Curse

SnipiousMax · Aug 18, 2006, 02:58 PM // 14:58

^ Now that I think about it, I am kinda curious why storm chaser is in just about everyone of your builds?

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 03:03 PM // 15:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

Do you ever get tired of forcing your opinion onto others?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

Longbows are not the best bow in the game, nor will they ever be. Hornbows are perfect Barrage bows whether your willing to allow 'nooby' rangers to see that or not.

Do you?

Actually, I will edit the Thumper build, I spread too thin, but just get a life regarding the bow argument. That was so five pages ago.

Evilsod · Aug 18, 2006, 03:50 PM // 15:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

Do you?

Actually, I will edit the Thumper build, I spread too thin, but just get a life regarding the bow argument. That was so five pages ago.

No actually it was 13 pages ago on the first page. Nowhere in there did i force my opinion on you, i merely said Longbows are not the best. You seem to be telling everyone that a Longbow is THE best for practically all situations whether you like it or not.

Oh and your still running 4 attributes (forgot that Shove was Tactics). How do you intend to spam Tigers Fury, Hammer attack skills, Shove and use Dodge effectively? Perhaps you should post some attributes along with these things instead of leaving them a guessing game. At this rate you may aswell just put this build on a Hammer Warrior and give them Tiger Stance/Frenzy instead of Tigers Fury. Theres no way you could use Tigers Fury often enough to make it effective with 4 attribute lines.

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 04:06 PM // 16:06

Actually I usually run Frenzy but last time I suggested doing something without layers of my own defense everyone screamed bloody murder. I play a Thumper with Frenzy. Bring a Prot Monk and you're fine.

Sir Mad · Aug 18, 2006, 04:12 PM // 16:12

To complete what Mooshee said:

Change (several times):

Marksmanship: 12+1+1
Wilderness Survival: 9+3
Expertise: 9+1

(7 points left)

to:

Marksmanship: 10+3+1
Wilderness Survival: 11+1
Expertise: 9+1

(14 points left)

Change:

Marksmanship: 0
Wilderness Survival: 10+1+1
Expertise: 12+3
Beast Mastery: 8+1

(5 points left)

to:

Marksmanship: 0
Wilderness Survival: 11+1
Expertise: 11+1+3
Beast Mastery: 8+1

(9 points left)

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 04:49 PM // 16:49

Those attribute distributions successfully gain you a few extra points left over at the end, but they fit no where. Good job with the math, I suppose, but that doesn't really gain you anything. It's merely important to get to the attribute levels suggested, whichever way you go about it.

SnipiousMax · Aug 18, 2006, 05:01 PM // 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

...that doesn't really gain you anything.

40 hit points in Mooshee's example. People pay alot of money for a +30 hp mod.

XvArchonvX · Aug 18, 2006, 05:10 PM // 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

If its not being stickied because of the way its written, then I no longer care about it being stickied. This isn't a "go ahead and try Incindiary Arrows to find out why it blows" its a "this skill blows, don't use it" thread. If you don't like it, I'm having trouble caring. I'm trying to help teach people what to use, not suggest lightly what they might consider doing.

You completely missed my point.

I'm not saying you should encourage people to try every skill and see why some are useful or not, but there is a difference between "most people tend not to use this skill in this because (insert rational explanation here)" and "Don't use this skill it blows". One of those statements treats the reader like a human being capable of evaluating a situation and gaining a greater understanding of a situation by seeing the full spectrum and one statement is an attempt to guide the reader blindy down the authors chosen path for no particular reason beyond that simple fact that the author said so. You don't have to encourage people to make bad decisions just because you didn't say something "sucks", offering a reasoning behind the inadequacy of that thing will generally convey your message just the same without insulting the reader's intelligence.

XvArchonvX · Aug 18, 2006, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnipiousMax

To be honest, the reason I've used Hunter's shot in the past, and will continue to use it in the future is because it is a spammable +damage skill with the chance of a secondary effect that only costs five energy. So I don't agree that it's unreliable simply because the secondary effect doesn't always take effect.

Agreed, this is why Hunter's Shot may often fall into my skill bar in a high energy build (i.e. crippleshot and/or poison).

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 05:24 PM // 17:24

I was referring to those in Sir Mad's example, which buy you essencially nothing. The numbers in Mooshee's post are wrong.

I run with...

Expertise: 9+1=10
Wilderness Survival: 9+3=12
Marksmanship: 12+1+1=14

He suggested...

Expertise: 9+1=10
Wilderness Survival: 10+1+1=12
Marksmanship: 11+2=13

The Superior Rune buys you one extra attribute point, as its designed to do. You can, of course, run with a Major, but you miss out on the attribute point.

SnipiousMax · Aug 18, 2006, 05:35 PM // 17:35

Amy Awien · Aug 18, 2006, 05:44 PM // 17:44

They may net some extra, for example:

Quote:

Marksmanship: 12+1+1 {14}
Wilderness Survival: 9+3 {12}
Expertise: 9+1 {10}

marks: 11+2+1
ws: 10+2
ex: 10+1

Gain: +5 health and +1 expertise. And major runes are cheaper then superior and minor runes.

Quote:

Marksmanship: 10+1+3
Wilderness Survival: 3+1
Expertise: 7+1
Channeling: 10

This could be changed to
Marks: 10+1+3
Channeling: 10
Expertise: 7+1
Wilderness Survival: 9+1

If the levels are just suggestions then I'd mention that - and with suggestions I'd not detail wich runes and masks to use.

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 06:11 PM // 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by SnipiousMax

^ No, he was suggesting this.

Expertise: 9+1=10
Wilderness Survival: 10+1+1=12
Marksmanship: 12+2=14

But this would also work

Expertise 9+1=10
Wilderness Survival: 10+2=12
Marksmanship 12+1+1=14

Yea, I know. None of that is possible. Sorry, it would be nice if it was.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

They may net some extra, for example:

Quote:
Marksmanship: 12+1+1 {14}
Wilderness Survival: 9+3 {12}
Expertise: 9+1 {10}

marks: 11+2+1
ws: 10+2
ex: 10+1

Gain: +5 health and +1 expertise. And major runes are cheaper then superior and minor runes.

Yes, those numbers actually work, and would net you a small gain. If you really wanted to, you could buy all the additional armor that would take and make it happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Quote:
Marksmanship: 10+1+3
Wilderness Survival: 3+1
Expertise: 7+1
Channeling: 10

This could be changed to
Marks: 10+1+3
Channeling: 10
Expertise: 7+1
Wilderness Survival: 9+1

If the levels are just suggestions then I'd mention that - and with suggestions I'd not detail wich runes and masks to use.

Hmm, I'm pretty sure that was a typo, and I had 16 in Mark, not 14. I'll fix that in the guide. But if you ran 14, yes, you could bring up Wilderness quite a bit.

HalPlantagenet · Aug 18, 2006, 06:14 PM // 18:14

First belated thanks to Sha Noran for his guide which I find interesting, provocative and instructive. While I empathize with calls from XvArchonvX, Amy Awien, and other rangers much more experienced and capable than me, for more apparent objectivity I have to say that I prefer the guide as it is for a couple of reasons. First, it’s engaging and personal and therefore probably a bit more accessible to many than something more antiseptic. Second, Sha Noran doesn’t attempt to hide his opinions behind apparent objectivity. As a result, I read them for what they are: opinions formed by extensive, careful game play but not necessarily perfect or rigorously provable. Strongly stated opinions like that have an interesting effect on me. I mostly agreed with him and shared his preference for long bows, but after reading the guide for the first time, decided to research bows more carefully. As a result, I carry a very different set in my active quiver. My horn bow, which was languishing in storage is now with me all the time because it offers significant advantages in certain situations.

In short, Noran’s guide feels like the gruff, plain advice of an arrogant curmudgeonly master ranger. Who wouldn’t want to buy him a pint in a Pub, listen to him declaim while keeping your own critical faculties fully engaged? I expect he would want no less. On the other hand, that’s not to say, I wouldn’t mind taking a seat at another table to listen to XvArchonvX and Amy Awien or Huntmaster debate a point or even better provide comprehensive guide of their own ranger experience.

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 06:20 PM // 18:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by HalPlantagenet

First belated thanks to Sha Noran for his guide which I find interesting, provocative and instructive. While I empathize with calls from XvArchonvX, Amy Awien, and other rangers much more experienced and capable than me, for more apparent objectivity I have to say that I prefer the guide as it is for a couple of reasons. First, it’s engaging and personal and therefore probably a bit more accessible to many than something more antiseptic. Second, Sha Noran doesn’t attempt to hide his opinions behind apparent objectivity. As a result, I read them for what they are: opinions formed by extensive, careful game play but not necessarily perfect or rigorously provable. Strongly stated opinions like that have an interesting effect on me. I mostly agreed with him and shared his preference for long bows, but after reading the guide for the first time, decided to research bows more carefully. As a result, I carry a very different set in my active quiver. My horn bow, which was languishing in storage is now with me all the time because it offers significant advantages in certain situations.

In short, Noran’s guide feels like the gruff, plain advice of an arrogant curmudgeonly master ranger. Who wouldn’t want to buy him a pint in a Pub, listen to him declaim while keeping your own critical faculties fully engaged? I expect he would want no less. On the other hand, that’s not to say, I wouldn’t mind taking a seat at another table to listen to XvArchonvX and Amy Awien or Huntmaster debate a point or even better provide comprehensive guide of their own ranger experience.

Well said, thanks for your support and I'm glad you liked the way it was written. I'm particularly glad that my guide inspired you to do more research on your own that lead you to forming your own opinions. My main goal with the guide was to supply Ranger's with some knowledge that they could build off of in order to raise the general Ranger IQ in the game. It seems it's doing so and that makes all the time spent well worth it.

SnipiousMax · Aug 18, 2006, 06:20 PM // 18:20

Sha Noran · Aug 18, 2006, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Nope, it doesn't. Sorry Max. :-)

Evilsod · Aug 18, 2006, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by XvArchonvX

Agreed, this is why Hunter's Shot may often fall into my skill bar in a high energy build (i.e. crippleshot and/or poison).

In PvE i don't really see the use for Cripshot. Nor Hunters Shot. Even though you can guarantee the enemy will be moving if they're a warrior, many foes are immune to bleeding/poison and additionally many are either dead too quickly or really not suffering at all from the little bit of extra damage bleeding gives. Hunters Shot is probably the best skill a PvP ranger could bring (specifically in ABs). It doesn't just affect warriors, many areas are extremely high up and give the ranger a significant increase in range. Many people, casters or otherwise may be running past, most not watching what you are doing, or simply trying to flee.

Sir Mad · Aug 18, 2006, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

Those attribute distributions successfully gain you a few extra points left over at the end, but they fit no where. Good job with the math, I suppose, but that doesn't really gain you anything. It's merely important to get to the attribute levels suggested, whichever way you go about it.

Sorry to say this, but this is the kind of arrogant response that upsets everybody since the beginning. This thread would be an excellent guide is you learnt how to listen at what people say.

Yes, those attribute points fit somewhere.

Example:

Quote:

Originally Posted by me

Change (several times):

Marksmanship: 12+1+1
Wilderness Survival: 9+3
Expertise: 9+1

(7 points left)

to:

Marksmanship: 10+3+1
Wilderness Survival: 11+1
Expertise: 9+1

(14 points left)

You need 13 points to raise an attribute from 9 to 10, and therefore can have 11 expertise instead of 10.

PS: it's not about doing math, it's just about applying the simple concept: to save the maximum attribute points, use a sup rune for your highest attribute.

SnipiousMax · Aug 18, 2006, 06:44 PM // 18:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sha Noran

Nope, it doesn't. Sorry Max. :-)

Well only being off by two measly points (202 instead of 200) without consulting the blasted chart isn't bad.

I remember what I did now. Yes his numbers (and the ones I subsequently posted) were wrong. What I had done was take that worthless point out of expertise. So I guess it comes down to whether 1 energy per 15 energy skill or 40 hits is more important.