Curse

Shuuda · Dec 08, 2006, 06:16 PM // 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Highwind

Okay kids stop the PvP arguments before this thread gets further derailed.

good point, considering that no one has actually answered my 2 questions I asked at 1st.

XvArchonvX · Dec 08, 2006, 06:56 PM // 18:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

considering the near unplayability of thumpers in pve (at least from my experience) The only way to talk about a sword ranger is in a pvp context.

Idk about that, I got through most of NF as a thumper. I generally switched to bow when I joined groups, but when I used hench/heroes I ran with 2 monks and a motivation paragon to support me. I found that in many instances I actually had better success running as a thumper.

@ Shuuda's origional questions:
I would suggest Whirling over PB whenever you have a monk to back you up. Reducing damage instead of healing yourself will prevent double healing from the monk. When you need a rez sig, I would suggest you drop the sever/gash combo for something like Pure Strike (aka: Jaizhenju Strike in factions). Use a zealous sword and you should have no problem spamming it as soon as it recharges. If you expect to encounter enemies that evade (like Corsair Bowmen), then take Wild Blow.

Darkpower Alchemist · Dec 09, 2006, 09:38 AM // 09:38

I have been playing R/W recently and realized a few things.

[skill=big]Rampage as One[/skill]

This skill is awesome. my pet has got more use in this week than I have ever used him for. Hammer Thumpers are so fun.

Anyway, the sword ranger subject still the topic, I have to admit what I didn't want to admit in my first post. It just isn't as effective as you may feel it is. If a warrior gets killed by you and a sword, he is a poor warrior imo. In melee, you would be wise to bring Wild blow, since every ranger in PvE in Elona has WD, unless you like taking 11 pts of damage for every swing that misses.

Once again, the exclusion of tactics in your sword build makes it useless,and if you have a sword that just smacks people and does no damage except against melee characters who run into your ripostes, then you are just not very effective. Your sword is even less useful than an attacking monk's wand.

That being said, I still want to help you with a sword based build. First, you MUST have a swordsmanship of 12 to even be considered dangerous. That means your BM must take the hit, or your pet has to take a powder and sit the sword fight out all together. If you take the minimum for whatever sword you have, you'll do base damage minus for AL. Tactics should be at or around 9, to be useful for any stance,shield, or even the Healing Signet. Let's not even talk about Expertise,being your 3rd attribute, will also be at 9+, so their is no room for BM in the least.

This would make you an effective swordsman. Is that what you want? If you aren't happy with what are rational bare minimums for a R/W swordsman, then lets see what you do want.

A Swordsman/Beastmaster is what you have started with, but it lacked healing for yourself, which makes you totally dependent on a monk in every situation. Also, you caused conditions but didn't really deal adequate damage until Final thrust lands,if it lands. In the case of a warrior build that I use as an anti warrior swordsman, it would basically make your build useless on the strength of my stance alone. Since you can't stop a stance with your build, and their is no room to add wild blow,you are always at a disadvantage. Also, your pet having the disrupt skill would make you not the major target, but still your build is so totally dependent on the pet or the monk that you are more like a secondary player in any fight.

Is that what you want? To be the background character? Honestly, your build isn't threatening to a skillful warrior. Whether a glad's warrior or a warrior build like the one that I use, your build would take a serious "L" and make you realize that what I have just said has too much truth for you to use that build again.

[skill=card]"Watch Yourself!"[/skill][skill=card]Wild Blow[/skill][skill=card]Riposte[/skill][skill=card]Deadly Riposte[/skill][skill=card]Soldier's Strike[/skill][skill=card]Soldier's Defense[/skill][skill=card]Healing Signet[/skill][skill=card]Dolyak Signet[/skill]

I would switch Dolyak for Resurrection Signet in a team situation, or Sprint/Rush in AB or possibly "Charge" since I have no elite in use. Their is no IAS because the build is made for aggressive warriors/melee types. My stats are as follows;

swordsmanship 14 tactics 12 Strength 10

Your current R/W would fold up like an old wallet, and I don't have an attack elite in use. That being the case, it shows that your current build can not be effective as it stands. Take the advice of others. Go hammer if you want to take the warrior secondary seriously, or drop the pet and go for poison and wilderness survival, using the troll unguent as a self heal.

XvArchonvX · Dec 09, 2006, 03:51 PM // 15:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

Anyway, the sword ranger subject still the topic, I have to admit what I didn't want to admit in my first post. It just isn't as effective as you may feel it is. If a warrior gets killed by you and a sword, he is a poor warrior imo. In melee, you would be wise to bring Wild blow, since every ranger in PvE in Elona has WD, unless you like taking 11 pts of damage for every swing that misses.

You only really encounter Whirling Defense in the early Kournan area with the bowmen. Rangers that are commonly encountered for the rest of the game don't have any defensive stance. Also the damage from WD isn't triggered from melee attacks, it only comes from ranged attacks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

Once again, the exclusion of tactics in your sword build makes it useless,and if you have a sword that just smacks people and does no damage except against melee characters who run into your ripostes, then you are just not very effective. Your sword is even less useful than an attacking monk's wand.

You don't need tactics to use a sword. The only legitamate disadvantage that will be faced is from the inability to get the damage bonus from a shield. That said, he still gets the benefit of the mods on the shield (this is largely why monks use shields at times in PvP).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

That being said, I still want to help you with a sword based build. First, you MUST have a swordsmanship of 12 to even be considered dangerous. That means your BM must take the hit, or your pet has to take a powder and sit the sword fight out all together. If you take the minimum for whatever sword you have, you'll do base damage minus for AL. Tactics should be at or around 9, to be useful for any stance,shield, or even the Healing Signet. Let's not even talk about Expertise,being your 3rd attribute, will also be at 9+, so their is no room for BM in the least.

He already has 12 att in swords. As for less att in BM, most thumpers will only run somewhere around 10 BM for their builds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

A Swordsman/Beastmaster is what you have started with, but it lacked healing for yourself, which makes you totally dependent on a monk in every situation.

I don't think he suggested this as a solo build, so I'm not sure what you see as being wrong with not having a self heal. When you run in a team with a monk, a damage reduction skill is better than a self heal. Even with that said, the purpose of this build is as a damage dealer, not a tank. This build is arguably comparable to a thumper, except that it has a stronger defense at the cost of not being able to KD. It may be able to deal about the same amount of damage as a thumper with the right skill setup, but the real advantage is of a slightly more hearty RaO ranger. However, this does not mean that he is a tank. The role of a this build is still to deal damage, and just like a thumper, he will be monk reliant. There is nothing wrong with being monk reliant. If there was, people wouldn't run thumper builds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

Also, you caused conditions but didn't really deal adequate damage until Final thrust lands,if it lands. In the case of a warrior build that I use as an anti warrior swordsman, it would basically make your build useless on the strength of my stance alone. Since you can't stop a stance with your build, and their is no room to add wild blow,you are always at a disadvantage. Also, your pet having the disrupt skill would make you not the major target, but still your build is so totally dependent on the pet or the monk that you are more like a secondary player in any fight.

If this is used in PvP, why would he be standing around dualing warriors?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

Is that what you want? To be the background character? Honestly, your build isn't threatening to a skillful warrior. Whether a glad's warrior or a warrior build like the one that I use, your build would take a serious "L" and make you realize that what I have just said has too much truth for you to use that build again.

If this build was meant for a one on one against a warrior, you might have some legitamacy to your argument, but it's not. Using this build to target a warrior instead of a squishy would be simply foolish.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

I would switch Dolyak for Resurrection Signet in a team situation, or Sprint/Rush in AB or possibly "Charge" since I have no elite in use. Their is no IAS because the build is made for aggressive warriors/melee types. My stats are as follows;

swordsmanship 14 tactics 12 Strength 10

Your current R/W would fold up like an old wallet, and I don't have an attack elite in use. That being the case, it shows that your current build can not be effective as it stands. Take the advice of others. Go hammer if you want to take the warrior secondary seriously, or drop the pet and go for poison and wilderness survival, using the troll unguent as a self heal.

I don't remember seeing the OP asking for a completely new build anywhere. Also his build may have less defense than what you suggest, but it will deal a LOT more damage, which is the point of the build that I believe you completely missed. I would say that the potential of the build would be better met by putting in more effective damage skills than Sever/Gash, but I don't see why he would have to completely change his build so he could be a 'tank' instead of a damage dealer.

Sheriff · Dec 09, 2006, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quite some interesting ideas in this topic.

First, GW is a team game. I do not doubt that on a 1vs1, a W/R is more likely to beat a R/W than the other way around. However, in a team play, things are going to be different.

Second, remember that the Ranger has, as base armor, 70AL+30 vs Elemental. This is 100AL vs Elemental, or 20 more than the base armor for the warrior. This makes the R/W an interesting character to chase the casters.

Third, maybe the hammer R/W might have a better damage output than the sword R/W. However, the sword R/W might have some advantages. Here's one idea (sorry, I still don't know how to add those nifty skill icons

)

Rampage As One
Charm Animal
Comfort Animal
Toxicity [-2 degen to poisoned] (also consider Scav. Strike)
Barbarous Slice [bleeding]
Final Thrust
Res Signet
Apply Poison [poisoning] (or forfeit WS and use poisonous bite)

Stats could be:

Sword 12
Beastmastery 11 + 1 + 2 = 14 (adjust according to tastes)
Expertise 5 + 1 = 6 (since the bulk of skills is in the 15 energy range)
Wilderness Survival 5 + 1 = 6 (anything goes here really)

So besides some decent damage, we have a R/W that can give some severe conditions and even run around and spread them if necessary.

I know someone will say "ah but if MY team has a monk that removes conditions you're useless" but hey if MY team has an interrupting mesmer or ranger, your monk is useless

Once again, GW is a team game, a synergies game. I can see a sword R/W having good synergies in a balanced party.

Just my 0.02c

Darkpower Alchemist · Dec 10, 2006, 06:30 AM // 06:30

@Archon. The point of my synopsis is that he isn't an asset to his team in his current build. He will be watched but not really looked upon in the way he could be in any way as useful or of any major consequence.

He is filling a team slot,and nothing more. As for more damage,how is he causing more damage than a hammer thumper? He is doing nothing but making a guy bleed a bit. The hammer thumper does more damage, causes kds, and is a pure nuisance on the field of combat- making him/her someone you HAVE to pay attention to.

As for the situation of him/her dealing with a warrior in the current build of discussion, he/she will have no choice in a combat situation. If you wield a sword/axe/hammer, then you will be forced to deal with the warriors of the opposing team. In PvE, he may have a chance with his sword, but in PvP he would have an issue each time melee combat with another melee type character came into play. R/W swordsman w/o a shield makes for less physical damage resistance, and the reference to lowering his BM stat is for tactics, not swordsmanship.

His tactic stat is non existent. He's not effectively using a shield,and even though he doesn't have tactic stances,imho, that makes him very vulnerable. I said he should have wild blow because when I play with my dervish and warrior against Kuornan archers, WD causes 11 pts of damage per ranged attack that misses. The damage is piercing damage, and isn't set off by melee attacks. So, in my previous post, I was mistaken it what set it off.

[skill=big]Whirling Defense[/skill]

However, if a monk or other caster is wanding the rangers while you are in melee range,WD is now causing you damage. Thus, WB is still useful to have on a bar. Whether stopping a rush/sprinter or to counteract a defensive stance.

The thought of harrassing a caster is understandable, but is just done better by hammer thumpers.

Also,being totally dependent on a monk seems to be ok to some guys. I think that is bad. Its like telling me to leave heals and res skills because the monks handle that. But when monks die, what do you do? Look for someone else to res or heal? I understand that concept if you are a primary warrior/melee attacker in PvP/GvG, where resurrections are handled differently under different circumstances, but in PvE/TA? I just don't agree.

Like I said previously, the swordsman ranger is just not doing enough to be viable as a melee attacker when compared with its hammer counterpart. If you just want to be different, more power to you. If you want to do it just to do it, more power to you, but if you want to know what is most effective overall, then I believe it is the hammer thumper. Of course, some may not agree with how I came to this conclusion, but it is my opinion from what I have experienced.

XvArchonvX · Dec 10, 2006, 07:14 AM // 07:14

Let me sum this up simply: I agree that a thumper is a better choice than a sword ranger. I don't think that it is 'bad' to be reliant on a monk and you are contradicting yourself if you believe that Thumpers are good, but reliance on a monk is bad. A team ultimately determines the usefulness of your build. If this guy wants to run a sword build, then let him, but trying to talk him into changing his whole build and throwing in a bunch of tactic skills for defense when he is obviously aiming for an offensive build is pretty weak. Making a R/W sword ranger into a wannabe tank isn't going to help him any.

Sheriff · Dec 10, 2006, 08:30 AM // 08:30

Tactics? Why Tactics? The R/P Pack Master (or whatever the BM/Spear build is called) doesn't use tactics either.

The sword R/W can simply wear an offhand, get partial energy for it, -5 of physical resistance (which is the weakness of the ranger armor) every 5 attacks, and 30 hp more than the hammer R/W. That gives him an edge in terms of survivability

Shuuda · Dec 10, 2006, 08:40 AM // 08:40

Expertise gives better stances than tactics, because the stances don't end when you use a skill.

Darkpower Alchemist · Dec 10, 2006, 10:03 AM // 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuuda

Expertise gives better stances than tactics, because the stances don't end when you use a skill.

Stance comparison time...

[skill=big]Soldier's Defense[/skill]

This is conditional,however, with the growing popularity of shouts and chants in the current game, this stance is a sure keeper on any compotent player's bar if looking for a non elite stance.

[skill=big]Whirling Defense[/skill]

This is the ranger stance of choice. This skill is similar to the previous stance, however, WD is self reliant and not conditional.

[skill=big]Wary Stance[/skill]

I imagine this is one of those stances you were refering to? Never used it personally for that very reason. however, if you just wanted to build adrenaline before unloading in a spike, then this may prove very useful.

[skill=big]Lightning Reflexes[/skill]

I liked this skill when i first started playing a ranger, but the recharge kills this skill.

[skill=big]Shield Stance[/skill]

Great for tanking, so don't try to be mobile when you use this stance.

Hmmm... I can't seem to remember any other ranger stances of note atm. I'll look for others.

XvArchonvX · Dec 10, 2006, 03:02 PM // 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

Stance comparison time...

[skill=big]Soldier's Defense[/skill]

Soldier's isn't a bad stance, but it requires a good investment into tactics as well as another slot to be taken up by a shout. Not a good choice for the OP's build.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

[skill=big]Whirling Defense[/skill]

This is the ranger stance of choice. This skill is similar to the previous stance, however, WD is self reliant and not conditional.

Exactly. This is why Tactics is a waste.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

[skill=big]Wary Stance[/skill]

I imagine this is one of those stances you were refering to? Never used it personally for that very reason. however, if you just wanted to build adrenaline before unloading in a spike, then this may prove very useful.

Sorry, but this skill is way too conditional to merit it's use, let alone it's investment into tactics. If this blocked attacks, it would be different, but a stance that only blocks attack skills is a waste imo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

[skill=big]Lightning Reflexes[/skill]

I liked this skill when i first started playing a ranger, but the recharge kills this skill.

This skill would be a bad choice for the OP's build and is arguably one of the ranger's weaker stances. The increased IAS means nothing to a ranger using RaO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darkpower Alchemist

[skill=big]Shield Stance[/skill]

Great for tanking, so don't try to be mobile when you use this stance.

Again, completely useless to the OP's build. This stance is really for tanks absorbing damage in PvE. When playing the role of a damage dealing melee character, the whole point is to be able to get to your enemy and inflict as much damage as possible. This won't happen with a speed reduction.

If nothing else, this should be taken into account: With greater investment into Expertise, while investment into tactics spreads attributes thin and weakens the potential of the rest of the build.

Sheriff · Dec 10, 2006, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Bonetti's is _the_ non-elite tactics stance, but, as I said, tactics is unnecessary to the sword R/W

BTW, has anyone considered a sword R/Me using IW? In here, the expertise stances could keep the ranger alive while relying on IW for a fast kill.

XvArchonvX · Dec 10, 2006, 08:52 PM // 20:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff

Bonetti's is _the_ non-elite tactics stance, but, as I said, tactics is unnecessary to the sword R/W

BTW, has anyone considered a sword R/Me using IW? In here, the expertise stances could keep the ranger alive while relying on IW for a fast kill.

Since expertise doesn't affect spells or stances, there's not much reason to choose this over a Me/W that can use warrior stances. The reason a R/W would be advantageous is because a ranger could use expertise to spam attack skills that require energy easier than a warrior could. Also, a R/W allows the use of RaO.

Sheriff · Dec 11, 2006, 08:46 AM // 08:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by XvArchonvX

Since expertise doesn't affect spells or stances, there's not much reason to choose this over a Me/W that can use warrior stances.

I beg to differ

There are some considerable differences. First, the AL. Warrior stances are not going to save the Me/W from all attacks, much less from spells. The R has higher AL specially vs elemental, so he should be fine.

Regarding expertise, yes, it is marginally more useless to an IW build than Fast Casting is

Still has an influence on the stances and the ranger skills.

Also, Serpent's Quickness potentially makes a 20% longer enchanting sword pommel unnecessary.

And the R/Me can still use BM: Tiger's Fury and a pet dealing some extra dmg should be useful

Mind you I have never tested a IW R/Me, but I'd be willing to give it a try.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XvArchonvX

The reason a R/W would be advantageous is because a ranger could use expertise to spam attack skills that require energy easier than a warrior could. Also, a R/W allows the use of RaO.

Definitely!

My suggestion of an IW R/Me was a totally different concept. It was not meant to be "worse" or "better" than the RaO R/W, just a different way of making a sword Ranger

Thom Bangalter · Dec 11, 2006, 09:20 AM // 09:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

No one has come out yet to just blatantly state that the idea is awful?

weird.

Yeah, I agree, this thread is promoting a really bad build. What are you using on expertise? Hamstring? Why is everyone promoting Whirling Defense on a RaO ranger? What disruption does this provide over a ranger with a hammer? (answer: none). What extra pressure does this provide over a thumper? (answer: none). What does a ranger with a sword have over a warrior? (answer: nothing).

dgb · Dec 11, 2006, 11:56 AM // 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheriff

Rampage As One
Charm Animal
Comfort Animal
Toxicity [-2 degen to poisoned] (also consider Scav. Strike)
Barbarous Slice [bleeding]
Final Thrust
Res Signet
Apply Poison [poisoning] (or forfeit WS and use poisonous bite)

Stats could be:

Sword 12
Beastmastery 11 + 1 + 2 = 14 (adjust according to tastes)
Expertise 5 + 1 = 6 (since the bulk of skills is in the 15 energy range)
Wilderness Survival 5 + 1 = 6 (anything goes here really)

So besides some decent damage, we have a R/W that can give some severe conditions and even run around and spread them if necessary.

Aside from the general all around suckage of this thing, no deep wound makes it suck more than the average black hole.

Thomas.knbk · Dec 11, 2006, 02:30 PM // 14:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shuuda

some scammer said it was worth 7K according to Wiki (do wiki even do price checks?)

Every watch seller in Turkey tries to sell Rolexes for 200 Lire. Sometimes, Japanese tourists buy them for that price. If you negotiate with them you can get it down to 5-10 euro's. Does that make them scammers or just smart?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

No one has come out yet to just blatantly state that the idea is awful?

weird.

I have tried out a R/W axe ranger, and it was almost good. The thing that's so strong about thumpers is the disruption provided through knockdown, and how well expertise synergized with irresistable and crushing blow. If the disruption isn't there, you should just run a warrior.

What he said.

Shuuda · Dec 11, 2006, 03:21 PM // 15:21

Sigh, I guess it was pointless to even try posting a fun build without people flaming it. ¬_¬

Only 1 kind person has actually attempted to answer my questions, the rest of you have just flamed the build and thrown in a whole bunch of stuff which I never asked for, and already knew about.

XvArchonvX · Dec 11, 2006, 04:07 PM // 16:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

Yeah, I agree, this thread is promoting a really bad build. What are you using on expertise? Hamstring? Why is everyone promoting Whirling Defense on a RaO ranger? What disruption does this provide over a ranger with a hammer? (answer: none). What extra pressure does this provide over a thumper? (answer: none). What does a ranger with a sword have over a warrior? (answer: nothing).

Believe it or not, some people actually run inneficient builds for the sake of enjoying the game. No one said this would be a good, effective build. Besides, he was going to use in AB, not GvG or HA.

I guess if it wasn't obvious from the discussion that has gone on and it makes you feel better, I'll make this disclaimer:
This build will never be a better choice than a thumper. This build is inneficient. Though the build may be tweaked to be better, it will lack in strength compared to other popular builds simply by virtue of it being based on a ranger with a sword.

With this said, most rangers just look kooler with swords than most warriors. Pirate lookalike ftw.

Sir Mad · Dec 11, 2006, 04:14 PM // 16:14

Erm I may add I find quoting and agreeing with himself kinda weird

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

No one has come out yet to just blatantly state that the idea is awful?

weird.

Yeah, I agree, this thread is promoting a really bad build. What are you using on expertise? Hamstring? Why is everyone promoting Whirling Defense on a RaO ranger? What disruption does this provide over a ranger with a hammer? (answer: none). What extra pressure does this provide over a thumper? (answer: none). What does a ranger with a sword have over a warrior? (answer: nothing).

And there is one thing a ranger can do betther than a warrior: RoA. They have the energy for that. Now, no one said the whole build would better than a warrior's build. But the point of this thread is to come with a decent ranger sword build. For the fun of it. Coming with statements like "sword rangers suck" is stupid. Yes, they prolly can't do a better job than a warrior. And then? What if someone has fun with it?