Chimes of Blades and Rangers

[Undacova]

<img src="http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c76/eq2kwin/ChimesofBlades.jpg" alt="" border="0" />OK, I don't post a lot on the forums but I really think the steps we are trying to take could really start having rangers back to the dps level we were in T7.That being said I had a QUESTION regarding the change of cacophany of blades no longer procing on range attacks.From what I understand the normalization was changed at the cost of the wizard proc and dirge procs no longer working on range.I understand this change for the wizard proc, as it is percentage based if I remember correct.  I am unsure why the dirge proc was removed.  From what I understand the dirge proc goes off on every single melee attack, ie 100% proc rate.  Wouldn't leaving this proc on range put us more on par with other melee based dps?I guess my question is, did normalization effect chimes of blades?  How so? and why was there a need to remove it after taking the 5.33 sec normalization cap away?NOTE: In no way am I claiming to be an expert in normalization (kinda confuses me), this is a question post.  Also I know that was more then one question <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Non-flaming responses are welcomed!

[JenoLT]

Rangers attack half as often as other scouts at best - so they would roughly do half the damage with it in comparison to melee classes (its a 100% proc, as you said). Thats why it would be overpowered for rangers, but other classes are fine with it. Thats logical, isn't it? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/0320a00cb4bb5629ab9fc2bc1fcc4e9e.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />To be serious: I don't understand why this would overpower rangers, either. I'd say it would be the step into the right direction to get ranger dps to the right level in raids, but it looks like the devs and their mysterious data don't think so. At least we can dream, huh?

[Gungo]

He seems to think adding CoB to rangers would overpower thier total dps.It prolly should be ranged and melee, but we will see how this turns out.

[Undacova]

This has been my line of thinking as well.  Any dev wanna "chime" in here and clarify the reasoning behind taking it away?

[jadsded]

As a Dirge this breaks my heart.  I saw the original release and was excited Chime was going to be even more effective.  But I guess one more dps in group and maybe 2 or 3 in raid getting this would be game altering...

[Ranja]

<cite>jadsded wrote:</cite><blockquote>As a Dirge this breaks my heart.  I saw the original release and was excited Chime was going to be even more effective.  But I guess one more dps in group and maybe 2 or 3 in raid getting this would be game altering...</blockquote>I would like a answer on this. Why, does CoB, which has a 100% proc rate have to be normalized for rangers. The fact that Aerlick stated that shows that he has no clue how other classes interact with Rangers or any other class. <span style="font-size: small;"><b>CoB is 100% proc, how come rangers can't use it? Especially when melee attack more anyways so they are getting a greater advantage from it.</b></span>

[ChodeNode1]

Yeah - allowing us to take take advantage of a proc EVERY melee class in group gets and would proc more than rangers would only keeps the gap lengthened between rangers and other scout dps.

[Lindar Phamoncry]

While I am all for rangers having this, should I be slightly offended that my class is being used as a tool to balance another? <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />on a more serious note...If other scouts hit every 2 seconds, and rangers hit about every 4 on autoattack... they are still getting only half the benefit as other scouts and while it sounds biased I think EVERYONE but Aeralik and crew think its absolutely appropriate.How is it unbalanced for Assassins, Rogues, Bards, Fighters, Summoner/Enchanter Pets etc... to be beneficially affected by this while the ranger is not? Heck even Priests and Mages can get in and swing if so inclined (Something I've always encouraged when lack of risk warrants it).... that makes Rangers the ONLY class that gets no proc benefit from this buff.I for one would be satisfied if I was only informed behind the logic behind this.

[Anxi]

I would love to see CoB proc from ranged for all the reasons stated above. It's a nice little bonus, I would also love to see Agitate proc from ranged attacks. For me personally on raids I usually end up in the caster group agitate proccing off ranged would be a nice win.

[Undacova]

I agree the agitate line should proc off range as well.  I don't see why it doesn't, similar to CoB.

[Eliason]

I think I can see a reason this doesn't work on ranged. It goes back to a previous response from a dev.I don't have the exact quote but it was something along these lines. You aren't shooting swords from your bow, thus no melee weapon procs on bows.This came about when they took away just about all the melee weapon procs a ranger could get. So in the same reasoning. The ability is called Chime of Blades. Again blades and bows...no mix. <Boggle> And here I thought it was some form of magic not the actual sword doing the extra damage. Seems magic is quite selective.

[vladsamier]

The 1 thing that really ticked me off playing a troubadour in my old guild was a ranger coming in and stealing agitate... Rangers should all just do themselves a favor and betray or re-roll another character. Obviously all of the ranger demands aren't going to be met with this LU.

[Illine]

<p>the answer is simple :</p><p>It's chimes of blades, not chimes of arrows <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Ok, I'm leaving <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/499fd50bc713bfcdf2ab5a23c00c2d62.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p>

[Magius789]

Aerilik has said that with his "mysterious data" rangers dps is fine so although it is nice to think about we rangers shouldn't be expecting any increase in DPS.  I guess our T7 dps is good enough for T8 even though we are no where near the top of the parse anymore.  So in short don't look for a rational explanation on why we aren't getting something because if the change would in any way increase our DPS, that change won't happen.

[gatrm]

<p>A number of you are making responses such as:</p><p>Obviously all of the ranger demands aren't going to be met with this LU.</p><p>It's chimes of blades, not chimes of arrows </p><p>This came about when they took away just about all the melee weapon procs a ranger could get. So in the same reasoning. The ability is called Chime of Blades. Again blades and bows...no mix.</p><p>The thing is, that CoB does currently on live proc from ranged attacks, and in fact since Cacophony was introduced, it has proced from ranged as well as melee attacks.  This is a change from what is on live and a nerf to both rangers and dirges.  Considering rangers are now getting benefit from this spell, their dps will decrease as a result of this change.  I am in general sick of the rangers complaining, but really, this is one time that they should be complaining- it looks to me that rangers are gonna start getting more dps benefits from the mage group and troub buffs before much longer.</p>

[Wookin]

<p>As a dirge, I would love to have all my melee slaves... erm, I mean non-casting damage dealing group mates receive the full benefit of my motivational music.  </p><p>Proc on, ranjas!</p>

[pseudocide]

<cite>gatrm wrote:</cite> <blockquote><p><span style="color: #cc0000;">The thing is, that CoB does currently on live proc from ranged attacks, and in fact since Cacophony was introduced, it has proced from ranged as well as melee attacks.</span>  This is a change from what is on live and a nerf to both rangers and dirges.  Considering rangers are now getting benefit from this spell, their dps will decrease as a result of this change.  I am in general sick of the rangers complaining, but really, this is one time that they should be complaining- it looks to me that rangers are gonna start getting more dps benefits from the mage group and troub buffs before much longer.</p></blockquote>                                <img src="http://www.o--rly.com/owl_orly.png" alt="" width="234" height="226" border="0" />

[Anxi]

<cite>gatrm wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>The thing is, that CoB does currently on live proc from ranged attacks, and in fact since Cacophony was introduced, it has proced from ranged as well as melee attacks. </p></blockquote>It does not proc from ranged on live and AFAIK never has. We get the haste benefit but not the proc.

[Lindar Phamoncry]

<cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>the answer is simple :</p><p>It's chimes of blades, not chimes of arrows <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Ok, I'm leaving <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/499fd50bc713bfcdf2ab5a23c00c2d62.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p></blockquote>As much as I hate to mention it in fear of a dev agreeing with that reasoning... then [Removed for Content]is it doing proc'ing off of a cleric's hammer, or a bruisers fists?

[Undacova]

<cite>gatrm wrote:</cite><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: small;"><u><b>The thing is, that CoB does currently on live proc from ranged attacks, and in fact since Cacophony was introduced, it has proced from ranged as well as melee attacks.  </b></u></span>This is a change from what is on live and a nerf to both rangers and dirges.  Considering rangers are now getting benefit from this spell, their dps will decrease as a result of this change.  I am in general sick of the rangers complaining, but really, this is one time that they should be complaining- it looks to me that rangers are gonna start getting more dps benefits from the mage group and troub buffs before much longer.</p></blockquote><img src="/eq2/images/smilies/385970365b8ed7503b4294502a458efa.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Windowlicker]

Sure, make CoB work with ranged.  While putting this fix in, lower ranger auto attack and ranged damage even more to ensure balance.

[TemerNeziel]

I just want to echo the points here, and add that I (sort of) understand removing the wizzy proc if you're not capping the normalization, but why remove this when it's already a 100% proc rate? Seems backwards to me, but then again I suppose I should be used to that by now with all the junk I've seen and been through in this game. <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/2786c5c8e1a8be796fb2f726cca5a0fe.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" />

[Merkad]

I don't see why all these people "understand" why it is ok to not have the wiz proc working on ranged because it is 25% proc and normalization is not capped. The whole point of normalization was to make procs more consistent and fair across all delay ranges. Where this deviates is actually at the higher chance to proc with lower delay weapons, such as CoB. In which case, fast weapons strike often and proc often (all the time) and slow weapons also proc all the time (assuming bows were added) but not striking as often.Afterall, if normalization is based on 3 delay, a bow with 9 delay having 300% chance to trigger CoB would mean little, which holds true once you reach and surpass 34% chance to proc (as that would be 102%, so 2% wasted). That does not hold true for the vast majority of melee weapons. So why would having a 25% proc chance be bad for Rangers? it is something like 75% chance for us, and ~42ish for dual wield 4.0 delay weaps (modified to 5.33 delay due to dual wield).I want the Sorc procs, and Agitate line. CoB too, but a whole lot less.Merkades, 80th ranger.Siege, Najena.

[Illine]

<cite>Lindar@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>the answer is simple :</p><p>It's chimes of blades, not chimes of arrows <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Ok, I'm leaving <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/499fd50bc713bfcdf2ab5a23c00c2d62.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p></blockquote>As much as I hate to mention it in fear of a dev agreeing with that reasoning... then [Removed for Content]is it doing proc'ing off of a cleric's hammer, or a bruisers fists?</blockquote>I now someone would have asked that <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /> but I'm not in the dev's head so can't answer that. All I can say is aac bruiser fist is closer to a blade since it's melee fight but bows or throwing daggers and ranged damage. In a way it's logical ... I didn't say it was a good change, I just said it was logical.That the problem between ranged and melee damage buffs could one enhance the other? since it's not at all the same fighting style.but don't try to ask me another question lol, I don't know, just try to understand why this change happen to see if it's logical or not.

[Faelgalad]

<p>Simple reason, </p><p>SOE is an American company. </p><p>In German Companys, they listen to the demands of their customers and fullfill them. </p><p>That's why we are export world champions with our middle classed 80 million people country <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p><p>Seriously, this whole drama shows an lack of product quality control and community communication </p><p>from SOE. Sadly, there is no company departments that we as customer can refer to which control </p><p>the work of the Devs, as the SOE buisness strategy is one of secretivity. Things are changed, not explained. </p><p>If a German car manufactorer changes something, they explain, and believe me, if machine producer change something </p><p>on the machines, they explain in best detail why. To keep their customers. </p><p>Age of Conam with it's "shield" and "cover" System is an serious competioner. So keep up SOE, or loose your money. </p>

[Lindar Phamoncry]

<cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Lindar@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Earar wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>the answer is simple :</p><p>It's chimes of blades, not chimes of arrows <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p><p>Ok, I'm leaving <img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/images/smilies/499fd50bc713bfcdf2ab5a23c00c2d62.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /></p></blockquote>As much as I hate to mention it in fear of a dev agreeing with that reasoning... then [Removed for Content]is it doing proc'ing off of a cleric's hammer, or a bruisers fists?</blockquote>I now someone would have asked that <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" width="15" height="15" /> but I'm not in the dev's head so can't answer that. All I can say is aac bruiser fist is closer to a blade since it's melee fight but bows or throwing daggers and ranged damage. In a way it's logical ... I didn't say it was a good change, I just said it was logical.That the problem between ranged and melee damage buffs could one enhance the other? since it's not at all the same fighting style.but don't try to ask me another question lol, I don't know, just try to understand why this change happen to see if it's logical or not.</blockquote>Was really only asking to make the point... wasn't expecting an answer lolI still fail to see the logic however <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />one last note... if your going to balance a class based on another class's buffs... doesn't it then mean they arent doing their designed dps without those classes? I suppose Wizards/Warlocks/Assassins are in this boat already... but it doesn't make sense to me to build groups around less than T1 DPS classes, which Rangers aren't considered by players, despite the devs thinking so for some unknown reason.

[jadsded]

Thank you Devs for actually listening and changing CoB to proc off ranged.  Dirges and Rangers alike appreciate it!

[Latpow]

I love this.. since in raids Rangers are normally put in groups with Dirges!  Even the Melee hit buff is great with all the melee they're usually grouped up with!  /sarcasm

[jadsded]

<cite>Latpow wrote:</cite><blockquote>I love this.. since in raids Rangers are normally put in groups with Dirges!  Even the Melee hit buff is great with all the melee they're usually grouped up with!  /sarcasm</blockquote>With the Mythical Dirge Epic CoB is raid wide.  I realize that rangers have not been getting a lot of love from SOE, but come on.... give me a freakin break!!  They actually listen on one issue (sure it is fairly insignificant in the grand scheme) and the first ranja post is whining because of raid group set ups..... Hmm wonder why the Devs don't worry about [Removed for Content] you folk off...