My Ranger Solution....

[Brynshand]

<div></div><div></div>I originally posted this in the RANGER forum but after a few people advised me that the Dev's never read the forums I posted it here as well.PLEASE Don't delete this because of this!! <a target="_blank" href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=39&message.id=24082">Link to original Message</a>Let me start off by saying that although I am fairly new to Everquest, I am not new to gaming. This whole situation has given me great insight into how the games mechanics work and through my recent experiences as a level 25 Ranger Pre amd Post update.This "nerf" was obviously meant to reign in the powers of higher level (50+) Rangers that were exceeding the boundry of what SOE expected.  Thus the timing to coinide with the release of the new expansion.  This is not unlike the fixes that were put into place by Wizards of the Coast regarding broken cards in Magic the Gathering.  The Rangers were obviously "broken" in much the same way as certain power cards in that game were.  I have no problem with tweaking a game to ensure that play is fair and balanced and would think poorly of any company that did not do this.When you tweaked the procs it was because High-Level / Group / Raid DPS was to high with KoS.  Unfortunately, this has greatly reduced the solo abilities of the lower level Rangers. I do believe your fix to the proc rate was a good and fair one.  As a 25 level Ranger going solo I was easily going through 100 poisons in a hour even though I was not fighting every creature I came across.That being said - Here are my suggestions for adjusting the Ranger to be Solo balanced again without causing the same high level imbalances:<font size="5"><b>1)</b></font>  Allow us to proc with our secondary hand again - It's my current understanding that currently they do not.  Since dual weapon speeds are usually quite low then according to your own formula the proc rate for these weapons would be quite low as well.  It simply doesn't make sense from a logical standpoint that we would only apply poison to one weapon but not the other.  And since Raiding / Grouping Rangers rarely get into melee combat this won't help them at all.<font size="5"><b>2)  </b></font>Allow our Pets to defend US as well as themselves.  This will at least allow us to handle Mobs of more that 1 creature much more effectively by occupying one of them.  It will also allow our melee combat stealth attacks to succeed more often as they are completely useless until there is only one enemy remaining.  Before the update I could take on green groups of three 18 level (no arrows) green gnolls.  It was a tough fight but I stood a decent chance of winning.  Post update I was killed EVERY TIME.  I don't even summon my pets anymore because they are completely useless.  But if they at least defended me then they would occupy one of the attackers while I fought he others, thus enabling me to take on groups larger than two.   And again - since Raiding / Grouping rangers rarely get into combat this won't help them.  Besides - If you were out walking your Dog wouldn't you expect him to help defend his master instead of watching him get killed?<font size="5"><b>3)  </b></font>Make bow damage modifiers based on AGI.  This would eliminate having to change the damage on the bow CAs.  Since AGI supposedly affects Accuracy then by extension a more accurate shot (eye, heart, groin, etc) would do more damage than an inacurate shot.   This could also be altered to increase Assasins damage and solo ability as well.  Instead of Just bow damage - give us both a buff that uses one concentration point to give additional damage based on AGI.  Assasins would get the bonus applied to melee while the Ranger gained bow damage.   It only makes sense since these classes are not "Hack and Slash".   Both classes are considered gracefull hunters - placing better blows as opposed to bigger blows and I think thier abilities should reflect this above all else.Please - NO FLAMES but feel free to post constructive comments on any of my suggestions.  I believe them to not only be fair but remain true to the spirit of of the Ranger (and Assassin).I have seen a lot of whining, finger pointing, conspiracy theorys and generally non-constructive comments posted here.This is my attempt to not only point out the problems that we are facing but to also offer some real, implementable solutions.Thank YouBryansharra 25 Ranger - Najena Server<div></div><p>Message Edited by Brynshander on <span class="date_text">02-24-2006</span><span class="time_text">12:39 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by Brynshander on <span class="date_text">02-24-2006</span><span class="time_text">12:43 PM</span></p>

[Grimme]

<div>It seems to me that the issue involves rangers at all levels, paricularly at high levels. Certainly they needed to cut ranger dps, but they seem to have cut too deeply. Rolling back about 50% of the lost dps looks like it would put them about there they should be, though I can't give a perfect number there as even with the parses I have seen on this forum there isn't enough information to tell conclusively, but I think 50% would put rangers in a better position.</div><div> </div><div>The formula to do this can be as simple or as complex as they make it. They can look at the changes and literally put the numbers half way between what they were and now are; or they could focus on specific CAs they want to emphasize for the class. I think the latter would end up better for the class, and would allow them to beef up ranged CAs specifically, since these are class defining and seem to have been hit too hard.</div><div> </div><div>Figuring this whole thing out is enormously complex. There are so many variables. It will take time to get this one right.</div>

[thepriz]

Not trying to flame you but it is against the rules to specificly put dev names or specificly put deves in the title to get their attention. They basicly say they will ignore any post that does this, so it will not help get them to read your post.<div></div>

[Brynshand]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>thepriz wrote:Not trying to flame you but it is against the rules to specificly put dev names or specificly put deves in the title to get their attention. They basicly say they will ignore any post that does this, so it will not help get them to read your post.<div></div><hr></blockquote>*sigh*Thanks for the info.   I would have sent this as an e-mail if I honestly thought it would get read.   I guess that's the price you pay for a large customer base - a lot of losing touch with people.....Makes you feel like you have to shout to be heard over all the commotion....</span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Brynshander on <span class="date_text">02-24-2006</span><span class="time_text">12:47 PM</span></p>

[Dontan]

I stopped reading when you said: This is not unlike the fixes that were put into place by Wizards of the Coast regarding broken cards in Magic the Gathering.<div></div>

[StarryEyedElf]

<div>1. Please don't direct threads to SOE staff.</div><div>2. Don't cross post to draw attention to other topics.</div><div> </div><div>And anyone who tells you that no one reads any board but this is flat out wrong. In fact, it is easier to see pertinent topics when they are in specific forums.</div><div> </div><div>Locking this puppy down.</div>