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 08-22-2010, 01:00 PM   #61
Gaige

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

[email protected] wrote:

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. 

Rangers were as good in RoK and TSO so this "years" straight is complete BS.  I betrayed from assassin to ranger in RoK and was immediately competitive on the parse and stayed that way throughout TSO.

Also its not "easy" - ranger is a lot easier in comparison in raid settings, as I've said numerous times.

Ballzz wrote:

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?

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? 

Ranger is a popular class and there are tons of crappy ones out there who have no idea how to setup their character.

That happens in SF because the mechanics are skewed so in favor of assassins that even if you're terrible you'll be better than you were as a ranger.

The reason I'm talking about betraying back already is because SOE can't do shifts in balance without screwing it up.  Guardian/SK for example?  One goes from best tank in the game to meaningless and the other becomes extremely overpowered and it has been that way for months and is just starting to get addressed.  What about illy/coercer?  Illy used to be omg amazing and then poof all the sudden they suck lol.  Its pretty obvious that doing sweeping changes like this all at once will so crazily overpower ranger auto attack that they will have the ability to compete just buy pressing their ranged auto attack button.

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2010, 01:55 PM   #62
Venez
Server: Unrest
Guild: Vendetta
Rank: Member

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

Gaige wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

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. 

Rangers were as good in RoK and TSO so this "years" straight is complete BS.  I betrayed from assassin to ranger in RoK and was immediately competitive on the parse and stayed that way throughout TSO.

Also its not "easy" - ranger is a lot easier in comparison in raid settings, as I've said numerous times.

Ballzz wrote:

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?

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? 

Ranger is a popular class and there are tons of crappy ones out there who have no idea how to setup their character.

That happens in SF because the mechanics are skewed so in favor of assassins that even if you're terrible you'll be better than you were as a ranger.

The reason I'm talking about betraying back already is because SOE can't do shifts in balance without screwing it up.  Guardian/SK for example?  One goes from best tank in the game to meaningless and the other becomes extremely overpowered and it has been that way for months and is just starting to get addressed.  What about illy/coercer?  Illy used to be omg amazing and then poof all the sudden they suck lol.  Its pretty obvious that doing sweeping changes like this all at once will so crazily overpower ranger auto attack that they will have the ability to compete just buy pressing their ranged auto attack button.

Rangers were not competive with Assassins in RoK because we had to use the RSB while melee dps kept getting upgrades. Melee could use there fabled myth / any new offhand. We didnt start to compete untill you were geared up and after another arrow/bow change, then you had to have Vol'drath or your full blown mythical, because if you used any bow besides the RSB you lost auto attack damage.EDIT: And this was not a short duration, iirc we had to wait almost the whole xpac before they fixed it.

And in TSO we (Defiance) didnt have a assassin, we actually havent had one since half thru RoK, so I cant compare versus our sin. All I can compare is the parse differance on flames and in chat channels, and those showed High End Assassins ahead of High End Rangers on almost every parse except most Avatars, and ahead by a fair amount, not a competitive amount.Even the parses you posted show you behind sins in TSO.

And now in SF it even further due to lots of things that have happened in the last 3 xpacs.

And im not talking average sins vs rangers, strictly high end raiding. And yes there are alot of very bad Rangers out there. But a average Assassin has outparsed a average Ranger for 3yrs now(if both are equally geared and mastered), and every parse post shows this to be true.

__________________
a href='http://eq2players.station.sony.com/characters/character_profile.vm?characterId=937242202'>
Venez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2010, 05:03 PM   #63
Ballzz

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

Gaige wrote:

Also its not "easy" - ranger is a lot easier in comparison in raid settings, as I've said numerous times.

Ballzz wrote:

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?

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? 

Ranger is a popular class and there are tons of crappy ones out there who have no idea how to setup their character.

That happens in SF because the mechanics are skewed so in favor of assassins that even if you're terrible you'll be better than you were as a ranger.

The reason I'm talking about betraying back already is because SOE can't do shifts in balance without screwing it up.  Guardian/SK for example?  One goes from best tank in the game to meaningless and the other becomes extremely overpowered and it has been that way for months and is just starting to get addressed.  What about illy/coercer?  Illy used to be omg amazing and then poof all the sudden they suck lol.  Its pretty obvious that doing sweeping changes like this all at once will so crazily overpower ranger auto attack that they will have the ability to compete just buy pressing their ranged auto attack button.

Ranger may be a popular class but only if you include non-raiding Rangers. You can't really include Rangers that only solo or do group or PVP content because Rangers are fine in those settings so who cares how many of them there are? I seriously doubt there are more raiding Rangers than raiding Assassins.

As for crappy Rangers..sure there are plenty but there are crappy Assassins as well and the fact that a poorly played Assassin or a freshly betrayed Ranger can not only equal but far surpass Ranger DPS without having a firm grasp of the class sort of discredits the idea that Rangers are so easy to play. You said it yourself. The mechanics so skewed in favor of Assassins. It doesn't matter if it's from skewed mechanics or something else. It's easier to put up higher parses as an Assassin whether they are played well or not. If only well played Assassins parsed well then I might agree but that is not the case and a poorly played Ranger isn't going to parse well... at all.

If getting a higher percentage of DPS from AA makes playing a Ranger somewhat easier it will only put them on par with Assassins in the difficulty department IMO but they will still need to go above and beyond AA dmg to maximize DPS so I don't think anyone will be able to sit there with only AA dmg and be competitive unless they are surrounded by seriously sub-par players.

__________________
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, 05:37 PM   #64
Neiloch

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

There's just no way, unless your playing with crappy DPS in your raids, these changes alone will not have rangers beating other T1 DPS performing classes. It's just groundwork to even stuff out for Velious. With both ae auto and flurry going in I can almost guarantee we are going to see A LOT more items and possibly skills with AE auto and flurry on them.

Honestly I was surprised at the 10% bump in ranged weapons they talked about. But the removal of the penalty and the long over due inclusion of AE auto and flurry need to be put in one way or another. will be nice not having to work under these ridiculous restrictions.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 12:54 AM   #65
Sydares

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

This is Gaige.

Gaige is troll.

Troll, Gaige, Troll.

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 01:44 AM   #66
Gaige

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

[email protected] wrote:

With both ae auto and flurry going in I can almost guarantee we are going to see A LOT more items and possibly skills with AE auto and flurry on them.

I can guarantee you that smart assassins will be using ranged auto attack and standing at 10m if they're smart.

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:21 AM   #67
kartikeya

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

I'm calling complete BS on that bit about competitive rangers in TSO. Maybe if you were Avatar geared in RoK, I don't know, I rejoined the raiding game late in that expansion, but TSO? BS, or your other DPS classes weren't pulling their own weight/weren't as well geared. SF compounded the problems and added a few new ones, but it didn't suddenly make them all appear out of thin air.

It's kind've cute how you've gone from 'oh, flurry and AE auto-attack aren't really that much of the parse, rangers will need more fixes than that' to 'zomg, rangers will be super easymode and will dominate so hard that all assassins are going to sit in the sweet-spot and macro their combat arts to ranged auto-attack' the moment these fixes are actually announced as coming. Save the complaining until if and when we get more adjustments. You said yourself that having bow mechanics fixed isn't going to threaten your precious parse. This is coming off as complaining for the sheer sake of whining about something.

__________________
kartikeya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:46 AM   #68
Neiloch

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

lol I still love that before when it wasn't confirmed I read posts and comments by multiple people that rangers wanting flurry and auto AE was stupid and wouldn't be much DPS. But now apparently its the end all, be all to auto attack DPS by people who don't even know how much the increase would actually be on paper and haven't played it on test. I thought rangers were the whiniest but apparently being pampered makes people cry a river when ranger's might possibly have the chance to get a better performing auto attack. Yes I know they didn't announce it with these damage increases either, but our auto attack DPS was already better than most, so if they will truly be op'd it would have been OP'd even without the damage increase.

Maybe rangers will get the bonus end of a special exception this time. That exception being only rangers can make Auto AE and flurry work off a bow. Know whats even greater about that? It makes PERFECT sense, why would anyone else be able to use a bow to its fullest extent like a ranger? People whining about it being ranger only wouldn't have a leg to stand on, would be like a 8 year old pouting and saying 'but but but its not FAIR!' Xelgad did say their coming 'for bows' so its also likely it will work for everyone. Plus I'm not sure if they are willing or even able to make the stats work like that.

Also can people who were rangers the day of these changes get a special title so we can be identified from the turncoats and fair weather players? lol

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 04:58 AM   #69
Sydares

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

[email protected] wrote:

our auto attack DPS was already better than most

It wasn't, though.

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 05:33 AM   #70
Neiloch

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

Well I was talking single target since we have no practical data for ranged AE auto comparison yet (wasn't possible). Obviously when people can AE with theirs and we can't with lots of adds, ours is gonna end up being less. Like on Maalus Imbued in Palace I tend to beat or at least match out everyone elses auto attack.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:37 AM   #71
Writer Cal

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

I like lemongrass chicken.  I also like bow fixes.  What does this have to do with this thread?  Not a clue.  Except lemongrass chicken + bow fixes = double tasty.

Also?  As much as certain people post about how rangers are inferior to assassins?  It's pretty funny when ranger fixes are incoming and certain posters instantly jump from the not enough crowd to the lolzomgisbad crowd.

In summary.  Lemongrass chicken is tasty.

__________________
~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 08-23-2010, 12:42 PM   #72
Striikor
Server: Nektulos
Guild: Purgatory
Rank: Raid Team

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 480
Default

Gaige wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

With both ae auto and flurry going in I can almost guarantee we are going to see A LOT more items and possibly skills with AE auto and flurry on them.

I can guarantee you that smart assassins will be using ranged auto attack and standing at 10m if they're smart.

And why is that? Most assassins I know disregard AA, I do. CA's create much more damage. Chain is much more important along with the procs off melee weapons and buffs. I only concentrate on AA timing whilst my CA's come back up (much more quickly than my Ranger)

No need to worry though Assassins will still get much better groups than a Ranger. Just do what I did, it does not take long. Run an Assassin and a Ranger.

For me it is tough to change my rhythm regarding  timing, position and jousting on a Ranger to an assassin ca spam and position. I admit stealth timing and trying to avoid interrupts on cancealment change can be a challenge.

AA for my ranger is ~20-25% of my DPS ~10-15% on my Sin. I fail to see how a max of 5% increase in damage (25%*20%) and flurry+AoE is going to make a dramatic difference. They are still not talking about getting Ranged procs across the board that are the same as melee.

Hopefully our Melee Ca range will change form 2 to 5 to 5 to 10 or something along those lines. That would help minimize DPS loss while constantly trying to get close enough and at the same time far enough for Ranged AA and CA's when they are up. A lot of mobs waste a few AutoAttacks because the box is not indicative of a 2-5 meter distance. Or the mob moves and you lose an AutoAttack and some CA's because they move too close.

On my assassin I just run up on the back of the mob and stay there, I try to make sure I trigger my concealment in between any aoe that may interrupt me. On my Assassin most of the CA's are quick enough I don't worry about them being interrupted. In fact Slip Away being instant cast and recast with  a .25 Recovery mean I am much quicker to recover on stealth Assassin attacks than I can on stealth Ranger attacks. My highest hitting Ranger attacks are stealth based and slow casting and if interrupted I am going to have to wait MUCH loner to re-stealth and try it again. Unless of course I am running PFT which my assassin has also. 

I would expect to get ~10% increase and I am often 10-20% and sometimes as much as 40% behind and equally equipped assassin (admittedly the groups we are in are much different.) I don't expect this to change dramatically, particularly if we are still without grouping logic. Grouping logic that Rangers don't have and that Assassin's and Swashy's still maintain.

__________________


“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 08-23-2010, 04:32 PM   #73
Boise

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 229
Default

Gaige wrote:

[email protected] wrote:

With both ae auto and flurry going in I can almost guarantee we are going to see A LOT more items and possibly skills with AE auto and flurry on them.

I can guarantee you that smart assassins will be using ranged auto attack and standing at 10m if they're smart.

And assassins need more dps?  lol

Thought this was suppose to help rangers and not help both classes (if not more).

Boise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 06:13 PM   #74
Sydares

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

Melee classes still excel with dirge/coercer buffs - often that means being in the main tank group if you don't have many dirges. Unlike an assassin or swashbuckler, a ranger has absolutely no business being in the main tank group, so that often means we get shunted in to "that group". The developers can't seem to grasp this concept.

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 06:47 PM   #75
Boise

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 229
Default

The problem here is that the bow increase will help not only rangers, but assassins and other bow-weilding classes. Top end assassins will see an dps increase because they will start using bow auto attack instead of melee. Why? Simply put, bows will have a higher damage rating. Add in AE Auto-attack and flurry and assassins will be just the new rangers now since they will be auto-attacking with there bows.

Makes no sense. 

Boise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 06:50 PM   #76
Xelgad

Game Designer
Xelgad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 199
Default

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

__________________
<img src="http://signavatar.com/files/sigs/3355_3.jpg">
Xelgad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 06:53 PM   #77
Boise

Loremaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 229
Default

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

And assassins just became the top parsing class in the game.  /sigh

Might as well just delete the ranger class from the game.

Boise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:05 PM   #78
Neiloch

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

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

Ahh wasn't aware the off hand was getting its restrictions removed as well.

So again, just more groundwork to even things out.

Kind of confused by your reply Boise, we get a huge increase in damage and mechanics and others don't get even half of that increase.

__________________
Neiloch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:13 PM   #79
Gungo

Loremaster
Gungo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crushbone
Posts: 5,378
Default

Boise wrote:

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

And assassins just became the top parsing class in the game.  /sigh

Might as well just delete the ranger class from the game.

So let me get this straight.Now offhand weapons will flurry and aoe auto atk. Which means dual wielding zerks got a massive dps boost. 1 hand/shield zerks see no change.Swashies see a big dps boost.Assassins will see a big dps boost.Brawlers get a decent dps boost.Rangers see a big dps boost. Brigands will see a small dps boost.

Now here comes the dilemma for assassins either they will end up using a bow and finding that "sweet spot" rangers use to sit at n raids and autoatk with a bow and use melee CA's, like old rangers Or they will do more dps dual wielding  and just do more dps then they currently do on live.

Gungo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:17 PM   #80
Gungo

Loremaster
Gungo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crushbone
Posts: 5,378
Default

[email protected] wrote:

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

Ahh wasn't aware the off hand was getting its restrictions removed as well.

So again, just more groundwork to even things out.

Kind of confused by your reply Boise, we get a huge increase in damage and mechanics and others don't get even half of that increase.

I think boise is getting to this point.Dual wield receives a small boost from offhand flurry and aoe auto atk. Bows receive a massive boost from basically a 20-30% auto atk damage increase and flurry and aoe auto atk.

So an assassin will have 1 of 2 choices, either they will end up using a bow and finding that "sweet spot" rangers use to sit at in raids and autoatk with a bow and use melee CA's, like old rangers Or they will do more dps dual wielding and end up doing more dps then they currently do on live.

while rangers and assassins will be alot closer in terms of dps output assassins will gain alot from these changes eitherway and should in thoery be the top dps class in game by a decent margin.

I do think these changes are needed but the devs do have to pay attention to how this change will effect other classes.

Gungo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:24 PM   #81
Darchon6

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

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

Thanks for the update -- while two T9 dual wield weapons have a slightly lower damage rating than a comparable bow, our increased number of guaranteed proc triggers (CoB, VC, deity blessings, etc) should cover the difference in terms of maximum damage output.

However, would you consider boosting the maximum range of melee auto-attack slightly to compensate for the nearly identical damage values?  Like I said before, melee classes (scouts and fighters alike) tend to lose thousands of dps when a target suddenly moves due to a combination of a small "target is too far away" threshhold and poor synchronization between the client and server.  Boosting the max range from 2 to 5 meters in PVE would make a world of difference for us.  Also, tell Kander to design T9 raid items with enhancements to maximum attack range SMILEY

__________________
Koldsteel Bladestorm

90 Assassin

Tyranny

Oasis
Darchon6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:26 PM   #82
Sydares

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

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

If you're going to make this change, you should consider re balancing the Assassin myth's passive 15% flurry. Maybe make it 60% ammo conserve. Or move it to the ennervated version of their weapon. 

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:33 PM   #83
Darchon6

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

Sydares wrote:

If you're going to make this change, you should consider re balancing the Assassin myth's passive 15% flurry. Maybe make it 60% ammo conserve. Or move it to the ennervated version of their weapon. 

Sorcerers are currently ahead of the curve by a small margin -- even more so when you take uncontested avoidance into account.  Perhaps you should ask for additional enhancements to the ranger class instead.  There's no need to call forth the nerf bat on another class.

__________________
Koldsteel Bladestorm

90 Assassin

Tyranny

Oasis
Darchon6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:35 PM   #84
Sydares

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

Darchon6 wrote:

Sydares wrote:

If you're going to make this change, you should consider re balancing the Assassin myth's passive 15% flurry. Maybe make it 60% ammo conserve. Or move it to the ennervated version of their weapon. 

 Perhaps you should ask for additional enhancements to the ranger class instead.

Which is exactly what I just did in demonstrating the sickening imbalance in our mythical effects.

Sydares is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:42 PM   #85
Ballads

Loremaster
Ballads's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 264
Default

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

So wait, your boosting all melee now? I understand rangers have an issue bu tto UP all meleers makes no sense to me. If your assassins can't keep up with your sorcs now, get better assassins.

Can mages get AoE spell cast ? How about spell flurry? Upping all melee with out adjusting casters as well is a terrible solution to fixing rangers.

Ballads is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:43 PM   #86
Gaige

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

kartikeya wrote:

It's kind've cute how you've gone from 'oh, flurry and AE auto-attack aren't really that much of the parse, rangers will need more fixes than that' to 'zomg, rangers will be super easymode and will dominate so hard that all assassins are going to sit in the sweet-spot and macro their combat arts to ranged auto-attack' the moment these fixes are actually announced as coming.

My main problem was always with increasing bow damage.  Flurry/AE are simple mechanics fixes.

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:43 PM   #87
kartikeya

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

Darchon6 wrote:

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

Thanks for the update -- while two T9 dual wield weapons have a slightly lower damage rating than a comparable bow, our increased number of guaranteed proc triggers (CoB, VC, deity blessings, etc) should cover the difference in terms of maximum damage output.

However, would you consider boosting the maximum range of melee auto-attack slightly to compensate for the nearly identical damage values?  Like I said before, melee classes (scouts and fighters alike) tend to lose thousands of dps when a target suddenly moves due to a combination of a small "target is too far away" threshhold and poor synchronization between the client and server.  Boosting the max range from 2 to 5 meters in PVE would make a world of difference for us.  Also, tell Kander to design T9 raid items with enhancements to maximum attack range

You are severely overestimating the effect this change is going to have on rangers. I would love if it would be a massive DPS boost, because we need it, but it really isn't. And as Xelgad just stated, the goal is to make autoattack come out DPS even. This means that we'll do the same autoattack DPS than assassins do, in theory, (instead of less as it is now), and we'll still have incredibly weak CAs that need looking over.

Seriously, just do a simple comparison between ranger CAs, Assassin CAs, and our mythical buffs. The disparity is, as another poster just put, sickening. Flurry, AE autoattack, and the removal of that stupid flat nerf to our bow damage is extremely needed, but we're not suddenly going to be challenging assassins on the parse (but this SHOULD be the end goal), especially since assassins are getting a small offhand boost now as well. Settle down.

__________________
kartikeya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:43 PM   #88
Gungo

Loremaster
Gungo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Crushbone
Posts: 5,378
Default

Darchon6 wrote:

Xelgad wrote:

These changes are intended to balance the damage from dual wielding, two handers and bows. As part of that, off-hand weapons will no longer be restricted from Flurry and AE auto-attack, so that dual wielding will scale at the same rate as two handed weapon and bow damage.

Bows will see the greatest benefit from these changes as they gave less auto-attack damage than both dual wield and two handed weaponry prior to this change.

Following this change, they will give approximately the same Auto-Attack damage. Anyone who is Auto-Attacking with more than just a one-handed weapon will see their damage increase with this change, but those who use bows as their primary means of attack will see the greatest increase.

Thanks for the update -- while two T9 dual wield weapons have a slightly lower damage rating than a comparable bow, our increased number of guaranteed proc triggers (CoB, VC, deity blessings, etc) should cover the difference in terms of maximum damage output.

However, would you consider boosting the maximum range of melee auto-attack slightly to compensate for the nearly identical damage values?  Like I said before, melee classes (scouts and fighters alike) tend to lose thousands of dps when a target suddenly moves due to a combination of a small "target is too far away" threshhold and poor synchronization between the client and server.  Boosting the max range from 2 to 5 meters in PVE would make a world of difference for us.  Also, tell Kander to design T9 raid items with enhancements to maximum attack range

I am all for making auto atk 5m, but mostly because it makes NO sense how melee combat arts are 5m and auto atk is less ~2-3m. Its not intuitive AT ALL for new players. Combat arts would be the ideal way to show melee players they are in range of melee.

Gungo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:47 PM   #89
kartikeya

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

Gaige wrote:

kartikeya wrote:

It's kind've cute how you've gone from 'oh, flurry and AE auto-attack aren't really that much of the parse, rangers will need more fixes than that' to 'zomg, rangers will be super easymode and will dominate so hard that all assassins are going to sit in the sweet-spot and macro their combat arts to ranged auto-attack' the moment these fixes are actually announced as coming.

My main problem was always with increasing bow damage.  Flurry/AE are simple mechanics fixes.

As I understand it, this is simply removing that stupid invisible nerf that Aeralik put in when he fixed arrow mechanics. This is something that we should have had in RoK. If somehow that makes bow damage too much, I guarantee they will nerf it, but I highly highly doubt that it will. It has the effect of making bows do the kind of damage they SHOULD be doing ANYWAY, but haven't because Aeralik couldn't stand the thought of a ranger focused fix actually helping rangers (no I'm not still bitter, nooo).

__________________
kartikeya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-23-2010, 07:48 PM   #90
Gaige

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

Ballads wrote:

So wait, your boosting all melee now? I understand rangers have an issue bu tto UP all meleers makes no sense to me. If your assassins can't keep up with your sorcs now, get better assassins.

Can mages get AoE spell cast ? How about spell flurry? Upping all melee with out adjusting casters as well is a terrible solution to fixing rangers.

You have spell double attack, last I checked CA double attack doesn't exist.

__________________
Gaige is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:45 PM.

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.