Curse

Mercurio Riven · Jun 02, 2005, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Sorry if my views are a little harsh. I just think that Ranger is, at best, a viable class. You can pin down players. So can other classes. You can disrupt skills/spells. So can other classes. In fact, mesmers can do pre-emptive disruptions by punishing players for even trying a skill. Damage over time. Whoopty doo. Although Ranger can do a lot of different things, the way his low energy and expertise works forces a ranger to focus on his sub-par class skills rather than synergize with another class. Traps are specific to rangers. That's about it. They can be useful, but like nature rituals the other team can just avoid the hassle by forcing you to bring the fight to them in many cases. I love the Ranger armor. That, IMO, is their biggest strength.

Another thing, I didn't get into the beta thing and I've heard of all these nerfs to Ranger damage. I'm not sure if it was overpowered at the time, but I feel that Rangers should be able to focus on being very powerful damage dealers if they choose. I've gotten some nice damage, but it is not nearly as easy as other classes since you have to get into position and use the right bow and preparation. You might say I'm just a noob and don't know how to play a ranger, however I say that all the extra hassle just to be close to the effectiveness of other classes makes the Ranger weak. Regardless, Ranger is my favorite class to play, but the design of guild wars makes them underpowered in PvP. Forced specialization due to low attribute limits and skill choices means that a jack of all trades class will suffer. Other classes have no problem since their secondary class can usually make up for their weaknesses. Ranger has no overwhelming weakness besides disenchantment. It is a class with an assortment of skills that is all over the place. Some nature rituals are nice, but they help/harm the other team and your own allies at the same time. I'm just saying the class is broken imo. Sure, it might be used effectively in some instances. I just feel that if they took Ranger out of the game, play mechanics would not change very much in pvp matches. Other classes can perform the same actions better than the ranger.

Edit- My theory is that the best classes are those that specialize in one main function. For example, monks heal and are the best at it hands down. They are essential to any serious group. Warriors focus on melee/tanking and are the best at it. Elementalists focus on magic damage and excel at this. I hope all would admit these are the main 3 classes. Mesmers focus on disruption and are very nice counters to monks. They serve an important role. Necros I'm not too familiar with, but they seem to focus on curses and sometimes death magic. They appear to be weak, but I haven't played a necro that often.

What do Rangers focus on? Laying traps? Bow damage? Taking care of a Moa bird? I would rather have seen them make the Ranger a form of ranged warrior that focused on dealing damage rather than throwing in a bunch of disruption shots. That way, if a Ranger wanted to disrupt he would just have to go mesmer second or maybe necro. The low energy level of Rangers just handicaps them.

Beqxter · Jun 02, 2005, 10:46 PM // 22:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercurio Riven

Regardless, Ranger is my favorite class to play, but the design of guild wars makes them underpowered in PvP.

So despite all this, it's still your favorite class, so SOMETHING must be going right, right? Do you just avoid PvP with your Ranger?

I'm not picking on you Mercurio, I think you made some good points, but I seriously don't understand the people on some of these threads who went through all the trouble to ascend a Ranger (or claim to) and bitch the whole time about what a crappy class it is. Why on earth did you stick with it if you hated it so much? I started a warrior, played it up a few levels, found the gameplay style boring and stopped playing. Seems like common sense. A little off-topic, sorry, but I felt the need to vent.

Xellos · Jun 02, 2005, 10:51 PM // 22:51

I don't think it's so much that their underpowered as to that like Ensign said, their the most picky at how to utilize potential. I don't think I even know what a "good ranger" is by their standards, but I do realize that the ranger is the exact opposite type of class that the flavours in tombs lately have been. Rangers are jack of all trades to a sense, just because your a damage ranger, doesn't mean you won't carry debil shot. Just because your a echo debil, doesn't mean you won't carry tigers fury. A ranger seems to be very assorted, therefore I think it is best to put rangers in groups that are assorted. Looking at Fiannas build for the final BWE, their build was very assorted. Every class almost had a secondary use which is by their secondary class to a large extent. You don't see air eles with warrior disables now, but Fianna did it in BWE. I'm guessing that's how rangers work, is that no matter how hard you specialize them, they still can't be complete specialists, and you need to work with that. Most people can't, because their use to trends, therefore they can't figure it out. Heck, I probably can't figure it out :P

Mercurio Riven · Jun 02, 2005, 11:11 PM // 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by deolmstead

So despite all this, it's still your favorite class, so SOMETHING must be going right, right? Do you just avoid PvP with your Ranger?

I'm not picking on you Mercurio, I think you made some good points, but I seriously don't understand the people on some of these threads who went through all the trouble to ascend a Ranger (or claim to) and bitch the whole time about what a crappy class it is. Why on earth did you stick with it if you hated it so much? I started a warrior, played it up a few levels, found the gameplay style boring and stopped playing. Seems like common sense. A little off-topic, sorry, but I felt the need to vent.

I chose Ranger for purely aesthetic reasons. I tend to play rogues in rpgs. Just a personal preference. Rangers looked like the closest class to a rogue in this game. I don't like playing a warrior. Don't really like spellcasters either although I do enjoy the mesmer. I would bet that a good deal of Ranger users use them because they like the idea of an agile fighter rather than the actual utility of the ranger. The "coolest-looking" class is usually the most played class. If rangers and necros looked like crap I doubt anyone would play them.

Ensign · Jun 02, 2005, 11:18 PM // 23:18

Low level Tombs strategy just hasn't progressed much past basic PvE strategy - damage + healing = win. Random PUGs running that will beat random PUGs running badly played Mesmers and Rangers. It's that simple.

If you have an uncoordinated, no strategy group, Warriors + Elementalists + Monks gives you the best chance of winning. Period.

Now exactly what that's supposed to mean in a game that's (supposedly) balanced for high level, competitive play, I'm not sure. Well, besides that people will bitch endlessly on the forums about this 'imbalance'.

Peace,
-CxE

Beqxter · Jun 02, 2005, 11:19 PM // 23:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercurio Riven

I chose Ranger for purely aesthetic reasons. I tend to play rogues in rpgs. Just a personal preference. Rangers looked like the closest class to a rogue in this game. I don't like playing a warrior. Don't really like spellcasters either although I do enjoy the mesmer. I would bet that a good deal of Ranger users use them because they like the idea of an agile fighter rather than the actual utility of the ranger. The "coolest-looking" class is usually the most played class. If rangers and necros looked like crap I doubt anyone would play them.

Huh. Never would've crossed my mind to play a character based on appearance.

So people LIKE the way the Necro looks? The women are OK I guess, but every time I look at the men I think "wow, his posture sucks."

Takes all kinds, I guess.

I think a rogue would be fun (steal from other players! hide in shadows!), and bet you'll see it in an expansion before too long. Until then...have fun with us in rangerland.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

If you have an uncoordinated, no strategy group, Warriors + Elementalists + Monks gives you the best chance of winning. Period.

Now exactly what that's supposed to mean in a game that's (supposedly) balanced for high level, competitive play, I'm not sure. Well, besides that people will bitch endlessly on the forums about this 'imbalance'.

Couldn't agree more. Hopefully, eventually, there will be enough skilled ranger players at higher levels to earn more respect in the community. I love the idea of a pure ranger guild kicking ass in HoH.

PS Ensign: Go Berkeley!

Erace · Jun 02, 2005, 11:46 PM // 23:46

i have found that ranger are exceptionaly useful in PVP, long range mage killers.

1 Ranger i think is enough tho,
i have found that the best party is something like

1 Ranger
3 Monks
2 Warriors
1 Mesmer
1 Ele or Necro

Citizen_Nokarot · Jun 03, 2005, 06:29 AM // 06:29

The good thing about rangers is, if you can sneak a good one into the group (have him healing or whatever), nobody notices..

... ... Shhh..

Calnaion Blackhawk · Jun 03, 2005, 02:57 PM // 14:57

i cant see why my ranger is never used, stack up fav winds, my composite bow and read the win, the arrows move at quite a speed, in the arenas(usually the lions arch one, all lvl20 my ranger seems to pop out a few kills, use penetrating shot with the stance and nature ritual, does a hell of alot of dmg....
been in the underworld/that area, just to stop anyone say" the comp arenas are nothing like tombs", acts the same, everyone only wants W/Mo, mostly people who dont have tactics and just want to tank their way into the HoH

Goonter · Jun 03, 2005, 04:39 PM // 16:39

The rangers are a support class.

I wish every class was a support class. To me, that would mean there is better balance in the system.

The thing about rangers is...they are very situational. So you may rule in one situation, and you may just be pressing the attack button in others. This is made even worst as you cant really predict your situation. Its when your in the middle of it, you say...."I wish I would have brought (certain skill) If Id known that Id be up against this"

A healing monk is good in every situation when he's on a team. Though Im not to crazy about this, I think most people like it this way.

So for a long time and maybe as long as these types of games are done. 2 or more healers on a team would be the most important ingredent of the team.

Del12 · Jun 03, 2005, 05:49 PM // 17:49

rangers have expertise which has excellent defensive skills (throw dirt, whirling def, and lightning reflexes) to keep them alive. I thought about making a R/Mo just for healing purposes. So you sacrifice the healing from divine favor, but as everyone mentioned, nobody attacks rangers first + excellent defense = you monk stays alive for looooong time. Sounds like not being 'noticed' is a good thing.

Dreamsmith · Jun 03, 2005, 06:01 PM // 18:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercurio Riven

What do Rangers focus on?

That depends entirely on the ranger.

Everything you said would be true, if it weren't for the fact that it's based on the assumption that a ranger is necessarily an unfocused Jack-of-all-trades. Just because the class itself doesn't force you into a particular role doesn't mean you're prevented from concentrating on a particular role. None of the classes force a particular role, despite the number of players who don't know enough to see all the options, and thus assume some stereotype for each class.

Quote:

My theory is that the best classes are those that specialize in one main function.

Close. The best builds are those that specialize in one main function. It doesn't make sense to apply this rule to classes, although when there's a strong stereotype about a particular class (ala "Monk's heal"), those who don't really know the ins and outs of the game will have the best success with them, because they'll make specialized builds by default by following the stereotype. Why are warriors, elementalists, and monks dominant in the population right now? Because they arrived with strong RPG stereotypes, stereotypes that were around long before Guild Wars was conceived, so players naturally make specialized builds without even thinking about it.

A class has no need to be specialized. With only eight skills slots, you can only use about 10% of the skills in any class anyhow. As long as you can find eight skills that support a particular role, you can make a very specialized character. How many other tasks that class can perform is irrelevant.

TheHalcyonKid · Jun 03, 2005, 06:26 PM // 18:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Couple that with it being both the hands down most popular class in the game ... Couple all this with the aformentioned point about Rangers...

You mispelled "Warrior/Monk" as "Ranger".

Lasher Dragon · Jun 03, 2005, 06:28 PM // 18:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheHalcyonKid

You mispelled "Warrior/Monk" as "Ranger".

ROFL

Howling Wind · Jun 03, 2005, 10:46 PM // 22:46

If so many people are complaining rangers suck in (in PvP that is) or atleast not being wanted by many or most tombs team maybe the developers might buff it up in some future update. If Troll Unergent had 1 sec cast time and Healing Spring not to be uninteruptable (and maybe 1 sec cast time too :P) then that would be a reallllyyy good improvement and wont hardly need to rely on other classes most of the time.

Till then most people just should try and make the most out of their rangers, they require good players skills to be good but soon rangers will be seen as quite usefull players in terms of 'supporting' other classes doing their job and being a disruptive anti-caster and trapper.

Kishin · Jun 04, 2005, 06:00 AM // 06:00

Those skills getting buffed would do Rangers zero good.

Troll Unguent is such a waste of a slot in Tombs, or even in most PvE groups. Have a little faith in your Monk. Also, while Healing Spring is nice, its not a Ranger's responsibility to heal.

Tellani Artini · Jun 04, 2005, 07:10 AM // 07:10

I think Rangers are balanced pretty well, but there are some simple things they could do to make beast mastery worthwhile in PvP. I had some fun in random arenas spamming disrupting lunge and beastial pounce at 12 beast mastery, but not being able to change your pet's target, or tell them to disengage, makes you pretty useless as a skirmisher.

I agree with everyone that's said rangers get no respect because no one knows how to play them well.

EDIT:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kishin

Those skills getting buffed would do Rangers zero good.

Troll Unguent is such a waste of a slot in Tombs, or even in most PvE groups. Have a little faith in your Monk. Also, while Healing Spring is nice, its not a Ranger's responsibility to heal.

Spot on. Switch out unguent and those silly defense skills, switch in crippling shot, debil shot, apply poison, barbed trap.. you will probably be the second to last class to be targetted, so as long as there's a necro still standing, you're fine

Jackathan · Jun 04, 2005, 07:27 AM // 07:27

poison

thurinn · Jun 04, 2005, 06:02 PM // 18:02

I've got to disagree with Troll Unguent being useless in PvP. It costs a ranger 2 energy to use with 13 expertise. Plus it can get as high as 9 health regen for 10 seconds. Activate it just before you go into battle. Or when you have DoTs like poison/disease/burning/phantasm on you. Save the monk some (read, lots of) energy. Please.

Minwanabi · Jun 04, 2005, 07:01 PM // 19:01

Quote:

Save the monk some (read, lots of) energy.

You save them next to no energy, it would require one hex removal, one condition removal, whatever, which they'll probably be doing anyways. Oh, and by the time a ranger is targeted as a focus target, the monks are dead anyways, that's the reason self heals are terrible. At the point where they're necessary, the battle is already lost for you.