And then the other shoe dropped......DPS reduction for PVE rangers.

stryker268 · 06-09-2007, 03:40 PM

Aeralik is the dev from the pvp board and this was his comment on the upcoming changes. The rest was my response.

Aeralik wrote:

Quarter@Venekor wrote:
And while you're at it, what's being done about ranged auto-attack damage?
Rangers can auto-attack you for 1k+ damage at range. I don't see how that didn't need a nerf but double-up somehow did need one?
That is part of the tweaking damage by level range. High level ranged damage was tuned down in general. Again its easily tweakable if its still too high so feel free to submit feedback on it.

Ok, this is just the worst news you could possibly give an entire class. It's bad enough you want to take all the elements that might keep us alive in a fight, now you want to take away the lions share of any rangers dps. Not only does this effect PVP rangers, it will also pretty much kill the PVE ranger as well. A ranger is taken on a raid for one reason only, dps. We have practically no utility other than a few debuffs. You have taken away survelience as a viable option to consussive (which remained a usable ability for casters). They changed the /target ability so that you can no longer use it with Amazing Shot to pull tough mobs. We are already out-parsed by Assassins and Swashbucklers doing 3k+ dps and now you want to take the last thing that makes us useful as a class?

Auto-attack damage is the lions share of our dps output, period. Before I learned this the best I could ever parse was around 1100 dps. With no other changes to gear or AA's my dps immeadiatly shot up to 1500-1700. With some equipment changes and a respec to take advantage of this I can now parse 1800-2000 dps consistently, and I don't even have a good fabled bow. Now you are telling me that not only are you going to take away any chance at a good PVP fight, but also the ability to be of any importance in my raid guild?

I have been a faithful subscriber to EQII since launch. I moved to a pvp server within days of it being available. I have spent hundreds of hours lvling toons to support my Ranger via tradeskills. I may not be the best ranger in EQII but I consider myself an asset and know what my class is capable of. This last hit of the nerf bat you have listed in this thread has me seriously considering cancelling BOTH my account. Now you tell me that that hit is even worse than what you first stated!!

It's been a long time, but I believe that the real world is still out there, maybe it's time to get back to it and away from this game we call Evercrack. Leave it for the farmers, lvl locks and newbs. "And the meak shall inherit the earth." Good job SOE

Gareorn · 06-09-2007, 03:54 PM

Are you FREAKING kidding me!

I definately have something to say, but thoughts right now wouldn't get pass the filter.

Ponos · 06-09-2007, 04:19 PM

It's shoe. And then the other shoe dropped. I vividly remember employing this catchphrase upon discovering my high school girlfriend had cheated on me again. "And then the other shoe dropped. You [Removed for Content]."

I feel your pain. I do, I truly do. What's a ranger without his bow! But it's shoe. And then the other shoe dropped. (You [Removed for Content].)

Perhaps Linda Rodina can help shed some light on the eyt...eytem...uh, eytemol...the history of the catchphrase. I wash my hands a lot and count toothpicks.

[Q] From Linda Rodina: "I am interested in the origin of the phrase, waiting for the other shoe to drop. Would you know about this phrase?"

[A] Curiously, few of my reference works even mention this phrase. When they do, it's usually in the form drop the other shoe!, meaning "go on, say the next obvious thing!", which seems to have been known for most of the twentieth century.

There was a discussion about your form of the phrase among members of the American Dialect Society some time ago, to no very positive effect, though it was established that it has been around for a long time. Barry Popik found a cartoon about Hitler in the New York World-Telegram for 15 February 1943 entitled "Waiting for That Other Shoe to Drop!", indicating that the phrase was by then well enough known to be something of a catchphrase. More recently, he found an even older example in the New York Times of March 1921: "If nine out of ten of us hadn't heard that ‘drop that other shoe' chestnut and molded our lives accordingly for the sake of the neighbor below us, what would be the end of us?" So it was old even then.

Its source would seem to be the following story. A man comes in late at night to a lodging house, rather the worse for wear. He sits on his bed, drags one shoe off and drops it on the floor. Guiltily remembering everyone around him trying to sleep, he takes the other one off much more carefully and quietly puts in on the floor. He then finishes undressing and gets into bed. Just as he is drifting off to sleep, a shout comes from the man in the room below: "Well, drop the other one then! I can't sleep, waiting for you to drop the other shoe!". This may come from music hall or vaudeville, though it would seem that nobody has been able to tie it down more precisely.

Janaka · 06-09-2007, 04:36 PM

Are you sure this isn't a high-end dps change for PVP only?

RoXx · 06-09-2007, 05:02 PM

[Removed for Content]? pve nerfed becaused of pvp? bring us some news? this is pretty standard nowadays..

stryker268 · 06-09-2007, 06:08 PM

Lol, my mistake. You are absolutely correct. It is "other shoe."

TerriBlades · 06-09-2007, 06:40 PM

Someone needs to tell these whiney [Removed for Content] rogues they need to have a nice tall glass of shut the [Removed for Content] up. Yes, you are a scout, but no, you shouldnt have the same damage output as an assassin or a ranger. Period!

Its not just rogues though, but a great deal of the [Removed for Content] is coming from that direction. In all forms. From, whaaaa rangers hit too hard with their auto attack, to whaaaa rangers to hit percent is 95+, to OMGZ Tenderwood arrows have a +75 to hit on them, they are broken. Give me a break. For once, I would love if before they actually whined their way into nerfing a class, they would actually play the class. Then maybe they would understand, but most likely not.

Funny, I dont recall them rolling out fixes for Swashys when everyone was talking about how insane their damage output was at the start of the expansion. Why is that? I dont remember them rushing out to fix Summoners when they were top DPS, hell they even gave necros a boost with lifeburn. So why is it whenever rangers are top on the parse everyone and their momma gets their panties in a bunch? And more important then that, why the hell do the devs insist on listening to them? Rothgar, I know you troll these forums because you play a ranger. Wanna chime in here? Maybe explain why it seems the devs want to keep rangers in the dog house, so to speak?

As much as I hate PvP, this change stinks. You basicly take away the one way that a ranger is going to be able to take down anyone else 1 on 1 by nerfing their damage output. Its simple really, if the [Removed for Content] of PvP knew how to play their classes properly, they would greatly increase the chances of downing rangers all the time, rather then come crying on the forums about how they got sniper shotted by a ranger, and before they could even find their target they were dead. Keep a ranger close, and you'll have a dead ranger. Its simple really. If this change makes its way over to PvE, well thats just one more reason for me to hate PvP. With all the hate in PvE focused on rangers hitting 3 and 4k parses, the last thing I want to see is another nerf... however,

Lockeye has already publicly stated

I'm looking into crafted arrow balance as part of this update. As with anything I touch, you pretty much already know what to expect...

We'll see how that goes.

Aeralik · 06-09-2007, 09:42 PM

At the start of that thread in the first paragraph, I talk about the damage reductions in pvp across the board. These mechanics already exist but we are now using modifiers based on level range. So high level rangers will see lower ranged auto attack damage while fighting in PvP. In PvE fights damage calculations remain the same. Nothing to see here other than some misunderstanding of the PvP balancing.

stryker268 · 06-09-2007, 10:03 PM

That is a major relief Chris. Thank you for clearing that up. Someone had said that the damage tweak for ranged auto-attack was going to be addresses on the PVE portion of GU36. I searched and searched for this but could not find where you had said that. So again, my apologies for getting it wrong.

Just keep in mind that as a class we are defined only on our ability do do damage in PVE. Also as a class we have seen too many PVP nerfs and up limiting our abilites in PVE. An example of this being our Survelience not being viable as a means to pull a tough mob out of a crowd of social mobs anymore. Yet wizards and coercers have the Concussive ability which still does exactly what Suvelience used to.

pseudocide · 06-09-2007, 10:29 PM

surveilance was bugged, none of the other spells in that line pulled w/o aggro, and idk how that has anything to do with pvp, freeps always social aggro.

stryker268 · 06-09-2007, 11:52 PM

The survelience but was "fixed" because people were using it in pvp by casting it on a pet while in city and making them engage without actually attacking. One of the rangers on my server did it in a tradeskill instance and got over 100p from the person he killed. It was changed soon after that.

Dextera · 06-10-2007, 07:32 AM

stryker268 wrote:

Just keep in mind that as a class we are defined only on our ability do do damage in PVE. Also as a class we have seen too many PVP nerfs and up limiting our abilites in PVE. An example of this being our Survelience not being viable as a means to pull a tough mob out of a crowd of social mobs anymore. Yet wizards and coercers have the Concussive ability which still does exactly what Suvelience used to.

Haha. A player, telling a Dev, how the game works. C'mon now... really? lol.

Gareorn · 06-10-2007, 12:34 PM

Dextera@Antonia Bayle wrote:

stryker268 wrote:
Just keep in mind that as a class we are defined only on our ability do do damage in PVE. Also as a class we have seen too many PVP nerfs and up limiting our abilites in PVE. An example of this being our Survelience not being viable as a means to pull a tough mob out of a crowd of social mobs anymore. Yet wizards and coercers have the Concussive ability which still does exactly what Suvelience used to.
Haha. A player, telling a Dev, how the game works. C'mon now... really? lol.

You must be new around here. There are dozens of examples in these threads where players taught a dev a thing or two about how an aspect of the game works. As a matter of fact, I believe the devs encourage feedback.

Terrius · 06-10-2007, 12:36 PM

This is the second time the PVP changes have been posted like they will effect PvE, Stop stiring up trouble, PVP doesnt effect PvE. IF it's on the PVP board chances are it wont effect us normal PvE players.

Gareorn · 06-10-2007, 12:40 PM

Terrius@Antonia Bayle wrote:

This is the second time the PVP changes have been posted like they will effect PvE, Stop stiring up trouble, PVP doesnt effect PvE. IF it's on the PVP board chances are it wont effect us normal PvE players.

lol, funny stuff. A paladin coming to the ranger forums to tell a ranger to stop stirring up trouble. Priceless.

stryker268 · 06-10-2007, 06:56 PM

Gareorn wrote:

Terrius@Antonia Bayle wrote:
This is the second time the PVP changes have been posted like they will effect PvE, Stop stiring up trouble, PVP doesnt effect PvE. IF it's on the PVP board chances are it wont effect us normal PvE players.
lol, funny stuff. A paladin coming to the ranger forums to tell a ranger to stop stirring up trouble. Priceless.

I agree. Gareorn. And even funnier is the fact that his claim that PVP won't make a difference in PVE is incorrect. Even if the damage modifications don't change anything in PVE ( which i am not totally convinced will be the case) you still have the fact that one of our basic buff lines is going to change from in combat to out of combat run speed. A change to the AA line isn't limited to just PVP as far as I know. It may be a little less relevent but it is still a change that was brought about by PVP.

And as for the "stirring up trouble", I am only trying to make as many people aware of the changes being made as possible. More people with this information means that there will be more people to give feedback and state their opinions.

TerriBlades · 06-10-2007, 07:46 PM

I guess we should be glad the Dev Tracker is broken, if not for that, Im sure this thread would have been flooded by ppl that cant play, and dont understand how rangers work, doing nothing but cheering over nerfs.

Dev Stalkers FTMFL!

Terrius · 06-11-2007, 02:17 AM

Yeah, I'm a Paladin, a Mystic, and Illusionist, a Fury, a Ranger and a Dirge. If you had station access and had taken the effort to search for my alts you'd already know that... anyways, Incombat runspeed wont effect my Ranger at all, not sure why it matters. I can already get away from anything with my 65% sprint, and this post started as a "the sky is falling!" thread, which always stirs up trouble. If it's going to effect PvE it will be on Test soon, but until it is a fact dont state that it's a nerf to PvE unless you are 100% sure.

Terrius · 06-11-2007, 03:07 AM

I didnt mean to be insulting in any form, but I hate threads that end with the class fighting amoungst itself and demeaning it's community, i'm sure this will effect some people, i'm just not sure how it'll effect me until it hits test.

xandez · 06-11-2007, 04:18 AM

its a known fact that PvP WILL affect PvE. yes, i know its stated (has been and will be) that it will NOT affect. However, this has NOT been the case and i will believe otherwise when the unbelievable happens (PvE unaffected by PvP) (it would not be so difficult to make it so that it would not affect, would it?) ++Xan

Shadowdragoon · 06-11-2007, 06:20 AM

TerriBlades wrote:

I guess we should be glad the Dev Tracker is broken, if not for that, Im sure this thread would have been flooded by ppl that cant play, and dont understand how rangers work, doing nothing but cheering over nerfs.
Dev Stalkers FTMFL!

And most who used devtracker probably uses the list of devs Targ posted in http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=365608 to keep following the devs..

SMILEY

Merkad · 06-11-2007, 07:10 AM

Just to add an example to Gareorn's post to Dextera (since I dislike it when no examples are given in this sort of context), Blackguard or Moorguard, I do forget which, once posted shortly after KoS launched and we received the proc change, that if Rangers were doing 50%+ damage from procs, then something was wrong...we were doing 50-60% damage from procs before then, and they did not even know (which was why so many complained, and we stayed in that heavily nerfed state for a decent while). A more recent example would be a Dev stating that auto attack does not make up the majority of our dps, probably true if you don't have a high end bow/ammo set up (think he had a wurm destroyer shortbow), but for the high end, it is not true. I have a RSB, so my auto attack damage percentage is usually in the mid to high 40s, and with a 9 second delay bow, I proc a lot more on auto attack than CAs. Not that I am saying Devs are clueless, but being a Dev does not make them omnipotent either. People are still just people at the end of the day. Merkades, 70th ranger. Siege, Najena.

Gareorn · 06-11-2007, 11:39 AM

Terrius@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Yeah, I'm a Paladin, a Mystic, and Illusionist, a Fury, a Ranger and a Dirge. If you had station access and had taken the effort to search for my alts you'd already know that... anyways, Incombat runspeed wont effect my Ranger at all, not sure why it matters. I can already get away from anything with my 65% sprint, and this post started as a "the sky is falling!" thread, which always stirs up trouble. If it's going to effect PvE it will be on Test soon, but until it is a fact dont state that it's a nerf to PvE unless you are 100% sure.

Nah, I choose not to spend my money on station access. Besides, it seems someone is always willing to tell me that if I had station access I'd know... Then they proceed to give me the information for free.

I too have many alts, as I'm sure most of us do. I don't really consider it a pass to go to those forums and stir the pot. But that's just me. I didn't mean anything personal, I was just pointing out your post because I thought it was funny. I believe I used the word "priceless."

I also want to point out, the OP did not make a "sky is falling" post. It is consistent with what we already know. We are constantly told "changes are being made to PvP only", and almost everytime that turns out to be false. I'll believe it when I see it.

Rabbitoh · 06-12-2007, 06:56 AM

Aeralik wrote:

At the start of that thread in the first paragraph, I talk about the damage reductions in pvp across the board. These mechanics already exist but we are now using modifiers based on level range. So high level rangers will see lower ranged auto attack damage while fighting in PvP. In PvE fights damage calculations remain the same. Nothing to see here other than some misunderstanding of the PvP balancing.

Answer me this, How is a ranger suppose to keep range if our leg shot is getting nerfed and our root is getting nerfed. We will have no in combat run speed to get us range and if i am mistaken every class will sprint at 40%?

Please answer this simple question, as i have taken alot of time perfecting killing all classes. It seems SOE is bowing to whining forum people who complain about being killed by classes and refuse to use their wasted complaining energy in actually learning how to play their own class.

Take away burst dps from rangers and assasins and we offer nothing to a group in pvp.

Also what will happen to our AA lines and Cloak of flames buff that increases our in combat speed. You take away our in combat run speed, leave us with crappy melee attacks and rangers will be sitting there with no way to get range, being fresh meat for all classes to kill. Thank god for track and evac, at least i can look good on the battle field permanetly immuned at the revive points.

All i can see in the proposed GU 36 is the death of 2 fun classes to play, the ranger and the assasin. At least Brigs and swashies will still offer things to a group.

Molok, Ranger of Vigilante. Naggy server.

Kradun · 06-12-2007, 02:57 PM

Rabbitoh wrote:

Aeralik wrote:
At the start of that thread in the first paragraph, I talk about the damage reductions in pvp across the board. These mechanics already exist but we are now using modifiers based on level range. So high level rangers will see lower ranged auto attack damage while fighting in PvP. In PvE fights damage calculations remain the same. Nothing to see here other than some misunderstanding of the PvP balancing.
Answer me this, How is a ranger suppose to keep range if our leg shot is getting nerfed and our root is getting nerfed. We will have no in combat run speed to get us range and if i am mistaken every class will sprint at 40%?
Please answer this simple question, as i have taken alot of time perfecting killing all classes. It seems SOE is bowing to whining forum people who complain about being killed by classes and refuse to use their wasted complaining energy in actually learning how to play their own class.
Take away burst dps from rangers and assasins and we offer nothing to a group in pvp.
Also what will happen to our AA lines and Cloak of flames buff that increases our in combat speed. You take away our in combat run speed, leave us with crappy melee attacks and rangers will be sitting there with no way to get range, being fresh meat for all classes to kill. Thank god for track and evac, at least i can look good on the battle field permanetly immuned at the revive points.
All i can see in the proposed GU 36 is the death of 2 fun classes to play, the ranger and the assasin. At least Brigs and swashies will still offer things to a group.
Molok, Ranger of Vigilante. Naggy server.

Adjust. You can't say you didn't think the game wouldn't ever change against your favor. The brigands by far have it much worse than us.

pseudocide · 06-12-2007, 03:00 PM

cry me a river and while your at it, delete this whine-fest of a thread

Gareorn · 06-12-2007, 04:14 PM

After giving this some thought, I don't think this change should really affect PvE. I was initially angry about the dev telling another class, that if he didn't feel rangers were nerfed enough, to just send feedback (paraphrasing obviously). But, since auto attack damage is already scaled down for PvP, they should be able to make changes to it independent of PvE.

I'd also like to add that comments like "cry me a river" and "whine-fest" are totally irrelevent and unnecessary.

Wytie · 06-12-2007, 04:37 PM

Gareorn wrote:

I'd also like to add that comments like "cry me a river" and "whine-fest" are totally irrelevent and unnecessary.

QFE

I wish everyone got this SMILEY

pseudocide · 06-12-2007, 05:29 PM

Gareorn wrote:

After giving this some thought, I don't think this change should really affect PvE. I was initially angry about the dev telling another class, that if he didn't feel rangers were nerfed enough, to just send feedback (paraphrasing obviously). But, since auto attack damage is already scaled down for PvP, they should be able to make changes to it independent of PvE.
I'd also like to add that comments like "cry me a river" and "whine-fest" are totally irrelevent and unnecessary.

i'm sorry, but threads like this are irrelevent and unnecessary. All i see from this thread is COMPLAINING, nothing constructive or insightful, just complaining, and most of it is complaining about a problem that never existed in the first place.

Salonkolya · 06-12-2007, 07:46 PM

"Incombat runspeed wont effect my Ranger at all, not sure why it matters."

Only way I've found so far to beat the hardest mobs i need for quests in restricted space is to use root/stun/knock-down and back up enough to get off a bow-shot before they close the gap. I hope the in-combat speed change won't effect that.

06-09-2007, 03:40 PM	#1
stryker268 Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 30	Aeralik is the dev from the pvp board and this was his comment on the upcoming changes. The rest was my response. Aeralik wrote: Quarter@Venekor wrote: And while you're at it, what's being done about ranged auto-attack damage? Rangers can auto-attack you for 1k+ damage at range. I don't see how that didn't need a nerf but double-up somehow did need one? That is part of the tweaking damage by level range. High level ranged damage was tuned down in general. Again its easily tweakable if its still too high so feel free to submit feedback on it. Ok, this is just the worst news you could possibly give an entire class. It's bad enough you want to take all the elements that might keep us alive in a fight, now you want to take away the lions share of any rangers dps. Not only does this effect PVP rangers, it will also pretty much kill the PVE ranger as well. A ranger is taken on a raid for one reason only, dps. We have practically no utility other than a few debuffs. You have taken away survelience as a viable option to consussive (which remained a usable ability for casters). They changed the /target ability so that you can no longer use it with Amazing Shot to pull tough mobs. We are already out-parsed by Assassins and Swashbucklers doing 3k+ dps and now you want to take the last thing that makes us useful as a class? Auto-attack damage is the lions share of our dps output, period. Before I learned this the best I could ever parse was around 1100 dps. With no other changes to gear or AA's my dps immeadiatly shot up to 1500-1700. With some equipment changes and a respec to take advantage of this I can now parse 1800-2000 dps consistently, and I don't even have a good fabled bow. Now you are telling me that not only are you going to take away any chance at a good PVP fight, but also the ability to be of any importance in my raid guild? I have been a faithful subscriber to EQII since launch. I moved to a pvp server within days of it being available. I have spent hundreds of hours lvling toons to support my Ranger via tradeskills. I may not be the best ranger in EQII but I consider myself an asset and know what my class is capable of. This last hit of the nerf bat you have listed in this thread has me seriously considering cancelling BOTH my account. Now you tell me that that hit is even worse than what you first stated!! It's been a long time, but I believe that the real world is still out there, maybe it's time to get back to it and away from this game we call Evercrack. Leave it for the farmers, lvl locks and newbs. "And the meak shall inherit the earth." Good job SOE

06-09-2007, 03:54 PM	#2
Gareorn Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,144	Are you FREAKING kidding me! I definately have something to say, but thoughts right now wouldn't get pass the filter. __________________ Leader of the vast right-wing conspiricy... Hiding from the world's smartest woman in a bunker under a Hooter's restaurant.

06-09-2007, 04:19 PM	#3
Ponos Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Athens, GA. Posts: 274	It's shoe. And then the other shoe dropped. I vividly remember employing this catchphrase upon discovering my high school girlfriend had cheated on me again. "And then the other shoe dropped. You [Removed for Content]." I feel your pain. I do, I truly do. What's a ranger without his bow! But it's shoe. And then the other shoe dropped. (You [Removed for Content].) Perhaps Linda Rodina can help shed some light on the eyt...eytem...uh, eytemol...the history of the catchphrase. I wash my hands a lot and count toothpicks. *[Q] From Linda Rodina: "I am interested in the origin of the phrase, waiting for the other shoe to drop. Would you know about this phrase?"* [A] Curiously, few of my reference works even mention this phrase. When they do, it's usually in the form drop the other shoe!, meaning "go on, say the next obvious thing!", which seems to have been known for most of the twentieth century. There was a discussion about your form of the phrase among members of the American Dialect Society some time ago, to no very positive effect, though it was established that it has been around for a long time. Barry Popik found a cartoon about Hitler in the New York World-Telegram for 15 February 1943 entitled "Waiting for That Other Shoe to Drop!", indicating that the phrase was by then well enough known to be something of a catchphrase. More recently, he found an even older example in the New York Times of March 1921: "If nine out of ten of us hadn't heard that ‘drop that other shoe' chestnut and molded our lives accordingly for the sake of the neighbor below us, what would be the end of us?" So it was old even then. Its source would seem to be the following story. A man comes in late at night to a lodging house, rather the worse for wear. He sits on his bed, drags one shoe off and drops it on the floor. Guiltily remembering everyone around him trying to sleep, he takes the other one off much more carefully and quietly puts in on the floor. He then finishes undressing and gets into bed. Just as he is drifting off to sleep, a shout comes from the man in the room below: "Well, drop the other one then! I can't sleep, waiting for you to drop the other shoe!". This may come from music hall or vaudeville, though it would seem that nobody has been able to tie it down more precisely. __________________

06-09-2007, 06:40 PM	#7
TerriBlades Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 588	Someone needs to tell these whiney [Removed for Content] rogues they need to have a nice tall glass of shut the [Removed for Content] up. Yes, you are a scout, but no, you shouldnt have the same damage output as an assassin or a ranger. Period! Its not just rogues though, but a great deal of the [Removed for Content] is coming from that direction. In all forms. From, whaaaa rangers hit too hard with their auto attack, to whaaaa rangers to hit percent is 95+, to OMGZ Tenderwood arrows have a +75 to hit on them, they are broken. Give me a break. For once, I would love if before they actually whined their way into nerfing a class, they would actually play the class. Then maybe they would understand, but most likely not. Funny, I dont recall them rolling out fixes for Swashys when everyone was talking about how insane their damage output was at the start of the expansion. Why is that? I dont remember them rushing out to fix Summoners when they were top DPS, hell they even gave necros a boost with lifeburn. So why is it whenever rangers are top on the parse everyone and their momma gets their panties in a bunch? And more important then that, why the hell do the devs insist on listening to them? Rothgar, I know you troll these forums because you play a ranger. Wanna chime in here? Maybe explain why it seems the devs want to keep rangers in the dog house, so to speak? As much as I hate PvP, this change stinks. You basicly take away the one way that a ranger is going to be able to take down anyone else 1 on 1 by nerfing their damage output. Its simple really, if the [Removed for Content] of PvP knew how to play their classes properly, they would greatly increase the chances of downing rangers all the time, rather then come crying on the forums about how they got sniper shotted by a ranger, and before they could even find their target they were dead. Keep a ranger close, and you'll have a dead ranger. Its simple really. If this change makes its way over to PvE, well thats just one more reason for me to hate PvP. With all the hate in PvE focused on rangers hitting 3 and 4k parses, the last thing I want to see is another nerf... however, Lockeye has already publicly stated I'm looking into crafted arrow balance as part of this update. As with anything I touch, you pretty much already know what to expect... We'll see how that goes. __________________

06-09-2007, 10:29 PM	#10
pseudocide Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 244	surveilance was bugged, none of the other spells in that line pulled w/o aggro, and idk how that has anything to do with pvp, freeps always social aggro. __________________

06-09-2007, 04:36 PM	#4
Janaka Server: Butcherblock Augur Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 51	Are you sure this isn't a high-end dps change for PVP only?

06-09-2007, 05:02 PM	#5
RoXx General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 187	[Removed for Content]? pve nerfed becaused of pvp? bring us some news? this is pretty standard nowadays..

06-09-2007, 06:08 PM	#6
stryker268 Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 30	Lol, my mistake. You are absolutely correct. It is "other shoe."

06-09-2007, 09:42 PM	#8
Aeralik Developer Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 672	At the start of that thread in the first paragraph, I talk about the damage reductions in pvp across the board. These mechanics already exist but we are now using modifiers based on level range. So high level rangers will see lower ranged auto attack damage while fighting in PvP. In PvE fights damage calculations remain the same. Nothing to see here other than some misunderstanding of the PvP balancing.

06-09-2007, 10:03 PM	#9
stryker268 Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 30	That is a major relief Chris. Thank you for clearing that up. Someone had said that the damage tweak for ranged auto-attack was going to be addresses on the PVE portion of GU36. I searched and searched for this but could not find where you had said that. So again, my apologies for getting it wrong. Just keep in mind that as a class we are defined only on our ability do do damage in PVE. Also as a class we have seen too many PVP nerfs and up limiting our abilites in PVE. An example of this being our Survelience not being viable as a means to pull a tough mob out of a crowd of social mobs anymore. Yet wizards and coercers have the Concussive ability which still does exactly what Suvelience used to.

06-09-2007, 11:52 PM	#11
stryker268 Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 30	The survelience but was "fixed" because people were using it in pvp by casting it on a pet while in city and making them engage without actually attacking. One of the rangers on my server did it in a tradeskill instance and got over 100p from the person he killed. It was changed soon after that.

06-10-2007, 07:32 AM	#12
Dextera Server: Antonia Bayle Guild: Mayhem Rank: Raiders Loremaster Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 145	stryker268 wrote: Just keep in mind that as a class we are defined only on our ability do do damage in PVE. Also as a class we have seen too many PVP nerfs and up limiting our abilites in PVE. An example of this being our Survelience not being viable as a means to pull a tough mob out of a crowd of social mobs anymore. Yet wizards and coercers have the Concussive ability which still does exactly what Suvelience used to. Haha. A player, telling a Dev, how the game works. C'mon now... really? lol. __________________

06-10-2007, 12:34 PM	#13
Gareorn Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,144	Dextera@Antonia Bayle wrote: stryker268 wrote: Just keep in mind that as a class we are defined only on our ability do do damage in PVE. Also as a class we have seen too many PVP nerfs and up limiting our abilites in PVE. An example of this being our Survelience not being viable as a means to pull a tough mob out of a crowd of social mobs anymore. Yet wizards and coercers have the Concussive ability which still does exactly what Suvelience used to. Haha. A player, telling a Dev, how the game works. C'mon now... really? lol. You must be new around here. There are dozens of examples in these threads where players taught a dev a thing or two about how an aspect of the game works. As a matter of fact, I believe the devs encourage feedback. __________________ Leader of the vast right-wing conspiricy... Hiding from the world's smartest woman in a bunker under a Hooter's restaurant.

06-10-2007, 12:36 PM	#14
Terrius Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Canada, We have Hockey and Beer, eh! Posts: 505	This is the second time the PVP changes have been posted like they will effect PvE, Stop stiring up trouble, PVP doesnt effect PvE. IF it's on the PVP board chances are it wont effect us normal PvE players.

06-10-2007, 12:40 PM	#15
Gareorn Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,144	Terrius@Antonia Bayle wrote: This is the second time the PVP changes have been posted like they will effect PvE, Stop stiring up trouble, PVP doesnt effect PvE. IF it's on the PVP board chances are it wont effect us normal PvE players. lol, funny stuff. A paladin coming to the ranger forums to tell a ranger to stop stirring up trouble. Priceless. __________________ Leader of the vast right-wing conspiricy... Hiding from the world's smartest woman in a bunker under a Hooter's restaurant.

06-10-2007, 06:56 PM	#16
stryker268 Loremaster Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 30	Gareorn wrote: Terrius@Antonia Bayle wrote: This is the second time the PVP changes have been posted like they will effect PvE, Stop stiring up trouble, PVP doesnt effect PvE. IF it's on the PVP board chances are it wont effect us normal PvE players. lol, funny stuff. A paladin coming to the ranger forums to tell a ranger to stop stirring up trouble. Priceless. I agree. Gareorn. And even funnier is the fact that his claim that PVP won't make a difference in PVE is incorrect. Even if the damage modifications don't change anything in PVE ( which i am not totally convinced will be the case) you still have the fact that one of our basic buff lines is going to change from in combat to out of combat run speed. A change to the AA line isn't limited to just PVP as far as I know. It may be a little less relevent but it is still a change that was brought about by PVP. And as for the "stirring up trouble", I am only trying to make as many people aware of the changes being made as possible. More people with this information means that there will be more people to give feedback and state their opinions.

06-10-2007, 07:46 PM	#17
TerriBlades Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 588	I guess we should be glad the Dev Tracker is broken, if not for that, Im sure this thread would have been flooded by ppl that cant play, and dont understand how rangers work, doing nothing but cheering over nerfs. Dev Stalkers FTMFL! __________________

06-11-2007, 02:17 AM	#18
Terrius Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Canada, We have Hockey and Beer, eh! Posts: 505	Yeah, I'm a Paladin, a Mystic, and Illusionist, a Fury, a Ranger and a Dirge. If you had station access and had taken the effort to search for my alts you'd already know that... anyways, Incombat runspeed wont effect my Ranger at all, not sure why it matters. I can already get away from anything with my 65% sprint, and this post started as a "the sky is falling!" thread, which always stirs up trouble. If it's going to effect PvE it will be on Test soon, but until it is a fact dont state that it's a nerf to PvE unless you are 100% sure.

06-11-2007, 03:07 AM	#19
Terrius Loremaster Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Canada, We have Hockey and Beer, eh! Posts: 505	I didnt mean to be insulting in any form, but I hate threads that end with the class fighting amoungst itself and demeaning it's community, i'm sure this will effect some people, i'm just not sure how it'll effect me until it hits test.

06-11-2007, 04:18 AM	#20
xandez Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,044	its a known fact that PvP WILL affect PvE. yes, i know its stated (has been and will be) that it will NOT affect. However, this has NOT been the case and i will believe otherwise when the unbelievable happens (PvE unaffected by PvP) (it would not be so difficult to make it so that it would not affect, would it?) ++Xan __________________ One can survive everything, nowadays, except death, and live down everything except a good reputation.

06-11-2007, 06:20 AM	#21
Shadowdragoon Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 113	TerriBlades wrote: I guess we should be glad the Dev Tracker is broken, if not for that, Im sure this thread would have been flooded by ppl that cant play, and dont understand how rangers work, doing nothing but cheering over nerfs. Dev Stalkers FTMFL! And most who used devtracker probably uses the list of devs Targ posted in http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/...topic_id=365608 to keep following the devs.. __________________ Feed Me!

06-11-2007, 07:10 AM	#22
Merkad General Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 246	Just to add an example to Gareorn's post to Dextera (since I dislike it when no examples are given in this sort of context), Blackguard or Moorguard, I do forget which, once posted shortly after KoS launched and we received the proc change, that if Rangers were doing 50%+ damage from procs, then something was wrong...we were doing 50-60% damage from procs before then, and they did not even know (which was why so many complained, and we stayed in that heavily nerfed state for a decent while). A more recent example would be a Dev stating that auto attack does not make up the majority of our dps, probably true if you don't have a high end bow/ammo set up (think he had a wurm destroyer shortbow), but for the high end, it is not true. I have a RSB, so my auto attack damage percentage is usually in the mid to high 40s, and with a 9 second delay bow, I proc a lot more on auto attack than CAs. Not that I am saying Devs are clueless, but being a Dev does not make them omnipotent either. People are still just people at the end of the day. Merkades, 70th ranger. Siege, Najena.

06-11-2007, 11:39 AM	#23
Gareorn Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,144	Terrius@Antonia Bayle wrote: Yeah, I'm a Paladin, a Mystic, and Illusionist, a Fury, a Ranger and a Dirge. If you had station access and had taken the effort to search for my alts you'd already know that... anyways, Incombat runspeed wont effect my Ranger at all, not sure why it matters. I can already get away from anything with my 65% sprint, and this post started as a "the sky is falling!" thread, which always stirs up trouble. If it's going to effect PvE it will be on Test soon, but until it is a fact dont state that it's a nerf to PvE unless you are 100% sure. Nah, I choose not to spend my money on station access. Besides, it seems someone is always willing to tell me that if I had station access I'd know... Then they proceed to give me the information for free. I too have many alts, as I'm sure most of us do. I don't really consider it a pass to go to those forums and stir the pot. But that's just me. I didn't mean anything personal, I was just pointing out your post because I thought it was funny. I believe I used the word "priceless." I also want to point out, the OP did not make a "sky is falling" post. It is consistent with what we already know. We are constantly told "changes are being made to PvP only", and almost everytime that turns out to be false. I'll believe it when I see it. __________________ Leader of the vast right-wing conspiricy... Hiding from the world's smartest woman in a bunker under a Hooter's restaurant.

06-12-2007, 06:56 AM	#24
Rabbitoh Loremaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 79	Aeralik wrote: At the start of that thread in the first paragraph, I talk about the damage reductions in pvp across the board. These mechanics already exist but we are now using modifiers based on level range. So high level rangers will see lower ranged auto attack damage while fighting in PvP. In PvE fights damage calculations remain the same. Nothing to see here other than some misunderstanding of the PvP balancing. Answer me this, How is a ranger suppose to keep range if our leg shot is getting nerfed and our root is getting nerfed. We will have no in combat run speed to get us range and if i am mistaken every class will sprint at 40%? Please answer this simple question, as i have taken alot of time perfecting killing all classes. It seems SOE is bowing to whining forum people who complain about being killed by classes and refuse to use their wasted complaining energy in actually learning how to play their own class. Take away burst dps from rangers and assasins and we offer nothing to a group in pvp. Also what will happen to our AA lines and Cloak of flames buff that increases our in combat speed. You take away our in combat run speed, leave us with crappy melee attacks and rangers will be sitting there with no way to get range, being fresh meat for all classes to kill. Thank god for track and evac, at least i can look good on the battle field permanetly immuned at the revive points. All i can see in the proposed GU 36 is the death of 2 fun classes to play, the ranger and the assasin. At least Brigs and swashies will still offer things to a group. Molok, Ranger of Vigilante. Naggy server.

06-12-2007, 02:57 PM	#25
Kradun Loremaster Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 121	Rabbitoh wrote: Aeralik wrote: At the start of that thread in the first paragraph, I talk about the damage reductions in pvp across the board. These mechanics already exist but we are now using modifiers based on level range. So high level rangers will see lower ranged auto attack damage while fighting in PvP. In PvE fights damage calculations remain the same. Nothing to see here other than some misunderstanding of the PvP balancing. Answer me this, How is a ranger suppose to keep range if our leg shot is getting nerfed and our root is getting nerfed. We will have no in combat run speed to get us range and if i am mistaken every class will sprint at 40%? Please answer this simple question, as i have taken alot of time perfecting killing all classes. It seems SOE is bowing to whining forum people who complain about being killed by classes and refuse to use their wasted complaining energy in actually learning how to play their own class. Take away burst dps from rangers and assasins and we offer nothing to a group in pvp. Also what will happen to our AA lines and Cloak of flames buff that increases our in combat speed. You take away our in combat run speed, leave us with crappy melee attacks and rangers will be sitting there with no way to get range, being fresh meat for all classes to kill. Thank god for track and evac, at least i can look good on the battle field permanetly immuned at the revive points. All i can see in the proposed GU 36 is the death of 2 fun classes to play, the ranger and the assasin. At least Brigs and swashies will still offer things to a group. Molok, Ranger of Vigilante. Naggy server. Adjust. You can't say you didn't think the game wouldn't ever change against your favor. The brigands by far have it much worse than us.

06-12-2007, 03:00 PM	#26
pseudocide Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 244	cry me a river and while your at it, delete this whine-fest of a thread __________________

06-12-2007, 04:14 PM	#27
Gareorn Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,144	After giving this some thought, I don't think this change should really affect PvE. I was initially angry about the dev telling another class, that if he didn't feel rangers were nerfed enough, to just send feedback (paraphrasing obviously). But, since auto attack damage is already scaled down for PvP, they should be able to make changes to it independent of PvE. I'd also like to add that comments like "cry me a river" and "whine-fest" are totally irrelevent and unnecessary. __________________ Leader of the vast right-wing conspiricy... Hiding from the world's smartest woman in a bunker under a Hooter's restaurant.

06-12-2007, 04:37 PM	#28
Wytie Mouse Betrayer! Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 2,579	Gareorn wrote: I'd also like to add that comments like "cry me a river" and "whine-fest" are totally irrelevent and unnecessary. QFE I wish everyone got this __________________

06-12-2007, 05:29 PM	#29
pseudocide Loremaster Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 244	Gareorn wrote: After giving this some thought, I don't think this change should really affect PvE. I was initially angry about the dev telling another class, that if he didn't feel rangers were nerfed enough, to just send feedback (paraphrasing obviously). But, since auto attack damage is already scaled down for PvP, they should be able to make changes to it independent of PvE. I'd also like to add that comments like "cry me a river" and "whine-fest" are totally irrelevent and unnecessary. i'm sorry, but threads like this are irrelevent and unnecessary. All i see from this thread is COMPLAINING, nothing constructive or insightful, just complaining, and most of it is complaining about a problem that never existed in the first place. __________________

06-12-2007, 07:46 PM	#30
Salonkolya Scholar Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 43	"Incombat runspeed wont effect my Ranger at all, not sure why it matters." Only way I've found so far to beat the hardest mobs i need for quests in restricted space is to use root/stun/knock-down and back up enough to get off a bow-shot before they close the gap. I hope the in-combat speed change won't effect that.