EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire

 

Go Back   EQ2 Forum Archive @ EQ2Wire > EverQuest II > Class Discussion > Scout's Den > Ranger
Members List Search Mark Forums Read

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-20-2010, 07:26 PM   #31
Writer Cal

Loremaster
Writer Cal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 700
Default

Thank you, Xelgad.  It's fantastic to see you post this.  Looking forward to trying the new changes when they come.  And I'll no longer have to cry when a dirge actually offers me spiffy buffs because I'll no longer have to say "Well, those don't actually do anything for me." SMILEY

Cheers! <3

__________________
~Daenee~

Member of the Tom Tobey Fan Club since 2010.

Homeshow Designs:

Deluxe Seaside Cottage

Reckoning Goes Corporate
Writer Cal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 07:30 PM   #32
Neiloch

Loremaster
Neiloch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,430
Default

Xelgad wrote:

Greetings, Mighty Forces!
 
AE Auto-Attack and Flurry are indeed on the way for bows.  We're also removing the 20% damage penalty for bows, and we're increasing the damage rating on all 81-90 bows (along with throwing weapons) by about 10%.  The intent is to allow you guys to get full benefit from buffs and gear, not to make the class entirely focused on Auto-Attack.
You know how you get more auto-attack damage from your melee weapons in many cases than from your bow? These changes should fix that, unless your melee weapons are simply of much higher quality than your bow.  At most, your auto-attack may jump from ~20% of your parse up to ~30% on raids, but I'd be surprised if many people end up with it higher than that.
Thanks for all of your feedback.

Thanks!

Bow itemization was rough until mythicals came around. Sentinels Fate let us use other bows and it was...better than bow itemization before it. The raid seal bow closed a gap but I still think it was a bit too close in damage ot the Toxx bow but /shrug.

If we are leaning on bows more, 'ranger' bows need to be more common drops through progression than it has in the past. Might see it as a overkill since only one class uses them as a main weapon, but with bow procs going off combat hits and stats being more universal, other classes would use them. Same as rangers picking up certain melee weapons for stats. If we see some new bows with flurry and auto AE on them in the future I'm SURE they would be wanting to snag them up heh.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 07:32 PM   #33
Striikor
Server: Nektulos
Guild: Purgatory
Rank: Raid Team

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 480
Default

Xelgad wrote:

Greetings, Mighty Forces!
 
AE Auto-Attack and Flurry are indeed on the way for bows.  We're also removing the 20% damage penalty for bows, and we're increasing the damage rating on all 81-90 bows (along with throwing weapons) by about 10%.  The intent is to allow you guys to get full benefit from buffs and gear, not to make the class entirely focused on Auto-Attack.
You know how you get more auto-attack damage from your melee weapons in many cases than from your bow? These changes should fix that, unless your melee weapons are simply of much higher quality than your bow.  At most, your auto-attack may jump from ~20% of your parse up to ~30% on raids, but I'd be surprised if many people end up with it higher than that.
Thanks for all of your feedback.

I have to say Xelgad, classy sense of self deprecating humor there SMILEY You posting in this thread is MUCH appreciated.

What you are setting about to do will certainly help, so thank you.

We still have to deal with the grouping logic that leaves us without buffs to compete, hopefully you are looking into that. Not to mean that I/we are looking for utility per se. But we are viewed as group 4 candidates along wiht several other classes. In my case usually a Brig and a Monk, we offer very little to each other in the way of buffs.

__________________


“The thirst for equality can express itself either as a desire to draw everyone down to one's level, or to raise oneself and everyone else up.”

Friedrich Nietzsche

“There are two tragedies in life. One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it.”

George Bernard Shaw
Striikor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 07:41 PM   #34
jjlo69

Loremaster
jjlo69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 364
Default

when are these changes gonna make it to test or are they just gonna go strait to live ????

Uncle

jjlo69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 07:46 PM   #35
kartikeya

Loremaster
kartikeya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 387
Default

I've decided this post needs more <3. So <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 <3

<3

__________________
kartikeya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 07:56 PM   #36
Striikor
Server: Nektulos
Guild: Purgatory
Rank: Raid Team

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 480
Default

Gaige wrote:

Assassins rely on stealth and a huge portion of our DPS relies on about 9 CAs, 8 of which require stealth.  If you use concealment at the wrong time and its interrupted, you're screwed.

Ranger is far, far easier to play.

I would have to disagree somewhat. Achieving the sweet spot, AA timing and our longer casts are constantly interrupted so they can be as big a challenge as the concealment chain. I have both and find them close to equal, though challenges are different. My ranger has a ~200K Sniper that seems to get interrupted just after I trigger coverage. While the concealment chain is more vulnerable it produces twice the damage. I do prefer the Ranger soooo ..... maybe it is easier. But certainly between the two the Ranger has a larger fun factor.

__________________


“The thirst for equality can express itself either as a desire to draw everyone down to one's level, or to raise oneself and everyone else up.”

Friedrich Nietzsche

“There are two tragedies in life. One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it.”

George Bernard Shaw
Striikor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 08:27 PM   #37
Carpediem
Server: Antonia Bayle
Guild: Azure Skies
Rank: Raider

Loremaster
Carpediem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 208
Default

First, thank you very much Xelgad!!!!

I'm guessing these are the first of what might become a few changes (unfortunately if a dev says that he will get hounded forever) since they have plans of making us more of a ranged class than having to sit so close.

This is a very good start though. Fixing the broken mechanics gives them a base line where we stand before they need to do anything else with CA's.

I honestly think the best way to make us a more ranged class is to shorten the reuse on our ranged CA's that have the same damage as the melee ones so they're up fast enough that we don't have to stand close to use the melee CA's when our ranged ones are down.

So, lower-medium damage CA's with long reuse timers like miracle shot and triple shot could be brought down to maybe 15 second recasts, make bloody reminder a ranged CA and maybe turn arrow rip into a ranged CA.

This would leave the important melee CA's that low level rangers need to level, like immobilzing lunge and our quick attack intact and we wouldn't need to rely on them at higher levels when we want to be fully ranged because we won't run out of ranged CA's.

Carpediem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 09:15 PM   #38
Neiloch

Loremaster
Neiloch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,430
Default

if I had to choose one thing with CA's it would be lower the reuse on ranged CA's. This would enact increasing ranged CA DPS simply because we can use them more often in a set amount of time, and let us be at least more ranged by not forcing us to close in to keep using attacks.

The problem that could still come up here though is if even if we can stay ranged, closing in to do our better melee CA's could still result in better DPS. This is the real problem. Ranged CA's DPS have to be increased to the point where they will either match or beat a CA rotation that includes melee CA's for rangers to ever truly be 'pure ranged' in the eye's of min/max'ers.

Right now with the Miragul charm I can use such highly effective attacks such as Bloody Reminder, Sneak Attack, Ranger's Blade, Immobilizing Lunge, Noxious Enfeeblement at 20 meters, which is enough for the typical jousting range (15 meters). Now if I could use those along with Emberstrike and Lightning Strike at 20 meters WITHOUT needing to have Collected Memories of the Betrayer (miragul charm) equipped, I would be willing to call that a 'purely ranged' ranger.

But like I said, even if you make it where we have ranged CA's up all the time, doesn't mean it will be good enough if going into melee (5-10 meters) still gets us a higher parse. I would call a purely ranged ranger one that can do their maximum possible parse at the distance of at least 20 meters if not more.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 09:27 PM   #39
Writer Cal

Loremaster
Writer Cal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 700
Default

For being "more ranged":  I'd say just up the max range of our melee CAs.  Then they work the same for close range for low levels, and allow a ranger to still do their max damage RANGED.

__________________
~Daenee~

Member of the Tom Tobey Fan Club since 2010.

Homeshow Designs:

Deluxe Seaside Cottage

Reckoning Goes Corporate
Writer Cal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 09:41 PM   #40
Sydares

Loremaster
Sydares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 700
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

For being "more ranged":  I'd say just up the max range of our melee CAs.  Then they work the same for close range for low levels, and allow a ranger to still do their max damage RANGED.

QFE.

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 09:49 PM   #41
Neiloch

Loremaster
Neiloch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,430
Default

[email protected] Bayle wrote:

For being "more ranged":  I'd say just up the max range of our melee CAs.  Then they work the same for close range for low levels, and allow a ranger to still do their max damage RANGED.

lol [Removed for Content] someone saying what i said but with more brevity. Yes make our awesome melee Ca's reach 20 meters kkthx.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 10:06 PM   #42
Toxicz
Server: Nagafen
Guild: Laser Beam Attack Walrus
Rank: Joffrey Baratheon

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 158
Default

So please explain to me how this is going to effect rangers in pvp? There arguably the best pvp class in the game, they can hit players harder than anyone else.. so please how is this going to effect pvp?

Toxicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 10:19 PM   #43
Lodor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 237
Default

Rangers arent even in the top 5 pvp classes now days, lol.

Lodor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 10:31 PM   #44
Gaige

Loremaster
Gaige's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
Default

Xelgad wrote:

Hopefully with the Guardian changes in a few weeks.

80k auto attacks means I'm betraying back.  Will be nice to afk through raids and still parse top 3.

The pendulum swings again!

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 10:57 PM   #45
Gaige

Loremaster
Gaige's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Arizona
Posts: 9,500
Default

[email protected] wrote:

I would have to disagree somewhat. Achieving the sweet spot, AA timing and our longer casts are constantly interrupted so they can be as big a challenge as the concealment chain. 

I've raided top end extensively on both and ranger is easier.  Nothing about ranger is challenging and you don't lose out on almost half of your parse because stealth gets interrupted.  Its not even comparable.

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 11:23 PM   #46
Sydares

Loremaster
Sydares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 700
Default

So, maybe this is the wrong place to bring it up, but... (hey, it's a bow, so...) are we ever gonna see our Mythical buff changed to something useful to compensate for having the minimum range stripped?

A chance to proc 60% arrow conserve isn't exactly in the same league as, say, 15% Passive Flurry. (Assassins)

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2010, 11:35 PM   #47
Boise

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 229
Default

Xelgad wrote:

Greetings, Mighty Forces!
 
AE Auto-Attack and Flurry are indeed on the way for bows.  We're also removing the 20% damage penalty for bows, and we're increasing the damage rating on all 81-90 bows (along with throwing weapons) by about 10%.  The intent is to allow you guys to get full benefit from buffs and gear, not to make the class entirely focused on Auto-Attack.
You know how you get more auto-attack damage from your melee weapons in many cases than from your bow? These changes should fix that, unless your melee weapons are simply of much higher quality than your bow.  At most, your auto-attack may jump from ~20% of your parse up to ~30% on raids, but I'd be surprised if many people end up with it higher than that.
Thanks for all of your feedback.

First, there are no rangers that are doing 20% dps auto-attack w/ their bows. I have not seen on ACT parse to prove me otherwise. Second, rangers "normally" do @25% auto-attack w/ bows, and you are giving us a 10% boost? So, now we will be more dependant on our bows than ever while our CAs fall far behind.

I just feel this whole update for rangers is all about bow damage and nothing else. This "quick" fix will probably bite all rangers in the rear in the long run.

Boise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 12:02 AM   #48
Alenna
Server: Guk
Guild: Defenders of the Light
Rank: Count

Loremaster
Alenna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,938
Default

Boise wrote:

Xelgad wrote:

Greetings, Mighty Forces!
 
AE Auto-Attack and Flurry are indeed on the way for bows.  We're also removing the 20% damage penalty for bows, and we're increasing the damage rating on all 81-90 bows (along with throwing weapons) by about 10%.  The intent is to allow you guys to get full benefit from buffs and gear, not to make the class entirely focused on Auto-Attack.
You know how you get more auto-attack damage from your melee weapons in many cases than from your bow? These changes should fix that, unless your melee weapons are simply of much higher quality than your bow.  At most, your auto-attack may jump from ~20% of your parse up to ~30% on raids, but I'd be surprised if many people end up with it higher than that.
Thanks for all of your feedback.

First, there are no rangers that are doing 20% dps auto-attack w/ their bows. I have not seen on ACT parse to prove me otherwise. Second, rangers "normally" do @25% auto-attack w/ bows, and you are giving us a 10% boost? So, now we will be more dependant on our bows than ever while our CAs fall far behind.

I just fee this whole update for rangers is all about bow damage and nothing else. This "quick" fix will probably bite all rangers in the rear in the long run.

Why don't we see wait to what happens this may be the first step.

__________________
Alenna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 12:16 AM   #49
Toxicz
Server: Nagafen
Guild: Laser Beam Attack Walrus
Rank: Joffrey Baratheon

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 158
Default

Lodor wrote:

Rangers arent even in the top 5 pvp classes now days, lol.

You either don't pvp, or have never seen a good ranger in pvp.

Toxicz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 02:55 AM   #50
TheSpin

Loremaster
TheSpin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,587
Default

Ok... so my ranger is currently the main character I'm focusing on, however I will admit my eq2 knowledge is more broad in the overall game than it is deep in one specific area such as the ranger class.  I do have some suggestions though that I think are beneficial.

If a ranger is truly going to become more ranged focus, why have stealth melee attacks at all?  I think the abilities Sneak Attack, Emberstrike, and Ranger's Blade should be adjusted in some way to make them useful in both ranged and melee combat.

As far as bringing 'something else' to a group I have a suggestion too.  Change Arrow Rip to a buff that grants a CA.  On ourselves the buff gives us what we have now, but If we put the buff on a different scout they get a higher damage CA .  On a fighter it becomes a medium damage and hate position increase CA.  This is kind of in the same spirit as the fury single target heal, which can be given to another group member.

Lastly... If assassins have a skill that does great damage, but you have to lead up to it by casting a bunch of skills in a certain order and/or timeframe...  give rangers something similar.  I don't want to play the easymode version of an assassin.  Maybe Sniper Shot would be a good candidate to be the CA that is adjusted.

These are just some rough ideas.  I'm sure if they have any merit others who are more experienced with the class would be able to think of more specific ways to implement them.

edit:  Probably more of a solo/casual player request, but how about change the 'bladed opening' AA attack into a 'bladed finishing' attack.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody really wants to start their fights out with a weak AA attack, but a lot of times having something a little extra at the end of a fight can save ya from using a real worthwhile CA.

TheSpin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 03:13 AM   #51
Neiloch

Loremaster
Neiloch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,430
Default

Well I imagine these changes will go to test first. Plus I'm sure its mostly ground work being laid before Velious and changes it brings, besides the obvious immediate benefits.

Also if his numbers of 'increase' he used are right, using my damage numbers on a ZW, ~25% being auto attack, these changes will make MY auto damage go up about 2k DPS. Not quite an AFK-T1 dps level increase.

EDIT: Found a much higher overall parse of mine, theoretically increase would be 3500 DPS increase on the really high end. This isn't gonna do much in closing the gaps between me and the people beating me heh. If it resulted in a 10k increase, might tie me up. Although I won't deny rangers in lower performing guilds would see a bigger increase in their share of the raid DPS.

Remember not to just add 20% and 10% to 25% either lol. Its 10% and 20% OF 25%. So the amount of increasing not factoring in flurry and auto AE that Xelgad said is about right even if its a little on the low end. Factoring Flurry and auto AE is difficult to say the least without some practical tests.

I've been told, by multiple assassins actually heh, that flurry and auto AE won't be the holy grail of DPS increase so certainly don't hope they will think it is now for some reason. Seriously its right now, "fine have auto ae and flurry won't do much", add it with about a 3k base increase and becomes, "OMGWTFBBQ OP'd!!!111"...what?

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 11:13 AM   #52
Striikor
Server: Nektulos
Guild: Purgatory
Rank: Raid Team

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 480
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Lodor wrote:

Rangers arent even in the top 5 pvp classes now days, lol.

You either don't pvp, or have never seen a good ranger in pvp.

Hmmm and how many rangers have you seen that can take down an equally equipped SK, Zerker, Bruiser, Warlock, Warden or Inquisitor in a one on one situation?

We do have our strengths in BG but I guarantee that even a Brig can take down ranger if they get close before the ranger sees them. In fact many of the nerfs we have had to deal with in PvE came from PvP whining.

__________________


“The thirst for equality can express itself either as a desire to draw everyone down to one's level, or to raise oneself and everyone else up.”

Friedrich Nietzsche

“There are two tragedies in life. One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it.”

George Bernard Shaw
Striikor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 07:36 PM   #53
Darchon6

Loremaster
Darchon6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 166
Default

double post - disregard.

__________________
Koldsteel Bladestorm

90 Assassin

Tyranny

Oasis
Darchon6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 08:14 PM   #54
Darchon6

Loremaster
Darchon6's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 166
Default

Xelgad wrote:

Greetings, Mighty Forces!
 
AE Auto-Attack and Flurry are indeed on the way for bows.  We're also removing the 20% damage penalty for bows, and we're increasing the damage rating on all 81-90 bows (along with throwing weapons) by about 10%.  The intent is to allow you guys to get full benefit from buffs and gear, not to make the class entirely focused on Auto-Attack.
You know how you get more auto-attack damage from your melee weapons in many cases than from your bow? These changes should fix that, unless your melee weapons are simply of much higher quality than your bow.  At most, your auto-attack may jump from ~20% of your parse up to ~30% on raids, but I'd be surprised if many people end up with it higher than that.
Thanks for all of your feedback.

Are you going to limit the effectiveness of AE auto-attack and flurry for bows and two-handers to make them comparable to the damage bonuses provided for dual wielding classes?  Currently, these attributes only apply to the primary weapon for dual wielders, making it less effective for them than rangers w/ their bows (after your proposed modifications) and fighters w/ two-handers due to the difference in base damage output for a single weapon.  If you don't plan to limit the effectiveness, you'll have to compensate dual wielders by making AE auto-attack strike each target in AoE twice (with only the first hit triggering procs) rather than once and make flurry affect our offhand auto-attack swings as well.

Possible limitations include restricting the maximum number of flurry hits to 2 rather than 4 for bows / two-handers and reducing the base damage of AoE auto-attacks by 50% in order to put the bonuses on par with dual wielding classes.

To all you assassin haters - I know that rangers have been comparitively less desirable in raids than assassins since T7, but it's not an excuse to make them more effective than us at their primary role.  We all know what the final outcome would be - assassins betraying to rangers and die-hard assassins being replaced with rangers in raid guilds due to the difference in damage output.  It's happened before with other classes.

Those points aside, how exactly do you plan to implement AE auto-attack for bows?  Will rangers face the same range limitations as melee classes?  What advantage will melee classes have to compensate for the range difference now that damage values are mostly equal?  Should I just betray?  /boggle

With the upcoming changes to ranged auto-attack, perhaps you should consider boosting the base range of melee auto-attack to match the average range of our combat arts.  "Target is too far away" while the target is moving can cost us thousands of dps mostly due to the fact that NPC movement isn't fully synchronized between the client and server.  The location of the NPC which you perceive from your end is often half a second behind schedule.

Also, you should consider giving melee-classes the option to boost the hit bonus of our attacks to match those found on arrows.  Just the same, it would have to be a consumable item at a comparable cost.

As the mechanics developer of this game, I hope that you've considered the repercussions of equalizing the base auto-attack damage output of bows and dual wield weapons while giving them the "full" benefit of flurry / AE auto.  Don't disappoint me (in other words, force me to betray since the grass is greener on the other side)

__________________
Koldsteel Bladestorm

90 Assassin

Tyranny

Oasis
Darchon6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 09:53 PM   #55
Candoor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 21
Default

Gaige wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

I would have to disagree somewhat. Achieving the sweet spot, AA timing and our longer casts are constantly interrupted so they can be as big a challenge as the concealment chain. 

I've raided top end extensively on both and ranger is easier.  Nothing about ranger is challenging and you don't lose out on almost half of your parse because stealth gets interrupted.  Its not even comparable.

Despite poor sins being so severly challenged they still manage to out dps rangers by a mofo bucket load.....

ZOMG I have to get my concealment chain just right and crap I havent this fight but i still out dps'ed a ranger comfortably.... by 10k dps instead of 30k.

Yes Ive played both classes too on the same toon and respect sins click faster...and have to get ffu chain just right to max their stuff out... but even if they dont... they stil leave rangers for dust right now.

So where is the difficulty in maxing dps on a sin assuming a reasonably well played toon with half decent gear?    Ranger maxing is all based on making the most of crappy mechanics on top of having the right gear.   If FFU wasnt broken 1 out of 3 just how much more dps would a sin do when they are already the defacto melee dps class?

I see a lot more crappy rangers than assassins.    So still debate if your point is valid tbh.

Candoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 10:08 PM   #56
Neiloch

Loremaster
Neiloch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,430
Default

I'm just gonna be a [Removed for Content] and say i have ZERO sympathy for assassins, former-rangers or otherwise. Been riding high and easy for literally YEARS straight, one bump of rangers POSSIBLY doing more DPS and then more than likely knocked down isn't gonna hurt your precious baby bottoms. And don't start crying about 'well we are gonna get replaced in our slots and blah blah blah' hey we've been living it for years. Shut up. You don't GET to whine.

You also keep forgetting ranger CA's blow HARD in comparison to Assassin CAs. To suggest some balance should be put in place to make the auto attack even when CA's aren't is ignorant to say the least. If our CA's aren't going to get adjusted our auto attack SHOULD be better in every single way for proper balance.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 10:18 PM   #57
Lodor

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 237
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Lodor wrote:

Rangers arent even in the top 5 pvp classes now days, lol.

You either don't pvp, or have never seen a good ranger in pvp.

Lol, I have a 90 ranger (plus 3 other 90s) and pvped as one off and on since eof era when they were truelly the top pvp class.

Crusaders, and near all healers if played and geared well will always beat a ranger less they majorly mess up.

Lodor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2010, 10:47 PM   #58
Corwinus

Loremaster
Corwinus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 196
Default

Darchon6 wrote:

...

To all you assassin haters - I know that rangers have been comparitively less desirable in raids than assassins since T7, but it's not an excuse to make them more effective than us at their primary role.  We all know what the final outcome would be - assassins betraying to rangers and die-hard assassins being replaced with rangers in raid guilds due to the difference in damage output.  It's happened before with other classes.

...

As the mechanics developer of this game, I hope that you've considered the repercussions of equalizing the base auto-attack damage output of bows and dual wield weapons while giving them the "full" benefit of flurry / AE auto.  Don't disappoint me (in other words, force me to betray since the grass is greener on the other side)

Koldsteel, there is no assassin haters here and I am sure there is no need for you to betray so forget the drama.

Assassins are still wanted more in raids than Rangers be it for pure dps (look at your CAs reuse timers and damage) or hate transfer to the tank.

Xelgad gives us a glimmer of hope with the bow mechanics and it concerns auto attack which represents now only about 30% ouf our dps output. If as he says it adds 20% more damage on auto attack we are talking about an increase of 6% of overall dps. so you still outparse Rangers, no need to whine unless your real objective is just to bargain another little dps increase for assassins (well it used to work with Aeralik right?)

Corwin - Still a Ranger - Cotw - Oasis

Corwinus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2010, 09:43 AM   #59
Ballzz

Loremaster
Ballzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 42
Default

This is great news. I may have to reevaluate my opinion of Xelgad in light of this action. It may not be exactly what people want but it's *something* and it's at least a good start. At this point anything is welcomed. As for our CAs or giving us utility I still think they should add another component to FA that gives a group buff to Ability Reuse. This would not only help us for our CAs but would make us not so worthless to be grouped with and seems like it would be fairly easy to implement so long as it doesn't throw any major balance of power out of whack in groups.

I also don't agree that Ranger's are so EZ-mode. If it was so easy to play a Ranger why do they have such a bad rep for doing horrible damage while Assassins have a rep for playing half-[Removed for Content] and still outparsing Rangers and other classes? I mean if it's so easy then every Ranger..even horrible players should be able to parse well (at least well for a Ranger which isn't even the case). Also, if Ranger is so much easier than Assassin then why is it so easy for raiding Rangers to betray and add an immediate 10k+ dmg to their parse without even knowing the details of how to play an Assassin or even having their Master spells? Unless the numerous posts from people saying how easy it was to boost their damage by simply betraying were incorrect then this whole EZ-mode Ranger argument sounds pretty weak. 

The crying already from some Assassins about a change that hasn't even happened yet is pretty pathetic considering how far behind Rangers have been and how needed the changes are. Sins that are worth a [Removed for Content] will more than likely still outparse Rangers and they have utility in an aggro xfer and a nice ally DPS buff and Rangers have nothing in that dept. I seriously doubt Assassins are going to suddenly betray to Ranger because of this..with the exception of maybe former Rangers that felt they had to switch to Assassin for raid viability. Good lord.

__________________
Ballhaus 90/250 Ranger: 90 Woodworker, 450 Transmuter, 450 Adorner

Smallhaus 90/250 Warden: 90 Provisioner, 450 Transmuter
Ballzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2010, 11:49 AM   #60
Venez
Server: Unrest
Guild: Vendetta
Rank: Member

Loremaster
Venez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 112
Default

Xelgad wrote:

Greetings, Mighty Forces!
 
AE Auto-Attack and Flurry are indeed on the way for bows.  We're also removing the 20% damage penalty for bows, and we're increasing the damage rating on all 81-90 bows (along with throwing weapons) by about 10%.  The intent is to allow you guys to get full benefit from buffs and gear, not to make the class entirely focused on Auto-Attack.
You know how you get more auto-attack damage from your melee weapons in many cases than from your bow? These changes should fix that, unless your melee weapons are simply of much higher quality than your bow.  At most, your auto-attack may jump from ~20% of your parse up to ~30% on raids, but I'd be surprised if many people end up with it higher than that.
Thanks for all of your feedback.

ROFL I think this is just great, remember all the posts I had about the bow modifier being nerfed with the Aeralik "arrow fix", and everyone telling me I was wrong........ya well kiss my lilly white /chuckle

Rangers have ALWAYS been balanced around there HUGH AUTO ATTACKS, higher than normal proc rates and the good ole sweet spot. Our DPS has been falling behind from the start of the -20% damage penelty, then it fell further with the standarization of all the procs,the implementation of much better rated melee weapons,lack luster Ranged AAs compared to some melee AAs, and just sucky mechaincs.

Right now melee auto attack still does more ext dps than ranged, so this fix should bring us back on par with melee auto dps. When we were parsing with Assassins we were doing MORE auto attack dps. This is because our CAs are FAR behind other T1 Dps class's.

So again just the 20% being added back is not going to bring us up to our counterparts, since in LU35? melee auto attack also recieved a +damage modifier to auto attack, but it is a very good start.

Im cautiously waiting to see what flurry/ae will do on bows, Im hopeing that all it does is equal out the +modifier that melee auto got back in LU35? and put us back to near that level. I do understand everyone freaking out about it possibly being OP and if it is I hope they just "tweak" it down in smaller increments instead of going WOOOO and destroying it and haveing it take years to get fixed.

__________________
a href='http://eq2players.station.sony.com/characters/character_profile.vm?characterId=937242202'>
Venez is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:46 AM.

vBulletin skin by: CompleteGFX.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All threads and posts originally from the EQ2 and Station forums operated by Sony Online Entertainment. Their use is by express written permission.