PDA

View Full Version : Rangers



shoebox747
10-15-2007, 03:18 PM
Rangers as we know can be built to perfection and overcome everyone. there a mixture of everything and can almost anything, if built right. People dont see this and i think some obvious things should happen so that rangers are more welcome in parties, so when someone needs a tank they can take a ranger to. A few suggestions could be an increase in the hitpoints, an incrase in ranged damange, also. For the spell barkskin. When a ranger reaches level 13 or something to show that they are going almost or are pure ranger, let barkskin give +10 to ac. That will want them welcome in parties big time. o and give rangers a special place to chill like the casters do

Kerr
10-15-2007, 03:45 PM
As much as I am for getting Rangers more invites, it still irritates me to no end to see every melee class invited to a group except Rangers, no to changing the Barkskin AC.

There's already too much inflation in this game, what we need is less inflation, not more.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 03:52 PM
Rangers as we know can be built to perfection and overcome everyone. there a mixture of everything and can almost anything, if built right. People dont see this and i think some obvious things should happen so that rangers are more welcome in parties, so when someone needs a tank they can take a ranger to. A few suggestions could be an increase in the hitpoints, an incrase in ranged damange, also. For the spell barkskin. When a ranger reaches level 13 or something to show that they are going almost or are pure ranger, let barkskin give +10 to ac. That will want them welcome in parties big time. o and give rangers a special place to chill like the casters do

Well, I mainly play rangers, so sure!

Ummm.. Actually, not really practical shoe. They'd already scaled back the ac bonus from barkskin a while back, so I'm pretty sure that they aren't going to hand out an increase of some kind. At one point the ranger barkskin was handing out +6 to ac, and that was dropped down to +5 where it is supposed to be.

I'd be okay with a self only buff of some kind that boosts a rangers natural armor bonus, but I'm not sure if that aligns with the pnp version of the rangers.

The main issue with rangers is that they are so easy to screw up. You can have a high ac, high hp, high dps ranger if you build them right... Or you can have a low ac, low hp, low dps ranger(meaning, mostly inneffective), and there is no way from the outside for people to tell the difference.

I get a TON of invites to parties with my ranger, but that's mainly because the people inviting me already know my capabilities and strengths.

This is where the ability to pick your own icon might come into play, or maybe have other people able to see a thumbnail sketch of your character when deciding to invite you to the group might be handy.

Cinwulf
10-15-2007, 03:53 PM
+10 natural bonus to AC? That's crazy!

shoebox747
10-15-2007, 03:54 PM
i agree with you fully, but the problem is that people when they see a ranger is that they dont know if your built properly or badly, casue if built right they just as good as any fighter, but if wrong then its like a wasted space, and any class is like that to be honest, but when they see a fighter even if hes built poorly they still take him becasue they dont know

shoebox747
10-15-2007, 03:55 PM
the +10 was just a reason to let rangers in lol just an example couldnt think of anything else

In_Like_Flynn
10-15-2007, 04:19 PM
Fix ranged combat = Fixed Rangers

Twerpp
10-15-2007, 04:37 PM
I give any class a shot but rangers are easy to gimp-build and play-style ranges from super-stud to somewhat helpful to squishy gimp.

No quest requires more than one tank, caster, or cleric or so many of them that you have to entirely block rangers, bard, rogues etc on your LFM. However they should tune their play style to at least make a contribution of some sort if their specialties are absolutely useless in the given quest.

Mad_Bombardier
10-15-2007, 04:42 PM
Fix ranged combat = Fixed RangersDon't forget fixing TWF rate of attack. ;)

Pfamily
10-15-2007, 05:06 PM
Fix ranged combat = Fixed Rangers


Don't forget fixing TWF rate of attack. ;)


Amen

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 05:35 PM
Fix ranged combat = Fixed Rangers

That implies that there is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

Yaga_Nub
10-15-2007, 05:47 PM
That implies thatthere is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

WHAT?!?

What game do you play?

In_Like_Flynn
10-15-2007, 05:50 PM
That implies thatthere is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.Blink. Blink.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 05:54 PM
That implies thatthere is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

Huh?

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 05:57 PM
WHAT?!?

What game do you play?

I play DDO, you know, the one where ranged combat is fine.
I am not sure what game the whiners about ranged combat are playing, but they seem to think that the MASSIVE advantages of ranged combat should not come with any cost and should do equal damage to a melee weapon, which is, frankly, equally absurd. However, DDO has, rightly, made ranged combat a very effective method of combat which does not also offer all of the advantages of melee.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 05:59 PM
If your complaint is NOT about DPS but about something else, then please elucidate me.

Cinwulf
10-15-2007, 06:01 PM
That implies that there is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

LMAO :p Even the developers have admitted there are problems with ranged combat. I think you just like calling people whiners.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:02 PM
LMAO :p

Cinwulf--- You and I have already had this discussion. :p

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:05 PM
LMAO :p Even the developers have admitted there are problems with ranged combat. I think you just like calling people whiners.

Well, I might like calling people whiners, but I stand by my statment. Please direct me to where the developers have said there was something wrong with ranged combat. Now I am not of course talking about the problems with targeting which are not really an issue with ranged as much as just an issue with combat in general.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:07 PM
That implies that there is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

Just a suggestion..

You may want to add something that says "In my opinion", or some other such modifier to statements like this.

A flat statement like that is just an invitation to arguements.

Mad_Bombardier
10-15-2007, 06:07 PM
Please direct me to where the developers have said there was something wrong with ranged combat.Check the Dev tracker for anything recent by Codog. :rolleyes:

KoboldKiller
10-15-2007, 06:07 PM
Firstly to imply there is nothing wrong with ranged combat is laughable. Second, and this is an honest question, what is the "proper" build for a ranger? I have three types, a str based dwarven ranger, a dex build elf and a 16str 16 dex base human build. So honestly before I get to far in what is the best build?

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:09 PM
Well, I might like calling people whiners, but I stand by my statment. Please direct me to where the developers have said there was something wrong with ranged combat. Now I am not of course talking about the problems with targeting which are not really an issue with ranged as much as just an issue with combat in general.

Go ahead and hit the Dev tracker... Look at Codog's posts starting from about two weeks ago... In the thread that starts with asking codog to say something...

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:09 PM
Just a suggestion..

You may want to add something that says "In my opinion", or some other such modifier to statements like this.

A flat statement like that is just an invitation to arguements.

Well no one was adding that to there statments about how much ranged combat needed a rework.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:14 PM
Check the Dev tracker for anything recent by Codog. :rolleyes:

HMMM I don't see anywhere where he says ranged is broken or needs a rework--- he says they will be evaluating it and will express the concerns of the players. I also saw the post where he explained in detail the advantages that Ranged combat offers and why they toned its DPS down in Beta. Never saw anything about how it was Broken or needed reworking, maybe I didn't go back far enough.


Do you have any actual arguements about how it is so inferior or are you just saying that it is?

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:15 PM
Well no one was adding that to there statments about how much ranged combat needed a rework.

Very true... And look how quickly it invited an arguement.

Twerpp
10-15-2007, 06:16 PM
Firstly to imply there is nothing wrong with ranged combat is laughable. Second, and this is an honest question, what is the "proper" build for a ranger? I have three types, a str based dwarven ranger, a dex build elf and a 16str 16 dex base human build. So honestly before I get to far in what is the best build?

You must not truly feel that ranged combat is "broken" at least to the point of being gimped or you wouldnt have rolled 3 of them. Or are you just a class addict? I'm the same way about fighters can't give up the bonus feats lol.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:16 PM
HMMM I don't see anywhere where he says ranged is broken or needs a rework--- he says they will be evaluating it and will express the concerns of the players. I also saw the post where he explained in detail the advantages that Ranged combat offers and why they toned its DPS down in Beta. Never saw anything about how it was Broken or needed reworking, maybe I didn't go back far enough.


Do you have any actual arguements about how it is so inferior or are you just saying that it is?


Correct... Keep going back.

Fallout
10-15-2007, 06:18 PM
That implies that there is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

When you want to smoke something, make sure its the GOOD stuff.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:20 PM
Firstly to imply there is nothing wrong with ranged combat is laughable. Second, and this is an honest question, what is the "proper" build for a ranger? I have three types, a str based dwarven ranger, a dex build elf and a 16str 16 dex base human build. So honestly before I get to far in what is the best build?

Why is it laughable? Try actually putting out a point, you see that is the nature of discussion, you put out a point, the guy who disagrees puts out a point, and attempts to counter yours, You counter his, etc. etc until one of you convinces the other or you agree to disagree.

I do not believe ranged combat should be doing more than about 30% of Melee DPS, it offers the advantage of distance, inaccessability, and the ability to spread effects across the battlefield with astounding speed. If the game did not have ranged smiters, disrupters, paralysers etc I might agree with you but used in groups with a tactical mind the ability to spread effects across a battlefield is can simply break the game.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:20 PM
You must not truly feel that ranged combat is "broken" at least to the point of being gimped or you wouldnt have rolled 3 of them. Or are you just a class addict? I'm the same way about fighters can't give up the bonus feats lol.

I'm going with the class addict theory... I'm the same way. I'd always liked playing Rangers in PnP, so I started playing them here.

But I have a dex based drow ranger, that I'd originally started to be a "ranged" character. Now, he's a "ranged character" while manyshot is up, and a twf character the rest of the time. Because the many issues with ranged combat made playing him a full time archer type a liability to the parties.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:21 PM
Very true... And look how quickly it invited an arguement.

Point conceded.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:29 PM
Correct... Keep going back.
Went back pretty far, didn't see anything saying it was broken, just expalining why it worked as it did and that indeed attack speed would continue to go up to 20th level. I mean how far back is this, I went back to the 10th, and that was a lot of Post By COdog.

JelloMold
10-15-2007, 06:31 PM
Firstly to imply there is nothing wrong with ranged combat is laughable. Second, and this is an honest question, what is the "proper" build for a ranger? I have three types, a str based dwarven ranger, a dex build elf and a 16str 16 dex base human build. So honestly before I get to far in what is the best build?

The answer is...(/drumroll)...the one(s) you enjoy playing. Builds are just advice. Most people would probably say my ranger and ranger/wizard are "gimped" (mindless term by the way), but anyone who has grouped with me has always been cool with having me come back. Have fun and avoid the cookiecutters and you'll be playing this game a lot longer than the "I'm so uber" crowd.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:36 PM
Why is it laughable? Try actually putting out a point, you see that is the nature of discussion, you put out a point, the guy who disagrees puts out a point, and attempts to counter yours, You counter his, etc. etc until one of you convinces the other or you agree to disagree.

I do not believe ranged combat should be doing more than about 30% of Melee DPS, it offers the advantage of distance, inaccessability, and the ability to spread effects across the battlefield with astounding speed. If the game did not have ranged smiters, disrupters, paralysers etc I might agree with you but used in groups with a tactical mind the ability to spread effects across a battlefield is can simply break the game.

Heh.. Much better! Makes for more of a "discussion" than an "arguement".

However, I disagree with you on some points.

Distance: Yes. Definitely an advantage in outdoor areas. Not so much in the indoor areas. The bulk of the adventures in this game aren't setup to allow much of an advantage in this area. In my experience, you get off a couple of shots, and then you'd better be switching over to melee style, or you get chopped into ittty bitty pieces with the ac penalty that you get from carrying a bow in melee range.

Inaccessability: Not so much. There are a few spots where you can just sit and range stuff to death... They usually end up being fixed once too many people figure out where they are. Or the mobs in the area end up being given ranged abilities to shoot back, and since the mobs are (by some people's reckonings) shooting at around twice the speed that the players are...

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:39 PM
Heh.. Much better! Makes for more of a "discussion" than an "arguement".

However, I disagree with you on some points.

Distance: Yes. Definitely an advantage in outdoor areas. Not so much in the indoor areas. The bulk of the adventures in this game aren't setup to allow much of an advantage in this area. In my experience, you get off a couple of shots, and then you'd better be switching over to melee style, or you get chopped into ittty bitty pieces with the ac penalty that you get from carrying a bow in melee range.

Inaccessability: Not so much. There are a few spots where you can just sit and range stuff to death... They usually end up being fixed once too many people figure out where they are. Or the mobs in the area end up being given ranged abilities to shoot back, and since the mobs are (by some people's reckonings) shooting at around twice the speed that the players are...

Well I think they are shooting a bit slower than that but they are indeed shooting faster than the players. However I have never been shot by a Human slaying arrow fired from a flaming paralyzing longbow. Nor have I ever been burst slayed/paralyzed/etc from a Heavy repeater in the extraordianarly short time they can do that.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 06:50 PM
Went back pretty far, didn't see anything saying it was broken, just expalining why it worked as it did and that indeed attack speed would continue to go up to 20th level. I mean how far back is this, I went back to the 10th, and that was a lot of Post By COdog.

Well, here is the post that the OP of that thread was referring to when he created the thread... This one was back a ways(may sometime)


I certainly have noticed this. I'm currently working this issue which turns out to be a number of different issues. I will be rolling out some improvements over time so that we start seeing fewer and fewer of these "misses" that are not misses. Until we get all of the known issues straightened out, your continued patience is appreciated.

If you are "missing" more than 1 in 6 shots, it might be helpful to us if you could post some information. We know there are synchronization issues with repeating crossbows (in fixing the other sychronization issues these should be addressed as well), so please don't post builds with those particular setups.

Please post the following information:

Race/Gender
Classes
Specific bow/crossbow/thrown weapons
Specific feats that enhance ranged combat
Specific enhancements that affect ranged combat
All of your equipped gear
Whether or not you have haste items in particular I am interested in.

Thanks and best regards,

Codog

PS. Happy Memorial Day!

And here is Codog's first response in that thread. I'll quote some of the parts here, it's pretty lengthy.

http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1385292&postcount=43


This last cycle (mod 5) I put in a few fixes that should help with the missing die roll problem. Under load, we were able to reproduce the fact that when the server was hitching you'd miss one and three of your shots. Auto-attack made this problem worse because it exactly (more or less) predicts the moment you should be ready for another attack.


So what I'm gathering from this thread is that one of the causes of this has been removed and there are yet other causes of the missed die rolls.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 06:56 PM
Well, here is the post that the OP of that thread was referring to when he created the thread... This one was back a ways(may sometime)



And here is Codog's first response in that thread. I'll quote some of the parts here, it's pretty lengthy.

http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p=1385292&postcount=43

Well this is why I specifically asked people to declare if DPS was not there issue--- Misses that are not misses is a problem with the targeting, it has to be because it happens to my wizard all the time with various and a sundry spells. Misses which are not misses is a bug, and it should be fixed but it is not a problem with the ranged combat system but with the targeting system specifically.

Taur
10-15-2007, 06:56 PM
Now I am not of course talking about the problems with targeting which are not really an issue with ranged as much as just an issue with combat in general.

even the supposed problems with targeting can be circumvented with a little mouse finesse. frankly, the targeting system as it is doesn't lead a ranged target, nor should it.

in my personal opinion, the only adjustment to the ranged targeting system that should really need to happen is that when you select a target, the game shouldn't automatically fire in that target's direction. you should actually have to cross-hair the target in order to hit it.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 07:01 PM
even the supposed problems with targeting can be circumvented with a little mouse finesse. frankly, the targeting system as it is doesn't lead a ranged target, nor should it.

in my personal opinion, the only adjustment to the ranged targeting system that should really need to happen is that when you select a target, the game shouldn't automatically fire in that target's direction. you should actually have to cross-hair the target in order to hit it.


I agree but I have seen with arrows and spells that if you have one creature targeted and a differant creature crosses your path of fire that that creature will often take the hit but not take any damage, and your targeted target doesn't either. This is particularly frustrating with spells as they are a much greater investment in time and resources. That is obviouly a bug.

Osharan_Tregarth
10-15-2007, 07:01 PM
Well I think they are shooting a bit slower than that but they are indeed shooting faster than the players.
I'm not claiming it... I don't really pay much attention. But if you read through that thread, there was some discussion about mob ranged speeds.
However I have never been shot by a Human slaying arrow fired from a flaming paralyzing longbow. Nor have I ever been burst slayed/paralyzed/etc from a Heavy repeater in the extraordianarly short time they can do that.Me neither. But I've only pulled(myself) around 200 slaying arrows/bolts of any type in the last year or so. That's not something I'll take into account here. I'm not going to bork an entire section of combat, because of short term, single use attacks.

My addon's in red...

Ranged dps has been helped out a bunch by the additions of precise shot and improved precise shot... I might actually attempt to run a mainly ranged character again. But the way the game is currently designed, I'm much more usefull to a party attacking mobs with my melee weapons than with my ranged weapons. If I'm soloing, I'll kite stuff around and so on with a bow, but otherwise I'm just slowing the party down, and making them chase stuff all over the place.

Elthbert
10-15-2007, 07:15 PM
My addon's in red...

Ranged dps has been helped out a bunch by the additions of precise shot and improved precise shot... I might actually attempt to run a mainly ranged character again. But the way the game is currently designed, I'm much more usefull to a party attacking mobs with my melee weapons than with my ranged weapons. If I'm soloing, I'll kite stuff around and so on with a bow, but otherwise I'm just slowing the party down, and making them chase stuff all over the place.


But paralyzation, destruption, smiting, those are not single use attacks, and for purposes of Undead or Constructs disruption and smiting are slaying effects. But more than that I have rune across rangers who have litterally pages of slaying arrows. they are for sale for a very inexpensive price on the auction house. This doesnot mention the ability to stack effects for damage alone such as flaming arrows on a greater giantbane bow for trolls and the like. I don't think this is an issue of single use effects as it is the ability of the ranged weapon in general.

QuantumFX
10-15-2007, 08:42 PM
So honestly before I get to far in what is the best build?

STR based elf. 30STR/30 DEX just rocks. Also you have the option for racial weapon enhancements in Peircing/Slashing/Class Specific Ranged Weapons (Rapier/Longsword/Bows) rather than limiting yourself to Slashing (Axes).

OK, back to the topic.

There are 2 factors that, IMHO, affect rangers more than any other class.

First is the DDO melee combat system. The lack of proper shields and double weapons disproportionately skews DPS in favor of THF styles. (This is from a DPS PoV not a stat damaging argument.)
- Sword and Board loses out on an offhanded source of damage. (S&B style affects STR rangers because of the bizarre implementation of Improved Shield Bash)
- TWF loses a souce of defense (bucklers and more specifically Improved Buckler Defense).
- The lack of double weapons also affects STR based rangers due to pack space and the fact that a double weapon can be used in TWF or THF style.
- THF gets an AOE effect that is nowhere in the P&P rules.

Second, rangers need a better selection for enhancement chains. For single class rangers there is only one desirable enhancement chain to max out: Rangers Dexterity. After that all the "cookie cutter" ranger builds max out racial enhancements.

Some suggestions I've offered in the past:

Rangers (OK, OK all classes) need to have the toughness enhancement chain open to them. Rangers have just as much affinity for the feat as any other melee class in this game. (And yes rangers are a melee class.)

Improved Two Weapon Defense/Blocking would be a nice ranger only chain since they do have an affinity for the TWF style.

Some "Way of" chains would be nice. Examples would include Way of the Dervish (Could emulate the PrC), Way of the Bow (To emulate aspects of the Initiate of the Bow PrC)

KoboldKiller
10-15-2007, 11:09 PM
No it's not bad enough to break the game, and yes laughable was maybe a little to harsh. The rate of fire while slightly increased it seems is still to slow compared to melee. DPS for a bow is to low as it is, whether the risk vs. reward is less with a bow is beside the point. The "Ranger" is supposed to be a master hunter thus knowing where to place his shot for maximum damage. I dont necessarily feel they should be able to do as much as melee but 30% is to low. Maybe more towards the 40%-45% of melee. As it stands now you cannot general get off more than two shots before the enemy is on top of you and pounding you down.

CSFurious
10-16-2007, 05:21 AM
that is just the way this game is designed right now

a good ranger fighting their favorite enemy is a great addition to any quest

on norm in the Tor, my ranger/fighter cuts through giants, same applies to undead

if some players do not know that, i do not want to play with them in the first place

Crabo
10-16-2007, 05:36 AM
However, DDO has, rightly, made ranged combat a very effective method of combat which does not also offer all of the advantages of melee.

You havent rolled a toon past level 8 , have you?

Talon_Moonshadow
10-16-2007, 01:07 PM
I don't think Rangers need any more than they already have.....We need some balance between the classes, and as you said Rangers are already an awesome class.

Ranged combat needs to be fixed for everyone, but other than that Rangers are great and don't need to be better. (Animal companions would be nice though)

I do agree that they don't get enough respect and invites though.
I have a muli-classed Rgr so I get even less respect, but I often group with a friend of mine who is a pure Rgr and one of the best in the game IMO. I've had to do some real sweettalking to convince some people to take both of us and that we did not need a tank to complete the quest.

My favorite has been two Tor runs with three Rangers and no other tanks.....people were so worried before the start, but it was mostly a very smooth run IMHO. We did wipe on one of the dragons once in both runs, but I don't think the lack of tanks was the reason.....and although I have not done scale runs as often as most, my experiance has been that wiping once on one of the dragons is normal....granted none of my toons are the most uber in the game.

With a high dex, and a shield a Ranger can have almost as good an AC as most tanks....at least at lower lvls...and with Barkskin at medium lvls as well......at higher lvls AC is much less important.

The best rangers I've seen are a little lacking in DPS, but usually make up for it by using rapiers with high crit ranges and special abilities. (duel wielding rapiers of puncturing for instance).

The high reflex saves and evasion, plus cure wands make them one of the most survivable classes in the game.

They really don't get enough respect....which surprises me at higher lvls....where the ranger really shines.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-16-2007, 01:22 PM
i agree with you fully, but the problem is that people when they see a ranger is that they dont know if your built properly or badly, casue if built right they just as good as any fighter, but if wrong then its like a wasted space, and any class is like that to be honest, but when they see a fighter even if hes built poorly they still take him becasue they dont know

Yeah, but, Is the only melee type you are willing to group with the one who can take down the boss in only two hits? That is not the majority of melees out there.

I'm always bothered by the fact that so many people need this perfect party makeup before going on any quest.....it's just not so.

if people just work together, almost anyquest can be done with an average group of almost any type of players.......that means even a low HP, low BPS ranger....

I play a Rgr6/Rog3/Wiz5.....I am a low HP, low BPS ranger........and I wouldn't want to be the only tank in many parties.....but I do have good weapons and equipment and can contribute well to any party.

If you are lacking in tanks, just have someone (anyone) block the door and lets your ranged/spell casters unload on the mobs....etc.

I know this game is weighted toward high DPS tanks, but I've had the most fun in groups that were very iregular in makeup.

Smart playing and cooperation is more imprtant I think.....and more fun anyway. It doesn't take the perfect build on any class....and there are many bad builds out there on every class.....infact, I would argue that a badly built ranger is better than a badly built fighter in many casses. Evasion, better saves, cure wands,.....those things go a long way. And even a bad ranger can still range pretty good.

Fallout
10-16-2007, 01:26 PM
Reason why some people don't want rangers in the group (unless the ranger is known), is that sometimes all they do is range combat.

Shoot at 1 mob. Then all mobs aggro on ranger. Ranger runs around. Cleric gets busy trying to heal ranger. Tanks get frustrated chasing the mobs around who's aggroed on ranger.

Rangers are a powerful class, but range combat is borked.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-16-2007, 01:31 PM
I play DDO, you know, the one where ranged combat is fine.
I am not sure what game the whiners about ranged combat are playing, but they seem to think that the MASSIVE advantages of ranged combat should not come with any cost and should do equal damage to a melee weapon, which is, frankly, equally absurd. However, DDO has, rightly, made ranged combat a very effective method of combat which does not also offer all of the advantages of melee.

There is room for a compromise you know. There have been numerous posts about how ranged combat is lacking.
Without going into everything about it, I will just say that it should be closer to melle than it is.....not equal, but closer than it is.

I have a dex based archer build that every ranged feat available and only weapon finesse to help him in melee combat........and he still gets more kills in melee than he does when ranging.....that is not right!
When the best ranged build cannot even compete with the worst melee build it is broken.

However, broken is still very effective when used right....even broken it is still possible to range manythings in the game and take no damage at all....broken but still nice.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-16-2007, 01:36 PM
Firstly to imply there is nothing wrong with ranged combat is laughable. Second, and this is an honest question, what is the "proper" build for a ranger? I have three types, a str based dwarven ranger, a dex build elf and a 16str 16 dex base human build. So honestly before I get to far in what is the best build?

I'd say all three of those are fine......but I think the OP was suggesting a tank oriented build was best. From my own experiance, specialized toons are better than more versitile ones (but not as fun...and not in all situations) and the game is weighter toward melee combat DPS. (also weighted toward Dwarves)

Talon_Moonshadow
10-16-2007, 01:54 PM
Reason why some people don't want rangers in the group (unless the ranger is known), is that sometimes all they do is range combat.

Shoot at 1 mob. Then all mobs aggro on ranger. Ranger runs around. Cleric gets busy trying to heal ranger. Tanks get frustrated chasing the mobs around who's aggroed on ranger.

Rangers are a powerful class, but range combat is borked.

I think this is mostly a lower lvl thing. Extremly annoying, yes....also happends with some arcanes too. But higher lvl rangers give up on ranged combat very fast.

I still range a lot, but I refuse to run around like that. If I draw agro, I change to mellee. Some rangers can still get a lot of kills by ranging and running, but most find that they can get more kills by just meleeing....especially after 8th lvl or so.

llevenbaxx
10-16-2007, 02:30 PM
even the supposed problems with targeting can be circumvented with a little mouse finesse. frankly, the targeting system as it is doesn't lead a ranged target, nor should it.

.

Disagree with this totally. Its a non-factor in a turn based game, as the creature isnt moving technically when you roll the dice. Real time needs to account for that. The monster benefit from it, so should we. We arent rolling an attack for the 5' radius the mod was just standing in, we were rolling on the mob. If we wanted a 1st person shooter game we wouldnt be here.

drachine
10-16-2007, 03:24 PM
i am excluding those who don't do this of course.

reason 1: is the ranger using ranged combat to aggro opponents and then proceeds to move away from the party, usually be backpedalling and shooting at them. then the fighters and melee end up running after the enemies and the ranger as well. i have reached the point that when i see this happening i don't bother to give chase anymore. after all, you aggroed the fool so i guess you should be able to kill them. good luck.

solution: kill or incapacitate your opponents or shoot at stuff already aggroed by the tanks.

reason 2: is the ranger that excels at two weapon combat and never dodges or blocks or tumbles or moves out of the way when it is clear their opponent is kicking their ass. not really sure what that is about. even drizz't had to block once in a while. sometimes the ranger has poor AC and they just become a mana pit for the cleric. i'm sure you have heard this before.

solution: buff well and use dodge and blocking and damage reduction effectively to not take so much damage. maybe heal yourself.

i think it's an easy class to learn to play well and usually at higher levels rangers are awesome, but this is what i have seen at lower levels that makes me hesitant to invite one.

Raiderone
10-16-2007, 03:40 PM
I play rangers and tanks. I'm playing a human ranger , human tank
and a elf ranger.

I for one don't like it either when ranger gets aggro with range weapon
and then runs all over the place. I never do that with my ranger.

FAce it, you should switch from ranged to melee attack. Your not LEGOLAS
so give it up. I TWF and I shield with one handed weapon too.
Do all that running and range **** when you are SOLOING...You aren't SOLOING. Might be more a PUG issue than a Ranger issue...

I don't TWF until much higher levels. I like my shield bonuses...

I've told some rangers before to stop getting aggro until tank engages.

It's no different with a rogue...don't rush in until tanks get aggro.
I always wait then attack...

Club'in
10-16-2007, 03:49 PM
i am excluding those who don't do this of course.

reason 1: is the ranger using ranged combat to aggro opponents and then proceeds to move away from the party, usually be backpedalling and shooting at them. then the fighters and melee end up running after the enemies and the ranger as well. i have reached the point that when i see this happening i don't bother to give chase anymore. after all, you aggroed the fool so i guess you should be able to kill them. good luck.

solution: kill or incapacitate your opponents or shoot at stuff already aggroed by the tanks.



As for 1; and it amuses (irritates?) the ranger that you guys get so miffed. Yeah, take a breather, man, I got this one. You don't HAVE to chase the thing around. If it's ****ed at me, it's not attacking the sorc, the rogue is getting sneak attacks, you can take a smoke break, for all I care. Or better yet, don't you carry a throwing axe or something? :p And as far as I know, anything else pulled is gonna be agro-d on the original puller, the ranger, so when that wave hits the front line you get a free round of attacks (or two) before they start beating on you. Try using intimidate as they pass you by. I thought you were a tank...

Beherit_Baphomar
10-16-2007, 04:01 PM
As for 1; and it amuses (irritates?) the ranger that you guys get so miffed. Yeah, take a breather, man, I got this one. You don't HAVE to chase the thing around. If it's ****ed at me, it's not attacking the sorc, the rogue is getting sneak attacks, you can take a smoke break, for all I care. Or better yet, don't you carry a throwing axe or something? :p And as far as I know, anything else pulled is gonna be agro-d on the original puller, the ranger, so when that wave hits the front line you get a free round of attacks (or two) before they start beating on you. Try using intimidate as they pass you by. I thought you were a tank...

/qft.

If you are in a heated battle with casters all round and mob tanks holding you from them, the ranger who plinks an arrow into each of those casters is doing you a huge favour.

People who dont use ranged combat effectively are the problem, not those that choose to kite. Eye em oh!

Elthbert
10-16-2007, 06:16 PM
You havent rolled a toon past level 8 , have you?

Yeah thats it... oh wait, i've been hear since beta and am one of the biggest complainers about the level cap not being raised.

My 14th level character uses a bow ALL the time.

Crabo
10-16-2007, 06:44 PM
Yeah thats it... oh wait, i've been hear since beta and am one of the biggest complainers about the level cap not being raised.

My 14th level character uses a bow ALL the time.

I have a pure 14 ranger which i built specifically for ranged combat. He can equip 2 x masterwork shortswords and do more damage with those than he can with any bow. If you have been running around shooting a bow letting parties drag your ass through the dungeon, that is your own problem.

I wouldnt describe using 2 x masterwork shortswords as " a very effective method of combat " as you described ranged combat, but it is certainly alot more use than using a bow. 15 seconds of manyshot is the ONLY time ranged combat does decent damage.

But you know all this right, been here since beta right...haha.

QuantumFX
10-16-2007, 07:13 PM
Try using intimidate as they pass you by. I thought you were a tank...

QFT - If you're a fighter or a barbarian and you cannot pull hate off of a ranger then the ranger is doing his job and you're not doing yours.

chuckpittman
10-16-2007, 07:48 PM
I love my ranger, but there are two things that I really want the devs to do for him.
1) Take manyshot off the timer. Let me take my minus to-hit and keep firing like in pnp.

2) GIVE ME SOME DAMMED PANTS!:D

salmag
10-16-2007, 08:21 PM
I have a level 14 capped ranger, as well. I think the main problem is that in a 'team' concept such as DDO, a ranger uses his bow in more of a support role rather than going for the kill count. I paralyze and destruct from a distance behind the tanks and allow them to get the kill after I've turned them blue or surrounded them in green. Unfortunately, Manyshot is the ONLY DPS available for the archer, and with a two-minute cooldown timer it is not feasible to use except for end bosses. If they ever lower it to 20-30 secs (like I've requested in the past), maybe it will balance the game a little better. As it stands right now, archery is best used in support. Let the tanks and casters get the kills.

Just my two coppers:D .

Elthbert
10-16-2007, 09:37 PM
I have a pure 14 ranger which i built specifically for ranged combat. He can equip 2 x masterwork shortswords and do more damage with those than he can with any bow. If you have been running around shooting a bow letting parties drag your ass through the dungeon, that is your own problem.

I wouldnt describe using 2 x masterwork shortswords as " a very effective method of combat " as you described ranged combat, but it is certainly alot more use than using a bow. 15 seconds of manyshot is the ONLY time ranged combat does decent damage.

But you know all this right, been here since beta right...haha.

Dps is not the only type of damage--- please look at my previous post. Ranged combat excels at spreading effects, and that is what makes it an effective form of combat. Far from having my party drag me around, my party gets antsy when I am not using it. Ranged weapons are not the equal to melee in HP damage-- as I said before they should not be. They are however fantastic at manipulating the battlefield using effects and they ALSO do damage.

Elthbert
10-16-2007, 09:39 PM
I have a level 14 capped ranger, as well. I think the main problem is that in a 'team' concept such as DDO, a ranger uses his bow in more of a support role rather than going for the kill count. I paralyze and destruct from a distance behind the tanks and allow them to get the kill after I've turned them blue or surrounded them in green. Unfortunately, Manyshot is the ONLY DPS available for the archer, and with a two-minute cooldown timer it is not feasible to use except for end bosses. If they ever lower it to 20-30 secs (like I've requested in the past), maybe it will balance the game a little better. As it stands right now, archery is best used in support. Let the tanks and casters get the kills.

Just my two coppers:D .

This is what I have been saying. But there is an Idea in this game that if you are not getting the kill you are not effective. My Caster almost never gets the kill, but I assure you he is quite effective. Bows are a support weapon in ddo butthat doesn't make them ineffective, and more than the caster casting CC is ineffective.

Elthbert
10-16-2007, 09:40 PM
I love my ranger, but there are two things that I really want the devs to do for him.
1) Take manyshot off the timer. Let me take my minus to-hit and keep firing like in pnp.

2) GIVE ME SOME DAMMED PANTS!:D

I think manyshot should be like it is in pnp. I think the timer is because of server issues but I could be wrong.

Elthbert
10-16-2007, 09:42 PM
No it's not bad enough to break the game, and yes laughable was maybe a little to harsh. The rate of fire while slightly increased it seems is still to slow compared to melee. DPS for a bow is to low as it is, whether the risk vs. reward is less with a bow is beside the point. The "Ranger" is supposed to be a master hunter thus knowing where to place his shot for maximum damage. I dont necessarily feel they should be able to do as much as melee but 30% is to low. Maybe more towards the 40%-45% of melee. As it stands now you cannot general get off more than two shots before the enemy is on top of you and pounding you down.

Well you can if you wait for the fighters to grab aggro.

Elthbert
10-16-2007, 09:44 PM
QFT - If you're a fighter or a barbarian and you cannot pull hate off of a ranger then the ranger is doing his job and you're not doing yours.

AMEN BROTHER!

Aesop
10-16-2007, 10:13 PM
Rangers as we know can be built to perfection and overcome everyone. there a mixture of everything and can almost anything, if built right. People dont see this and i think some obvious things should happen so that rangers are more welcome in parties, so when someone needs a tank they can take a ranger to. A few suggestions could be an increase in the hitpoints, an incrase in ranged damange, also. For the spell barkskin. When a ranger reaches level 13 or something to show that they are going almost or are pure ranger, let barkskin give +10 to ac. That will want them welcome in parties big time. o and give rangers a special place to chill like the casters do

Of your suggestions the only thing I can get behind is the Ranged bit... but I'm more concerned with the RoF and viability of ranged as an attack form in more than specific circumstances. Ranger over all is fine the way it is. The only problem with ranger is peoples perception of apparently any class with evasion as being unable to dps... what a pile of dung that is.

Aesop

Aesop
10-16-2007, 10:14 PM
I think manyshot should be like it is in pnp. I think the timer is because of server issues but I could be wrong.

I agree

all aspects positive and negative

Aesop

Crabo
10-17-2007, 08:11 AM
Dps is not the only type of damage--- please look at my previous post. Ranged combat excels at spreading effects, and that is what makes it an effective form of combat. Far from having my party drag me around, my party gets antsy when I am not using it. Ranged weapons are not the equal to melee in HP damage-- as I said before they should not be. They are however fantastic at manipulating the battlefield using effects and they ALSO do damage.

Which effects are you talking about ? Destruction...not needed in most cases.Paralyzing...meh i will just take a caster. Smiting , melee can smite better than ranged. Disruption...melee better. Wounding/puncturing...melee better. Cursespewing...hmm, maybe i can give you that one, even though duel wielding cursespewers is probably better. Banishing ...melee better.
And ranged combat EXCELS at spreading these effects?
It all comes down to what i said before, if you arent burning manyshot, put the useless bow away.
Interested in your comments on this.

Aesop
10-17-2007, 09:00 AM
Which effects are you talking about ? Destruction...not needed in most cases.Paralyzing...meh i will just take a caster. Smiting , melee can smite better than ranged. Disruption...melee better. Wounding/puncturing...melee better. Cursespewing...hmm, maybe i can give you that one, even though duel wielding cursespewers is probably better. Banishing ...melee better.
And ranged combat EXCELS at spreading these effects?
It all comes down to what i said before, if you arent burning manyshot, put the useless bow away.
Interested in your comments on this.

Well if you consider improved precise shot then a any of the non crit based effects the ranged could eek out with the advantage... not that I wouldn't like to see a few buffs to the Archery category

Aesop

llevenbaxx
10-17-2007, 09:18 AM
I love my ranger, but there are two things that I really want the devs to do for him.
1) Take manyshot off the timer. Let me take my minus to-hit and keep firing like in pnp.

2) GIVE ME SOME DAMMED PANTS!:D

I would love to see manyshot as a stance too. Buy more hampsters to run them wheels already.:)

They took away from manyshot while feats like cleave and great cleave function more like whirlwind attack. Does it even matter if you miss in the cleave-attack progression? Seems like I get a radius attack no matter the results of each attack. Soory, just cant help but compare what they did with the two from PnP.

Just seems like everything from melee attacking in PnP was either brought directly over and kept the same or juiced up while everything from ranged was either brought over the same or toned down(other than the str bonus, which is really just having a composite bow rating in PnP).

For having a core set of rules to model after, the Devs sure did ALOT of tweaking but in opposite directions for melee vs ranged. They were basically very similar in PnP, why should ranged be sent to a more support position in DDO. The only decent reasons Ive ever really seen is Turbines hardware cant handle it, they are "able" to support well and melee just seems like it should do more damage. All kinda weak at that.

Elthbert
10-17-2007, 10:11 AM
Which effects are you talking about ? Destruction...not needed in most cases.Paralyzing...meh i will just take a caster. Smiting , melee can smite better than ranged. Disruption...melee better. Wounding/puncturing...melee better. Cursespewing...hmm, maybe i can give you that one, even though duel wielding cursespewers is probably better. Banishing ...melee better.
And ranged combat EXCELS at spreading these effects?
It all comes down to what i said before, if you arent burning manyshot, put the useless bow away.
Interested in your comments on this.


Yes it excels at "spreading" the effects, is a 1H paralyser better at paralysing a single opponant, of course, There are more swings in a second. Is a 1H better at paralysing the entire opposition, no. As I said on the thead about Arrows, D&D is about Co-operation, in my experiance massed effect spewing ranged combat is simply devestating. Especially if used in complementary forms. 3 paralysing bows or 2 paralyazing bows and a curse spewer can simply make a tanks job one of executioner not combatant. Single archers are realitivly weak, SO what, archery is a realativly weak form of combat for an individual combatant in real life too. But used with some brains, in a group, it can be simply devestating. Now the fact that most people are not using it in that manner is not Turbines fault, it is peoples lack of group organizations fault. Ranged is good at "speading" effects around, --fire, Tab, Fire, Tab, Fire, Tab, Fire, Tab, Fire, Tab, Fire, Tab... tab around for any which have not been effected, stand back and watch the tanks obliterate the paralysed creatures while you continue to tab through them continuing to keep them paralysed. Of course this requires you to pick a spot BEHIND the tanks and wait for them to get grab aggro, but the same is true for an arcane caster who doesn't want to get smashed. Now, you get 3 people with paralysing bows do that. Or 3 people with disrupters, or smiters, or wounding/puncturing etc and watch the battlefield.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-17-2007, 10:13 AM
As for 1; and it amuses (irritates?) the ranger that you guys get so miffed. Yeah, take a breather, man, I got this one. You don't HAVE to chase the thing around. If it's ****ed at me, it's not attacking the sorc, the rogue is getting sneak attacks, you can take a smoke break, for all I care. Or better yet, don't you carry a throwing axe or something? :p And as far as I know, anything else pulled is gonna be agro-d on the original puller, the ranger, so when that wave hits the front line you get a free round of attacks (or two) before they start beating on you. Try using intimidate as they pass you by. I thought you were a tank...

Funny you mention the throwing axe thing....cause that's exactly what my tanks do in this situation.....I start to give chase, and then just stop and pull out my axe......if the guy comes back or there is another target i switch back to melee.....but I hate to give chase like that.

What I would like to see, not so much on rangers, but on squishy types that get agro, is to run toward the tank.....stand in the same spot as the tank and fight there.......you still might ge hit once, but I can almost guarantee that after one hit from the tank, you will no longer have agro...

Talon_Moonshadow
10-17-2007, 10:21 AM
/qft.

If you are in a heated battle with casters all round and mob tanks holding you from them, the ranger who plinks an arrow into each of those casters is doing you a huge favour.

People who dont use ranged combat effectively are the problem, not those that choose to kite. Eye em oh!

All of my tanks are low lvl, but I've seen this from both sides....you guys have to understand that most tanks see it as there job to get agro and hold it....that's what the higher HP are for. They can take it....they see it as their job to protect everyone else.

Shooting casters and taking agro is great.....as well as agro from the parties casters......But that's also what the tank is trying to do.

I musc prefer to have all of the baddies on the other side of the door with the tanks forming a protective wall.......But when the ranger draws agro first it creates an unknown/uncontroled situation.......guys are running past the tanks toward the back of the party and can now get at squishies if they choose.

There is a compromise here you know.......let tanks get agro first......Ranger concentrate on non-moving guys if possible....catsers and archers on platforms....rangers guard the back ranks......agro anyone geting past the tanks or assist in taking down a guy already agroed and fighting the tank....

I sometimes forget alot of this too, cause i want kills too......

I also think that most of these complaints are common to lower lvl groups.....at higher lvls I see way less of this situation.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-17-2007, 10:31 AM
Dps is not the only type of damage--- please look at my previous post. Ranged combat excels at spreading effects, and that is what makes it an effective form of combat. Far from having my party drag me around, my party gets antsy when I am not using it. Ranged weapons are not the equal to melee in HP damage-- as I said before they should not be. They are however fantastic at manipulating the battlefield using effects and they ALSO do damage.

True.....I don't have most of the great bows like paralysers yet.....can't find them or afford them. :( Quite often i will use a curse spewer and just try to curse as many targets as possible.....IMHO I think it works great. But if I do draw agro it is usually just one guy at a time, and i will switch to melee, and I'm certainly a good enough tank to take out one guy (most of the time anyway).....but I won't play that run backwards game for long....not at higher lvls anyway. Past a certain point bow DPS is extremely low.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-17-2007, 10:47 AM
Which effects are you talking about ? Destruction...not needed in most cases.Paralyzing...meh i will just take a caster. Smiting , melee can smite better than ranged. Disruption...melee better. Wounding/puncturing...melee better. Cursespewing...hmm, maybe i can give you that one, even though duel wielding cursespewers is probably better. Banishing ...melee better.
And ranged combat EXCELS at spreading these effects?
It all comes down to what i said before, if you arent burning manyshot, put the useless bow away.
Interested in your comments on this.

Destruction may not be needed, but it is nice.....helps rogues and battle bards a lot I think. Paralysing is great, and I'm surprised you don't support that one more. (really wish I had a paralysing bow :( ) I've tried smiting with a bow and yeah....it's sucks. So does distruption (not that I have a bow of that either) and wounding puncturing (except certain very high HP or heal capable baddies).
Cursespewing can be dished out in great quantities with a bow....and the ability of an archer to switch targets quickly makes it much more effective as a ranged weapon IMO.

I would Paralysing, Destruction, and Cursespewing are most effective with a bow.....also the ability to sit back with an overview of the battlefield and able to switch targets quickly and help out anyone in the party who needs it should not be overlooked......I can be back a long way unmolested....see the caster taking agro and target his opponent.......or even pull out a wand and help out the cleric when things get real bad......the tank is hip deep in baddies and quite often oblivious to what the rest of the party is doing.....

I can support the tank with nominal DPS or special purpose bows.....and support eveyone else as well.....My kills may be a distant third in most groups, but I think I have contributed a lot to every battle, and saved a lot of people's butts........that rez ring of mine has brought back many a cleric....and it was used quickly and uninterupted because I was back very far from the fight and not in the thick of things.....ranged has some real advantages, and even the lower DPS still gets kills....I wish there was an assist count....I bet I damage more creatures than anyone else in the group most of the time. (firewall might be an exception though)

ErgonomicCat
10-17-2007, 11:45 AM
Dang fine post, overall. ;) You've clearly abused TWF in PnP. The key to TWF, in PnP, is splatbooks. You can make an okay TWF'er using only core material, but it's hard. You really need to branch out in to a couple books to make something that you'll enjoy playing. DDO lacks most of that, except in the form of enhancements....

Specific comments in red.




- Sword and Board loses out on an offhanded source of damage. (S&B style affects STR rangers because of the bizarre implementation of Improved Shield Bash)

Agreed. Heck, with PHB II, there's Agile Shield Fighter which lets you TWF with a sword and board without needing high Dex. My favorite rangers have been combos like this - you lose out on feats like WF applying to both weapons, but WF is a pretty weak feat in PnP at this point. My most memorable ranger was one that used 3.0 monkey grip to wield a longspear in one-hand, and then had a spiked bashing shield in the other. 3.5, he'd have a Kusari-gama and shield.

- TWF loses a souce of defense (bucklers and more specifically Improved Buckler Defense).

Somewhat. IBD is often made irrelevant by the use of dancing shields, at the point that you have more money than feats. But the key is that a TWF'er in DDO can't get a shield bonus, barring shield clickies. That's been mitigated in PnP, but not here.

- The lack of double weapons also affects STR based rangers due to pack space and the fact that a double weapon can be used in TWF or THF style.

100%. Double weapons are the misunderstood children of DnD, but they are masterful. The ability to choose more attacks or more power attack damage is a lovely thing. The ability to use power attack on twf is a lovely thing....

- THF gets an AOE effect that is nowhere in the P&P rules.

Some "Way of" chains would be nice. Examples would include Way of the Dervish (Could emulate the PrC), Way of the Bow (To emulate aspects of the Initiate of the Bow PrC)

I would love to see DDO get an enhancement revamp, much like WoW's talent revamp - all enhancements are refunded, enhancement point values are adjusted, new trees are put in, etc. I think it's about time, and I think rangers and sorcs are the top of the list for that....

suitepotato
10-17-2007, 02:54 PM
Remember the Lord of the Rings trilogy and Aragorn's fighting skills? Legolas' skills? There you go. A nice mix between the two is what a ranger should be. Now then, in DDO terms that means a slight fix to ranged fighting such as a better enhancement chain than what we have now; i'd like to see called trick shots which require a concentration check in battle but which do an automatic critical if successful, maybe even a vorpal instakill high level enhancement that like a vorpal needs a high threshold but based on concentration, int, and wis.

With twf, it should come with better speed like a natural half-haste to account for the martial arts nature of it versus standard hack and slash, and a better enhancement chain such as specializing in different weapons. Kukris lend themselves to it but with enough strength and the right kata, you should be able to twf dwarven war axes to their best effect. Use strength and dex as pre-reqs as well as int and wis. You must be this smart and this strong to master this weapon twf art, and so on.

AND... when you give twf automatically, force the player to choose a school/path. Such as kukri, long sword, short sword, etc. Their choices limited by int, dex, str, and wis. The longevity of their skill in battle being constrained by con beyond which they head into becoming fatigued. Such as they twf in melee for too long and their bonuses temporarily lower until the skill cannot be used and their ac drops until they rest at a shrine or receive a heal or restoration. The more stenuous the type of twf weapons and school style, the shorter the duration of using it.

Cap a school at some level and allow a second school to be then started at ground floor, it becoming more useful as they progress, regardless of actual level cap being raised or not.

And on custom builds absolutely forbid certain twf styles/schools/weapon choices from working AT ALL with heavier armors. Let there be a special hard to qualify for school based on your stats that could do plate with two longswords but in a restricted way that lessened dps while also limiting AC at the same time since while you are concentrating on twf in armor, you're not concentrating on using that armor to best defensive effect. Also, give a shield bash real teeth by making it part of twf with a school of its own.

HP probably doesn't need any increasing unless they make a sub-type that is crossed essentially with a barbarian with its own proper restrictions (such as on types of weapons that simply will not be used due to cultural considerations on a barbarian ranger of the tribal wilds versus one comfortable with the other cultures they meet).

Do this with rogues too. Heck, all of the classes could use better school/style subtyping.

EDIT: Just came to mind... certain twf styles should also make you doubly more open to a backstab or a flanking attack from some monsters so concentration, dex, wis, and int need to figure in as to where the toon's skill actually is. Can they commit to a twf power attack and still react fast enough to abort it to decreased effectiveness and turn to deflect a flank or rear attack? Can they do it fully through fast enough to get the full damage done and then react afterwards in the spare time given by attacking faster? Some of these should be inherent and others clickable.

Elthbert
10-17-2007, 04:12 PM
True.....I don't have most of the great bows like paralysers yet.....can't find them or afford them. :( Quite often i will use a curse spewer and just try to curse as many targets as possible.....IMHO I think it works great. But if I do draw agro it is usually just one guy at a time, and i will switch to melee, and I'm certainly a good enough tank to take out one guy (most of the time anyway).....but I won't play that run backwards game for long....not at higher lvls anyway. Past a certain point bow DPS is extremely low.


Well I have to say someone cursing everyone on the battlefield is just awesome. Agian, take those effects mentioned above and combine them with a cursespewer, 2 disrupters and cursespewer are really nasty to undead.

Crabo
10-17-2007, 06:11 PM
Now, you get 3 people with paralysing bows do that. Or 3 people with disrupters, or smiters, or wounding/puncturing etc and watch the battlefield.

You could replace the 3 archers with 3 x any other class and have more success.
Possibly on wide open areas like stormcleave you may have a point. There isnt too many dungeons like that though.
I love rangers and i really wanted ranged combat to be good, the truth is , it simply isnt.

Crabo
10-17-2007, 06:30 PM
Destruction may not be needed, but it is nice.....helps rogues and battle bards a lot I think. Paralysing is great, and I'm surprised you don't support that one more. (really wish I had a paralysing bow :( ) I've tried smiting with a bow and yeah....it's sucks. So does distruption (not that I have a bow of that either) and wounding puncturing (except certain very high HP or heal capable baddies).
Cursespewing can be dished out in great quantities with a bow....and the ability of an archer to switch targets quickly makes it much more effective as a ranged weapon IMO.

I would Paralysing, Destruction, and Cursespewing are most effective with a bow.....also the ability to sit back with an overview of the battlefield and able to switch targets quickly and help out anyone in the party who needs it should not be overlooked......I can be back a long way unmolested....see the caster taking agro and target his opponent.......or even pull out a wand and help out the cleric when things get real bad......the tank is hip deep in baddies and quite often oblivious to what the rest of the party is doing.....

I can support the tank with nominal DPS or special purpose bows.....and support eveyone else as well.....My kills may be a distant third in most groups, but I think I have contributed a lot to every battle, and saved a lot of people's butts........that rez ring of mine has brought back many a cleric....and it was used quickly and uninterupted because I was back very far from the fight and not in the thick of things.....ranged has some real advantages, and even the lower DPS still gets kills....I wish there was an assist count....I bet I damage more creatures than anyone else in the group most of the time. (firewall might be an exception though)

Paralyzing is a wonderful effect if the caster in your party is asleep or out of sp. Other than that...it would be far more efficient to let your caster handle the crowd control and assist the tanks in taking stuff down. You would have a point if all the mobs in every dungeon all lined up nicely for you to put an arrow through the lot of them, or if there were alot of wide open maps like stormcleave. I have a paralyzing longbow on my ranger...and never dream of using it. There are so many better things i can do than stand back and do below average damage, paralyzing mobs that the tanks kill in 4 swings anyway.

Elthbert
10-17-2007, 07:20 PM
You could replace the 3 archers with 3 x any other class and have more success.
Possibly on wide open areas like stormcleave you may have a point. There isnt too many dungeons like that though.
I love rangers and i really wanted ranged combat to be good, the truth is , it simply isnt.

I disagree-- the ability of an archer to effect the battlefield from clear across the field, to stay out of danger, to not draw any significant mana from the cleric, if played well---that is a tremendously useful trait. The casters in my static party have found much less mana use since the increase in bow use, and I don't think that saving 400 or so spell points is little thing at all.

Elthbert
10-17-2007, 07:23 PM
Paralyzing is a wonderful effect if the caster in your party is asleep or out of sp. Other than that...it would be far more efficient to let your caster handle the crowd control and assist the tanks in taking stuff down. You would have a point if all the mobs in every dungeon all lined up nicely for you to put an arrow through the lot of them, or if there were alot of wide open maps like stormcleave. I have a paralyzing longbow on my ranger...and never dream of using it. There are so many better things i can do than stand back and do below average damage, paralyzing mobs that the tanks kill in 4 swings anyway.

wow I simply could not disagree more--- I have found that paralysing was really really powerful.

Crabo
10-17-2007, 07:30 PM
I disagree-- the ability of an archer to effect the battlefield from clear across the field, to stay out of danger, to not draw any significant mana from the cleric, if played well---that is a tremendously useful trait. The casters in my static party have found much less mana use since the increase in bow use, and I don't think that saving 400 or so spell points is little thing at all.

Heh, one of the good things about this game is there is alot of different ways to do things. To avoid a ****ing contest, lets agree to disagree...because unless something changes in ranged combat, my paralyzing bow will be staying exactly where it is now in my backpack.
I will say this though..next time your sorc is dumping his sp pool before he shrines on a whole heap of buffs that you dont need anyway, you will know that the 400sp meant nothing. I have 2 x lvl14 sorcs and this happens regularly. In fact , there are only a few places in the game where my sorc struggles to get to a shrine without having sp to spare, and yes ...this is without a archer in the party using a paralyzer.

Elthbert
10-17-2007, 07:33 PM
Heh, one of the good things about this game is there is alot of different ways to do things. To avoid a ****ing contest, lets agree to disagree...because unless something changes in ranged combat, my paralyzing bow will be staying exactly where it is now in my backpack.
I will say this though..next time your sorc is dumping his sp pool before he shrines on a whole heap of buffs that you dont need anyway, you will know that the 400sp meant nothing. I have 2 x lvl14 sorcs and this happens regularly. In fact , there are only a few places in the game where my sorc struggles to get to a shrine without having sp to spare, and yes ...this is without a archer in the party using a paralyzer.


I will certainly agree to disagree, but my wizard is constantly running low.

QuantumFX
10-17-2007, 08:20 PM
Dang fine post, overall. ;) You've clearly abused TWF in PnP. The key to TWF, in PnP, is splatbooks. You can make an okay TWF'er using only core material, but it's hard. You really need to branch out in to a couple books to make something that you'll enjoy playing. DDO lacks most of that, except in the form of enhancements....

Specific comments in red.

Actually my main knowledge of modified TWF styles was from the early heydays of D&D 3.0! :D Monte Cook wrote an article on rangers and introduced me to the concept of: TWF + Imp. Shield Bash + Sword + Shield = Profit.

The Imp buckler defense has been brought up before and I made some suggestions on how it could be implemented. Basically in pre-IBD bucklers would provide the shield extras (ex. Fortification, SR, Elemental Resistance) to the character and would only come into play AC wise when the shift key was held down. This was to help encourage simple development, but, I'd actually like to see mapped fighting style attack buttons. (ex. Right mouse = one hander attack, Left Mouse = TWF attack)

I just like the idea of a more robust combat system in this game. The 3 basics are there but THF scales offensively much better in DDO than P&P and doesn't lose anything defensively (cause it has none...), TWF scales in 1 more attack but loses the defensive scaling, and S&B gains little defensive scaling while completely losing any offensive scaling.

Deathromancer
10-18-2007, 08:17 PM
I'd like to see some ideas that allow heavy repeater users abilities and dmg progress in line with bow progression, since str plays no part in their dmg, in the long run as lvls increase there will be no reason to stay with them, especailly if they have a multishot power attack type feat for bows added.

Also I'd like to see Great crossbows become non exotic as theres no reason to use them currently when comparing them to repeaters or longbows, and the few ppl who i know that got the feat to try one out got rid of it asap, after trying them out, or if they remain exotic beef up the dmg more so they compare with faster fire rated wpns damage over time, so its worth spending a feat on.

They should have major DR penetration for starters and do more dmg than they currently do and maybe even precision since in reality I could line multiple ppl up and shoot one bolt from a great crossbow and it should penetrate multiple targets with ease compared to all other ranged wpns

Another biggie, I'd like to see, is Ranger spells like flame arrow or acid arrows ect ect with increased dmg potential as you lvl up, so they can enhance their own arrows or Bolts.

last but not least time to beat the dead horse of arrow/bolt stack size increase them or give us quivers similiar to the new storage bags.

QuantumFX
10-23-2007, 11:54 AM
Something else that would be fun to see would be alternative feat tracks for the ranged feats. My P&P DM implemented this from a Dragon magazine article.

Basically rather than the Bow specific chain (Rapid Shot/Manyshot/Imp Precise Shot) you could go thrown weapons (Quickdraw/WF: Thrown Weapon??/Imp Precise Shot) or Crossbows (Rapid Reload/WF: Crossbow??/Imp Precise Shot)

It's meant to deal with the fact that a 7' tall longbow is kind of a waste in a cave.

Raiderone
10-29-2007, 10:09 AM
All of my tanks are low lvl, but I've seen this from both sides....you guys have to understand that most tanks see it as there job to get agro and hold it....that's what the higher HP are for. They can take it....they see it as their job to protect everyone else.

Shooting casters and taking agro is great.....as well as agro from the parties casters......But that's also what the tank is trying to do.

I musc prefer to have all of the baddies on the other side of the door with the tanks forming a protective wall.......But when the ranger draws agro first it creates an unknown/uncontroled situation.......guys are running past the tanks toward the back of the party and can now get at squishies if they choose.

There is a compromise here you know.......let tanks get agro first......Ranger concentrate on non-moving guys if possible....catsers and archers on platforms....rangers guard the back ranks......agro anyone geting past the tanks or assist in taking down a guy already agroed and fighting the tank....

I sometimes forget alot of this too, cause i want kills too......

I also think that most of these complaints are common to lower lvl groups.....at higher lvls I see way less of this situation.

This strategy is not just for rangers...but for all toons. It's called let
the tanks get aggro and form a wall to protect those behind them.

Let the rangers join in at the wall or pick them off from behind.
Targeting the casters would be better for ranged combat or even head on.
NO need to wait on them... Casters and Clerics too. Don't aggro until after
your foot soldiers...

It's nothing against rangers. Or lets say I have nothing against rangers
since i play them too.

Tanks/Melee Types First (not rogues)... Range Types and CAsters after Tank Aggro...when possible..

Raithe
10-29-2007, 10:38 AM
This strategy is not just for rangers...but for all toons. It's called let
the tanks get aggro and form a wall to protect those behind them.

Tanks/Melee Types First (not rogues)... Range Types and CAsters after Tank Aggro...when possible..

This is funny that the thread got necro'd for this, but it brings up a very key point for D&D:

There are no tanks.

Don't believe me? Walk into a PvP brawl session and see how long your "tank" lasts. Everyone in D&D is vulnerable. Fighter-types are highly vulnerable to spells and elemental damage. Their hit points are almost a form of weakness, in that they typically die just as fast as any of the other classes against those attacks they have very little defense, but require much more healing to get back to "normal."

Rangers and rogues should be the ones typically holding aggro against spellcasters. They have this nifty little feat called evasion, and when accompanied by some decent to awesome saves, it makes a character difficult to kill through magic.

Kerr
10-29-2007, 02:45 PM
Which effects are you talking about ? Destruction...not needed in most cases.Paralyzing...meh i will just take a caster. Smiting , melee can smite better than ranged. Disruption...melee better. Wounding/puncturing...melee better. Cursespewing...hmm, maybe i can give you that one, even though duel wielding cursespewers is probably better. Banishing ...melee better.

It's called playing the angles, son. With improved precise shot and a paralyzer bow on a normal or even hard quest, elite it's usually not worth it, my Ranger can bring an entire platoon of enemies to a halt. All you need to do is start lining up the shots with your furthest target and let it rip through one after another enemy until they're standing around waiting for the DPS folks to finish killing them. Last night in a Titan run those poor Ogres manning the cannons just couldn't get a break from me. Getting 8-10 standing on their post and targetting the last one brought an end to any more fire/acide/sonic/electricity etc being shot out at people making their way down the hallway.

And arrows move a lot faster than we do, even with haste, so you can spread the effects on the field a LOT faster.

Kerr
10-29-2007, 02:49 PM
You could replace the 3 archers with 3 x any other class and have more success.
Possibly on wide open areas like stormcleave you may have a point. There isnt too many dungeons like that though.
I love rangers and i really wanted ranged combat to be good, the truth is , it simply isnt.

Then you aren't playing them effectively.

Kerr
10-29-2007, 02:51 PM
Paralyzing is a wonderful effect if the caster in your party is asleep or out of sp. Other than that...it would be far more efficient to let your caster handle the crowd control and assist the tanks in taking stuff down. You would have a point if all the mobs in every dungeon all lined up nicely for you to put an arrow through the lot of them, or if there were alot of wide open maps like stormcleave. I have a paralyzing longbow on my ranger...and never dream of using it. There are so many better things i can do than stand back and do below average damage, paralyzing mobs that the tanks kill in 4 swings anyway.

Wow. In your mind it's more efficient to use a non replenishable resource (mana with the exception of shrine and mana pots, used by both arcanes/divine for healing/CC/damage) than use an easily replenishable resource (+3 House D returning arrows).

No wonder you have so many problems with ranged combat.

BUpcott
10-29-2007, 06:44 PM
wrong thread sorry...continue...

Kire
10-29-2007, 08:50 PM
That implies that there is something wrong with ranged combat, which there is not.

Elthbert lets try a little experiment. You come running at me swinging a greataxe from say, oh, 20 yards. i can drop you with two arrows easily. i own a recurve bow and a compound bow. choose which on you want me to use. both will prolly kill you in one hit, the compound more likely but eh i wouldnt want to be on teh recieving end of a 60 pnd recurve bow either.

Seriously i do archery in real life. so come over. i'll buy a set of chain mail or full plate online. we cna try it.

oo dont forget to sign the waiver first :D

~Kire

Elthbert
10-29-2007, 10:34 PM
Elthbert lets try a little experiment. You come running at me swinging a greataxe from say, oh, 20 yards. i can drop you with two arrows easily. i own a recurve bow and a compound bow. choose which on you want me to use. both will prolly kill you in one hit, the compound more likely but eh i wouldnt want to be on teh recieving end of a 60 pnd recurve bow either.

Seriously i do archery in real life. so come over. i'll buy a set of chain mail or full plate online. we cna try it.

oo dont forget to sign the waiver first :D

~Kire


Fine, I do archery in real life too, also have 13 years of western martial arts training, started With HACA back in 1994, left when HACA became ARMA but didn't stop training. Contrary to what you may have heard, arrows are not particulalry lethal agianst heavy armour. The myth of Crecy and Agincourt being won by the almighty longbow not withstanding. You want to buy me a good set of armour, made by a real armourer, and I'll be happy to do your test, but only if I get to swing at you with a live blade when I get there. If you want to see the real effectiveness of an arrow agianst plate armour, you don't have to invest $5000 in a good set. Look for a show called Conquest (The Episode on the Longbow), where the participants (In plate armour) actually allow themselves to be shot with arrows as the charge the archers. It is quite telling. You can also look into some other battles, like those in the 1430's where Italian mercs wearing plate road over the English Longbowmen like grass.

And how much archery agianst living creatures do you do, I do some bow hunting and even a 100 LB deer can ussually cover some distance after being hit by my 65lb recurve.

Staedtler
10-29-2007, 10:54 PM
Seriously i do archery in real life. so come over. i'll buy a set of chain mail or full plate online. we cna try it.

Buy me a set of +5 adamantine full plate and I'll let you shoot at me all day. Arguing about real life applications when talking about magic is just... silly.

As a fun aside, the kinetic energy output (http://www.huntersfriend.com/2007-Carbon-Arrows/arrow-selection-guide5.htm) of a bow is only around 60 ft-lbs max. By comparison, a 40 lb greataxe being swung at around 3 fps has over 350 ft lbs of stopping power :)

Kire
10-30-2007, 06:26 AM
Fine, I do archery in real life too, also have 13 years of western martial arts training, started With HACA back in 1994, left when HACA became ARMA but didn't stop training. Contrary to what you may have heard, arrows are not particulalry lethal agianst heavy armour. The myth of Crecy and Agincourt being won by the almighty longbow not withstanding. You want to buy me a good set of armour, made by a real armourer, and I'll be happy to do your test, but only if I get to swing at you with a live blade when I get there. If you want to see the real effectiveness of an arrow agianst plate armour, you don't have to invest $5000 in a good set. Look for a show called Conquest (The Episode on the Longbow), where the participants (In plate armour) actually allow themselves to be shot with arrows as the charge the archers. It is quite telling. You can also look into some other battles, like those in the 1430's where Italian mercs wearing plate road over the English Longbowmen like grass.

And how much archery agianst living creatures do you do, I do some bow hunting and even a 100 LB deer can ussually cover some distance after being hit by my 65lb recurve.


Buy me a set of +5 adamantine full plate and I'll let you shoot at me all day. Arguing about real life applications when talking about magic is just... silly.

As a fun aside, the kinetic energy output (http://www.huntersfriend.com/2007-Carbon-Arrows/arrow-selection-guide5.htm) of a bow is only around 60 ft-lbs max. By comparison, a 40 lb greataxe being swung at around 3 fps has over 350 ft lbs of stopping power :)

Eh if you hit a deer in the right spot they'll drop where they are. ive been hunting for as long as i could hold a bow i think. Now you guys are forgetting gaps in your armor. and in ddo you hit pretty much where you want to. and staed im not arguing but having a discussion. and arrows aren't exactly magic.

~Kire

barecm
10-30-2007, 07:49 AM
My main is my ranger and I have been playing him for a long time now. A few points I would like to make on this thread in regards to ranged combat and play styles (which somehow this has become the topic of the thread).

First, ranged combat is broken. Yes, it has gotten better lately, but still when you fire an arrow at an enemy that is directly in front of you and you get nothing registered, no hit, no miss... nothing... that is how it is broken.

Second, there should be more enhancements to increase the damage output when using bows. I would think adding more damage via an enhancement, feat or a modifier would help. I know it is maybe not in line with DnD rules, but sometimes you have to make adjustments to fit.

Thrid, attack speed, although adjusted in mod 3, is still too slow compared with melee and does not scale. There is no way that the attack speed of a lvl 14 ranger using a bow is 4 per round.

Forth, either an additional feat is needed or many shot needs a quicker reset timer. Currently, it is the only real damage dealer available to a ranger. Called shot or something along those lines needs to be implemented.

Ok, now for playstyles. Over a year ago our guild was born (ust after Mod 3 hit the street). Now I am not going to say we are the best guild of all or that we have all the best player ect... We do have some pretty good folks and a reputation of sorts (good / bad whatever). Back to the point, when Mythical started there was 1 ranger in our guild. Me. That's it. The feeling was that rangers were useless. I would like to think that I had a part in changing that opinion. Now just about everyone in our guild (which is a decent size now) has a ranger. Has much changed since Mod 3? Nope. Then why all the rangers now? Simple. They are good toons but need tons of good equipment to be viable. Plus, rangers and very adept at running things solo. You can splash a level of rogue in to be even more useful with umd, but even straight up rangers can use heal wands, cast some decent spells (resists, heal, barkskin, FoM and some others) that take some of the mana load off the casters / cleric.

Kerr
10-30-2007, 10:30 AM
Eh if you hit a deer in the right spot they'll drop where they are. ive been hunting for as long as i could hold a bow i think. Now you guys are forgetting gaps in your armor. and in ddo you hit pretty much where you want to. and staed im not arguing but having a discussion. and arrows aren't exactly magic.

~Kire

So what, an Imperial Star Destroyer wouldn't have a chance against the Enterprise-D!!!!!!!!

Oh god people, please stop arguing about it. It's pointless, it's a waste of time. They've said they've intentionally gimped ranged combat for good reason. It's done, it's not changing for good reason.

Kire
10-30-2007, 02:35 PM
So what, an Imperial Star Destroyer wouldn't have a chance against the Enterprise-D!!!!!!!!

Oh god people, please stop arguing about it. It's pointless, it's a waste of time. They've said they've intentionally gimped ranged combat for good reason. It's done, it's not changing for good reason.

im asking for a change (if you read CODOG rnager thread a little down you'll see CODog (a dev) said there would be changes to range combat in mod 6)
and i was pointing out the things wrong with ranged combat because El thought there wasn't anything wrong. read the first page.

Kerr
10-30-2007, 02:41 PM
No, you read the person's posts before yours and others. He is trying to make the argument that a composite longbow should be as damaging as a great axe in combat. Others before you have been asking for ranged combat to be as effective DPS as melee. They've already said that will never be the case, for good reason.

Kire
10-30-2007, 02:58 PM
No, you read the person's posts before yours and others. He is trying to make the argument that a composite longbow should be as damaging as a great axe in combat. Others before you have been asking for ranged combat to be as effective DPS as melee. They've already said that will never be the case, for good reason.

thats nto what im asking for.. if you want to send me a PM i'll explain it to you. Other then that please dont put words into my mouth. And el was trying to make the argument that a COmposite Longbow should be as damaging as a great axe? because from what i assumed he was saying there was nothing wrong with ranged combat and that it shoudl be left alone

~Kire

llevenbaxx
10-30-2007, 03:06 PM
No, you read the person's posts before yours and others. He is trying to make the argument that a composite longbow should be as damaging as a great axe in combat. Others before you have been asking for ranged combat to be as effective DPS as melee. They've already said that will never be the case, for good reason.

It is nearly as damaging as a greataxe. 1-8 compared to 1-12. They both have the potential do do severe damage on a crit(X3) and in PnP at least, have the same amount of attacks. That not equal no but quite close all told. The only good reason ive seen is their system cant handle that many arrows flying around:rolleyes:. In PnP ranged was comparable with melee, in DDO they are night and day. Think thats all they are trying to get at.

There really arent that many good perch point you can get in before the melee has slaughtered everything. In WW you can drop most things before they get to you but by the time you get to tangleroot thats mostly over. I just started another ranger 2 weeks ago(level8 currently with a 28dex/18str) and its already evident why I stopped my first two attempts.

They jacked up melee and toned down ranged. Melee special attacks are better or equal to PnP while the rangers where put on timers even with lower attack rates. The system worked early on but the rising hp totals at level 8 and the insane hp total at level 14 ranged combat does not cut it.

If I wanted to be CC/debuff Ill play one of my wizards. If I want to kill like a ranger in PnP D&D I have to run around in circles plunking away to do the same thing a melee could accomplish in 2-3 swings. All has been said before I know.

Kerr
10-30-2007, 03:11 PM
It is nearly as damaging as a greataxe. 1-8 compared to 1-12. They both have the potential do do severe damage on a crit(X3) and in PnP at least, have the same amount of attacks. That not equal no but quite close all told. The only good reason ive seen is their system cant handle that many arrows flying around:rolleyes:.

Try rereading the threads then. You missed some important, very revealing items by CODOG. Ranged damage must remain less than melee damage or people would just start resorting to kiting everything or finding more exploits to kill enemies while being unreachable while using a bow.

Kire
10-30-2007, 03:37 PM
Try rereading the threads then. You missed some important, very revealing items by CODOG. Ranged damage must remain less than melee damage or people would just start resorting to kiting everything or finding more exploits to kill enemies while being unreachable while using a bow.

Well i wasnt talking to him when you interupted my convo with El. and i never said CoDog said this was gonna happen. he did say however that there would be changed to the range system in DDO in mod 6. he didnt say how. and if you go read the other ranger thread you'll realize that im not suggesting being able to score crazy damage all the time. so go read the last 3 or 4 pages of the other thread about rangers and you might realize i was arguing with el about whether or not ranged combat is broken, not about how it should be fixed.

~Kire

llevenbaxx
10-30-2007, 03:39 PM
Try rereading the threads then. You missed some important, very revealing items by CODOG. Ranged damage must remain less than melee damage or people would just start resorting to kiting everything or finding more exploits to kill enemies while being unreachable while using a bow.

Read that thread actually(I read them all:)).

It already is better weapon damage right out of the gates by weapon type, compounded by the fact you can achieve godly levels of strength to further the gap-add in the "extra" attack and....) The kiting thing might have flown when the level cap was 10(barely) but with the newer stuff it would take alot longer in a game where everyone wants to deal death at light speed. That isnt going to happen with a bow in this game. You think everyone going to run out an roll up a ranger because they can get through content with out getting hit but taking 2-3X as long?:rolleyes:Didnt buy it when he said it either.:D

Perches are exploits? I thought he suggested using that as a tactic in that same thread. Kinda what made me roll my new ranger up. If kiting/CC is the only legit tactic of using ranged combat, the class truly is doomed.:)

Kire
10-30-2007, 03:42 PM
Read that thread actually(I read them all:)).

It already is right out of the gates by weapon type, compounded by the fact you can achieve godly levels of strenght to further the gap. The kiting thing might have flown when the level cap was 10(barely) but with the newer stuff it would take alot longer in a game where everyone wants to deal death at light speed. That isnt going to happen with a bow in this game. You think everyone going to run out an roll up a ranger because they can get through content with out getting hit but taking 2-3X as long?:rolleyes:Didnt buy it when he said it either.:D

Perches are exploits? I thought he suggested using that as a tactic in that same thread. Kinda what made me roll my new ranger up. If kiting/CC is the only legit tactic of using ranged combat, the class truly is doomed.:)


Lol i laugh in pvp when im playing my lowbie sorc and killing lvl 14 tanks. they always say "why do you keep running and jumping around!#!@#"

Apparantly all ranged combatants are supposed to stay in one spot and not try to get a point of advantage.

In von 3 near hte beggning of the quest there is a ledge with 3-4 archers on it and 2-3 mages. they are clearly exploitng :D

llevenbaxx
10-30-2007, 03:48 PM
Lol i laugh in pvp when im playing my lowbie sorc and killing lvl 14 tanks. they always say "why do you keep running and jumping around!#!@#"

Apparantly all ranged combatants are supposed to stay in one spot and not try to get a point of advantage.

In von 3 near hte beggning of the quest there is a ledge with 3-4 archers on it and 2-3 mages. they are clearly exploitng :D

Sure I can see it being a trip in PVP:D but when you are trying to get a quest done and you are playing the chasing game continually, people tend to not like it. I just think you should be able to build a viable ranged damaging character, with current mechanics and dungeoun design I just dont see it happnin.:(

Kire
10-30-2007, 03:51 PM
Sure I can see it being a trip in PVP:D but when you are trying to get a quest done and you are playing the chasing game continually, people tend to not like it. I just think you should be able to build a viable ranged damaging character, with current mechanics and dungeoun design I just dont see it happnin.:(

well in another thread i suggested a couple things, among them:

1. Are strong bow hit (kinda likea smite evil) that has unlimited uses per rest but has a cooldown. Does 4x damage. 10x on crit. lowers shooting speed some in between uses.

2. A stance that increases shooting speed (melee?) but lowers accuracy and damage.

With this you could customize your ranger quite a bit. you can choose to shoot quickly but with little damage, do massive damage but not shoot as fast. or you can be in-between ( the current system).

Would definanatly add some customization to teh whole thing

~Kire

oronisi
10-30-2007, 04:05 PM
Rangers as we know can be built to perfection and overcome everyone. there a mixture of everything and can almost anything, if built right. People dont see this and i think some obvious things should happen so that rangers are more welcome in parties, so when someone needs a tank they can take a ranger to. A few suggestions could be an increase in the hitpoints, an incrase in ranged damange, also. For the spell barkskin. When a ranger reaches level 13 or something to show that they are going almost or are pure ranger, let barkskin give +10 to ac. That will want them welcome in parties big time. o and give rangers a special place to chill like the casters do

What you need to do is march over to the ranger forum and tell the rest of your class how to play. Whenever I pug with a ranger, they seem to neither provide valuable dps (they arent drawing agro or getting any kills; = not doing dps), they aren't healing or buffing minus barkskin sometimes. What are rangers supposed to do? You should go tell your buddies.

I'd be fine with rangers adding low dps, and then pounding the **** out of casters in the back. Rangers are well suited for that with their reflex, saves, and given spells and 2h feats. But they don't. There are just too many rangers that stink, don't offer any benefit to the party, or if they do, they do it by stealing rogue abilities and trying to mooch off of what rogues can already do.

So if you think rangers can be made to be powerful helpful characters, I'd ask you to tell the other would-be rangers how to reroll.

Gol
10-30-2007, 04:06 PM
Rangers as we know can be built to perfection and overcome everyone. there a mixture of everything and can almost anything, if built right. People dont see this and i think some obvious things should happen so that rangers are more welcome in parties, so when someone needs a tank they can take a ranger to. A few suggestions could be an increase in the hitpoints, an incrase in ranged damange, also. For the spell barkskin. When a ranger reaches level 13 or something to show that they are going almost or are pure ranger, let barkskin give +10 to ac. That will want them welcome in parties big time. o and give rangers a special place to chill like the casters do
I'll speak for most people from Argonnessen when I say...

They don't hate Rangers as much as you think. I think what you see is more of a personal thing than a class thing. I think saying any more would earn me infraction points, so I'll leave it at that and let you draw your own conclusions.

Meriadeuc
10-30-2007, 04:35 PM
As a fun aside, the kinetic energy output (http://www.huntersfriend.com/2007-Carbon-Arrows/arrow-selection-guide5.htm) of a bow is only around 60 ft-lbs max. By comparison, a 40 lb greataxe being swung at around 3 fps has over 350 ft lbs of stopping power :)

This isn't correct. I suspect that you are using 40 as the mass, which is incorrect since the pound is a unit of force in the English system, not mass. The correct unit of mass to use here is the slug (a mass of 1 slug produces a gravitational force of 32 pounds at the surface of the earth). Kinetic energy is (1/2)MV^2 (even if 40 were the correct mass you would have 180 foot pounds, not 360), so the kinetic energy of the axe is (1/2)(40/32)3^2, or about 5.6.

Kire
10-30-2007, 04:42 PM
This isn't correct. I suspect that you are using 40 as the mass, which is incorrect since the pound is a unit of force in the English system, not mass. The correct unit of mass to use here is the slug (a mass of 1 slug produces a gravitational force of 32 pounds at the surface of the earth). Kinetic energy is (1/2)MV^2 (even if 40 were the correct mass you would have 180 foot pounds, not 360), so the kinetic energy of the axe is (1/2)(40/32)3^2, or about 5.6.

wow.. physics class doesnt help me on this one... =P


~Kire

Elthbert
10-30-2007, 06:29 PM
Eh if you hit a deer in the right spot they'll drop where they are. ive been hunting for as long as i could hold a bow i think. Now you guys are forgetting gaps in your armor. and in ddo you hit pretty much where you want to. and staed im not arguing but having a discussion. and arrows aren't exactly magic.

~Kire

There are no significant gaps in full plate. The fact is, that historically the armourer's art defeated the bowyer's art. By the end of the 15th century the only thing that could reliably penetrate plate was an Arbalest ( Great Crossbow) or an Arquebus, and both of those bounced off more often than they went through.

As for the deer thing, well sir, lets just agree to disagree because I have seen a deer run 100 yards with an exit hole in its chest the size of a women's fist and no heart. I have never seen an arrow put a deer down instantly, even well placed shots, quickly yes, but not instantly.

And I agree we are having a discussion not arguing.

Kire
10-30-2007, 06:44 PM
There are no significant gaps in full plate. The fact is, that historically the armourer's art defeated the bowyer's art. By the end of the 15th century the only thing that could reliably penetrate plate was an Arbalest ( Great Crossbow) or an Arquebus, and both of those bounced off more often than they went through.

As for the deer thing, well sir, lets just agree to disagree because I have seen a deer run 100 yards with an exit hole in its chest the size of a women's fist and no heart. I have never seen an arrow put a deer down instantly, even well placed shots, quickly yes, but not instantly.

And I agree we are having a discussion not arguing.


There are few mobs that are wearing complete FP in ddo. and if you hit a deer in a spine its proly not moving. if your shooting from a tree stand and you hit the spine while hitting the heart at the same time the deer will prolyl fall right there. Ive seen it happen a many times.

lol ive shot a deer through both lungs and its heart and seen it run up hill 50 yrds or so. just depends on teh deer and teh bow. teh arrow could also have a good part in it.

And my main point with that is how many arrows does it take to drop the deer? 1. you dont have to hit a deer 10-15 times to kill it like you would to a wolf in ddo. i knwo real life has no place in DDO, but this is a pretty close similaritie (excuse my spelling).

salmag
10-30-2007, 06:52 PM
There are no significant gaps in full plate. The fact is, that historically the armourer's art defeated the bowyer's art. By the end of the 15th century the only thing that could reliably penetrate plate was an Arbalest ( Great Crossbow) or an Arquebus, and both of those bounced off more often than they went through.

As for the deer thing, well sir, lets just agree to disagree because I have seen a deer run 100 yards with an exit hole in its chest the size of a women's fist and no heart. I have never seen an arrow put a deer down instantly, even well placed shots, quickly yes, but not instantly.

And I agree we are having a discussion not arguing.

Don't say "the fact is" because you weren't in the 15th century, so you do not have direct knowledge of whether this is true or not.

That being said, I do agree with you about the deer running about 100 yards before dropping more often than not. I, personally, have seen only 2 deer drop from the force of an arrow shot. Unfortunately, they were NOT dropped by me. One was from my older brother shooting at a buck from a blind about 10 yds above the deer, and the other was from my friend about 20 yds away. All my kills, however, had the deer running anywhere from 100-200 yds before dropping.

I believe that with the correct amount of force and the proper distance an arrow could, possibly, pierce full plate. I suppose this would also depend upon the thickness of the armor (because we all know that all armors are not made equally). I would think that the odds on it, however, are in favor of the armor wearer and not the archer. In a game setting, an archer could always find the "weak link/kink in the armor," just as a fighter can locate a "soft spot."

If they would just lower the Manyshot cooldown timer, this would solve the unbalance issue, and possibly make archery viable again. People would still complain, however...

Kerr
10-30-2007, 06:55 PM
And my main point with that is how many arrows does it take to drop the deer? 1. you dont have to hit a deer 10-15 times to kill it like you would to a wolf in ddo. i knwo real life has no place in DDO, but this is a pretty close similaritie (excuse my spelling).

You chop a man with a greataxe once, he goes down. You stab a man with a sword once, he goes down. You smash a man's head with a club once, he goes down.

Get it yet? We're not playing reality here. It's make believe. If you want your character and everything else out there to have 1 HP then you might as well play tag.

Kire
10-30-2007, 07:42 PM
You chop a man with a greataxe once, he goes down. You stab a man with a sword once, he goes down. You smash a man's head with a club once, he goes down.

Get it yet? We're not playing reality here. It's make believe. If you want your character and everything else out there to have 1 HP then you might as well play tag.

two things:

1. WHEEE TAG!

2. some ppl have nice pain resistance. plus a dull axe wont pierce armor all the time, a club would only knock uncouncious and if im angry it might not even do that. a sword, well same thing with an arrow. depends where you hit

Meriadeuc
10-30-2007, 08:06 PM
There are no significant gaps in full plate. The fact is, that historically the armourer's art defeated the bowyer's art. By the end of the 15th century the only thing that could reliably penetrate plate was an Arbalest ( Great Crossbow) or an Arquebus,

Does the name "Agincourt" mean anything to you?

Perceval418
10-30-2007, 08:14 PM
But paralyzation, destruption, smiting, those are not single use attacks, and for purposes of Undead or Constructs disruption and smiting are slaying effects. But more than that I have rune across rangers who have litterally pages of slaying arrows. they are for sale for a very inexpensive price on the auction house. This doesnot mention the ability to stack effects for damage alone such as flaming arrows on a greater giantbane bow for trolls and the like. I don't think this is an issue of single use effects as it is the ability of the ranged weapon in general.

The first issue i think coming from alot of players is they dont have a Smiting/Paralyzing/Disrupting bow.

The second issue is that i think people want to have it easier. Ive also taken this view on rangers, that not only thier TWF feats and Ranged feats make them a viable, diverse class, but thier buffs make them important to a party and thier ability to heal can save a party from a wipe in a tight situation.

I agree with you 100%. It may be difficult to aquire some of these weapons but thats true of every class, the best casters/fighters all had to play for awhile to get the items they needed to make thier toons the best they could be.

Kire
10-30-2007, 08:22 PM
The first issue i think coming from alot of players is they dont have a Smiting/Paralyzing/Disrupting bow.

The second issue is that i think people want to have it easier. Ive also taken this view on rangers, that not only thier TWF feats and Ranged feats make them a viable, diverse class, but thier buffs make them important to a party and thier ability to heal can save a party from a wipe in a tight situation.

I agree with you 100%. It may be difficult to aquire some of these weapons but thats true of every class, the best casters/fighters all had to play for awhile to get the items they needed to make thier toons the best they could be.

I had all the epics on my ranger ( smting, para, ghost touch of disruption, etc etc) and i i could only get aprties with ppl who knew me. i barely pugged. i ended up deleting him and now im rebuilding him as a twf build (wooh STWF at 16!) but im still very appealed to the ranging side of things.

~Kire

Staedtler
10-31-2007, 02:11 AM
This isn't correct. I suspect that you are using 40 as the mass, which is incorrect since the pound is a unit of force in the English system, not mass. The correct unit of mass to use here is the slug (a mass of 1 slug produces a gravitational force of 32 pounds at the surface of the earth). Kinetic energy is (1/2)MV^2 (even if 40 were the correct mass you would have 180 foot pounds, not 360), so the kinetic energy of the axe is (1/2)(40/32)3^2, or about 5.6.

I completely agree with everything you've said. However, a lot of the readily available results for ballistic physics I found used the formula of KE = weight*velocity^2 This is, as you pointed out, incorrect, but you have to compare apples to apples. Were it up to me all measures would be in SI and canonical formulas would be used, but I don't set the standards for easily referenced ballistic information.


Does the name "Agincourt" mean anything to you?

The comment was in reference to the end of the 15th century. Agincourt occured in the beginning of that century.


some ppl have nice pain resistance. plus a dull axe wont pierce armor all the time, a club would only knock uncouncious and if im angry it might not even do that. a sword, well same thing with an arrow. depends where you hit

So do you have anything to back this up?

GlassCannon
10-31-2007, 02:53 AM
This discussion has gotten a bit out of hand hasn't it?

If I apply Inertial Storage Devices and Kinetic Recombinant Coil Drivers on a bow(Boosted, naturally), you can fire an arrow from it at roughly a quarter the speed of light. Apply "Magic" from D&D and you can probably get about the same effect, to a much smaller scale. What I'm talking about uses the energy of a couple dozen nuclear power plants, stored and focused through certain devices which can't be named in public(copyright, patent, security clearance, blah blah.), and released once every 6 seconds. In DDO.... well, you get the drift.

A good DDO Ranger can comparatively knock a Sherman Tank off a highway(or at least put some nasty craters in it). Why then can't a good Ranger instakill? This appears to be where the thread has gone. I think the D&D system has been implemented properly, and some of the players want to see a more Unreal Tournament or Quake 4 performance out of it. Although this would add some interesting aspects and combat tactics to the game, I think DDO is still far too young for such things(raids where you have to pinpoint shoot a target from a good 30 second hasted run away, despite lag and interference... you get the idea), and things are pretty much fine the way they are. The Damage Scale is definitely broken, but then... D&D was made to be tweaked. I would like to see a Vorpal type effect from Rangers regardless what bow/crossbow/thrown item they use however. It would add some intrigue to the game. Balancing it would be a mess.

Oh, and something I totally loved from MOD 3: Ranged Touch Attack Critical Hits(Crit on Ranged Touch, get 3 hits instead of 1). I want it back :D

Hvymetal
10-31-2007, 02:53 AM
Off topic here but had to comment, the sharpness of the sword nor axe is not really a huge factor when considering people in plate armor. The real damage done by these weapons, i.e. large swords and axes was in crushing damage and the breaking of bones......

Emili
10-31-2007, 04:01 AM
Off topic here but had to comment, the sharpness of the sword nor axe is not really a huge factor when considering people in plate armor. The real damage done by these weapons, i.e. large swords and axes was in crushing damage and the breaking of bones......

Arrows generally did not pierce a hauberk either... the real power of the welsh (latter english) longbow was the shear number of arrows the archers would send through the sky. A column of archers shooting 2 arrows a minute would mop up most all the unarmoured soldiers of the opposing side and a few of those who were semi-armoured... leaving the more elite men-of-arms.

Now certain swords such as the heavy claymore did do considerable crushing damages but it and longswords and hand-n-half were designed for much more... there are people today who actually study the art of using these weapons and a true swordsman used every aspect of the weapon from stabbing, to cleaving to even clubing with the hilt.

Unlike the axe or knife the sword is the only bladed weapon which was designed for one purpose - to kill another human being - thus those who were to use the weapon were highly trained to do so. Armour plate evolved over time and most all of it of it was penetratable by pierce in the force of blow from a skilled swordman. Also contray to popular belief... full plate armour was built for the wearer in such a way not to restrict mobilty. Knights who fell from their stead did not have terrible trouble getting up... Armore was actually built for tight fighting to the wearer and the weight was distributed evenly around the wearer's body thus was not much more an infringement on the knights rate of mobility then a 50-60 pack was to a GI in the last few modern wars.

Meriadeuc
10-31-2007, 05:40 AM
I completely agree with everything you've said. However, a lot of the readily available results for ballistic physics I found used the formula of KE = weight*velocity^2 This is, as you pointed out, incorrect, but you have to compare apples to apples. Were it up to me all measures would be in SI and canonical formulas would be used, but I don't set the standards for easily referenced ballistic information.


If you did both calculations correctly using SI units, the result would still be that the arrows have a lot more kinetic energy than the axe in your example.




The comment was in reference to the end of the 15th century. Agincourt occured in the beginning of that century.


Right, I used Agincourt because it's the most famous example of the English longbow being used with devestating efficacy against plate armor, but the longbow continued to be a decisive weapon into the early 16th century in battles such as Flodden Field (longbows were even used as late as the mid-17th century in the English Civil war).

The English longbow was actually a significantly more effective weapon than early (and probably even much later) firearms. Benjamin Franklin apparently did some testing and calculated that the revolutionary armies would have been able to rip through the British if they had been armed with longbows instead of smooth-bore muskets. The problem, of course, is that it took 20 years of training to create a really good longbow man, while you could get someone adequately proficient with a musket in just a few months.

Kire
10-31-2007, 06:09 AM
So do you have anything to back this up?[/QUOTE]

Well everyone has pain resistance. thats a fact. for example if i push my nephew (he's 6) and he falls it'll hurt him more then if i get pushed down by say my older brother. why? because i have better pain resistance then him. plus if youve been drunk before and gotten into a fight you'll notice punched that would of normally knocked you out barely fazed. same thing if your really angry (rage).

~Kire

Meriadeuc
10-31-2007, 06:29 AM
Off topic here but had to comment, the sharpness of the sword nor axe is not really a huge factor when considering people in plate armor. The real damage done by these weapons, i.e. large swords and axes was in crushing damage and the breaking of bones......

Or in knocking the enemy down and generally tiring him out. An axe might have about the same or even less kinetic energy than an arrow, which is an important consideration for penetrating armor, but it has a lot more momentum (particularly when used on horseback), which effects how much force can be exterted (since force is change in momentum over time). A weapon that can extert a lot of force, regardless of whether it penetrates armor or even whether it is blocked, has a good chance of knocking the enemy down or of tiring him out rapidly through constantly staggering him backward. Endurance and fatigue is something we don't have in D&D, but it's how most melee fights were decided in the age of the sword.

Mad_Bombardier
10-31-2007, 08:49 AM
Does the name "Agincourt" mean anything to you?Learning from History, FTW! :D

Kerr
10-31-2007, 11:26 AM
Well everyone has pain resistance. thats a fact. for example if i push my nephew (he's 6) and he falls it'll hurt him more then if i get pushed down by say my older brother. why? because i have better pain resistance then him. plus if youve been drunk before and gotten into a fight you'll notice punched that would of normally knocked you out barely fazed. same thing if your really angry (rage).

*sigh*

Okay. I want you to sign a waiver that makes me totally free from any legal recourse. Then I want you to stand there while I crush your skull in with a 10 lb club in one swing. I promise that I'll speak kindly of you to your next of kin.

Kerr
10-31-2007, 11:32 AM
Endurance and fatigue is something we don't have in D&D, but it's how most melee fights were decided in the age of the sword.

If I were you, I wouldn't even bring this one up.

A while back I brought up the concept of a stamina pool that would be self regenerating and would help determine how long a person could engage in melee/ranged combat before needing to take a minute's breath. The firestorm of people complaing "Waahhhh!!!Waaaaaahhh!! You're trying to stop our zergfests!!! Wahhhhh!! Waahhhhh! I wanna zerg everything, why is that caster trying to buff me while I'm running away at full tilt!! Wahhhhh!!!!"

It's just not worth it. :rolleyes:

llevenbaxx
10-31-2007, 11:50 AM
1. Are strong bow hit (kinda likea smite evil) that has unlimited uses per rest but has a cooldown. Does 4x damage. 10x on crit. lowers shooting speed some in between uses.

2. A stance that increases shooting speed (melee?) but lowers accuracy and damage.



I like the sound of one but number two sounds like it would go alot further to get rangers back to par.

At second glance though number two is very much like many shot but with more arrows instead of speed. Why dont they just ungimp manyshot, make it what it was in PnP. I know, the other tread.;) I think that would be huge though, using that is the only time I dont feel like Im try to cut a redwood down with a hacksaw.:D

barecm
10-31-2007, 11:52 AM
Here is a fact of history for the armor vs bow arguement. The reason that Ghengis Khan' army was so successful was because of the recurved bow. It hit harder and could penetrate the heaviest of mails worn by the European knights. The heavier the mail produced to combat this, the slower moving and clumsy the knight. Easy pickings for the archers that fired with deadly precision from horses they trained on since youths. The only thing Ghengis Khan could not defeat was a natural death.

What did help against arrows was silk shirts worn under light armor. (as the Mongol army wore, not the Europeans) which would wrap itself around the arrow point minimizing the damage when the arrow was pulled out of the victim....which was a majority of the injury sustained.

HumanJHawkins
10-31-2007, 12:45 PM
There are no significant gaps in full plate. The fact is, that historically the armourer's art defeated the bowyer's art. By the end of the 15th century the only thing that could reliably penetrate plate was an Arbalest ( Great Crossbow) or an Arquebus, and both of those bounced off more often than they went through. <CUT>

This is simply false, though you may have to watch the history channel for two weeks straight to see it proven.

There are plenty of shows there catering to people's fascination with killing. And they regularly pull up research that shows period bows go straight through plate mail. They don't need to hit a gap. Then, for those who don't trust research, they take an old bow and shoot an arrow straight through a plate mail breastplate.

llevenbaxx
10-31-2007, 12:50 PM
This is simply false, though you may have to watch the history channel for two weeks straight to see it proven.

There are plenty of shows there catering to people's fascination with killing. And they regularly pull up research that shows period bows go straight through plate mail. They don't need to hit a gap. Then, for those who don't trust research, they take an old bow and shoot an arrow straight through a plate mail breastplate.

It was TLC at some point too:) He was correct in saying that some did try to cover themselves in the equivalent of a wood burning stove to protect themselves but in the process became easy and cumbersome targets for other combat types.

barecm
10-31-2007, 01:04 PM
This is simply false, though you may have to watch the history channel for two weeks straight to see it proven.

There are plenty of shows there catering to people's fascination with killing. And they regularly pull up research that shows period bows go straight through plate mail. They don't need to hit a gap. Then, for those who don't trust research, they take an old bow and shoot an arrow straight through a plate mail breastplate.

QFT One such show had the Mongols and their recurved bows as well as developments in protection from arrows.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-31-2007, 01:06 PM
Have you guys ever been in a party where almost everyone used ranged weapons? It is truly a wonderful thing to behold. Baddies run back and forth toward the guy that hit them last, and hardly ever touch anyone!

The few times I've been lucky enough to be in a group like this were some of the smoothest runs I've ever seen......of course it helped that the classes mos likely to be ranged based are rangers, bards, Rogues, and muli-classed arcanes.....all of which are the most self sufficent of the classes.

But ranged attacks used in mass are very powerful. Maybe not in all dungeons, but even in close quarted ones as long as there is some way to put distance between the baddies and you.

Talon_Moonshadow
10-31-2007, 01:10 PM
I will certainly agree to disagree, but my wizard is constantly running low.

I have a Sorc that runs low too.....but that is because I really, really spam CC spells all of the time. I enjoy being a very active combatant, and I've noticed that my groups cake walk through most quests......well....until I run out of SP anyway.....then people start dying.

Kire
10-31-2007, 02:56 PM
*sigh*

Okay. I want you to sign a waiver that makes me totally free from any legal recourse. Then I want you to stand there while I crush your skull in with a 10 lb club in one swing. I promise that I'll speak kindly of you to your next of kin.

Ok first let me put ona helmet. metal. like in DDO. then get my angry (rage). then take a swing. But in real life (and DDO) unless i was a fighter i wouldnt be up near you. so. since we are talking about rangers you start 20 yrds from me ( could make it more seeing as rangers have unlimted shooting distance in DDO) start running at me. i bet i could hurt you more in the shots i get off then you could with one swing of your club. now take into consideration that witha recurve bow i can shoot more then one arrow at once ( in real life - 2 sometimes 3. DDO- 3.) so i can prolly get 3 sets of two arrows of before you get to me. so. thats 6 arrows. what kind of armor are you wearing? if your wearinga heavy plate then your gonan run slower so make it 5 sets. 10 arrows. Light armor? you run fast but teh arrows will do more damage.

~Kire

P.S. hehe

Aesop
10-31-2007, 03:13 PM
Its not about if arrows could penetrate armor at this point (though I admit to have seen an Archery Show ie Demonstration (at a Ren Faire) fire an Arrow through a 1/4 inch plate of steel). Its about improving game experience for people. Ranged combat is too slow and seen as too situational. Here are some things I'd like to see.


Manyshot implementation as a stance... accounting for MMo playability and balance.

1. Make it a Stance like Power Attack

2. Incorporate the Penalties (though maybe less so or another derivation)
2a. within "30 ft" or Short Range make the penalties Half (-1,-2,-3,-4)
2b.Beyond SHort Range make the penalties normal (-2,-4,-6,-8)

3. Incorporate ALL the penalties. There is also the attack speed penalty. I'd say have it reduce your attack speed by 15%... now I also think RoF needs a little boost as well. but that's the next part



RoF

1. Increase Base RoF to 50% of Melee... before the Rapid Shot Feat is taken into account.

2. Rapid Shot shuold increase the RoF by about 15% (bringing us to 65%)

3. I would like to see Improved Rapid Shot brought in to Increase RoF by an additional 10% (total of 75%)


Attack Progression

If meleeists get an Attack progression then so too should Archers. In my ideal world it would change a few things too.


1. Reduce Attack Progression from 0/0/5/10 to 0/2/4/6

2. Incorporate this for Ranged as well but totally specced out 0/2/4

3. With the 5th attack coming out for melee it'll be 0/2/4/6/8 and still only 0/2/4 for Ranged (though perhaps the attack animation would be a touch faster I suppose allowing for the continued 75% over the course of 100 melee attacks.

4. Blance the Monster ACs against this new set of numbers.



Incorporate Quivers and increase stack sizes

1. Increase Ammo Stacks (thrown to 100 and ranged to 250)

2. Basic Quiver holds 4 stacks of ammo (equips to Ammo slot)

3. Incorporate magic Quivers that apply effects to the Ammo (as someone else mentioned and I extrapolated upon above)



Fix the dang bug.


1. I know you are working on it ... thank you .

2. But still its important to note this .

3. I fired 12 arrows in a row with no attack roll on an oncoming mob... ticked me off



With much affection,

Aesop

QuantumFX
10-31-2007, 03:18 PM
To be fair to the devs they've already said multiple times that they want us to have quivers. I think it's going to take a little while to make it work.

Aesop
10-31-2007, 03:24 PM
To be fair to the devs they've already said multiple times that they want us to have quivers. I think it's going to take a little while to make it work.

I am not fair... I am, Rams...

get out of my mind you little....


;)

Aesop


ps still want em :)

QuantumFX
10-31-2007, 03:44 PM
I am not fair... I am, Rams...

get out of my mind you little....


;)

Aesop


ps still want em :)

I'm actually hoping they have something along the lines of a Quiver of Enholla as a raid loot item.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 06:21 PM
Don't say "the fact is" because you weren't in the 15th century, so you do not have direct knowledge of whether this is true or not.

That being said, I do agree with you about the deer running about 100 yards before dropping more often than not. I, personally, have seen only 2 deer drop from the force of an arrow shot. Unfortunately, they were NOT dropped by me. One was from my older brother shooting at a buck from a blind about 10 yds above the deer, and the other was from my friend about 20 yds away. All my kills, however, had the deer running anywhere from 100-200 yds before dropping.

I believe that with the correct amount of force and the proper distance an arrow could, possibly, pierce full plate. I suppose this would also depend upon the thickness of the armor (because we all know that all armors are not made equally). I would think that the odds on it, however, are in favor of the armor wearer and not the archer. In a game setting, an archer could always find the "weak link/kink in the armor," just as a fighter can locate a "soft spot."

If they would just lower the Manyshot cooldown timer, this would solve the unbalance issue, and possibly make archery viable again. People would still complain, however...


I most certianly will say the fact is, because it is a fact, there are numerous historical referances to it, for the 15th cerntury, as well as the early 16th century. Further, there have been scientifically conducted experiments which have shown that standard plate armour 9 not the uber thick jousting stuff) after the new metalurgical developments of the early 1400's where niegh invulnerable to arrows. Plate was awesome stuff, the best amounting to a mobile skin of metal, contrary to myth, the plate wearer could do summersaults, vault into the saddle and even do cart wheels, but was also virtually immune to rapiers, sword cuts, arrows, and light weapons of all kinds, and at range even early guns. Why do you think people were willing to spend a fortune on a suit?

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 06:24 PM
You chop a man with a greataxe once, he goes down. You stab a man with a sword once, he goes down. You smash a man's head with a club once, he goes down.

Get it yet? We're not playing reality here. It's make believe. If you want your character and everything else out there to have 1 HP then you might as well play tag.

Well to be Fair the HP in d&d are abstrations, in D&D you chop a man witha great axe , he goes down too, HP are a representation of luck, learning how to take the blow so that the energy is not put in, getting out of the way etc. Strictly speaking all hits in D&D do not draw blood and may not even actually make contact.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 06:31 PM
Does the name "Agincourt" mean anything to you?

Yes it was referanced by me above--- and agincourt is 1415 which is desidedly before the END of the 15th century. And anyway the English victory at agincourt was not so much a testement to the awesome power of the Longbow as to the dicisive nature of poor tactical decisions on the part of the French. Yes the longbow allowed a decisive victory there, it did at Crecy too, but several thousand French knights were also whiped out by a bunch of Flemish peseants armed with clubs and farm tools, do to supreamely stupid actions---- No one trys to say that the club and the pitchfork where the Uber weapons of the day.

Kire
10-31-2007, 06:45 PM
I most certianly will say the fact is, because it is a fact, there are numerous historical referances to it, for the 15th cerntury, as well as the early 16th century. Further, there have been scientifically conducted experiments which have shown that standard plate armour 9 not the uber thick jousting stuff) after the new metalurgical developments of the early 1400's where niegh invulnerable to arrows. Plate was awesome stuff, the best amounting to a mobile skin of metal, contrary to myth, the plate wearer could do summersaults, vault into the saddle and even do cart wheels, but was also virtually immune to rapiers, sword cuts, arrows, and light weapons of all kinds, and at range even early guns. Why do you think people were willing to spend a fortune on a suit?

Dude your saying it made you invinvible to any weapon escept clubs. which is ridiculous. if you hack at something long enough wihta greatsword its gonna break or be cut. if you shoot something long enough your gonna get through. and buy a set of platemail and do a somesault. i'll give ya a cookie.


~Kire

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 06:49 PM
If you did both calculations correctly using SI units, the result would still be that the arrows have a lot more kinetic energy than the axe in your example.




Right, I used Agincourt because it's the most famous example of the English longbow being used with devestating efficacy against plate armor, but the longbow continued to be a decisive weapon into the early 16th century in battles such as Flodden Field (longbows were even used as late as the mid-17th century in the English Civil war).

The English longbow was actually a significantly more effective weapon than early (and probably even much later) firearms. Benjamin Franklin apparently did some testing and calculated that the revolutionary armies would have been able to rip through the British if they had been armed with longbows instead of smooth-bore muskets. The problem, of course, is that it took 20 years of training to create a really good longbow man, while you could get someone adequately proficient with a musket in just a few months.

Well lewts try this agian--- I lost my first response to this.


The English armies were not wearing plate armour, they had abandoned said armour because a musket ball could penetrate said armour at a reasonable range. Kind of a rock beats scissors but scissors beat paper kind of thing( not the Ben Franklin is a particularly reliable source on military matters).

The Longbow was certianly used into the 16th century(and even into the 1620's but I have never seen referance to them in a document from the English Civil War, can you direct me to them) but they certianly were not decisive in them. They where a standard part of combined arms for the English, but they were never decisive after the 1450's.

I would remind you of who one the Hundred Years War, it was not the Longbow using English, but armour trusting Crossbow using French.

Certianly, armour out lived the bow by a very very long time, many cavalry units still wore breast plates all the way to WWI.

Kire
10-31-2007, 06:49 PM
Well to be Fair the HP in d&d are abstrations, in D&D you chop a man witha great axe , he goes down too, HP are a representation of luck, learning how to take the blow so that the energy is not put in, getting out of the way etc. Strictly speaking all hits in D&D do not draw blood and may not even actually make contact.

I agree with this. HP is mroe stamina not how much blood you ahve elft :D

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 07:25 PM
Dude your saying it made you invinvible to any weapon escept clubs. which is ridiculous. if you hack at something long enough wihta greatsword its gonna break or be cut. if you shoot something long enough your gonna get through. and buy a set of platemail and do a somesault. i'll give ya a cookie.


~Kire


Well I have friends who have done summersaults in theier plate right in front of me., and no it didn't make you invincible to anything but clubs. Axes, Maces war Hammers, Military Picks, they all became much more popular do to the protective capability of the armour and those weapons ability to defeat it. They also developed weapons specifically to counter it, the estoc and the tuck for instance, which were very thick rigid thrusting sword like weapons, ( I simply refuse to call anything a sword which has no edge whatsoever) etc. So no one was not invulnerable, but on as veryu nearly so compared to the average unarmoured, or lightly armoured combatant. Think of a mounted warrior in plate as a tank, are tanks incvulnerable --- no---- do you want fight on with weapons designed for anything but fighting a tank ---- NO!.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 07:26 PM
I agree with this. HP is mroe stamina not how much blood you ahve elft :D

Exactly---- see we can agree on something.;)

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 07:29 PM
If I were you, I wouldn't even bring this one up.

A while back I brought up the concept of a stamina pool that would be self regenerating and would help determine how long a person could engage in melee/ranged combat before needing to take a minute's breath. The firestorm of people complaing "Waahhhh!!!Waaaaaahhh!! You're trying to stop our zergfests!!! Wahhhhh!! Waahhhhh! I wanna zerg everything, why is that caster trying to buff me while I'm running away at full tilt!! Wahhhhh!!!!"

It's just not worth it. :rolleyes:

We have one of those already--- the pool is called HP.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 07:46 PM
Here is a fact of history for the armor vs bow arguement. The reason that Ghengis Khan' army was so successful was because of the recurved bow. It hit harder and could penetrate the heaviest of mails worn by the European knights. The heavier the mail produced to combat this, the slower moving and clumsy the knight. Easy pickings for the archers that fired with deadly precision from horses they trained on since youths. The only thing Ghengis Khan could not defeat was a natural death.

What did help against arrows was silk shirts worn under light armor. (as the Mongol army wore, not the Europeans) which would wrap itself around the arrow point minimizing the damage when the arrow was pulled out of the victim....which was a majority of the injury sustained.

Sigh.

Okay. First, Ghengis Khan lived in the 12th and 13th century not the 15th.
Second, Ghengis never fought Western Europeans, so we really have no data on thier combat effectiveness, however, the Iranians turned his armies back so they were not all that invincible.

3rd the Composite Recurve of the Mongols was not some damn super weapon either, it had a draw wieght of about that of an English longbow ( which there is strong evidence was often recurved).

4th The mail clad warrior did not just through on some chian over his day cloths, it was a multiple layered affair of think padding.

5th While mail can get cumbersome in large wieghts it did last as an armour for nearly 2000 years, it was amazingly effective. Still, plate does not suffer from the same issues as Mail because plate is evenly distributed across your body and does not rest on your sholders and hips.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 07:53 PM
This is simply false, though you may have to watch the history channel for two weeks straight to see it proven.

There are plenty of shows there catering to people's fascination with killing. And they regularly pull up research that shows period bows go straight through plate mail. They don't need to hit a gap. Then, for those who don't trust research, they take an old bow and shoot an arrow straight through a plate mail breastplate.

LYeah there are shows on the History channel which imply that there are monsters living in Lake Champlain too. There is a lot of science n this area---- look into some of the really good scientific test--- some have been on the History channel--- Conquest and the The Weapons that made England: Longbow, both had very well done and very scientifically valid ( meaning in methodology) test. I suggest looking for them if you really want to see them.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 08:04 PM
It was TLC at some point too:) He was correct in saying that some did try to cover themselves in the equivalent of a wood burning stove to protect themselves but in the process became easy and cumbersome targets for other combat types.

What the hell are you ltalking about, good plate wieghed about 50 to 60 lbs, and that wieght was evenly distributed across the body, ( thats less than a marine carries by the way) and by the mid 15th century was virtually arrow proof. There were gaps in armour to be sure, the armpit ( not exactly a good arrow target, behind the Knee, and of course the eyes ( lots of men died from an arrow shot to the eye) but it wasn't some robin hoodesque guy putting an arrow through the gap , it was 5000, archers raining an arrow every 10 seconds or so that luck found the eye slit in the helm.

Armour is seriously underrated, do you think that men who spent there whole life training for war spent vast amounts of wealth and trusted their lives to something that was not effective? Do you really believe that some welshmen with a Bow was the military equal of a warrior who had trained for 20 odd years to do NOTHING but kill? Armour was worn because it worked, it worked very, very well.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 08:06 PM
I have a Sorc that runs low too.....but that is because I really, really spam CC spells all of the time. I enjoy being a very active combatant, and I've noticed that my groups cake walk through most quests......well....until I run out of SP anyway.....then people start dying.

YUP!

Kire
10-31-2007, 08:32 PM
What the hell are you ltalking about, good plate wieghed about 50 to 60 lbs, and that wieght was evenly distributed across the body, ( thats less than a marine carries by the way) and by the mid 15th century was virtually arrow proof. There were gaps in armour to be sure, the armpit ( not exactly a good arrow target, behind the Knee, and of course the eyes ( lots of men died from an arrow shot to the eye) but it wasn't some robin hoodesque guy putting an arrow through the gap , it was 5000, archers raining an arrow every 10 seconds or so that luck found the eye slit in the helm.

Armour is seriously underrated, do you think that men who spent there whole life training for war spent vast amounts of wealth and trusted their lives to something that was not effective? Do you really believe that some welshmen with a Bow was the military equal of a warrior who had trained for 20 odd years to do NOTHING but kill? Armour was worn because it worked, it worked very, very well.


The armpit is a great target. theres a vein in your armpit. you get hti there you die. and archers train for a long time too. they dont just randomeyl pick up a bow. but we're not taking a bunch of archers that are trained to shoot one area en masse. we are taking a select few arhcers who may have been trained to hit those spots. also not all the mobs in DDO are wearing platemail. most arent actually. and if your telling me im not a good enough archer to be able to hit someones heart when they are wearing a robe i might just go jump off a bridge :eek:

~Kire

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 08:45 PM
The armpit is a great target. theres a vein in your armpit. you get hti there you die. and archers train for a long time too. they dont just randomeyl pick up a bow. but we're not taking a bunch of archers that are trained to shoot one area en masse. we are taking a select few arhcers who may have been trained to hit those spots. also not all the mobs in DDO are wearing platemail. most arent actually. and if your telling me im not a good enough archer to be able to hit someones heart when they are wearing ar boe i might just go jump off a bridge :eek:

~Kire




Well in D&D many mobs have thick natural armour, like an elephant. and I didn't mean the armpit was not a useful target, just that it should never be exposed to a ranged attack except under very unusual circumstances.Hitting someones heart through armour has nothing to do with your skill as an archer, it just has to do with physics.

English bowmen trained every week, but they did not live for war like the knight ( or later just the mounted professional soldier did).

I think the heart of the problem is one of enflated hp of the opponants and the iinflated damage potental of the melee classes in relation to the ranged attack. This is largely do to the great up in speed melee got in DDO and the fact that the solution to that was to up the HP of the Average mob. I cannot tell how upset I was the first time I went through Old Sullies Grog and hit a kobold with MM and he didn't drop, then I hit him agian And he still didn't drop ---- I fliped out, Kobolds have 2 HP on average, 4 I could have excepted But 9 I had done 9 HP of damage and he didn't drop I was just furious. I understand the frustration, but w=ith the uber loot in DDO I think that better ranged is probably too much, simply because it is so handy at putting on effects at range agianst a wide swath of targets.

Kire
10-31-2007, 08:52 PM
Well in D&D many mobs have thick natural armour, like an elephant. and I didn't mean the armpit was not a useful target, just that it should never be exposed to a ranged attack except under very unusual circumstances.Hitting someones heart through armour has nothing to do with your skill as an archer, it just has to do with physics.

English bowmen trained every week, but they did not live for war like the knight ( or later just the mounted professional soldier did).

I think the heart of the problem is one of enflated hp of the opponants and the iinflated damage potental of the melee classes in relation to the ranged attack. This is largely do to the great up in speed melee got in DDO and the fact that the solution to that was to up the HP of the Average mob. I cannot tell how upset I was the first time I went through Old Sullies Grog and hit a kobold with MM and he didn't drop, then I hit him agian And he still didn't drop ---- I fliped out, Kobolds have 2 HP on average, 4 I could have excepted But 9 I had done 9 HP of damage and he didn't drop I was just furious. I understand the frustration, but w=ith the uber loot in DDO I think that better ranged is probably too much, simply because it is so handy at putting on effects at range agianst a wide swath of targets.


well if someone is running at you they usually have their arm up in their back swing. that would be when to attack. of course that wouldnt kill them right away.

One of the main problems is the crit range on a bow. 19-20 is kinda crappy. i could understand if it had the reg damage out put of a pick and had the crit multiplier of a pick. but for bow its just X2. which sucks.

Another big prob is the lack of a auto kill bow. if a mob has to much health then the tanks can whip out vorps. now the ranger is stuck doing most of the damage (odd i know) and accidentally grabbing agro because he doesnt have a auto killer to contribute with

~Kire

Invalid_86
10-31-2007, 08:54 PM
Armour is seriously underrated, do you think that men who spent there whole life training for war spent vast amounts of wealth and trusted their lives to something that was not effective? Do you really believe that some welshmen with a Bow was the military equal of a warrior who had trained for 20 odd years to do NOTHING but kill? Armour was worn because it worked, it worked very, very well.

Don't kid yourself. English longbowmen frequently did train for 20 years just to kill. These guys were elite specialists for the day. Again referencing the Hundred Years War the English were also successful against superior French odds because they treated their bowmen as vital military commodities, not as cannon fodder to be trampled over by friendly cavalry like the French did. Plate armor was good, yes, but still was frequently penetrated by arrows- not every set was super uber top of the line high tech stuff. In fact there are historical records from the time of longbow arrows hitting the legs of knights, going through the leg armor one the outside, through the leg itself, out the inside armor, through the barding/saddle on the horse, and into the hrse's flesh. It's no coincidence that good longbowmen were feared by mounted knights.

Part of that fear led to the French practice of cutting off the bowfingers of captured bowmen before releasing them, becoming the forefather of the current rude English two fingers gesture.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 09:05 PM
well if someone is running at you they usually have their arm up in their back swing. that would be when to attack. of course that wouldnt kill them right away.

One of the main problems is the crit range on a bow. 19-20 is kinda crappy. i could understand if it had the reg damage out put of a pick and had the crit multiplier of a pick. but for bow its just X2. which sucks.

Another big prob is the lack of a auto kill bow. if a mob has to much health then the tanks can whip out vorps. now the ranger is stuck doing most of the damage (odd i know) and accidentally grabbing agro because he doesnt have a auto killer to contribute with

~Kire

No trained combatant is going to show his armpit to a bowman, it just isn't going to happen on even a semiregular basis.

And A bow has a crit of 20/ x3---- a crossbow is 19- 20/ x2

I understand the whole no instakill vs damage / aggro department, try doing DD with an arcane--- I keep telling my party--- too bad there isn't a HP done tracker on the XP chart, just a Kill counter, because I assure you I do the vast amount of HP damage during an adventure when I just feel like nuking things, but only rarely do I win the kill count.

Meriadeuc
10-31-2007, 09:07 PM
The English armies were not wearing plate armour, they had abandoned said armour because a musket ball could penetrate said armour at a reasonable range.


You're missing the point here. From a purely technological perspective, the longbow was a superior weapon in terms of rate of fire and accuracy at range all the way up to the age of rifles. If it had been possible to train longbow men as easily as musketeers, it would be the longbow that you would now be crediting with demise of plate armor.





The Longbow was certianly used into the 16th century(and even into the 1620's but I have never seen referance to them in a document from the English Civil War, can you direct me to them)


Try "The Garrisons of Shropshire During the Civil War", written by F. Stackhouse-Acton in 1867 (out of print, of course, but you might be able to find a reprint). It quotes a letter of the period that describes how a royalist force used longbows to route the roundheads in a minor engagement.




They where a standard part of combined arms for the English, but they were never decisive after the 1450's.


They were certainly a decisive weapon (along with others) at Flodden Fields in 1513. If you are not familiar with this battle, try "Flodden" by Niall Barr (Tempus Pub. Ltd., 2003).



I would remind you of who one the Hundred Years War, it was not the Longbow using English, but armour trusting Crossbow using French.


Well, that's a classic example of how it's possible for one side (the English) to win all the battles and still lose the war, isn't it? "War is an extension of politics by other means", and all of that.

Kire
10-31-2007, 09:09 PM
No trained combatant is going to show his armpit to a bowman, it just isn't going to happen on even a semiregular basis.

And A bow has a crit of 20/ x3---- a crossbow is 19- 20/ x2

I understand the whole no instakill vs damage / aggro department, try doing DD with an arcane--- I keep telling my party--- too bad there isn't a HP done tracker on the XP chart, just a Kill counter, because I assure you I do the vast amount of HP damage during an adventure when I just feel like nuking things, but only rarely do I win the kill count.

ah sorry got mixed up. havent had a true bowman ina long time. Ah well most combatants aren't trained that well in DDO =P. go into pop. the first clerics will raise their arms (revealing their armpit) for 2-3 secs. def long enough to get a shot off. Maybe we need a DoT attack for rangers. i would love it but it would have to be serious damage due to the mobs major hp. like 2d10 damage for 30 sec. this would help for big end named mobs. of course if it was a poision type attack the mob could have poision immunity (drueger black guards in BAM) that would stop this damage. or if it was bleeding over time (Which would really be con instead) it couldn't work on undead. see the flow?

~Kire

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 09:27 PM
Don't kid yourself. English longbowmen frequently did train for 20 years just to kill. These guys were elite specialists for the day. Again referencing the Hundred Years War the English were also successful against superior French odds because they treated their bowmen as vital military commodities, not as cannon fodder to be trampled over by friendly cavalry like the French did. Plate armor was good, yes, but still was frequently penetrated by arrows- not every set was super uber top of the line high tech stuff. In fact there are historical records from the time of longbow arrows hitting the legs of knights, going through the leg armor one the outside, through the leg itself, out the inside armor, through the barding/saddle on the horse, and into the hrse's flesh. It's no coincidence that good longbowmen were feared by mounted knights.

Part of that fear led to the French practice of cutting off the bowfingers of captured bowmen before releasing them, becoming the forefather of the current rude English two fingers gesture.

No the average bowmen practiced for 20 years-- while he went about his average daily life. I have always found it amusing that practice ranges were set up outside the Churches, so that required weekly practice would be attended, the powers that were knew that everyone would be at Sunday Mass so they had practice afterward, but an English bowman was not a professional soldier. Indeed there are such accounts of bowmen, but there are far more accounts of such things with Crossbow bolts, crossbows hit much harder and were more accurate, it was a rate of fire issue ( though I my self was shocked when I saw a side by side test and the crossbow came out with about about 10 shots a minute which is a lot better than I expected, granted it wasn't as fast as the 18 of the longbow, but still it was a lot faster than they are normally given credit for.
The Longbowmen was not an Elite specialist, he was a citizen soldier who had the right weapon for the day for a citezen soldier, a weapon which was potentially lethal and had a high rate of fire ( High rate of fire is almost essential for a good citizen soldier type weapon). From the point of veiw of ranged combatants Crossbowmen where much more "Elite", more highly trained and ussually better equiped as wwell as being professionals.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 09:31 PM
ah sorry got mixed up. havent had a true bowman ina long time. Ah well most combatants aren't trained that well in DDO =P. go into pop. the first clerics will raise their arms (revealing their armpit) for 2-3 secs. def long enough to get a shot off. Maybe we need a DoT attack for rangers. i would love it but it would have to be serious damage due to the mobs major hp. like 2d10 damage for 30 sec. this would help for big end named mobs. of course if it was a poision type attack the mob could have poision immunity (drueger black guards in BAM) that would stop this damage. or if it was bleeding over time (Which would really be con instead) it couldn't work on undead. see the flow?

~Kire



I would have no problem with this as long as it was limited in some way and the ranger had to give up something else to get it, an enhancement line which scaled damage like an action boost and which stacked with Many shot would not bring any objection from me.

Kire
10-31-2007, 09:35 PM
No the average bowmen practiced for 20 years-- while he went about his average daily life. I have always found it amusing that practice ranges were set up outside the Churches, so that required weekly practice would be attended, the powers that were knew that everyone would be at Sunday Mass so they had practice afterward, but an English bowman was not a professional soldier. Indeed there are such accounts of bowmen, but there are far more accounts of such things with Crossbow bolts, crossbows hit much harder and were more accurate, it was a rate of fire issue ( though I my self was shocked when I saw a side by side test and the crossbow came out with about about 10 shots a minute which is a lot better than I expected, granted it wasn't as fast as the 18 of the longbow, but still it was a lot faster than they are normally given credit for.
The Longbowmen was not an Elite specialist, he was a citizen soldier who had the right weapon for the day for a citezen soldier, a weapon which was potentially lethal and had a high rate of fire ( High rate of fire is almost essential for a good citizen soldier type weapon). From the point of veiw of ranged combatants Crossbowmen where much more "Elite", more highly trained and ussually better equiped as wwell as being professionals.

When i first starting hunting i couldnt pull a compound bow. so i had to use a crossbow. i had one shot because i couldnt recock it in the tree stand. i used it for about 3 years. over those 3 years of practing maybe for a week out of a year i became able to hit a deer's vital spots from 45 yards. without moving my dot (it was a laser scope). trsut my had to do it quite a few times. the safety belt i had to wear wasnt exactly quiet lol.

My point is that crossbows can shoot faster and stronger. But with a bow by the time the deer i hit starts running (unless i hit it's spine) i have another arrow knocked and pulled back. Cuz if i did hit the deer in the spine i want to kill it quickly. i don't want it to suffer for long.

In DDO the RoF for crossbows and bows are nearly the same. but crossbows do more damage. now crossbows SHOULD do more damage but i cant reload a crossbow faster then i can a bow. And either Bow's RoF need to be increased or crossbow's decreased.

Ive proly said this many times but we need a stance that increase are attack speed but lowers our damage and chance to hit.

~Kire

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 10:04 PM
You're missing the point here. From a purely technological perspective, the longbow was a superior weapon in terms of rate of fire and accuracy at range all the way up to the age of rifles. If it had been possible to train longbow men as easily as musketeers, it would be the longbow that you would now be crediting with demise of plate armor. No it wouldn't. The longbow is simply not that effective, as I said the armourer had beaten the Bowyer. Unless, you are going to contend that the Compound bow was just over the technological horizion then I just cannot agree with that assesment.





Try "The Garrisons of Shropshire During the Civil War", written by F. Stackhouse-Acton in 1867 (out of print, of course, but you might be able to find a reprint). It quotes a letter of the period that describes how a royalist force used longbows to route the roundheads in a minor engagement..

I will look for that, I don't doubt that this is true, I just have never heard of it, thank You I will try and find it.






They were certainly a decisive weapon (along with others) at Flodden Fields in 1513. If you are not familiar with this battle, try "Flodden" by Niall Barr (Tempus Pub. Ltd., 2003).

I am familiar with it. Though I am certianly not an expert on that particular battle I have always had the impression that it was more of a decisive victory for the Bill over the Pike. However, I would also point out, that James (like the french at Agincourt) acted stupidly. His army was poorly trained in the use of the pike, and the pike was a very poor choice for that terrain. Lets say that I think that is a valid interpretation of Flodden, but not mine.



Well, that's a classic example of how it's possible for one side (the English) to win all the battles and still lose the war, isn't it? "War is an extension of politics by other means", and all of that.

Except that indeed they didn't. The Battle of Bauge comes to mind, as does the battle of Formigny ( I have no idea if that is spelled right). And of course the disaster at Castillon, in which, if memory serves the English earl in command was killed, that could be mistaken, but I am pretty sure . The English lost plenty of battles in that long drawn out affair.

Elthbert
10-31-2007, 10:09 PM
When i first starting hunting i couldnt pull a compound bow. so i had to use a crossbow. i had one shot because i couldnt recock it in the tree stand. i used it for about 3 years. over those 3 years of practing maybe for a week out of a year i became able to hit a deer's vital spots from 45 yards. without moving my dot (it was a laser scope). trsut my had to do it quite a few times. the safety belt i had to wear wasnt exactly quiet lol.

My point is that crossbows can shoot faster and stronger. But with a bow by the time the deer i hit starts running (unless i hit it's spine) i have another arrow knocked and pulled back. Cuz if i did hit the deer in the spine i want to kill it quickly. i don't want it to suffer for long.

In DDO the RoF for crossbows and bows are nearly the same. but crossbows do more damage. now crossbows SHOULD do more damage but i cant reload a crossbow faster then i can a bow. And either Bow's RoF need to be increased or crossbow's decreased.

Ive proly said this many times but we need a stance that increase are attack speed but lowers our damage and chance to hit.

~Kire

Well with regard to rangers, bows get str damage and crossbows do not. And I can see a differance in the rate, though it, might not be as differant as it should.

Invalid_86
10-31-2007, 10:18 PM
No the average bowmen practiced for 20 years-- while he went about his average daily life. I have always found it amusing that practice ranges were set up outside the Churches, so that required weekly practice would be attended, the powers that were knew that everyone would be at Sunday Mass so they had practice afterward, but an English bowman was not a professional soldier. Indeed there are such accounts of bowmen, but there are far more accounts of such things with Crossbow bolts, crossbows hit much harder and were more accurate, it was a rate of fire issue ( though I my self was shocked when I saw a side by side test and the crossbow came out with about about 10 shots a minute which is a lot better than I expected, granted it wasn't as fast as the 18 of the longbow, but still it was a lot faster than they are normally given credit for.
The Longbowmen was not an Elite specialist, he was a citizen soldier who had the right weapon for the day for a citezen soldier, a weapon which was potentially lethal and had a high rate of fire ( High rate of fire is almost essential for a good citizen soldier type weapon). From the point of veiw of ranged combatants Crossbowmen where much more "Elite", more highly trained and ussually better equiped as wwell as being professionals.

Nonsense once again. In this time period there existed mercenary companies of longbowmen. Sure there were peasant longbowmen but even they were valued due to the many years of practice it took for them to use their weapons.

The advantage of crossbows is that they are easier to use and can be used from horseback. You don't need a whole lot of training to be good with them Thus more mercenary companies and professional soldier used them.

A good of a place as any to start in on some research is right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_longbow

Sure it's Wiki but it's Wiki with references and a bibliography.

Meriadeuc
11-01-2007, 06:36 AM
No it wouldn't. The longbow is simply not that effective, as I said the armourer had beaten the Bowyer.


Personally, I don't find proof by repeated assertion to be all that convincing.

The reason why I mentioned battles like Agincourt and Flodden is to provide evidence of longbows being used very effectively against the armor of the day. You seem to feel that the fact the French and the Scottish were "stupid" in some way invalidates this. Well, of course they were "stupid": they exposed heavily armored but slow moving troops to longbow fire at close range. That was a "stupid" thing to do because longbows were devestatingly effective against heavy armor at close range. If, as you claim, plate armor was impervious to longbow fire it wouldn't have mattered how "stupid" the French were at Agincourt, since 5/6 of the English force would have been completely ineffective against them.





Unless, you are going to contend that the Compound bow was just over the technological horizion then I just cannot agree with that assesment.


I must confess that I have absolutely no idea what your point is here.





I am familiar with it. Though I am certianly not an expert on that particular battle I have always had the impression that it was more of a decisive victory for the Bill over the Pike. However, I would also point out, that James (like the french at Agincourt) acted stupidly. His army was poorly trained in the use of the pike, and the pike was a very poor choice for that terrain. Lets say that I think that is a valid interpretation of Flodden, but not mine.


For the purposes of this discussion, all that matters is that longbows were used against the troops wearing the best armor of the day (on the Scottish right) and routed them.




Except that indeed they didn't. The Battle of Bauge comes to mind, as does the battle of Formigny ( I have no idea if that is spelled right). And of course the disaster at Castillon, in which, if memory serves the English earl in command was killed, that could be mistaken, but I am pretty sure . The English lost plenty of battles in that long drawn out affair.

Nobody ever wins literally all the battles, of course. The English repeatedly achieved complete and utter victory against French field armies, largely because longbow men were deadly against armored knights engaging in a direct assault. The English were unable to translate these victories into a sucessfull political solution, however, so eventually they had to start losing. This fact no more demonstrates that the crossbow or the armored knight were technologically superior to the longbow than the outcome of the Vietnam war demonstrates that the North Vietnamese were technologically superior to the US.

Talon_Moonshadow
11-01-2007, 10:01 AM
This post is really degrading.... :(
Your weapon debate has been the topitc of tabletop bannter among gamers since the dawn of D&D.......all it ever accomplished was bows and crossbows getting more damage, and maybe a better rate of fire in 3.0+.

The average soldier in any medievel battle I am aware of did not have full plate and the average bowman was not so well trained that he could hit a knights armpit.......that is rediculous to think so.

The bow's advantage has always been distance. And when you flood the battles field with hundreds of arrows at a time, you do a lot of damage to the non-well armored average soldier.....through shear numbers, and having the odds in your favor. You also get to attack them at a distance and take them out of the battle before they can hurt you........just like DDO DTW.

Yes.....an arrow through the head can put you down practically imediately....probably just as fast as an axe through the head.

I doubt even the best deer hunters out there drop a dear in one shot, instantly. Oh, they can kill in one shot......but the dear does not just fall over dead.
That said, the dear and the tabletop brabarian will not charge and attack the guy that just shot him with an arrow either......both will run for their lives.

However, Conan.....and our fantasy Barbs.....might suck it up and continue the charge........but they also might disregard a knife in their gut too.

Legolas did not exist.......but neither did Dragons and hobgoblins...this is a fantasy game and we have the right to be Legolas if we want (well, without the name anyway, according to Turbine).
We have the right to play Conan too.......and both should be fun and should be able to get lots of kills in their own way.

The basic argument here (well in the beginning anyway) is that DDO ranged combat is not up to PnP D&D ranged combat standards.......some of it is understandable, but even the Devs now admit that it needs some improvement.

A balance needs to be created that allows both Legolas and Conan to be valid and desireable toons to play. Neither should be clearly advantagous in most situations......One of the core concepts in 3.o+ D&D was to make the classes more equal. Yet DDO is very slanted toward melee types.

Only very recently have arcanes started to dominate.....and I think that is because of the power of their spells more than anything else that has been designed into the game.

I want a game that puts Legolas and Conan into a ring together and shows that neither is better than the other.....that both forms of combat are roughly equal in most situations.......at least when you average them together.
Obviously Conan has an advantage at pointblank range and Legolas has the advantage in an open field.

Now.......what we really need to address is crossbows!
They were way more deadly in reality then they are in any version of D&D!
For one shot anyway........I have not even seen a fantasy movie where a crossbow was reloaded in any decent amount of time at all.

In reality, if I see a charging barbarian, I should be able to shoot once with my crossbow.......kill him in one shot........than throw my crossbow down because it is now useless to use against his friends.......at least anytime in the next minute or five.

linuxhippie
11-01-2007, 11:29 AM
I play DDO, you know, the one where ranged combat is fine.
I am not sure what game the whiners about ranged combat are playing, but they seem to think that the MASSIVE advantages of ranged combat should not come with any cost and should do equal damage to a melee weapon, which is, frankly, equally absurd. However, DDO has, rightly, made ranged combat a very effective method of combat which does not also offer all of the advantages of melee.

dude, please. I've got 2 lvl 14 rgrs. Been playing a rgr since this game was in beta. I LOVE my ranger. Builds, smuilds, ranged combat IS broke. ranged combat is not universally effective, it is very situational. About the only thing more situational in this game are rogue skills. As a pure rgr I'm effective for as long as my manyshot timer is up. Then I'm a mana sump because whatever I didn't kill is very very ****ed off at me and will seek me out. If ranged was as effective as you profess, you'd see more rangers and less fighters, bottom line. I play all classes, and frankly, I enjoy my ranger the most. But effective, if i need effective I bring my Sorc. Range is broke. If you played beta, you'd know how broke it is.

Krellin
Blind faith
Sarlona

kensihin_Himura
11-01-2007, 03:26 PM
They are going to have to fix multi-shot soon, with the monk coming out and their fury of fists. So either they are going to fix multi-shot so that it functions like fury of fists, or they are going to make fury of fists like multi-shot and have more people complaining about the timer. Multi-shot is the rangers answer to dps. They also need to fix the ranged so that we can hit people moving, or atleast give us some chance of hiting them, maybe a 50/50.

salmag
11-01-2007, 07:21 PM
They are going to have to fix multi-shot soon, with the monk coming out and their fury of fists. So either they are going to fix multi-shot so that it functions like fury of fists, or they are going to make fury of fists like multi-shot and have more people complaining about the timer. Multi-shot is the rangers answer to dps. They also need to fix the ranged so that we can hit people moving, or atleast give us some chance of hiting them, maybe a 50/50.

/signed

GlassCannon
11-01-2007, 09:07 PM
dude, please. I've got 2 lvl 14 rgrs. Been playing a rgr since this game was in beta. I LOVE my ranger. Builds, smuilds, ranged combat IS broke. ranged combat is not universally effective, it is very situational. About the only thing more situational in this game are rogue skills. As a pure rgr I'm effective for as long as my manyshot timer is up. Then I'm a mana sump because whatever I didn't kill is very very ****ed off at me and will seek me out. If ranged was as effective as you profess, you'd see more rangers and less fighters, bottom line. I play all classes, and frankly, I enjoy my ranger the most. But effective, if i need effective I bring my Sorc. Range is broke. If you played beta, you'd know how broke it is.

Wait... I don't have a clone do I?

I have 2 capped rgrs as well... considering making a 3rd. Yes, Ranged Combat is extremely broken, but it is more effective in most cases than Melee as far as result vs expenditure goes.

Elthbert
11-01-2007, 10:05 PM
Nonsense once again. In this time period there existed mercenary companies of longbowmen. Sure there were peasant longbowmen but even they were valued due to the many years of practice it took for them to use their weapons.

Of course there were mecenary companies which had longbowmen, bt they were notthe norm and certianly not who was doning most of the fighting for the English. The Battle of Flodden Hill referanced by Meriadeuc was fought in the early 16th century and even at that pioint was fought with Bowmen raised from the various shires of England. Not professionals, just men who had been using the longbow thoroughout there life.

Th
e advantage of crossbows is that they are easier to use and can be used from horseback. You don't need a whole lot of training to be good with them Thus more mercenary companies and professional soldier used them.

A good of a place as any to start in on some research is right here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_longbow

Sure it's Wiki but it's Wiki with references and a bibliography.


This is simply a D&D fallacy, the crossbow was not easier to use, it required a lot more maintance and the tactics with which it was often used required a lot more training than the normal method of bowmen use--- mass firings at an area to banket it witharrows and wound the lesser armoured warriors, horses and whatever unlucky bastard caught it in the eye, neck or the like.

The peasent in England was required to practice with the longbow weekly, this gave the English a large number of proficent citizen soldiers which the used regularly. The Bow was cheap and could be maintained by a peasent. If you would like to do some research on the history of arms ownership by the populous and the requirments in England to bow practice ( as well as armour ownership and other weapon requirments) I recomend That Every Man Be Armed By Stephen Halbrook ( c 1984, University of New Mexico Press) which researches the legal tradion of arms ownership and particularly the concept of a Militia in Common Law and it's origions in Medieval England. It also talks about the continuation of that right into the modern age, but that doesn't really concern us here.

Elthbert
11-01-2007, 10:35 PM
Personally, I don't find proof by repeated assertion to be all that convincing.

The reason why I mentioned battles like Agincourt and Flodden is to provide evidence of longbows being used very effectively against the armor of the day. You seem to feel that the fact the French and the Scottish were "stupid" in some way invalidates this. Well, of course they were "stupid": they exposed heavily armored but slow moving troops to longbow fire at close range. That was a "stupid" thing to do because longbows were devestatingly effective against heavy armor at close range. If, as you claim, plate armor was impervious to longbow fire it wouldn't have mattered how "stupid" the French were at Agincourt, since 5/6 of the English force would have been completely ineffective against them.


Not at all. First I was very specific to state when the meturgical break thoughs were made, in the 1420's if you go back you will note that I said that BEFORE anyone brought up Agincourt.

The French at Agincourt where not to benifit from these breakthoughs because they were made a full decade after that battle, and then they were made in Italy( as I remember in Milan), first the French used Italian troops with the new armour, only later did it become common.




I must confess that I have absolutely no idea what your point is here.


My point is that the bow has a limit to it's power based on the limit of a man to draw it, the compound bow uses machines to allow that amount to greatly increased. The introduction of the compound bow might indeed have been able to keep up with the penetrative power of the early gun and prevented it's adoption en masse. Indeed, this might have brought about an end to armour, but the limits on the draw wieght of a simple bow where never going to surpass that of the resistance of steel.






For the purposes of this discussion, all that matters is that longbows were used against the troops wearing the best armor of the day (on the Scottish right) and routed them.


Well I will have to look into that and see exactly what happend on the Scottish right before I can concede or refute the point.






Nobody ever wins literally all the battles, of course. The English repeatedly achieved complete and utter victory against French field armies, largely because longbow men were deadly against armored knights engaging in a direct assault. The English were unable to translate these victories into a sucessfull political solution, however, so eventually they had to start losing. This fact no more demonstrates that the crossbow or the armored knight were technologically superior to the longbow than the outcome of the Vietnam war demonstrates that the North Vietnamese were technologically superior to the US.


And the French repeatedly achieved the same over massed achers. I don't see the point?

Elthbert
11-02-2007, 12:08 AM
This post is really degrading.... :(
Your weapon debate has been the topitc of tabletop bannter among gamers since the dawn of D&D.......all it ever accomplished was bows and crossbows getting more damage, and maybe a better rate of fire in 3.0+.

The average soldier in any medievel battle I am aware of did not have full plate and the average bowman was not so well trained that he could hit a knights armpit.......that is rediculous to think so.

The bow's advantage has always been distance. And when you flood the battles field with hundreds of arrows at a time, you do a lot of damage to the non-well armored average soldier.....through shear numbers, and having the odds in your favor. You also get to attack them at a distance and take them out of the battle before they can hurt you........just like DDO DTW.

Yes.....an arrow through the head can put you down practically imediately....probably just as fast as an axe through the head.

I doubt even the best deer hunters out there drop a dear in one shot, instantly. Oh, they can kill in one shot......but the dear does not just fall over dead.
That said, the dear and the tabletop brabarian will not charge and attack the guy that just shot him with an arrow either......both will run for their lives.

However, Conan.....and our fantasy Barbs.....might suck it up and continue the charge........but they also might disregard a knife in their gut too.

Legolas did not exist.......but neither did Dragons and hobgoblins...this is a fantasy game and we have the right to be Legolas if we want (well, without the name anyway, according to Turbine).
We have the right to play Conan too.......and both should be fun and should be able to get lots of kills in their own way.

The basic argument here (well in the beginning anyway) is that DDO ranged combat is not up to PnP D&D ranged combat standards.......some of it is understandable, but even the Devs now admit that it needs some improvement.

A balance needs to be created that allows both Legolas and Conan to be valid and desireable toons to play. Neither should be clearly advantagous in most situations......One of the core concepts in 3.o+ D&D was to make the classes more equal. Yet DDO is very slanted toward melee types.

Only very recently have arcanes started to dominate.....and I think that is because of the power of their spells more than anything else that has been designed into the game.

I want a game that puts Legolas and Conan into a ring together and shows that neither is better than the other.....that both forms of combat are roughly equal in most situations.......at least when you average them together.
Obviously Conan has an advantage at pointblank range and Legolas has the advantage in an open field.

Now.......what we really need to address is crossbows!
They were way more deadly in reality then they are in any version of D&D!
For one shot anyway........I have not even seen a fantasy movie where a crossbow was reloaded in any decent amount of time at all.

In reality, if I see a charging barbarian, I should be able to shoot once with my crossbow.......kill him in one shot........than throw my crossbow down because it is now useless to use against his friends.......at least anytime in the next minute or five.


I agree wtih you on most counts, and I would not have discussed the armour thing at all was not the idea of me charging a bowmen in RL brought up.

The only thing I disagree with in this post is the crossbow, the crossbow does not take that long to load, in test I have seen run about 6 or 7 seconds a shot, and thats not by a guy who is really going to die if he doesn't get it loaded. I think 3.X really hit the loading times of crossbows pretty well.

Leetsneaks101
11-02-2007, 05:57 AM
Rangers as we know can be built to perfection and overcome everyone. there a mixture of everything and can almost anything, if built right. People dont see this and i think some obvious things should happen so that rangers are more welcome in parties, so when someone needs a tank they can take a ranger to. A few suggestions could be an increase in the hitpoints, an incrase in ranged damange, also. For the spell barkskin. When a ranger reaches level 13 or something to show that they are going almost or are pure ranger, let barkskin give +10 to ac. That will want them welcome in parties big time. o and give rangers a special place to chill like the casters do

worst idea ever... rangers are already godlike, if you cannot get into a group, just make one, or run with the guild. changing the ruleset just so rangers have a better chance of getting in a group is stupid. But, rangers are only good if you play them right and with skill.. and lots of people make ****** rangers.

Kire
11-02-2007, 08:02 AM
worst idea ever... rangers are already godlike, if you cannot get into a group, just make one, or run with the guild. changing the ruleset just so rangers have a better chance of getting in a group is stupid. But, rangers are only good if you play them right and with skill.. and lots of people make ****** rangers.

How do you consider Ranger's godlike?

~Kire

Invalid_86
11-02-2007, 09:18 PM
Of course there were mecenary companies which had longbowmen, bt they were notthe norm and certianly not who was doning most of the fighting for the English. The Battle of Flodden Hill referanced by Meriadeuc was fought in the early 16th century and even at that pioint was fought with Bowmen raised from the various shires of England. Not professionals, just men who had been using the longbow thoroughout there life.

Without getting into a quibbling match over the word "professional" the fact remains that these men trained year round for 20 years just to be able to use their weapons effectively. That is not to be dismissed lightly.



This is simply a D&D fallacy, the crossbow was not easier to use, it required a lot more maintance and the tactics with which it was often used required a lot more training than the normal method of bowmen use--- mass firings at an area to banket it witharrows and wound the lesser armoured warriors, horses and whatever unlucky bastard caught it in the eye, neck or the like.


Nonsense again. Crossbows are by their nature easier to use. That was their appeal- a relatively weak and untrained man can still load the weapon, point and shoot. Even a child can do it- and as a child I did. The advantage of crossbows and the modern compound bows is that they allow a person who cannot physically draw back a conventional bow and aim effectively to at least harness a similar draw force. We aren't even talking maintenance or tactics here- we are talking about the ability to draw upon enough upper body strength to effectively use a bow with a 160-200 pound draw strength. This is the kind of strength that used to distort the spinal columns of archers of old and the power that was repeatedly reported to send an arrow through plate armor.

Just for fun here is a video of a guy shooting through metal plates using just a humble 110 pound draw bow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15ppoxi3PM4

Plus another cool video discussing the mounted cavalry vs longbowmen effect, showing that at close range arrows could indeed pierce plate armor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuTTvuoUPiI

captain1z
11-02-2007, 09:29 PM
Crossbows are by their nature easier to use. That was their appeal- a relatively weak and untrained man can still load the weapon, point and shoot. Even a child can do it- and as a child I did.




DUDE!!!!! How old are you? and Duncan McCloud called, he wants his butter churner back. :)

Invalid_86
11-02-2007, 09:38 PM
DUDE!!!!! How old are you? and Duncan McCloud called, he wants his butter churner back. :)

Some days I feel too old!

Nah my family actually owns an old style crossbow.

Besides I am descended from the Keiths by way of the Dixons- we have our own butter churns!

Elthbert
11-02-2007, 11:50 PM
Without getting into a quibbling match over the word "professional" the fact remains that these men trained year round for 20 years just to be able to use their weapons effectively. That is not to be dismissed lightly.




Nonsense again. Crossbows are by their nature easier to use. That was their appeal- a relatively weak and untrained man can still load the weapon, point and shoot. Even a child can do it- and as a child I did. The advantage of crossbows and the modern compound bows is that they allow a person who cannot physically draw back a conventional bow and aim effectively to at least harness a similar draw force. We aren't even talking maintenance or tactics here- we are talking about the ability to draw upon enough upper body strength to effectively use a bow with a 160-200 pound draw strength. This is the kind of strength that used to distort the spinal columns of archers of old and the power that was repeatedly reported to send an arrow through plate armor.

Just for fun here is a video of a guy shooting through metal plates using just a humble 110 pound draw bow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15ppoxi3PM4

Plus another cool video discussing the mounted cavalry vs longbowmen effect, showing that at close range arrows could indeed pierce plate armor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuTTvuoUPiI


A chilld can pull back a crossbow, say a standard crossbow that D&D would call a light crossbow, with a a draw wieght of 120 to 150 lbs or something in that range, how exactly would they be doing that? Use of a Frog certianly helped with speed and allowed a crossbowmen to use his back to load the weapon but I don't see your average 8 year old doing that without seriously damaging his back. I would say you are full of it, or you don't understand the type of crossbows we are talking about. Further, the longbow certianly didn't normally have a 200 lb draw wieght, Or even 160lb's, try 80 to 120 not over that, have you any idea how small the Welsh were? Or are, judging from my Welsh realitives ( tiny tiny little people)? And certianly tactics matter a great deal when it comes to the use of a weapon. That is one of the most ridiculous things I think I have even seen some one type out.

Invalid_86
11-03-2007, 12:27 AM
A chilld can pull back a crossbow, say a standard crossbow that D&D would call a light crossbow, with a a draw wieght of 120 to 150 lbs or something in that range, how exactly would they be doing that? Use of a Frog certianly helped with speed and allowed a crossbowmen to use his back to load the weapon but I don't see your average 8 year old doing that without seriously damaging his back. I would say you are full of it, or you don't understand the type of crossbows we are talking about. Further, the longbow certianly didn't normally have a 200 lb draw wieght, Or even 160lb's, try 80 to 120 not over that, have you any idea how small the Welsh were? Or are, judging from my Welsh realitives ( tiny tiny little people)? And certianly tactics matter a great deal when it comes to the use of a weapon. That is one of the most ridiculous things I think I have even seen some one type out.


I would reference you to the longbows from the wreckage of the Mary Rose, which were found to have pull strengths of 150-200lbs. As I said it required long, intense year round physical training to be a longbowman.

Again, a reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longbow
Note that it even mentions a gentleman named Mark Stretton who holds a world record shooting a 200lb bow.

As I said I was able to load the equivalent of a light crossbow as a child, and provided a winch or loading lever I could have probably loaded a heavier one. I didn't say it was easy- it was a struggle- but it could be done.

Note that the design of crossbows allows the pulling back of a drawstring with a pull of (for example) 120 pounds without using 120 pounds worth of strength from the arms alone- that's its mechanical advantage over a longbow.

Honestly if you are going to continue with this at least back it up with something. Otherwise it's just a waste of our time.

Further reading on the physics of crossbows vs longbows:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/crossbow.htm

Elthbert
11-03-2007, 01:20 AM
I would reference you to the longbows from the wreckage of the Mary Rose, which were found to have pull strengths of 150-200lbs. As I said it required long, intense year round physical training to be a longbowman.

Again, a reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longbow
Note that it even mentions a gentleman named Mark Stretton who holds a world record shooting a 200lb bow.

As I said I was able to load the equivalent of a light crossbow as a child, and provided a winch or loading lever I could have probably loaded a heavier one. I didn't say it was easy- it was a struggle- but it could be done.

Note that the design of crossbows allows the pulling back of a drawstring with a pull of (for example) 120 pounds without using 120 pounds worth of strength from the arms alone- that's its mechanical advantage over a longbow.

Honestly if you are going to continue with this at least back it up with something. Otherwise it's just a waste of our time.

Further reading on the physics of crossbows vs longbows:

http://science.howstuffworks.com/crossbow.htm


Well I have repeatedly cited sources and test, however, nothing so dramatically reliable as youtube and wiki ( sarcasm intended).

ANd Where do you get theat the longbows of the MAry Rose had a draw of 150 - 200 lbs

HEre are a few links that discuss draw weight

These are of course on the internet and therefore not to be taken as supremly authoritive, but they certianly trup Youtube and Wiki.


On the Bows of the Mary Rose

http://www.the-tudors.org.uk/mary-rose-longbows.htm


On longbows in general
http://margo.student.utwente.nl/sagi/artikel/longbow/longbow.html

Look at citation 9 and 10 for General Draw weights and 21 for the Flodden Bow. Also citation 21, 29 ( a 50lb longbow), and 36 for the bows of the Mary Rose.

And for the Flodden people, look at citation 25 and the quote from the actual contemporary source regarding the longbows effectiveness. The Scots where not very impressed, though the bill-hook scared the bejesus out of them.

You also might want to look on the arrow length discussion in this artical which has a lot to do with draw length and therefore the maximum draw of a given bow ( as well as the mass of it's projectile.

I will have to continue this another time, it is late and I am tired.

Pellegro
11-03-2007, 09:17 AM
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e233/mcpine/comicbookguy-worst-thread-ever.jpg

:D

Invalid_86
11-04-2007, 11:17 PM
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e233/mcpine/comicbookguy-worst-thread-ever.jpg

:D


On that note I take my leave!

kensihin_Himura
11-09-2007, 04:53 AM
Cool videos rodian, one thing that rangers need arre some spells that help their damage. Ranger spell are mostly for buffs, the damage spells really suck. Need a spell that puts thorns on our arrows or some other magical damage. Flame arrows are nice, but you need a caster to do that and most rnagers don't have the umd to use a flamearrow wand or scroll. Smae goes for melee weapons, maybe make thornguard a ranger spell. The gloves from the demon queen chest have thornguard on them.

Pellegro
11-09-2007, 09:28 AM
On that note I take my leave!


I was just kidding! Well ... I mean, I'm not interested in it, but who cares?!? :D

Mercules
11-09-2007, 09:53 AM
well if someone is running at you they usually have their arm up in their back swing. that would be when to attack. of course that wouldnt kill them right away.

One of the main problems is the crit range on a bow. 19-20 is kinda crappy. i could understand if it had the reg damage out put of a pick and had the crit multiplier of a pick. but for bow its just X2. which sucks.

Another big prob is the lack of a auto kill bow. if a mob has to much health then the tanks can whip out vorps. now the ranger is stuck doing most of the damage (odd i know) and accidentally grabbing agro because he doesnt have a auto killer to contribute with

~Kire

Slaying Arrows.

Talon_Moonshadow
11-09-2007, 10:55 AM
Cool videos rodian, one thing that rangers need arre some spells that help their damage. Ranger spell are mostly for buffs, the damage spells really suck. Need a spell that puts thorns on our arrows or some other magical damage. Flame arrows are nice, but you need a caster to do that and most rnagers don't have the umd to use a flamearrow wand or scroll. Smae goes for melee weapons, maybe make thornguard a ranger spell. The gloves from the demon queen chest have thornguard on them.

Any lvl 5 Wiz/Sor can use a wand/scroll of flamearrow anytime. Actually they just need one lvl of Wiz/Sor and be a lvl5 toon.
I'm very tempted to take one lvl of Wiz or Sor on any ranged build just for this ability......but you lose a lot and don't really gain any other perks from it. Might be worth it for a WF so they could also use repair wands.

best would be to have a Wiz friend you always ran with use the wand for you. I feel uncomfortible asking PUG arcanes to do it for me......especially because I would like a lot of them, and it actually takes some time to get enough FAs made.

Kerr
11-09-2007, 10:59 AM
Slaying Arrows.

So after 6 seconds you've used up those Slaying arrows, and one actually killed something, then what?

Comparing an expendable resource to a weapon that effectively never gets used up is like comparing an apple to a platypus.

Kerr
11-09-2007, 11:01 AM
Any lvl 5 Wiz/Sor can use a wand/scroll of flamearrow anytime. Actually they just need one lvl of Wiz/Sor and be a lvl5 toon.
I'm very tempted to take one lvl of Wiz or Sor on any ranged build just for this ability......but you lose a lot and don't really gain any other perks from it. Might be worth it for a WF so they could also use repair wands.

best would be to have a Wiz friend you always ran with use the wand for you. I feel uncomfortible asking PUG arcanes to do it for me......especially because I would like a lot of them, and it actually takes some time to get enough FAs made.

Keep the level of Ranger and just invest in UMD. I'm up to a 10% chance of activation and I have no UMD items yet. Another two levels and I should be able to get the wand to fire off on a semi-regular basis.

rpasell
11-09-2007, 11:08 AM
So after 6 seconds you've used up those Slaying arrows, and one actually killed something, then what?

Comparing an expendable resource to a weapon that effectively never gets used up is like comparing an apple to a platypus.

Use greater slaying. While they may be expendable when used properly they will get you a long way. Also, there are a ton of slaying arrows and bolts on the AC. I made it through half of the quest north and west of A Cry For Help (can't remember the name atm) using 20 Dwarf Slaying arrows.
While not a vorpal, slaying arrows do the same job, faster and are more readily available.

Mercules
11-09-2007, 11:09 AM
So after 6 seconds you've used up those Slaying arrows, and one actually killed something, then what?

Comparing an expendable resource to a weapon that effectively never gets used up is like comparing an apple to a platypus.

He didn't say there wasn't a good option. He said there wasn't an option.

Personally I think the power 5 weapons were a mistake to bring into the game as early as they did. Then again they will be less useful later when everything makes it save. This won't effect Vorpals one bit though, which is why they should be rarer than they are in DDO.

Kerr
11-09-2007, 11:20 AM
He didn't say there wasn't a good option. He said there wasn't an option.

Personally I think the power 5 weapons were a mistake to bring into the game as early as they did. Then again they will be less useful later when everything makes it save. This won't effect Vorpals one bit though, which is why they should be rarer than they are in DDO.

I don't know, I've yet to pull a single Vorpal weapon, they seem rare to me. I've pulled a few disruptors and two paralyzers, but those cap out based upon the save the mob gets.

Kerr
11-09-2007, 11:21 AM
Use greater slaying. While they may be expendable when used properly they will get you a long way. Also, there are a ton of slaying arrows and bolts on the AC. I made it through half of the quest north and west of A Cry For Help (can't remember the name atm) using 20 Dwarf Slaying arrows.
While not a vorpal, slaying arrows do the same job, faster and are more readily available.

Again, expendable. Not everyone has the cash to keep dropping for arrows that are going to run your bill up, and likely only come in stacks of 20 at a time. It just doesn't compare to the effectiveness of a sword that you just keep swinging until it procs the vorpal effect.

Bobbyd
11-09-2007, 11:28 AM
STR BUILD HALFLING........ FTW


They wont out dps a fighter or a barb.... but for stright class builds.. they pretty darn good.

I enjoy playing my ranger than any other class. It nice having great saves, save on almost any trap, self heal, self buff and not bad dps.

rpasell
11-09-2007, 11:33 AM
Again, expendable. Not everyone has the cash to keep dropping for arrows that are going to run your bill up, and likely only come in stacks of 20 at a time. It just doesn't compare to the effectiveness of a sword that you just keep swinging until it procs the vorpal effect.


Not everyone has a Vorpal, and I assure you, my greater slaying arrows will take down a target faster than a Vorpal most of the time. I'm not saying it's ideal, but slaying arrows are powerful. If they dropped at a higher rate it would just continue to unbalance the game like "Power 5" weapons did. Also, this is a Ranger thread, so if you want viable alternatives slaying arrows are a great one for Rangers.

rpasell
11-09-2007, 11:34 AM
STR BUILD HALFLING........ FTW


They wont out dps a fighter or a barb.... but for stright class builds.. they pretty darn good.

I enjoy playing my ranger than any other class. It nice having great saves, save on almost any trap, self heal, self buff and not bad dps.

I agree. Luca is a STR based halfling ranger and is a ton of fun to play.

Talon_Moonshadow
11-09-2007, 12:15 PM
I don't know, I've yet to pull a single Vorpal weapon, they seem rare to me. I've pulled a few disruptors and two paralyzers, but those cap out based upon the save the mob gets.

They are rare....at least as loot pulls. If there was no lvl cap most people would be lvl20 without ever pulling even one.
However, since we are capped and since all we do is loot farm the same quests over and over agin until they are a cakewalk...they are not actually rare in Stormreach.

Mercules
11-09-2007, 12:33 PM
Not everyone has a Vorpal, and I assure you, my greater slaying arrows will take down a target faster than a Vorpal most of the time. I'm not saying it's ideal, but slaying arrows are powerful. If they dropped at a higher rate it would just continue to unbalance the game like "Power 5" weapons did. Also, this is a Ranger thread, so if you want viable alternatives slaying arrows are a great one for Rangers.

Not to mention you can get more targets hit with Improved Precise Shot(and multiple hits on each of those targets with Rapid Shot meaning more save checks) than you can with a Cleave/Great Cleave. Trade off, consumable.

Delzon
11-09-2007, 12:33 PM
Shouldn't the class just be called an "ER" since there really isn't any "range" anymore?

j/k

stockwizard5
11-09-2007, 02:03 PM
Almost all the Quests are snooze/slaughter fests were 6 anythings built anyway that know the quest can walk through. There are a handful of quests that provide substantial level appropriate challenge and that challenge is generally (not only e.g. TF but generally) dealing with red named bosses.

Ranged combat against Red Named Bosses is relatively ineffective. I have thought for sometime that we need a mechanic that makes one Ranger far more DPS'able but somehow does not stack to make multiple Rangers overpowered. Perhaps some Ranger Damage 2,4,6 enhancement that does Ranger Level * Enhancement Level Untyped Damage Non-Stacking / Round or some such :confused:

Ebuddy
11-10-2007, 11:35 AM
I play a Ranger (lvl 11) and I find it enormously fun. It CAN be tough to get into a group but I just usually send a tell first explainig that I can tank pretty well - and I can. I'm usually #1 or #2 in the kill-count in every group I'm in. With finesse and TWF, some good light armor (+5 mith chain) and an assortment of swords (depending on the quest - transumuter, paralyzer, frost, flame, acid, GT) I can usually deal too much damage too quickly for the baddies to react fast enough to hurt me badly.

Don't misunderstand, I'm no bad-ass. I don't go charging ahead just to keep my kill-count high. I play carefully with the group I am in.

The bigger challenge I face is others who play rangers that sit in the back with their bow (not that that alone is bad) and do 10-15 hp damage in a lvl 12 quest. Either they have the wrong weapons or the wrong build and it gives the rest of us a bad name.

That said, I've seen my fair share of pure clerics that forget to heal and charge into battle and wizzards hacking away at a fire ele when they have coneof cold all set to go. It's all about playing the character as you designed it to play but within the NEEDS of the party you are in. Sorceres w/ swords can be just fine and I know some EXCELLENT battle-clerics. But what makes them good is that they understand (or even ask) what the needs of the party are and play accordingly.

I think Bards in particular have the same challenges as Rangers.