Curse

Rhombus · Jun 22, 2005, 12:29 PM // 12:29

What about the aggro circle, ow agro circle, or however much g's as you want. I think Rangers use more stealth than warriors, out of instinct. Warriors are tanks, while rangers should be the "Solid Snakes" of guild wars. I'm not asking to implement stealth like every other mmorpg has for rogue classes, but just a smaller aggro circle for rangers. For example warriors need a Large circle, rangers a small one, and the other classes somewhere in between (depending on their secondary prof too????). I think it will add some new pve tactics... Now, flame away...

RTSFirebat · Jun 22, 2005, 12:38 PM // 12:38

Could be interesting, however some areas and maps are currently be sneakable since the circles are all the same size, making them bigger would equal making it harder to sneak about with some groups...

But its an orginal idea, I'll give you that.

Racthoh · Jun 22, 2005, 12:40 PM // 12:40

Rangers would then have the advantage of farming over everyone else as they could slip by the worthless enemies easily. Yes it makes sense, but the fact that a warrior can't dish out nearly as much damage as an elementalist on a frequent basis doesn't make much sense now does it?

Alodarn · Jun 22, 2005, 01:02 PM // 13:02

I must admit I find the lack of stealth in pvp in GW a refreshing change, and I think it should stay that way.

However, for pve, having the circle change in size as you move about, would sort of mimic stealth, for example if you hide behind a tree and stay still the circle would reduce, but if you just belt it up the middle of the path it grows.

Some spots are already set up to allow you to bypass groups and reduce the amount of fighting, but it's all down to proximity, it would add more realisim if it factored in terrain and lighting, tricky I know, but it would be cool.

Shadow_Avenger · Jun 22, 2005, 01:15 PM // 13:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Racthoh

Rangers would then have the advantage of farming over everyone else as they could slip by the worthless enemies easily. Yes it makes sense, but the fact that a warrior can't dish out nearly as much damage as an elementalist on a frequent basis doesn't make much sense now does it?

Lets put this in perspective.
A warrior runs at you and hits you with Huge great sword, he cleaves you in two , you dead.
Now a mage cast a spell, a shower of meteors fall from the sky, they hit a village destroying the village under molten rubble, ripping up the earth, creating huge creaters, destorying 100's if not 1000's of people in the area of effect.
Now in a game the warrior does not kill in one blow, and the mage does not wipe out entire villages, but what does remain is a scaled down resemblance in the powers.
A warrior has a greater chance of survival in a upclose battle than a mage, but give the mage room and the mage can destroy whole battle fields.

Racthoh · Jun 22, 2005, 01:48 PM // 13:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow_Avenger

Lets put this in perspective.
A warrior runs at you and hits you with Huge great sword, he cleaves you in two , you dead.
Now a mage cast a spell, a shower of meteors fall from the sky, they hit a village destroying the village under molten rubble, ripping up the earth, creating huge creaters, destorying 100's if not 1000's of people in the area of effect.
Now in a game the warrior does not kill in one blow, and the mage does not wipe out entire villages, but what does remain is a scaled down resemblance in the powers.
A warrior has a greater chance of survival in a upclose battle than a mage, but give the mage room and the mage can destroy whole battle fields.

Fair enough and well put.

Santanus_Perro · Jun 22, 2005, 02:23 PM // 14:23

How about a stealth skill that is available for each profession, but % chance of getting caught and length of enchantment is tied to skill level. For warrior it could be tactics, for ranger it could be wilderness survival, etc.

JoDiamonds · Jun 22, 2005, 02:36 PM // 14:36

Badly titled post. -1 karma.

That said: There should be some positives and negatives. Make it related to how big the character is:

Bigger characters should have larger aggro circles, but also be able to block a larger physical space (i.e. body blocking).

If they actually did that, they might want to give each character a 1-time opportunity to change their size.

Makkert · Jun 22, 2005, 02:52 PM // 14:52

interesting.
but even more interesting: applying this in pvp

make those rangers invisible..spooky!
yeah, it never will happen, but one can dream :P

Racthoh · Jun 22, 2005, 02:54 PM // 14:54

You should also be given the option of walking which would slightly decrease the size of the circle. Also considering a warrior is wearing heavy plated armour it would make noise.

Although that is taken from FFXI so we can't do that.

JoDiamonds · Jun 22, 2005, 03:07 PM // 15:07

Quote:

You should also be given the option of walking which would slightly decrease the size of the circle. Also considering a warrior is wearing heavy plated armour it would make noise.

Although that is taken from FFXI so we can't do that.

Ha. Stealing general ideas from other games is always ok, and it's not like FFXI invented the idea that heavy armor is noisier. That at least goes back to D&D, possibly earlier. Decades old idea, anyway. =)

Night · Jun 22, 2005, 03:28 PM // 15:28

How about just the ranger gets the stealth skill as he/she is a woodperson/tracker/hunter and in theory should have some knowledge of how to see without being seen. I'd say its a spell tied to wilderness survival or expertise. I also second that warrior or any classes aggro circle shouldn't be circumvented. I would be more inclined to support circle growing in accordance to damage potential so a Mage would have a larger aggro circle but I would much prefer no change to it all.