Curse

-Byron- · Jun 20, 2007, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Barring attack skills, bows are certainly worse off than spears. But otherwise, bows have a much better variety of skills than spears do....spears have the potential for a deep wound yes, but it is conditional for both skills (vicious attack and cruel spear). Spears currently have two elites, both of which are ok but certainly nothing to write home about. Bows have a huge variety of elites, from damage to pressure to interrupts. The only truly significant factor separating bow damage from that of other weapons is the limited access to a good IAS rangers have.

I fail to see how the two weapons can even be compared when skills are factored into the equation. Consider preparations and I think spears just completely get trumped in comparison. Granted, spears are comparatively weaker due to the nature of the class as a whole, which is warranted.

While I disagree that bows are underpowered, I do agree that scythes are a weapon that have been needing some tweaking for a while, something I feel the community has neglected. With the highest base damage, AOE, high potential for spikes, and great skills in the line, the only downside to scythes is the attack speed, which is hardly debilitating considering some of the excellent IAS skills that Dervishes have. But this is really a separate issue.

XvArchonvX · Jun 20, 2007, 10:14 PM // 22:14

I think there's something to be addressed here. Scythes do very high damage, but they are balanced because they cannot spike like a warrior can spike their weaponry. A team may run with a Melandru Dervish, but Dervish will never replace warriors because a warrior can pressure AND spike, even if the c-space damage of their weapons equates to less.

Paragons have weapons that deal out decent DPS, but aren't mean to damage enough to replace warriors since they were designed to be a support character.

Rangers deal aren't supposed to be on the same level as Warriors and Dervish because they are utility characters. They can and should be able to deal enough dps to make themselves useful as a damage dealer in some cases, but their abilities and skills allow them to have survivability and disruption above most classes. Ranger spike may be long out of the metagame, but it did show that rangers can kill. B/ps in PvE also show that rangers can deal out numbers as well, but overall they were designed to be much like a Crip Shot or BA ranger is: Durable, agile, and flexible.

Evilsod · Jun 20, 2007, 10:50 PM // 22:50

Actually i was directing insults out to anyone who was dumb enough to just instantly quote me back and say that even though that wasn't even what i was saying... looks like you won. Your arguement wasn't rational, you basically read what i said, made your own assumptions about what it meant and attempted to mock me for it. I covered my ass in my first post. Yours was just ignorant shite.

PvP exists outside of GvG/HA.... well bugger me. Sadly GvG/HA are the ONLY 2 forms of PvP Anet balance things around. HvH/TA/RA may get the odd gimmick build sorted out if its too strong and isn't use anywhere else in PvP but they sure as hell don't balance around it.

Congratulations... you did 'more than that' with an assassin using a combo... i said i did with 1 normal attack you cretin. Stop replying if you don't even know what you're talking about. Actually you've already decided your gonna stop... so i'll hold you to it.

The ability for a Paragon to change doesn't really mean a great deal... they have a fixed attack speed, lower than all the bows. They have a fixed arc, its low enough to hit easily. Its low enough, when combined with the distance to be reasonable for interrupts. They may not get the ability to change to suit things ideally but they don't exactly have to...

Because what really matters in this game is how balanced weapons are vs targets who kite... snares don't actually exist. Nor knockdowns. Doesn't matter if its ridiculously overpowered, like the Scythe, vs stationary targets, the fact its 'balanced' vs moving foes is what counts...

Ensign · Jun 20, 2007, 10:57 PM // 22:57

Yes, bows are underpowered. The only reason Burning Arrow is the elite of choice on a Ranger is because it's the one skill that enables a Ranger to actually kill things. Otherwise you're a couple of good interrupts on a hard target but not much else.

Cathode_Reborn · Jun 20, 2007, 11:00 PM // 23:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

Theres a reason why bow rangers don't actually exist in PvP... they suck for damage.

Try observing some GvG matches.....you might find it shocking when you see a ranger in almost ever match

Most people will agree with you that bows do "suck" for damage. They also know that bows arn't really used for damage but instead they're often used for utility.

XvArchonvX · Jun 20, 2007, 11:17 PM // 23:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathode_Reborn

Most people will agree with you that bows do "suck" for damage. They also know that bows arn't really used for damage but instead they're often used for utility.

I think this point hits the nail on the head. No one is going to lie and say that a bow is a good damage dealing weapon (at least I hope they don't), but that doesn't make them underpowered weapons. Don't get me wrong, if they did buff bow damage, I'd be happy since I consider the ranger class my favorite and primary, but I just don't think it's really needed.

If someone wants to make the argument that some bow skills need to be buffed, I'd agree there. Power Shot, Point Blank Shot, etc are just sad.

pork soldier · Jun 20, 2007, 11:47 PM // 23:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by LifeInfusion

I don't think bows are underpowered as people say over at GWO and since nobody made this type of thread here I will link to it.

http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...d.php?t=454958
Thread title: "[Rangers need another look at?!]: Decrease Refire Rate / Add more Base Dmg..."

The discussion has really picked up since it started.

Bad Idea™

More base damage = Ranger Spike

Quaker · Jun 20, 2007, 11:52 PM // 23:52

I'm going to say that a bow IS a good damage dealing weapon, and I'm not lying. (And I'm only considering physical damage, not conditions.) But, it depends upon how you define good. I would say that, for physical damage, some weapons are best (scythe?), some are good (bow), and some are poor (staffs/wands). A 20/20 sundering shortbow (or 5/-1 vamp, if you count that as physical) with 15%^50 is gonna do a hell of a lot more damage than some elementalist's staff with a +5 energy inscription (which would be more normal than a +dmg mod), for example.

Overall, considering the range, the damage, the conditions and multiple targets, the Ranger is very well balanced IMHO.

Evilsod · Jun 21, 2007, 12:09 AM // 00:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cathode_Reborn

Try observing some GvG matches.....you might find it shocking when you see a ranger in almost ever match

Most people will agree with you that bows do "suck" for damage. They also know that bows arn't really used for damage but instead they're often used for utility.

I really need to define bow rangers more often to not 'A non-Burning Arrow build that is almost always identical' or 'A non-BHA build' or 'A non-Glass Arrows/Conjure spike build'. Rangers excel at spiking, we already know that. Theres damage skills in general suck. The only reason they're good at spiking is that they can stack as much as possible into a Dual Shot/Savage Shot to make it as strong as possible. But i'm still waiting on a Rangers bar to actually involve the rest of the Marksmanship line...

That point really is getting old now... people don't use bows for damage. They use them for utility. Thats because people know they suck for damage. Why use them for damage when you know it won't work! Is it THAT hard to understand!

Randomway Ftw · Jun 21, 2007, 12:51 AM // 00:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

I really need to define bow rangers more often to not 'A non-Burning Arrow build that is almost always identical' or 'A non-BHA build' or 'A non-Glass Arrows/Conjure spike build'. Rangers excel at spiking, we already know that. Theres damage skills in general suck. The only reason they're good at spiking is that they can stack as much as possible into a Dual Shot/Savage Shot to make it as strong as possible. But i'm still waiting on a Rangers bar to actually involve the rest of the Marksmanship line...

That point really is getting old now... people don't use bows for damage. They use them for utility. Thats because people know they suck for damage. Why use them for damage when you know it won't work! Is it THAT hard to understand!

I really don't see a way that you can have rangers deal marksmanship damage without it either being about flare spamming like usage of attack skills, or spiking, it is likely that without any additional functionality added to bow skills any big buff would create a new form of rspike.
If they are going to something like that they might as well drop the recharge on dual shot back to seven seconds instead because at least that way we know what that build is capable of and don't have another ritspike like balance screwup.

pork soldier · Jun 21, 2007, 01:46 AM // 01:46

There's a reason you see rangers in almost all groups, they're a good class.

LifeInfusion · Jun 21, 2007, 02:04 AM // 02:04

Scythes tend to have lower bonus damage than sins and warriors, for the record.

XvArchonvX · Jun 21, 2007, 02:06 AM // 02:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

I really need to define bow rangers more often to not 'A non-Burning Arrow build that is almost always identical' or 'A non-BHA build' or 'A non-Glass Arrows/Conjure spike build'. Rangers excel at spiking, we already know that. Theres damage skills in general suck. The only reason they're good at spiking is that they can stack as much as possible into a Dual Shot/Savage Shot to make it as strong as possible. But i'm still waiting on a Rangers bar to actually involve the rest of the Marksmanship line...

That point really is getting old now... people don't use bows for damage. They use them for utility. Thats because people know they suck for damage. Why use them for damage when you know it won't work! Is it THAT hard to understand!

So, you admit that a bow ranger is good for utility and spiking, but because it's not a great pressure weapon on the same level as something like an axe or scythe it sucks? What do you honestly want out of the weapon? Your complaints are really leaning towards something that would outclass otherweapons hands down. You also keep discounting bow buffs like preparations as if they are a bad thing or like a bow is weak because of them, but that's completely wrong. Bows are stronger because of their diversity in skills, not weaker. Preparations allow a bow to become something that deals damage, unleashes conditions, or assists in interuption. If a bow could pack out big damage without skills, then combining it with skills would make it overpowered. If you nerf the skills and buff the bow, the game just gets boring. C-space attacking ftl.

If you have complaints with the marksmanship line, I can understand, but don't blame the bow.

gasmaskman · Jun 21, 2007, 02:20 AM // 02:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotteN

bows are just fine, rangers are fine, people that complain should go play WoW and pick one of the overpowered classes so they can have the obvious ingame advantage to compensate for their lack of actual playerskill.

You shouldn't talk about WoW if you haven't played it.

Anyways, bows are good enough. They have disruption, condition pressure, and they have utility. What more could you want?

Master Ketsu · Jun 21, 2007, 02:24 AM // 02:24

Guild wars is not about Dps...

A good interrupt ranger can int anything 3/4 and longer.

Magebane shot ftw....

Evilsod · Jun 21, 2007, 09:45 AM // 09:45

The bow is just dodgy because of its refire... 2 seconds, 2.4 seconds and 2.7 seconds? What is the point of the Hornbow? The only time it ever sees use is for those couple of seconds your spiking in PvP. Then it vanishes again. We already know the rest of the Marksmanship line sucks... it just seems Izzy is too blind to see it.

cataphract · Jun 21, 2007, 11:25 AM // 11:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by XvArchonvX

Rangers deal aren't supposed to be on the same level as Warriors and Dervish because they are utility characters.

And this is what has been wrong in the game since day one.

The fact that rangers cannot inflict Deep Wound on a target or break its stance, not to mention lack of knock-down, is what made rangers utility characters. Which they shouldn't have become because it's not logical that an arrow hit cannot knock a target down or break the stance its in. Obviously, not all bows give enough kinetic energy for KD arrows and ranger KD skills should be made to work only with long and flat bows. Same goes for Deep Wound and stance breakers.

Shuuda · Jun 21, 2007, 11:41 AM // 11:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by pork soldier

There's a reason you see rangers in almost all groups, they're a good class.

Wow, your simple logic has won this thread (not sarcasim)

XvArchonvX · Jun 21, 2007, 01:18 PM // 13:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by cataphract

And this is what has been wrong in the game since day one.

The fact that rangers cannot inflict Deep Wound on a target or break its stance, not to mention lack of knock-down, is what made rangers utility characters. Which they shouldn't have become because it's not logical that an arrow hit cannot knock a target down or break the stance its in. Obviously, not all bows give enough kinetic energy for KD arrows and ranger KD skills should be made to work only with long and flat bows. Same goes for Deep Wound and stance breakers.

KD from any type of bow is ridiculous. If rangers want to do KD, they have traps. A stance breaking skill isn't a bad idea. Deep wound isn't really utility, but more of a form of damage.

Longasc · Jun 21, 2007, 01:32 PM // 13:32

Bows are per se a weak weapon in terms of pure DPS.

But together with Preparations, Interrupts and the ability to spread conditions at range... combined with Expertise... they are formidable!

Marksmanship skills mostly suck, that is true.

But what can we do? Rangers already excel at many things, they have great armor, great stances ... should we really give them more killing power?

I agree to some buffs to some marksmanship skills, but more than that is not really needed.

This is from a PvE perspective. Jin and Margrid are my favorite Heroes when I am going to vanquish an area, and they use bows. Just because Hero Battles work so well with Pack Hunters does not mean that bows suck big time.