? There's no excuses for you dying instantly. Especially to warriors who aren't all that bad. My elementalist could probably kill several at one time without sustaining any damage, and his armour sucks compared to other classes. Oh, by the way, Ensign isn't always right... just 99.999999 percent of the time. __________________

Jun 27, 2005, 07:57 PM // 19:57	#23
Hentai Pre-Searing Cadet Join Date: Jun 2005	Also played since the beta. Got some xP tho. You got the point there Paine. These guys love ya. They just can't admit it =)

Jun 27, 2005, 08:25 PM // 20:25	#27
taion Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: May 2005 Location: Pasadena, California Profession: Mo/	Paine: You're wrong, Ensign's right. Following your lead, I will justify myself with nothing more than silly worthless handwaving -- Clan: Final Dynasty Ladder Rank: 13 A well played ranger can give a team more trouble than you can possibly imagine. The following is not an example of something good to do with a ranger: Psst, here's a fun way to run out of energy really fast on a ranger -- quickening zephyr, tiger's fury, quick shot spam. Even with 14 expertise and a zealous bow, I only have about 10 seconds worth of shortbow uzi-ing. Oh well )=

Jun 27, 2005, 09:49 PM // 21:49	#29
Fye Duron Wilds Pathfinder Join Date: May 2005 Location: Chico, CA, USA Guild: Dragon Fang	Rangers require brains and skill... W/Mo's require neither... and a Ranger will laugh at the burning crippled bleeding poisoned warrior trying to chase him.... hahaha

Jun 28, 2005, 12:23 AM // 00:23	#31
drowningfish999 Krytan Explorer Join Date: May 2005 Guild: Awakened Tempest [aT]	Competition arenas are nothing, even though I did use them as an example in my previous post. However, I also mentioned all the classes involved in the battle. Also, killing someone means nothing. Maybe you just attacked them when they were already being slapped silly by someone else. Was that in 3 seperate arenas, or all at once. I've killed a warrior and at least 2 monks in one battle in the Tombs with my ranger, I guess that means monks and warriors suck too.

Jun 28, 2005, 12:44 AM // 00:44	#33
Akilles Krytan Explorer Join Date: May 2005 Guild: Brothers of the Jade	So far at this site I have seen posts and replies regarding all professions, from what i have gathered...according to everyone, all professions suck and all skills suck. everyone has a back and forth argument about what is good and what is not. Pick the one you think looks the coolest and sucks the least and select his/hers sucky skills and get adjusted to them till they suck less. It is all a matter of personal prefrence. If you want to win, get in a teamspeak guild and play together for a while, see how you all play together and then see how you feel.

Jun 28, 2005, 01:21 AM // 01:21	#35
Cs Coldize Guild Wars Guru Join Date: May 2005 Location: Georgia Guild: BEER Profession: E/Mo	wow paine I think you just opened up a world of hell for yourself ..... >_> <_< BOO PAINE! (I had to jump on the bandwagon) oh and yes, one more thing: Paine, stop f****** with Ensign, he'll just pwn you over and over and over.

Jun 28, 2005, 01:22 AM // 01:22	#36
taion Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: May 2005 Location: Pasadena, California Profession: Mo/	I respectfully disagree. I think every class, skill, and strategy is ludicrously overpowered, and they all deserve to be either severely nerfed or removed from the game entirely.

Jun 28, 2005, 02:46 AM // 02:46	#40
Blackace Guest	Nope, there are strategies that are always better than others. Just because it's an RPS system doesn't mean every build and every strategy has an equal chance of winning.