Curse

isilwen · May 17, 2005, 11:30 AM // 11:30

i guess people here dont think out of box on how to use their rangers or what the herd instinct of the gw crowd is i.e flavor of the month class or combo

i play both a monk that finished the game and a ranger that i started, i never had difficulties dropping war/mo or even mages in pvp and in pve pr pvm whatever we call it i can drop mobs fast too that it surprises my groups alot. my advise is learn to play the ranger strategically not just dash in and use same 1 or 2 skills as war or same couple of spells as mage. rng is class you play with thinking on the fly adapting to different situations in each mission or each pvp contest.

Zarconis · May 17, 2005, 11:54 AM // 11:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kilguri

Also, keep in mind Rangers need a clear line of sight or point blank range to be able to use any of their offensive skills (traps excluded), while Mesmers and Necromancers can cast through obscuring objects, which is a very simple method to countering Rangers, it's just that most people don't even bother with the Rangers and always leave them as the last target.

Your argument is flawed. Everyone except for the physical damage dealers can USE skills/magic (not attack). By the same token, a warrior is nearly useless if the target is obscurred.

Rangers have a variety of skills that can make them a deadly scalpel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sting

... already at a disadvantige because its limiting you to just 1 class where everyone else gets to enjoy the best of both worlds. Do rangers suck? No. the biggest issues with them are to get any kind of damage that competes with the other classes is it takes 2 or 3 other skills where it only takes 1 elementalist skill to dish out the same or more DPS(and in a game that limmits your skill slots that is HUGE). The second is the fact that GW has become nothing more than W/Mo and Mo/?? game and we are not as good at taking Warriors out becasue of their armor, that leaves us to monks wich we can disrupt the crap out of but most grps employ at LEAST 2 monks. And lets face it a Ranger as a secondary or Mesmer can do that. A-NET has done with the Ranger what DAoC and EQ2 relegated the class to not the "jack of all trades" but more to "master of none". In 1v1 this is a decent trait but thier are no 1v1 that really matter.

Anyone who thinks that Rangers are filler or that they are less than any of the other classes are not using the Ranger correctly. Your problem is that you have a pre conceived notion of what a Ranger is. Unfortunately, in GW, the Rangers are not elves and they are not a master of all. They can however specialize to fill virtually any need in the team, but only at the expense of some other specialized task. This could be said for all classes, except for the Warrior. IMO the Warrior is the one who got shafted. No matter what 8 skills they bring to the table they will always be called upon to tank.

AGAIN, I ask you please to search and read the forums before you post.

The problem with most players, not just the ones who are rangers, is that they don't take the time to figure out what they want their character to do.

Do you want to be an anti caster ? I'll go toe to toe with any Me out there as far as that goes. You name the competition. If the skill level is the same, the Me will likely interrupt better, but the caster will be dead by my hand quicker.

Do you need a healer in a tight situation ? You might find it hard to believe but the Rangers actually have a handful of skills that make it very easy to serve as a support to a decent monk. No profession is as good as having the mo, but ranger (and necros) are the only ones I can think of that can help keep you alive.

Do you want to deal maximum damage ? There are so many skills for this and only 2 main attributes that you'll want to pump on this. It's ridiculous how much damage you can do.

How DOT ? Again, I can create a build for this as well.... it's so easy.

The bottom line on all of this discussion is that you'll have to leave some of the skills you like at home in order to accomplish what you want to accomplish. If you want to be some l33t ub3r Ranger that deals the most damage, can heal, support , lay traps and get out of any tight situation, you are playing the wrong profession. You need to be a w/mo.

I play as a R/mo and I usually end up having to tank a little do to pugs as well as heal my team. During Pvp I go for mostly damage, but in PvE I run interupts and support with one or two offensive skills. Most of the time i can attribute success to my efforts in a bad bug and other times I blend in to the team overall. I rarely ever hear, "Damn Zarconis, what are you packin'?" But the enemies fall none the less. The next time someone goes up against a "knockdown" opponent and after the first one they wonder why they see the skill light up but nothing happens, make sure to put in a good word for "RAGNERS"

I really love how this topic has become so popular. I will now begin misspelling all of my topics to encourage posting.

Theneler · May 17, 2005, 12:16 PM // 12:16

Why do you all have such trouble when getting melee'd?
in PvE i have no problem if 2 monsters aggro me. I just lay on a stance, take a couple shots, then put on Troll Unguent, and rarely do i die. Infact im almost always the last alive if im with a group that i dying.

And PvP? If im hanging back perching ( like i do ), and some warrior decides to come kill me, im happy. Sure i lose now and then, but in general hes the one that drops. And this is assuming he gets to me before i see him. And im sure once i have oath shot and barrage it'll be even easier.

And in PvP, if you layer up favorable winds, ignite arrows, and judges insight.... phew look out. Normally i find somewhere high, whip out my longbow, and wait. When you have that stand off between two groups that are just staying outta range... most players dont realize how far a ranger up high can shoot a longbow, and when i hit them for 80-120 dmg, it tends to break their formation pretty quick.

roselan · May 17, 2005, 02:46 PM // 14:46

what I see through this thread is that the only way for rangers to make some impact is that the opposite team is doing some, let's face it, noobish, misstakes.

disruptive rangers are not dissruptive as soon as they have a warrior on their back. they are dead. Sure they can bring swirling defense, reflexes, throw dirt, pin down, penetrating shoot, troll perfume. Well that's not a lot left to get disruptive.

High dmg rangers are not even better, as they need to disrupt to deal damage... meaning no skill left for defense. Again as soon as you pound on opposite mage/casters, you are toast, as you attract fire.

The point is that a warrior can kill a ranger pretty fast, but a ranger can't kill a warrior, despise all his tricks, ever. Moreover, a ranger is on par with warriors to kill casters. (Anti-warrior casters works usually quite well against rangers too).

Sure rangers can play well, but the ennemy too. There is some smart wamos out there too ya know ^^

Lasher Dragon · May 17, 2005, 03:02 PM // 15:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by roselan

what I see through this thread is that the only way for rangers to make some impact is that the opposite team is doing some, let's face it, noobish, misstakes.

disruptive rangers are not dissruptive as soon as they have a warrior on their back. they are dead. Sure they can bring swirling defense, reflexes, throw dirt, pin down, penetrating shoot, troll perfume. Well that's not a lot left to get disruptive.

High dmg rangers are not even better, as they need to disrupt to deal damage... meaning no skill left for defense. Again as soon as you pound on opposite mage/casters, you are toast, as you attract fire.

The point is that a warrior can kill a ranger pretty fast, but a ranger can't kill a warrior, despise all his tricks, ever. Moreover, a ranger is on par with warriors to kill casters. (Anti-warrior casters works usually quite well against rangers too).

Sure rangers can play well, but the ennemy too. There is some smart wamos out there too ya know ^^

Striker Shardale · May 17, 2005, 03:14 PM // 15:14

It is true, a ranger is nearly helpless against a warrior that is correctly built but then again warriors are a little overpowered or is it just me who thinks that? I mean sure, I can make my ranger piss you off by crippling you then causing you to bleed as you attempt to get away or come at me, lay a trap and then continue to cripple you and deal some form of dmge till you die but even that takes more than just 4 skills.

Defafnyr · May 17, 2005, 03:22 PM // 15:22

I'm sure reading a lot of rangers, mezzers, necros suck as primaries threads. Sounds like most of the vocal only hold warriors, monks and enchanters as the best of the best and the only truely necessarry primary classes needed in a group.

Striker Shardale · May 17, 2005, 03:29 PM // 15:29

Well, I think it is that the warrior is just far too overpowered. A ranger can easily hold it's own against anything that is not a warrior, the only thing I have found to be affective against a warrior was I think a necro. The thing is, nearly every build is helpful in some way just not the best in most situations. I personally do not think I would be able to do anything other than play my R/Mo or my soon to come Me/Mo and Me/E.

Sting · May 17, 2005, 05:49 PM // 17:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defafnyr

I'm sure reading a lot of rangers, mezzers, necros suck as primaries threads. Sounds like most of the vocal only hold warriors, monks and enchanters as the best of the best and the only truely necessarry primary classes needed in a group.

Cant speak for the Anti-Ranger crowd but my main toon is a R/Me. I enjoy playing a great deal (when I can get a group). But they have some issues that make them less desirable (why take a R/Me when you can get a E/Me and get the same/better results and more DPS). Also alot of it is perception Id care to bet money that if lets say Barrage came down looking like a huge firestorm or some other cool looking effect it would allow rangers to at least SHOW the group they are doing something constructive.

All you have to do is look at the makeup of most groups. 4W/?? (usually w/Mo). 2 or 3 Mo/?? 1 or 2 casters (depending on how many monks). There is NO demand for rangers (Ive been in grps who merge with other grps and im booted imediatly. This usually backfires because my RL buddy leaves with with Monk toon. But it happens 3 or 4 times a night).

Lasher Dragon · May 17, 2005, 06:16 PM // 18:16

What a lot of the Wamo playing ranger-haters don't understand is that with a high expertise, such as mine at 12 currently, I can use skills all day long. I can sit there and use Penetrating shot every time it cools down (which works out to about every other shot with a shortbow/halfmoon) and never run out of energy.

Reaven · May 17, 2005, 06:54 PM // 18:54

My bro is a ranger-ele. He pwns... But thats either couz he´s had millions of PvP char´s to figgure out what he whanted exacly

Sting · May 17, 2005, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reaven

My bro is a ranger-ele. He pwns... But thats either couz he´s had millions of PvP char´s to figgure out what he whanted exacly

very constructive feedback LOL

Defafnyr · May 17, 2005, 09:37 PM // 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lasher Dragon

What a lot of the Wamo playing ranger-haters don't understand is that with a high expertise, such as mine at 12 currently, I can use skills all day long. I can sit there and use Penetrating shot every time it cools down (which works out to about every other shot with a shortbow/halfmoon) and never run out of energy.

....So does expertise make your energy (mana) bar regen faster?

Lasher Dragon · May 17, 2005, 10:05 PM // 22:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defafnyr

....So does expertise make your energy (mana) bar regen faster?

No, it just decreases the cost of most of the ranger abilities you would use. 4% per rank IIRC. So, at 12 ranks, all my attacks, preparations and traps cost me 48% less energy. Hmm now I read that according to this site it is 5% per rank... weird. Anyway, that would make it, what, 60% less energy to cast those things? Anyway, since I have had my expertise at 12, I have never come across a situation where I ran out of energy except those mergoyles that drain it.

Defafnyr · May 18, 2005, 02:49 AM // 02:49

Okay, I sucketh at math, so please explain in blond terms. Let's say most of my skills take 10 energy each. I put 10 in expertise. Now how much energy do they take?

Ravyn · May 18, 2005, 03:15 AM // 03:15

Picking a 2nd profession can cripple a Ranger severely.

1) Are you going to lower your marksmanship and shoot for less?
2) Are you going to lower your expertise and wait longer for energy skill use?
3) Wilderness survival? Are you sacrificing defense and some offense?

TBO, I find warriors quite easy to kill. Half the time, they give up trying to damage me and move on or I kill them while toe to toe.

ginetti · May 18, 2005, 04:04 AM // 04:04

warriors, hmph.

Troll ungent for the win.

Otherwise, my ranger does alot more damage than my w/n friend.

In pve he gets all the group on him. I "Ignight arows" and duel shot doing around 150-200 damager per attack.

Not bad eh?

Oh, and yeah casters drop quick vs that tactic.

Vs. a warrior, i usualy get owned.

TheZoologist · May 18, 2005, 04:09 AM // 04:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Defafnyr

Okay, I sucketh at math, so please explain in blond terms. Let's say most of my skills take 10 energy each. I put 10 in expertise. Now how much energy do they take?

10 x 4% = 40%

40% of 10 = 4

Your 10-energy skills cost 4 energy points less. They cost 6 energy.

Now what I'm interested in is the possibility of using "General" skills from other professions, i.e. those skills that are available to a profession (or secondary profession) but are not tied to a particular attribute. For example, I have found the Necromancer skill Plague Touch rather amusing to use, and I apparently don't have to put any points into Necromancer attributes to use it. However, there are only two such skills for Necromancers, so perhaps not the best secondary to make use of general skills with. Still better than Elementalist secondary, as their general skills are all tied to spells.

Defafnyr · May 18, 2005, 04:12 AM // 04:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ravyn

Picking a 2nd profession can cripple a Ranger severely.

1) Are you going to lower your marksmanship and shoot for less?
2) Are you going to lower your expertise and wait longer for energy skill use?
3) Wilderness survival? Are you sacrificing defense and some offense?

TBO, I find warriors quite easy to kill. Half the time, they give up trying to damage me and move on or I kill them while toe to toe.

I found this to be true to my playstyle. I have a second profession, but I stopped carrying any of the skills and took the points out of it.

roselan · May 18, 2005, 08:05 AM // 08:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lasher Dragon

What a lot of the Wamo playing ranger-haters don't understand is that with a high expertise, such as mine at 12 currently, I can use skills all day long. I can sit there and use Penetrating shot every time it cools down (which works out to about every other shot with a shortbow/halfmoon) and never run out of energy.

Same here, that is nice effectivly. Actually you can chain 3 skillz non stop. (penatring shoot, hunter shoot by exemple) But even by unleashing all my best skillz non stop on a wamo, it does not hurt him that much (and if he has a tactics stance, I nearly don't touch him).

I will drop tactics for survival tonight too, but I doubt it will change a lot.