What kind of Ranger feedback do you want?

[Effidian]

<p>What exactly do you want feedback on?  Obviously, your unwilling to change the 20% reduction on auto-attack.  So, what feedback would be useful to get things changed?  Seems like a waste of time to do feedback on things that you've already made up your mind to do.  Your numbers don't match what many of us see, so if all you use is your numbers and you don't share them with us, I'm unsure how we can provide feedback that is useful.</p>

[Freliant]

<p>Effidian, feedback does not mean that every suggestion will be taken. Sorry that bows in general are going down in attack damage, however, the ranger as a class is going to be doing better because of the changes. Its easy enough to say: just leave the bows as they were before the patch and just introduce a new arrow, but it has already been stated by the developer that this skewed the way ranger damage was meant. Instead of upping ranger damage through increase in bow auto attack through the introduction of a new arrow tier, they decided to increase all the other things that increase a ranger's damage. Currently a ranger on test is doing better than a ranger on live, with the exception of ranged auto attack.</p><p>With that said, I do not see the point of another thread on the same subject.</p>

[RoXx]

<cite>Freliant wrote:</cite><blockquote><p>Effidian, feedback does not mean that every suggestion will be taken. Sorry that bows in general are going down in attack damage, however, the ranger as a class is going to be doing better because of the changes. Its easy enough to say: just leave the bows as they were before the patch and just introduce a new arrow, but it has already been stated by the developer that this skewed the way ranger damage was meant. Instead of upping ranger damage through increase in bow auto attack through the introduction of a new arrow tier, they decided to increase all the other things that increase a ranger's damage. Currently a ranger on test is doing better than a ranger on live, with the exception of ranged auto attack.</p><p>With that said, I do not see the point of another thread on the same subject.</p></blockquote><p>Hey Mr.Know-it-all. I disagree with you that another thread is pointless. The other threads are massive, so every now and then we need new threads because its basically impossible to find any usefull info in there.Effidian had a specific question of great relevance. You think there is an answer in one of the other threads? Maybe.. but how long would it take to find it? The search engine is kind of broken if you sort by date etc so you get results from back in 2004 even..</p><p>Effidian, I have no clue what feedback they want. Like you're saying they seem to have some completely different numbers than most of us. If we only could see those numbers it could help a lot to solve this situation..</p>

[Tyberi]

As always the feedback they want is for everyone to roll over and say how brilliant the changes are, how much sense it makes for ranger auto attack DPS to be locked at a lower percentage than it has ever been at before, how much better it is that there is a minor CA DPS increase to compensate.

[Lolianna]

SOE is pushing rangers ever closer to the melee side of things. Many rangers are confused and offended by this move. An explanation as to why rangers are being pushed away from the 'ranged' side of things would be the decent thing to do.

[Katsugen]

<cite>Meerah@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote>SOE is pushing rangers ever closer to the melee side of things. Many rangers are confused and offended by this move. An explanation as to why rangers are being pushed away from the 'ranged' side of things would be the decent thing to do. </blockquote><p>Seems obvious to me that they don't know how to properly balance rangers. The melee mechanics seem to be much better understood, so I think they are just going to make rangers more CA and melee based so they can easily control our dps. </p><p>I personally don't like what I'm seeing. The changes and direction rangers are going. I'm begining to realize that SOE's ranger class, is not the archer/hawkeye class I want it to be. I didn't mind having to be in the sweet spot to pop off melee arts, but with the focus moving to melee skills I don't see why rangers shouldn't betray. Personally I'd quit before I did that.</p><p>-Katsugen</p>

[Krakelkr]

<cite>Freliant wrote:</cite><blockquote>snipSorry that bows in general are going down in attack damage, however, the ranger as a class is going to be doing better because of the changes. Its easy enough to say: just leave the bows as they were before the patch and just introduce a new arrow, but it has already been stated by the developer that this skewed the way ranger damage was meant. Instead of upping ranger damage through increase in bow auto attack through the introduction of a new arrow tier, they decided to increase all the other things that increase a ranger's damage. Currently a ranger on test is doing better than a ranger on live, with the exception of ranged auto attack.</blockquote><p>Nobody knows that, people aren't playing on test like on live. Tests on the training wall means next to nothing. It's not like raiding, it's not like grouping, it's not like solo play.</p><p>I have less burst damage and more damage when my range attacks are down to compensate for it, i.e. melee. That is a major change in emphasis and one that I for one absolutely do not want. I don't want to melee or I'd be playing another class. It's really that simple.</p><p>All you people are thinking about is The Parse. Really, stuff your parses, it's always about how it feels to play the class.</p>