ranger vs sin aa change imbalance with 8/10/11 patch [Archive]

Nevao

08-11-2011, 12:55 AM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>assassin<li>Enhance: Exacting will modify Exacting to increase all of its affected abilities' Crit Bonus while Exacting is active.</li>vsranger<li>Enhance: Escape now also reduces the power cost of Escape.</li>REALLY a boost to a temp buff that effect 6 out of the 8 abilities of a assassins concealment chain to include fatal follow up where we get a power reduction to Escape im sry but how is that balanced</blockquote>My guess is that they will say, but you get Crit Bonus on Snaring shot and that's up a lot more often than Exacting... Mathmatically it might even be true, but it's impossible to tell with the AA trees jacked up on test right now. I'm guessing though that the for it to work it's going to have to be one really large crit bonus...But this isn't the only place they have done something like this. Look at Swash vs Brig. Brigs get sneak/hate improvements (neither relevant since positionals are the only thing that really helps and it's Stealth Speed!) while two of Swashies better temp buffs get Crit Bonus...

jjlo69

08-11-2011, 01:05 AM

yeah guess i'll have to wait and see now that aa's are messed up on test atm i do enjoy seeing beastlord as an aa tab though.

Talathion

08-11-2011, 01:07 AM

everyones a monk on test..

Gaige

08-11-2011, 01:10 AM

The arts exacting affects don't really hit that hard. It'd be hard to tell which is the better dmg increasing AA since snaring shot recasts so quickly.

Uryu

08-11-2011, 05:35 AM

SOE should stop playing around and give rangers some utility.

Davngr1

08-11-2011, 05:49 AM

come on uncle.. if you want to get a better fix you don't have to throw assassin under the bus for it.

Nevao

08-11-2011, 11:03 AM

Give us some utility that we can point to that isn't subject to AoE's killing it or short durations and longer recasts (hey look assassins provide 6% sustainable Max Health Debuff with 4% Burst and a Hate Transfer!) and I think you'll find Ranger's would be much less likely to jump on thing like this.

jjlo69

08-11-2011, 02:57 PM

Ok so im throwing sins under the bus. I logged in to test made a buffed sin and a buffed ranger so the gear and stats would be even. I tested the sin and ranger combat arts that would be effected by AA changes currently on test all combat arts are at expert level, zero aa's spent, all gear removed.sin combat arts that will be effected by excactingwith out excacting running recast da mage ambush 10 746-1243 deadly shot* 20 508-864 death blow** 45 972-1620 or 2917-4862 death mark + 30 2060-3435 gushing wound*** 30 470-784, 101-168 every 4 sec fo 24 sec impale*** 20 300-501, 82-137 every 4 sec fo 24 sec improvised weapon 18 544-902 masked strike 10 500-833 nox enfebalment**** 45 529-794 quickstrike*** 10 315-525 63 damage every 4 sec for 12 sec touch of the nightshade 45 1800-2700 with excacting running recast time with excacting up damage with excacting up ambush 7.7 969.8-1615.9 deadly shot* 15.4 660.4-1123 death blow** 34 1263.6-2550.6 3534.7-6320.6death mark+ 23 2678-4465 gushing wound*** 23 611-1019.2 131.3-218.4impale*** 15.4 90-651.3 106.6 178.1improvised weapon 7.7 707.2- 1172.6 masked strike 7.7 650-1082.9 nox enfebalment**** 30 687.7- 1032.2 quickstrike*** 7.7 409.5-682.5 81.9 touch of the nightshade 30 2340-3510 vsrangersnaring shot 10 349-581Ranger dont get a comparable temp buff to excactring so it dosent get buffed any higher damage wise then you see here. Example as to why it is OP and imbalanced.Masked strike alone out preforms snaring shot that with out casting excacting and doubles snaring shot when excacting is up alone even before any aa's to include the excacting and snaring shot CB changes are even factored in.<table style="width: 435pt; border-collapse: collapse;" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="580"><colgroup span="1"><col span="4" width="64"></col><col span="1" width="324"></col></colgroup><tbody><tr height="20"><td colspan="4" width="256" height="20">*= combined damage since it hitstwice</td><td width="324"> </td></tr><tr height="20"><td colspan="5" height="20">**= dmg is based on if the mob is over or under 33% health</td></tr><tr height="20"><td colspan="3" height="20">***= has a DOT component</td><td> </td><td> </td></tr><tr height="20"><td colspan="5" height="20">****=damage does not enclude DOT component inclused with 10 points spent in heroic tree += combined 5 death mark triggers 412-687 </td></tr></tbody></table>

Jaraab

08-11-2011, 05:23 PM

18+ CAs I'd rather use than Snaring Shot. Recast don't matter if it ain't worth casting. From a parse from a 14 min HM Tormax last night, used snaring shot 6 times. woot CB on a useless CA! But now I can sprint away for my life and still have enough power to evac. See all the bases are covered.

Uryu

08-11-2011, 05:45 PM

I think SOE is doing this on purpose. Starting to really dislike them. i think they look at post with the word ranger in them then turn away. If they give us some utility and really balance the classes. Rangers can finally say their asssassins counterpart. knowing SOE though that may never happen.

Sprin

08-11-2011, 07:02 PM

Apart from the balance issues asside, seriously SOE? I mean Seriously? Less power on escape? That has easily got to be the most worthless thing Ive ever seen...I mean... seriously?how about turning the worthless hate loss buff into a hate transfer... SOMETHING that might be usefull, lower power usage on something that takes you out of combat anyways thats only useable every 10 minutes? I mean Seriously? Is this a joke?

Sprin

08-11-2011, 07:04 PM

<cite>Ghettoblaster@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Apart from the balance issues asside, seriously SOE? I mean Seriously? Less power on escape? That has easily got to be the most worthless thing Ive ever seen...I mean... seriously?how about turning the worthless hate loss buff into a hate transfer... SOMETHING that might be usefull, lower power usage on something that takes you out of combat anyways thats only useable every 10 minutes? I mean Seriously? Is this a joke?</blockquote>Seriously!?!? I mean....seriously?

BigDaddy28

08-11-2011, 07:18 PM

<cite>Ghettoblaster@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Apart from the balance issues asside, seriously SOE? I mean Seriously? Less power on escape? That has easily got to be the most worthless thing Ive ever seen...I mean... seriously?how about turning the worthless hate loss buff into a hate transfer... SOMETHING that might be usefull, lower power usage on something that takes you out of combat anyways thats only useable every 10 minutes? I mean Seriously? Is this a joke?</blockquote>QFE

Sprin

08-11-2011, 07:46 PM

<cite>Pedialyte@Permafrost wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Ghettoblaster@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Apart from the balance issues asside, seriously SOE? I mean Seriously? Less power on escape? That has easily got to be the most worthless thing Ive ever seen...I mean... seriously?how about turning the worthless hate loss buff into a hate transfer... SOMETHING that might be usefull, lower power usage on something that takes you out of combat anyways thats only useable every 10 minutes? I mean Seriously? Is this a joke?</blockquote>QFE</blockquote>I mean just about the only tanks that can really hold aggro against a ranger with the silly stupid DPS they do nowadays is a Pally with a dirge and / or coercer in the group..... give rangers the BEST hate transfer in the game, because they provide zero utility to the group, so might as well make them desireable for the group in something...Sins do as much, usually more DPS then rangers, have hate transfer, apply poisons.....Change the worthless bird into a beastly "until canceled" hate transfer ON TOP of the hate loss rangers currenly have, make people WANT to take rangers into their groups because they make any tanks look good at holding aggro.... SOMETHING ffs

cawalton

08-11-2011, 09:02 PM

Enhance: Escape now also reduces the power cost of Escapethis really was "huh?" momentof all the useful things that could have been done for rangers this should never have been one of them

jjlo69

08-11-2011, 09:16 PM

<cite>cawalton wrote:</cite><blockquote>Enhance: Escape now also reduces the power cost of Escapethis really was "huh?" momentof all the useful things that could have been done for rangers this should never have been one of them</blockquote>YUP not only is this aa out there but it is so imbalanced that it reminds me of something that the previous machanic dev for so many expansions.

Seiffil

08-11-2011, 09:47 PM

<cite>cawalton wrote:</cite><blockquote>Enhance: Escape now also reduces the power cost of Escapethis really was "huh?" momentof all the useful things that could have been done for rangers this should never have been one of them</blockquote>I don't think there's ever been a single moment in this game where I've been like, oh man, wish escape cost less power so I could have cast it before we wiped.

Aerinn

08-11-2011, 11:19 PM

I get the strong feeling, as a ranger, that there is simply no representation or lobbying (sensibly) with SOE. Assassins have Gaige to advocate assassins...and he did a very good job getting them bumped up during DoV beta.It appears that, from a dev/designer perspective, that rangers simply aren't broken. They are arrow slurping, poison eating, hate generating moderately high dps that can do 80% of their max dps from range. Think of us as a lower dps, higher consumable eating, lower utility version of a wizard, warlock, etc.And if you look where the top players sit, rangers may be fairly balanced. Balance is, and has been for as long as I can remember, based on the highest potential of each class...not the reality of where the bulk of players are actually sitting. Living in the timezone I do means I never get the top level gear...ever.Yet, I play a ranger, because I like the 'idea' of a ranger. And maybe that's what SOE uses to determine whether a class is 'balanced' enough. Relative numbers being played...popularity...over a reasonable time period?Who knows, but I'd really like to know from the guys that make the decisions...what drives the decision to enhance or 'fail to enhance' (aka. nerf) classes.

NardacMM

08-12-2011, 11:08 AM

The real problem is not that assassins are getting an upgrade to a temp buff.. The problem is that somebody at SOE thinks it would benefit rangers to reduce the mana cost of Escape, which is completely insane. I can't think of a single situation in which this would be a beneficial way to spend AA. It's obviously extreme laziness and lack of creativity that's driving this.There are a few Mystic AAs which made me scratch my head, but nothing compared to this.As an assassin, I welcome the change to exacting, but should point out that it does have a moderate recast, so it's not like we're able to do that increased damage constantly. No need to take this change away, but let's give something useful to rangers, too.

Nevao

08-12-2011, 11:39 AM

<cite>Deverel@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>The real problem is not that assassins are getting an upgrade to a temp buff.. The problem is that somebody at SOE thinks it would benefit rangers to reduce the mana cost of Escape, which is completely insane. I can't think of a single situation in which this would be a beneficial way to spend AA. It's obviously extreme laziness and lack of creativity that's driving this.There are a few Mystic AAs which made me scratch my head, but nothing compared to this.As an assassin, I welcome the change to exacting, but should point out that it does have a moderate recast, so it's not like we're able to do that increased damage constantly. No need to take this change away, but let's give something useful to rangers, too.</blockquote>I think what is driving things like the Escape change is not a mind set of "Hey Ranger's really are getting screwed over on their Escape power cost" but rather a desire to take AAs whose primary benefits could be capped (mostly dealing around cast and reuse speeds) and add some secondary effect to make the AA point spent more meaningful. Good job in this case on Snaring Shot, head scratcher on Escape. I'm also guessing they aren't too worked up about the balance descrepencies since in most cases 5 or 10 CB to one ability is a drop in the bucket when you have 170 CB just off of EM Raid gear. Of course mileage will vary on how small of an effect it really is when comparing classes.

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 01:36 PM

as a sin i would happly accept a boost to 12 of my combat arts but as a ranger to accept the changes to one ca which last night snaring shot parsed out at 1% of my zw. Where over half of the 12 ca's effected by excacting are 3% or higher of a sins ZW is grossly imbalanced plain and simple. escape power cost is garbage if you really want to balace the 2 AA's give crit bounus to focus aim and deadly focus while it is up. Just about anything better then what on test.

Nevao

08-12-2011, 01:49 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>as a sin i would happly accept a boost to 12 of my combat arts but as a ranger to accept the changes to one ca which last night snaring shot parsed out at 1% of my zw. Where over half of the 12 ca's effected by excacting are 3% or higher of a sins ZW is grossly imbalanced plain and simple. escape power cost is garbage if you really want to balace the 2 AA's give crit bounus to focus aim and deadly focus while it is up. Just about anything better then what on test.</blockquote>All I was saying, especially about escape, is that it was not a target for balance but rather "you triggered this criteria, change it". Doesn't mean I like it, I was just commenting on how I figured it came to be.As for Exacting vs Quick Shot I honestly haven't said much simply becuase I can't get on test at the moment to do any kind of basic math. We don't know the CB amounts yet, I don't know the damage ranges on the CAs affected for Assassins and simply haven't had a chance to play with it. My initial reaction is annoyance, but reserving judgment until I can see the actual post AA numbers, especially since Exacting is a short term buff with a 2 and half minimum recast on it.There's also the school of though that in general these are small tweaks relative to the CB pools most of us have access to. I just don't know yet, and won't until I can get into test.That said though I'd personally rather fight to get the utility side of the argument addressed at the moment than the damage. Assassins have the much loved hate transfer, the 6% sustanined + 4% burst Max Health debuffs and a poison proc buff. Until we can point to meaningful utility on our side having the same level of DPS will still be irrelevant since you can bring a 'sin and get the rest.

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 01:56 PM

<cite>Nevao wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>as a sin i would happly accept a boost to 12 of my combat arts but as a ranger to accept the changes to one ca which last night snaring shot parsed out at 1% of my zw. Where over half of the 12 ca's effected by excacting are 3% or higher of a sins ZW is grossly imbalanced plain and simple. escape power cost is garbage if you really want to balace the 2 AA's give crit bounus to focus aim and deadly focus while it is up. Just about anything better then what on test.</blockquote>All I was saying, especially about escape, is that it was not traget for balance but rather "you triggered this criteria, change it". Doesn't mean I like it, I was just commenting on how I figured it came to be.As for Exacting vs Quick Shot I honestly haven't said much simply becuase I can't get on test at the moment to do any kind of basic math. We don't know the CB amounts yet, I don't know the damage ranges on the CAs affected for Assassins and simply haven't had a chance to play with it. My initial reaction is annoyance, but reserving judgment until I can see the actual post AA numbers, especially since Exacting is a short term buff with a 2 and half minimum recast on it.There's also the school of though that in general these are small tweaks relative to the CB pools most of us have access to. I just don't know yet, and won't until I can get into test.That said though I'd personally rather fight to get the utility side of the argument addressed at the moment than the damage. Assassins have the much loved hate transfer, the 6% sustanined + 4% burst Max Health debuffs and a poison proc buff. Until we can point to meaningful utility on our side having the same level of DPS will still be irrelevant since you can bring a 'sin and get the rest.</blockquote>well ive already crunched the dmaage number and masked strike alone even before the knowing cb number with if it goes like the other classes have seem 5% cb usally the max with 5 points so yeah pretty easy to crunch numbers off that

Nevao

08-12-2011, 02:23 PM

Test is back up. Looks like 5% bonus to Exacting affecting arts and a 7.5 CB bonus to Snaring.

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 04:23 PM

7.5 CB for one medicore ca compared to 5% for 12 ca's every 2 minute 20 sec on top of they all out parse that ca with out the increase to CB is beyond fail

Davngr1

08-12-2011, 04:33 PM

i don't know what ranger AA are but i do know that rangers have better aoe and auto attack AA's/abilities than assassin. you can say all you want but the assassin EoF tree is junk, everything in it is useless and becomes more and more useless with every passing expansion. this change was to balance the AA so they won't be useless not to balance rangers alone. would you be happy if they just plain took our AA away? would that make you happy?

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 05:35 PM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>i don't know what ranger AA are but i do know that rangers have better aoe and auto attack AA's/abilities than assassin. you can say all you want but the assassin EoF tree is junk, everything in it is useless and becomes more and more useless with every passing expansion. this change was to balance the AA so they won't be useless not to balance rangers alone. would you be happy if they just plain took our AA away? would that make you happy?</blockquote>actually yes remove both the sin and ranger aa changes and put something in that is balanced imho

Davngr1

08-12-2011, 05:42 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>i don't know what ranger AA are but i do know that rangers have better aoe and auto attack AA's/abilities than assassin. you can say all you want but the assassin EoF tree is junk, everything in it is useless and becomes more and more useless with every passing expansion. this change was to balance the AA so they won't be useless not to balance rangers alone. would you be happy if they just plain took our AA away? would that make you happy?</blockquote>actually yes remove both the sin and ranger aa changes and put something in that is balanced imho</blockquote> you can ask for fixes for your class with out throwing assassin under the bus uncle. this type of whiny thread that calls for nerfs to another class is why this game can't improve.

Nevao

08-12-2011, 06:33 PM

Ok, as promised I did the math to see what the damage difference was between the two AA's. Like Uncle I created two new toons on test and and buffed them, but in this case I went ahead and geared them (since they came off the buff bot the they had the same base stats), cast their self buffs, and did a standard AA setup for both.Assumptions:<ul><li> Since we balance off max potential (or something close) that the assassin is capped on reuse (presumably through gear, AA, and temp buffs). </li><li>I looked at Max Damage only and multiplied it out by the CB % to see how much "extra" damage they would get on top of everything else.</li><li>I assumed that the mob was in fact below 30% and the extra damage of Death Blow was in play.</li></ul>First Round: For the first test I did just a base comparision of if you cast Exacting and only cast the 12 abilities once (and they run full duration). That should take rougly 6 to 8 seconds (depending on lag) so we'll assume that the Ranger gets Snaring off twice.<ul><li>Assassin Extra Damage: 6,071.30</li><li>Ranger Extra Damage: 571.73</li></ul>As Uncle pointed out earlier Masked Strike with only one swing is more than the extra damage generated by (233.20 extra damage vs 190.58 for Snaring). But it, like Quick Strike will both be doubled due to the Dexterous Attacks AA. Either way, we're looking at 10.6 times the extra damage for Assassins in the simplest of tests.Second Round: So we all knew that in the "single cast" scenario above would make the Exacting AA bonus look better but what I wanted to see is how it played out over the course of the full duration and recast of Exacting. For this test I assumed that abilities would be cast as soon as they were back up, even if they still had some duration on the DoT components (and therefore in my calculations I counted only the tics that would happen during the recast). I also assumed the Ranger would keep cast Snaring as soon as it was up for the full duration + recast of Exacting.<ul><li>Assassin Extra Damage: 21,958.95</li><li>Ranger Extra Damage: 4954.95 </li></ul>So as I suspected the "longer view" does even it out a bit, but the Assassin' AA is doing 4.4 times as much damage as Ranger's. But that's with the ranger continue to cast Snaring shot for 90 seconds after Exacting is down. If you look at it just for the 40 seconds that Exacting is up it is a 14.3 ratio in favor of the Assassins.Now granted this scenario two may not be completely realistic. The Assassin in question probably will not have fully capped reuse and their cast orders may make casting everything as soon as it's back up not quite feasible. But it shows that if itemization takes us to that point (which with them implementing effective caps on MA is possible) how far apart the difference is in effectiveness of the AA. And this is not even counting the fact that they got a second CB bonus to Sinister Strike.If you want these to be balanced then it's going to take giving a boost of 25 (assuming non-perfect conditions) to 33 (assuming best conditions for the Assassin) CB to Snaring to get to the same rough damage output. Though the Assassin will still get the advantage because they can put those numbers up in 40 seconds as opposed to the 130 it will take the Ranger. If you want to match just over the 40 second duration then you're looking at needing 100 to 110 CB for Snaring. Personally I think that's too extreme and provides too large of a long duration bonus to the Ranger, though I do think they should get slightly more damage just because of the extra work and 90 seconds needed to get a fair "efficiency" comparison. Personally I think I would shoot for a 40 to 50 CB bonus for Snaring.If people want I can post a link to the spreadsheet so people can look for errors. I didn't really think people would want to try read all the numbers in a post though.

Gaige

08-12-2011, 07:18 PM

If AA and CA damage has to match, then so should auto attack. Exactly how much auto attack modifier do we need to catch up to rangers?

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 07:25 PM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>i don't know what ranger AA are but i do know that rangers have better aoe and auto attack AA's/abilities than assassin. you can say all you want but the assassin EoF tree is junk, everything in it is useless and becomes more and more useless with every passing expansion. this change was to balance the AA so they won't be useless not to balance rangers alone. would you be happy if they just plain took our AA away? would that make you happy?</blockquote>actually yes remove both the sin and ranger aa changes and put something in that is balanced imho</blockquote> you can ask for fixes for your class with out throwing assassin under the bus uncle. this type of whiny thread that calls for nerfs to another class is why this game can't improve.</blockquote>ok so im throwning sins under the bus and whiny. hmm not only did i show it was inbalanced in a eariler post but another person has shown that it is not balanced. so please show me how these aa's are balanced and make any since to put put in the game and ill shut up.

Nevao

08-12-2011, 07:34 PM

<cite>Gaige wrote:</cite><blockquote>If AA and CA damage has to match, then so should auto attack. Exactly how much auto attack modifier do we need to catch up to rangers?</blockquote>I don't know man, I'm not entirely sure how much Flurry you actually have. Why don't you give up your secret for 50% flurry and then we can talk about it.In all seriousness it is out of whack, but to address the problem properly Xelgad is going to have to decrease ranger Auto Attack damage and tweak the Ranged CAs to make up the difference. I seriously doubt he's going to take that much time during this GU to look at it. If he had that time Troubs deserve the attention a lot more anyway.But either way, if Assassins do more damage than Rangers and have more Utility than Rangers why should we sit back as you're giving something new that pushes that advantage even further?

Gaige

08-12-2011, 07:35 PM

What secret lol. Its just buffs and gear, like everyone else.Assassins and rangers, at the extreme high end, can both do very well. Check out some of Maplewood's parses I guess. With all the MA and stuff rangers are easy to parse on as well, with most of their abilities for doing damage being passive, so when they can't cast for whatever reason the drop in their damage isn't near as substantial as other classes.

Nevao

08-12-2011, 07:37 PM

<cite>Gaige wrote:</cite><blockquote>What secret lol. Its just buffs and gear, like everyone else.</blockquote>Yeah I know, I was just being a snarky. Got to keep entertained on a quiet Friday afternoon.

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 07:51 PM

didnt xeglad balance melee and ranged auto attack at the beginning of sf beta and it went live? i could be mistaken about that though

Davngr1

08-12-2011, 07:53 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>i don't know what ranger AA are but i do know that rangers have better aoe and auto attack AA's/abilities than assassin. you can say all you want but the assassin EoF tree is junk, everything in it is useless and becomes more and more useless with every passing expansion. this change was to balance the AA so they won't be useless not to balance rangers alone. would you be happy if they just plain took our AA away? would that make you happy?</blockquote>actually yes remove both the sin and ranger aa changes and put something in that is balanced imho</blockquote> you can ask for fixes for your class with out throwing assassin under the bus uncle. this type of whiny thread that calls for nerfs to another class is why this game can't improve.</blockquote>ok so im throwning sins under the bus and whiny. hmm not only did i show it was inbalanced in a eariler post but another person has shown that it is not balanced. so please show me how these aa's are balanced and make any since to put put in the game and ill shut up.</blockquote> you don't get it man, but you should since you played both. assassins and rangers are the most different sub-class in the game and thus should not be compared directly as you try to do in this page. why don't you instead find a good fix for the class YOU play and stop trying to get the class you DON'T play nerfed.

Nevao

08-12-2011, 07:55 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>didnt xeglad balance melee and ranged auto attack at the beginning of sf beta and it went live? i could be mistaken about that though</blockquote>During the SF beta (and before it in later TSO) you could do more damage with melee weapons as a Ranger than you could with a bow. Part of that was itemization and part of it was back end math. Xelgad did fix it so that Rangers did more damage with a bow but I don't specifically remember if he balanced it against Sin's Auto Attack.

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 07:57 PM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>i don't know what ranger AA are but i do know that rangers have better aoe and auto attack AA's/abilities than assassin. you can say all you want but the assassin EoF tree is junk, everything in it is useless and becomes more and more useless with every passing expansion. this change was to balance the AA so they won't be useless not to balance rangers alone. would you be happy if they just plain took our AA away? would that make you happy?</blockquote>actually yes remove both the sin and ranger aa changes and put something in that is balanced imho</blockquote> you can ask for fixes for your class with out throwing assassin under the bus uncle. this type of whiny thread that calls for nerfs to another class is why this game can't improve.</blockquote>ok so im throwning sins under the bus and whiny. hmm not only did i show it was inbalanced in a eariler post but another person has shown that it is not balanced. so please show me how these aa's are balanced and make any since to put put in the game and ill shut up.</blockquote> you don't get it man, but you should since you played both. assassins and rangers are the most different sub-class in the game and thus should not be compared directly as you try to do in this page. why don't you instead find a good fix for the class YOU play and stop trying to get the class you DON'T play nerfed.</blockquote>ok so instead of trying to stop aa that is a bad idea you would rather it go live i get it. so tell me how would you fix these aa's to be balanced i did recommend a chance to focus aim and deadly focus to enclude a crit bounus buff while active. what do you think about that

Davngr1

08-12-2011, 07:59 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>didnt xeglad balance melee and ranged auto attack at the beginning of sf beta and it went live? i could be mistaken about that though</blockquote> how could he? ranger myth buff gives you a big boost to ALL auto attack damage (that has HUGE potential right now) and assassin myth gives 15% flurry(flurry does NOT increase ALL auto attack damage). but seriously.. keep posting whiny post bro, the devs will probably ignore them. if you want to be heard why don't you post concise arguments to better your class not hurt others.

Davngr1

08-12-2011, 08:01 PM

<cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote> i did recommend a chance to focus aim and deadly focus to enclude a crit bounus buff while active. what do you think about that </blockquote> sure sounds good but it has nothing to do with assassin having their useless eof AA fixed.

jjlo69

08-12-2011, 08:12 PM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uncle@Mistmoore wrote:</cite><blockquote>didnt xeglad balance melee and ranged auto attack at the beginning of sf beta and it went live? i could be mistaken about that though</blockquote> how could he? ranger myth buff gives you a big boost to ALL auto attack damage (that has HUGE potential right now) and assassin myth gives 15% flurry(flurry does NOT increase ALL auto attack damage). but seriously.. keep posting whiny post bro, the devs will probably ignore them. if you want to be heard why don't you post concise arguments to better your class not hurt others.</blockquote>ok so now you want to change the subject to mythical buffs. I have posted sound feedback on how the aa's are not balanced and that was backed up by someone other then myself and even made a recommendation on how to balance it with 2 eof aa's. so im gonna ask you again prove what has been posted wrong and and a sound recommendation on how to balance it. Cause i really dont think im the one whining as of late

Gaige

08-12-2011, 08:27 PM

Sure, they're not balanced. The posts here though reference numbers and how to completely balance them which doesn't make sense since other aspects of the classes also aren't balanced.

Uryu

08-13-2011, 12:10 AM

I just wont some utility... I will worry about how far assassins are after we get that far. Not sure why rangers away get the short end of the stick. It's sad when other classes can see it and think the same thing.

Davngr1

08-13-2011, 12:26 AM

<cite>Uryu wrote:</cite><blockquote>I just wont some utility... I will worry about how far assassins are after we get that far. Not sure why rangers away get the short end of the stick. It's sad when other classes can see it and think the same thing.</blockquote> what are you talking about man? go to flames and look in the ranger section, you will see parses that are about the same and some better than assassins. you guys just need to ditch the whole cry baby thing and start putting together some solid ideas on how to make your class better not make your class better then assassin ffs.

llicah

08-13-2011, 12:59 AM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite> </cite> what are you talking about man? go to flames and look in the ranger section, you will see parses that are about the same and some better than assassins. </blockquote>so if rangers and assassins are more or less balanced right now, shouldnt the new aa going in also be balanced?

Davngr1

08-13-2011, 01:08 AM

<cite>llicah wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite> </cite> what are you talking about man? go to flames and look in the ranger section, you will see parses that are about the same and some better than assassins. </blockquote>so if rangers and assassins are more or less balanced right now, shouldnt the new aa going in also be balanced?</blockquote> what you don't get is that these aa changes are to fix useless AA that give meaningless boost. if devs missed AA on the ranger EoF tree that are out dated rangers should bring that up NOT cry about useless assassin aa being fixed.

maplewood333

08-13-2011, 01:50 AM

Im just mad they dont nerf the f out of auto attack, I would like to see a drop in auto attack and a increase to CA's to make them useful after 5min into a fight....... right now auto attack is just dumb. Me, a ranger having 40% flurry plus 600%MA is just dumb. Dont know if u guys saw but they moved the cap of MA to 600% so we can have insane amounts of DPS mod and flurry and even do more than now..fail <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" /> Would like to see mythbuff that gives 20% to auto go to like 20% to all ranged attacksThe blance between assassins and rangers is none existent assassins have the advantage in utility and burn fight by far and we get decrease power cost to escape...... snaring shot isnt to bad i guess but what about all of the AA on the right side triple shot ,stream of arrows, storm of arrows, searing shot buff them. Just dont make us a point and shot class give us utility/some fun CA's chains ca ca ca auto ca ca ca is not fun after 3 years of being a ranger.PS. Sullon HM weapons sword from first named and shield from 3rd named have 6 flurry a piece auto attack ftw.....<img src="/eq2/images/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" />

Uryu

08-13-2011, 02:07 AM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Uryu wrote:</cite><blockquote>I just wont some utility... I will worry about how far assassins are after we get that far. Not sure why rangers away get the short end of the stick. It's sad when other classes can see it and think the same thing.</blockquote> what are you talking about man? go to flames and look in the ranger section, you will see parses that are about the same and some better than assassins. you guys just need to ditch the whole cry baby thing and start putting together some solid ideas on how to make your class better not make your class better then assassin ffs.</blockquote>What are you talking about, did i say i could not dps well? i can keep up with my raid assassin just fine. i was referring to GU61. I see you are little paranoid and trying your best to prevent a nerf that will not happen more then likely. I was just saying that rangers could use some utility, an i would worry about the GU61 Crit bonus stuff later. One more thing, why are you getting all worked up over the rangers compareing them selfs to assassins, on this post?Thier not trying to get you nerf in any way, thier only trying to better them selfs, and to get SOE to stop giveing rangers the blind eye... escape really? i mean really? Also you are Rangers conterpart after all, who else would they compare them selfs to. I have nothing agienst you though, your only trying to protect your class. I'm a former Assassin... but its not a class i enjoy as much so i betrayed back despite the fact that i knew my raid time would be cut in half.Ranger suits me, but Raids don't like them as much as assassins cause they don't bring much to the raid besides dps. To sum it all up, i just would like rangers to be liked by raid guilds. in order for that to happen we need something besides dps that we can bring to the raids. Do you ever see Recruiting for raid guild pst ranger? I don't think even casual guilds ask for rangers, they only except them cause they need to fill their spots. Assassins have it easy, most rangers have to prove them selfs to get into the top guilds. I would just like to see rangers get some love this GU. Thats my opinion don't read into it too much though, i'm a little drunk.

maplewood333

08-13-2011, 02:39 AM

Really rangers do "some" need love i must say we just to tweaked i guess u could say. Change DPS in area's to others auto attack------> CA's we are to much of a class of point and shot. I must admit ive never been in a guild with a good assassin such as gaige but when apping to NPU in SF (when rangers were worse than than they are now) i had to work my butt off. Right now dps wise we are on par with assassins depending on the fight and duration. But when u bring in utility we are blown away. Yes getting some love on lets say focus aim making it raid wide adding more goodies idk would be nice but we would just be OP and would not fix the main problem with our class. But as of now to be wanted in a raid you just need to wipe the floor dps wise or else people will look at OMG assassins had hate trans, health debuffs and more dps on burn fights. I really dont care if assassins are better than rangers, aslong as the class is fun to play but as of now im losing it ca ca ca auto.....come on devs we need more than just decrease power cost on escape <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e78feac27fa924c4d0ad6cf5819f3554.gif" border="0" />AMD FIX ARROWS COME ON DEVS 1 AUTO ATTACK = 1 ARROW!!! 1 CA = 1 ARROW

gourdon

08-13-2011, 05:57 AM

I'm trying to figure out why rangers think they should have equal DPS + utility with assassins when they can do their damage from range and aren't nearly as dependent upon position and stealth state. There should be a significant reward for the risk that assassins and brigands take on with their mode of combat. Otherwise, why not just go with the less complicated option?The problem with this whole argument is that the combat arts in question that are being affected are not equal to begin with. Masked strike requires flanking position and melee range while snaring shot doesn't require position and is ranged. Mr. Apple meet Mr. Orange. The numbers might not be right, but expecting them to be equal is silly.The power cost reduction for escape is pretty ridiculous. I have no idea why they bothered.

Noob1974

08-13-2011, 08:35 AM

<cite>gourdon wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm trying to figure out why rangers think they should have equal DPS + utility with assassins when they can do their damage from range and aren't nearly as dependent upon position and stealth state. There should be a significant reward for the risk that assassins and brigands take on with their mode of combat. Otherwise, why not just go with the less complicated option?The problem with this whole argument is that the combat arts in question that are being affected are not equal to begin with. Masked strike requires flanking position and melee range while snaring shot doesn't require position and is ranged. Mr. Apple meet Mr. Orange. The numbers might not be right, but expecting them to be equal is silly.The power cost reduction for escape is pretty ridiculous. I have no idea why they bothered.</blockquote> That's nonsense and by just repeating it doesn't make it any more true. Rangers have to be for Melee CA's where every other Scout is,too...............

jjlo69

08-13-2011, 11:55 AM

<cite>gourdon wrote:</cite><blockquote>I'm trying to figure out why rangers think they should have equal DPS + utility with assassins when they can do their damage from range and aren't nearly as dependent upon position and stealth state. There should be a significant reward for the risk that assassins and brigands take on with their mode of combat. Otherwise, why not just go with the less complicated option?The problem with this whole argument is that the combat arts in question that are being affected are not equal to begin with. Masked strike requires flanking position and melee range while snaring shot doesn't require position and is ranged. Mr. Apple meet Mr. Orange. The numbers might not be right, but expecting them to be equal is silly.The power cost reduction for escape is pretty ridiculous. I have no idea why they bothered.</blockquote>i only used masked strike as one example out of the 12 combat arts excacting is effecting and used that since it was on the same timer as snaring shot but heck pick any of 12 combat arts that effected by excacting and it will out prefrom snaring shot even before it being used by excating and more so after. Oh yeah i think i used the apple to orange line in another post myself.

Gaige

08-13-2011, 12:02 PM

<cite>Noob1974 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rangers have to be for Melee CA's where every other Scout is,too...............</blockquote>Not anymore. With multiattack uncapped and the addition of flurry onto items rangers are seeing way less of a drop in DPS staying out the entire time firing off ranged CAs. If you look at any of Maplewood's breakdowns posted on Flames you'll see that of his Top 10 damaging abilities only exploit weakness, bloody reminder and stream of arrows are normally up there as abilities he has to press.While granted bloody reminder requires a bit of a joust in you're going to do that anyway to keep nox enfeeblement up.I understand that ideally as a ranger you're going to want to do all of your CAs and stand in the sweet spot, however if you can't for whatever reason (HM Gregedor, HM Tormax, HM Vald) the penalty a ranger suffers for standing at range is nowhere near as big as the penalty suffered by melee scouts, especially the assassin.While I'm in 100% agreement about the escape AA I'm not sure so sure about the other. You can't directly compare exacting and the CAs it effects to snaring. I mean you can, but you'd be pretty silly. Too many other things between the classes are skewed, like % of DPS from autoattack and procs on encounters were both classes can do their jobs with impunity. While maybe a little bump to the CB on the new snaring AA may be inline equalizing it out certainly wouldn't be. Rangers are already more autoattacked biased than we are and anything that boosts their CAs to equate to equal damage over time with ours would mess with the current balance unless SOE also addresses all the damage rangers receive from auto attack via having the highest mod in the game while being able to reach equal levels of MA as all other scouts (and about 35% flurry).

Nevao

08-13-2011, 12:59 PM

<cite>Gaige wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Noob1974 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rangers have to be for Melee CA's where every other Scout is,too...............</blockquote>Not anymore. With multiattack uncapped and the addition of flurry onto items rangers are seeing way less of a drop in DPS staying out the entire time firing off ranged CAs. If you look at any of Maplewood's breakdowns posted on Flames you'll see that of his Top 10 damaging abilities only exploit weakness, bloody reminder and stream of arrows are normally up there as abilities he has to press.While granted bloody reminder requires a bit of a joust in you're going to do that anyway to keep nox enfeeblement up.I understand that ideally as a ranger you're going to want to do all of your CAs and stand in the sweet spot, however if you can't for whatever reason (HM Gregedor, HM Tormax, HM Vald) the penalty a ranger suffers for standing at range is nowhere near as big as the penalty suffered by melee scouts, especially the assassin.While I'm in 100% agreement about the escape AA I'm not sure so sure about the other. You can't directly compare exacting and the CAs it effects to snaring. I mean you can, but you'd be pretty silly. Too many other things between the classes are skewed, like % of DPS from autoattack and procs on encounters were both classes can do their jobs with impunity. While maybe a little bump to the CB on the new snaring AA may be inline equalizing it out certainly wouldn't be. Rangers are already more autoattacked biased than we are and anything that boosts their CAs to equate to equal damage over time with ours would mess with the current balance unless SOE also addresses all the damage rangers receive from auto attack via having the highest mod in the game while being able to reach equal levels of MA as all other scouts (and about 35% flurry).</blockquote>Honestly, I don't think you'd get that much of an argument over changing the ratio of our AA/CA damage but that's besides the point. Due to all the disparities over the years (some addressed, some still in place) Rangers are very sensitive to things that effect the perceived "balance" we have now with Assassins. Perhaps oversensitive. While Rangers can do more damage from far, it's a limited number of encounters that that is meaningful on (and those are your own words over on Flames) and that DPS amount is still nothing compared to what Locks and Wizards can do from ranged. On top of that we have a joke of utility compared to Assassins and a lesser extent Wizards and Locks, and that's not just us complaining. Ask most raid leaders what they would prefer and they'll point to the extra utility and burst ability of the assassin over the advantage of "ranged dps" that can just as easily be done by cloth wearers.So when Ranger's see new/updated AAs that give Assassins more of a DPS advantage it triggers a "not again" knee-jerk reaction, even if it's only a small amount. It's only natural given the history of the class and community perception of Ranger DPS/Utility. I think in this case some easy modifications can be made to address this particular AA disparity if Xelgad deems it should be done. And those changes don't take away from Assassins are currently getting. But really all we're doing here is spinning our wheels. We've provided Xelgad with the data and our arguments for. The rest is up to him.

maplewood333

08-13-2011, 05:04 PM

WTB MORE RANGED CA's! less melee CA's and nerf AUTO ATTACK <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" />

Davngr1

08-14-2011, 03:44 AM

<cite>Nevao wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Gaige wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Noob1974 wrote:</cite><blockquote>Rangers have to be for Melee CA's where every other Scout is,too...............</blockquote>Not anymore. With multiattack uncapped and the addition of flurry onto items rangers are seeing way less of a drop in DPS staying out the entire time firing off ranged CAs. If you look at any of Maplewood's breakdowns posted on Flames you'll see that of his Top 10 damaging abilities only exploit weakness, bloody reminder and stream of arrows are normally up there as abilities he has to press.While granted bloody reminder requires a bit of a joust in you're going to do that anyway to keep nox enfeeblement up.I understand that ideally as a ranger you're going to want to do all of your CAs and stand in the sweet spot, however if you can't for whatever reason (HM Gregedor, HM Tormax, HM Vald) the penalty a ranger suffers for standing at range is nowhere near as big as the penalty suffered by melee scouts, especially the assassin.While I'm in 100% agreement about the escape AA I'm not sure so sure about the other. You can't directly compare exacting and the CAs it effects to snaring. I mean you can, but you'd be pretty silly. Too many other things between the classes are skewed, like % of DPS from autoattack and procs on encounters were both classes can do their jobs with impunity. While maybe a little bump to the CB on the new snaring AA may be inline equalizing it out certainly wouldn't be. Rangers are already more autoattacked biased than we are and anything that boosts their CAs to equate to equal damage over time with ours would mess with the current balance unless SOE also addresses all the damage rangers receive from auto attack via having the highest mod in the game while being able to reach equal levels of MA as all other scouts (and about 35% flurry).</blockquote>Honestly, I don't think you'd get that much of an argument over changing the ratio of our AA/CA damage but that's besides the point. Due to all the disparities over the years (some addressed, some still in place) Rangers are very sensitive to things that effect the perceived "balance" we have now with Assassins. Perhaps oversensitive. While Rangers can do more damage from far, it's a limited number of encounters that that is meaningful on (and those are your own words over on Flames) and that DPS amount is still nothing compared to what Locks and Wizards can do from ranged. On top of that we have a joke of utility compared to Assassins and a lesser extent Wizards and Locks, and that's not just us complaining. Ask most raid leaders what they would prefer and they'll point to the extra utility and burst ability of the assassin over the advantage of "ranged dps" that can just as easily be done by cloth wearers.So when Ranger's see new/updated AAs that give Assassins more of a DPS advantage it triggers a "not again" knee-jerk reaction, even if it's only a small amount. It's only natural given the history of the class and community perception of Ranger DPS/Utility. I think in this case some easy modifications can be made to address this particular AA disparity if Xelgad deems it should be done. And those changes don't take away from Assassins are currently getting. But really all we're doing here is spinning our wheels. We've provided Xelgad with the data and our arguments for. The rest is up to him.</blockquote>the history is that DoF, KoS and EoF were ranger expansions and RoK,SF,(TSO was a horrible expansion for any scout) were assassin expansions but now it's about even and even towards the end of SF rangers kept up just fine. your knee jerk reaction to cry about every littel thing even when it has nothing to do with your class or balance and everything to do with fixing useless AA, is not justified.

Nevao

08-14-2011, 05:42 AM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>the history is that DoF, KoS and EoF were ranger expansions and RoK,SF,(TSO was a horrible expansion for any scout) were assassin expansions but now it's about even and even towards the end of SF rangers kept up just fine.your knee jerk reaction to cry about every littel thing even when it has nothing to do with your class or balance and everything to do with fixing useless AA, is not justified.</blockquote>I think your timeline is a bit off, but either way you're the one over reacting. Rangers want to be equal, see a disparity, ask for something to be done and in this case it was asking for a boost to one AA on the Ranger side or to look at a different one. You come in and start trying to brow beat them into shutting up. I know Niber made you the Assassin Class mod on Flames man and you feel the need to defend the class, but you really should keep the aggressivenes over on that side of the fence. Or if nothing else realize you've now made the same point repeatedly and just walk away. All you're doing (as usual) is making yourself look worse by relentlessing boring in on the same point. Even Gaige, the most vocal of the assassin community has moved on man.And with that last attempt to reason with a brick wall complete, I'm going to bed.

Corwinus

08-14-2011, 11:16 AM

Well Gnite Nevao, and thanks to try to put some common sense into this thread.Cor

Davngr1

08-14-2011, 06:01 PM

<cite>Nevao wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>the history is that DoF, KoS and EoF were ranger expansions and RoK,SF,(TSO was a horrible expansion for any scout) were assassin expansions but now it's about even and even towards the end of SF rangers kept up just fine.your knee jerk reaction to cry about every littel thing even when it has nothing to do with your class or balance and everything to do with fixing useless AA, is not justified.</blockquote>I think your timeline is a bit off, but either way you're the one over reacting. Rangers want to be equal, see a disparity, ask for something to be done and in this case it was asking for a boost to one AA on the Ranger side or to look at a different one. You come in and start trying to brow beat them into shutting up. I know Niber made you the Assassin Class mod on Flames man and you feel the need to defend the class, but you really should keep the aggressivenes over on that side of the fence. Or if nothing else realize you've now made the same point repeatedly and just walk away. All you're doing (as usual) is making yourself look worse by relentlessing boring in on the same point. Even Gaige, the most vocal of the assassin community has moved on man.And with that last attempt to reason with a brick wall complete, I'm going to bed.</blockquote>wrong. assassin mod or not, i hate people who ask for nerfs to other classes just becasue they aren't happy with what they got. uncle could have asked for better AA for rangers with OUT mentioning assassin but you're so dead set in your crying ways that you don't see that, amirite?

Nevao

08-14-2011, 08:01 PM

<cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Nevao wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Davngr1 wrote:</cite><blockquote>the history is that DoF, KoS and EoF were ranger expansions and RoK,SF,(TSO was a horrible expansion for any scout) were assassin expansions but now it's about even and even towards the end of SF rangers kept up just fine.your knee jerk reaction to cry about every littel thing even when it has nothing to do with your class or balance and everything to do with fixing useless AA, is not justified.</blockquote>I think your timeline is a bit off, but either way you're the one over reacting. Rangers want to be equal, see a disparity, ask for something to be done and in this case it was asking for a boost to one AA on the Ranger side or to look at a different one. You come in and start trying to brow beat them into shutting up. I know Niber made you the Assassin Class mod on Flames man and you feel the need to defend the class, but you really should keep the aggressivenes over on that side of the fence. Or if nothing else realize you've now made the same point repeatedly and just walk away. All you're doing (as usual) is making yourself look worse by relentlessing boring in on the same point. Even Gaige, the most vocal of the assassin community has moved on man.And with that last attempt to reason with a brick wall complete, I'm going to bed.</blockquote>wrong. assassin mod or not, i hate people who ask for nerfs to other classes just becasue they aren't happy with what they got. uncle could have asked for better AA for rangers with OUT mentioning assassin but you're so dead set in your crying ways that you don't see that, amirite?</blockquote>Acutally you're not, if you bothered to read any of my posts you'd see I actually called for a buff to the Ranger AA. Your problem is with Uncle (and even he wasn't doing what you're accusing him of in the way you claim) but you're painting an entire class with the same brush. As usual, over reacting man.But carry on, you're obviously having fun posting your rants and in the end this lovely back and forth isn't going to make a bit of difference with Xelgad or how any of the other players in this thread think.(Gives Dav an hour before he responds again since he has to have the final word to prove himself)

jjlo69

08-14-2011, 10:59 PM

Davngr1 hey man if you think im throwing sins under a bus you may want to read this thread <a href="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?topic_id=504853">http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=504853</a>

Aerinn

08-23-2011, 12:08 AM

There are a few good points made in this thread, and there are some small tweaks that would make AA's useful for rangers. Some thoughts:<ul><li>It's incredibly wanky to ask for a nerf to another class, especially when it's another scout! If you must, attack the mages! <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></li><li>Arrow consumption is just CRAZY now. How about AA to reduce arrow consumption more? (better than mana reduction on escape)</li><li>AA that converts hate reduction to hate xfer</li></ul><div>If we wanted to give mechanics people REAL headaches, we could get an AA that reduces base auto-attack damage and increases crit bonus and potency (maybe even resulting in MAX dps for rangers coming when you're doing more button pressing than auto-attack avoidance).</div><div></div><div>That said, I don't REALLY believe that any of this is going to happen unless some dev thought about it on their own. We just need to recruit more to the ranger ranks! <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></div>