Curse

Dzan · Sep 25, 2005, 04:45 AM // 04:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akathrielah

Yay for well of profane!

Hurray for rend and rigor mortis!

Yay spellbreaker. See, naming skills which counter other skills is meaningless to the discussion. No matter what I name, you can name counter for it, and vice versa.

The bottom line is that shielding hands and guardian are pretty effective counters. Not perfect, but assuming you have a good team, it should hold up the initial barrage which should mean you will win.

twicky_kid · Sep 25, 2005, 05:20 AM // 05:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dzan

Yay spellbreaker. See, naming skills which counter other skills is meaningless to the discussion. No matter what I name, you can name counter for it, and vice versa.

The bottom line is that shielding hands and guardian are pretty effective counters. Not perfect, but assuming you have a good team, it should hold up the initial barrage which should mean you will win.

its not the dmg you have to worry about. its that split seconds that gaurdian isn't in affect when you refesh it and get interrupted 10 times in a row. sheild ing will stop the dmg from kindle but will not stop the interrupts.

Goonter · Sep 25, 2005, 05:28 AM // 05:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by twicky_kid

wrong my friend.

Since when have we become friends?

Quote:

hammer warriors will get 1 attack vs 4 from the ranger. swords and axe doesn't get much better.

So. The dont hit for sh** if you remove preps.

Quote:

ele are just about completely screwed even the ele/mo. glyph is not the answer. you add 5 energy and 1 sec casting to the next spell you need to cast + .75 after cast for using glyph.

E/Mos that smite because its better than monks that smite is stupid anyhow.
Not really the point...but, if Glyph of Concentration has "after cast" penalitys, maybe they should be looked at, balanced and penalitys removed if nesscary.
Personal testamony: I used it against a team of 3 rangers under focused fire in random areas.(and won) And every other ranger I faced, I got pelted something stupid, and I got interrupt maybe 3 times in 6 matchs. Not exaggarating. I used earthquake and aftershock. And aftershock got interrupted 3 times across 6 matchs against them spammy ass rangers. Earthquake never did. Not to bad in the current clement of interrupts.

Quote:

Necros fall in the same boat. they are just SoL.

Yeah they is.

Quote:

monks are so predictable its not funny. breeze at 1/4 life, healing touch at <50% hp. only protection skills are the exception with 1/2 or 1/4 casting times. still haven't been able to interrupt reversal with distracting yet.

Interrupting monks isnt even a good idea if you arent planning some Arcane Conundrum/Concussion Shot combo.
As of now, with the current interupting spam is not as hard (if only by frequent "chance" interrupting spurts), but...Ive already stated my proposed solution for that.
You can still chain interrpt them just to spike the crap out of them if you dont remove the prep.

Quote:

mes are probly the least affecting with shackles and fast cast but even they can be interrupted.

You can still spike the crap out of them too.

Quote:

no matter what you face it doesn't lose any affectiveness.

Im not saying, dont touch it. Im saying, touch it differently than what you suggest.
Ive stated my reasons why.

Before adding a large recast time, Id rather see them put [Cast: - ] back on Punishing and Savage Shot and turn it back to the way it was, because it would be less of a nerf.

Red Locust · Sep 25, 2005, 05:44 AM // 05:44

People are still missing the point. It's not about rangers being too powerful, they can easily be controlled by playing it smart; using the terrain, kiting, using enchantments and stances, these will all "own" rangers.

The problem lies in the fact that making a ranger build degenerates into taking those 8 skills stated earlier. You want an interrupt ranger? Take that interrupt spammer. You want a damage ranger? Take that interrupt spammer yet again. Generally speaking, that one build offers the best of anything a ranger can offer (there are of course specific skills needed in specific builds, but for the most part, this is true). If you don't see the problem with having one build that is the best in its class, you need to look harder.

Zorlag · Sep 25, 2005, 06:57 AM // 06:57

Just wondering that if these are changed is the ultimate damage ranger then Quickshotter (or Barrage in mobs)? Most of the other attacks seem almost useless because they wont enjoy damage increases from preparations/enhancements nearly as often.

Sambjo · Sep 25, 2005, 07:40 AM // 07:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorlag

Just wondering that if these are changed is the ultimate damage ranger then Quickshotter (or Barrage in mobs)? Most of the other attacks seem almost useless because they wont enjoy damage increases from preparations/enhancements nearly as often.

If interrupts are changed then you get at least 2 viable standard ranger builds instead of one:

practiced/choking

kindle/quickshot

EDIT:
As said before in the thread, non-interrupt bow attacks need a buff.

What I'd like to see:

*Change savage shot back to attack speed.
*Buff non-interrupt bow attack skills (power shot, determined shot, point blank shot, etc). Having the skills that were designed for a DPS ranger be useless, even if interrupts get nerfed, is stupid.

FrogDevourer · Sep 25, 2005, 09:28 AM // 09:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Red Locust

People are still missing the point. It's not about rangers being too powerful, they can easily be controlled by playing it smart; using the terrain, kiting, using enchantments and stances, these will all "own" rangers.

The problem lies in the fact that making a ranger build degenerates into taking those 8 skills stated earlier. You want an interrupt ranger? Take that interrupt spammer. You want a damage ranger? Take that interrupt spammer yet again. Generally speaking, that one build offers the best of anything a ranger can offer (there are of course specific skills needed in specific builds, but for the most part, this is true). If you don't see the problem with having one build that is the best in its class, you need to look harder.

Unfortunately, I think you are right. The majority of posters who tried to participate to this thread missed the point, or worse, they didn't even take the time to understand it. It's obvious many of the recent posters didn't take the time to read the thread entirely, or worse that they are unable to read and to think before posting.

If something must be done about ranger interrupts, it is because there is a "potential" balance concern. Be it justified or not. Many posters gave facts that showed these interrupts are potentially too powerful when compared with similar skills. I invite you to reread this thread if you actually want to know why.

Skill balance or unbalance, is an intrinsic feature. It is not related to the skill's popularity nor to its degrees of success. So, in a few words:
- We don't care if it is widely used or not. This is irrelevant. ANet is known to issue global balance fixes, including on skills which were not yet abused.
- We don't care if interrupt ranger becomes the next FotW. We're talking the intrisic balance of a skill, not about colour and fashion.
- We don't care if a ranger can be countered or not. If you still haven't understood why by now, you need to read more and to post less.
- We don't care if there is a counter to the counter to the counter. See above why.
- We don't care if these skills will be overnerfed. The best way to avoid that is to actually propose a reasonnable fix. You can't achieve that if you close your eyes and ignore the potential abuse.
- We don't care if you like nerfs or not, if you like rangers or not. An intelligent discussion is based on facts and arguments, not on opinions.

Now if you're concerned about the build's popularity, if your only argument is the fact that rangers can be countered, if you don't know what balance is about, or even worse if you don't think we need a balanced environment to have more viable options, I invite you to refrain from posting.

Pandora's box · Sep 25, 2005, 10:57 AM // 10:57

I posted a somewhat ironic comment somewhere in an earlier threat. The bottom line was that nerfing will never end as long as players don't accept that in every class people like to stick to the 8 skills they find best.

After every 'balance' a new build will get the next most popular one. There's no end in that process. A vast majority of the players don't like it at all to switch skills with every new game. So if they find a good working build they will continue to use it... Until its nerfed.

If we want this game to last long we have to accept that you can't force players to use multiple skill builds. And stop complaining about a popular build that seems to 'rule'. I've posted other solutions before and I'm not going to repeat them here. But I would like to ask Anet to consider how many time it will take if every popular build needs to be nerfed for 'balancing' issues in future...

FrogDevourer · Sep 25, 2005, 11:39 AM // 11:39

Good job ignoring the discussion. The problem is not the popularity of these skills. If you're not concerned about skill balance, feel free to post elsewhere and to start a new thread.

Pandora's box · Sep 25, 2005, 01:47 PM // 13:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrogDevourer

Good job ignoring the discussion. The problem is not the popularity of these skills. If you're not concerned about skill balance, feel free to post elsewhere and to start a new thread.

Sorry, but you obviously did not read my post very well! I'm very concerned that the discussion about skill balancing is becoming an endless loophole:
-Players stick to their favorite 8 skill build
-Other players complain because they find the build too strong
-Anet tries to balance it by a nerf
-Players find a new great build and stick to it
-Complaints because another group of players finds its too strong
-Nerf
-New build
-Comlaints
-Nerf
..........
This is not my opinion: Its an observation of what's happening all the time. You said it yourself: The best way to prevent overnerfing is to suggest reasonable fixes. The question is: Is it reasonable to ask Anet for a 'fix' every time someone notices something he/she finds too strong in a build?

LifeInfusion · Sep 25, 2005, 03:00 PM // 15:00

Rangers are fine. You are basically saying they excel at what they do best, interrupt. And mesmers don't need a line of sight, rangers do. Shields Up!, evade/block arrow stances and evade/block stuff form monk/ele/mesmer can counter rangers.

entropy · Sep 25, 2005, 03:17 PM // 15:17

There will always be a GREAT build or one that is just better than the rest. It all goes down to the skills. Eviscerate it 10x better than cleave etc.. It doesn't give much room for creativity. Now in a post I read in this thread someone wanted to stop stacking of things and spells. Well that would basically degrade it to rock beats scisor and so on.

FrogDevourer · Sep 25, 2005, 04:17 PM // 16:17

This thread is too time consuming to stay open. I'm closing it in an effort to keep it decent before it turns into another "what's the best way to go off topic, and to whine/rant/insult the other camp instead of bringing something useful to the table".

Thanks to those who provided insightful material and food for thought (on both sides). The spammability of these skills may deserve some fix in the future, even if they are not as prevalent as they could be. The interrupt ranger is apparently the best option if you want to play this profession, or simply to counter the enemy. Be ready to counter them with hexes,conditions and stances, or to counter the counter if you're a ranger. If a skill update is being considered, let's hope ANet is able to find a good compromise, instead of killing what used to be very good skills (before the secret buff of doom).

My personal conclusion is: you can't have a discussion about skill balance if you involve people who are unwilling to understand this concept, or unable to read and to think about previous posts, or unable to make the difference between opinions and facts, not to mention those who are simply looking for some bandwidth to waste.

The best we can hope after 10 pages of this is: "this build can be countered" which was obvious from page 1, and which is still irrelevant as non sequitur. If you still don't understand why, you need to read more and to post less.