PDA

View Full Version : Please make Rangers work like they do in PnP



Failedlegend
03-04-2011, 01:52 PM
Currently rangers have access to ALL their bonus feats which is incorrect at level 1 rangers are supposed to choose to focus on either ranged or melee thus get bonus feats in that category.

I'd be totally fine if each side got another feat or two to compensate but if ranged combat ever becomes a viable form of combat (something Eladrin recently promised is coming soon*tm) it will makes those melee rangers that carry a bow around for manyshot ridiculously overpowered. Which than may lead to nerfs thus make ranged overall broken...again.

Also a note to some people: A melee character that uses manyshot than goes back to meleeing is NOT a ranged character so stop telling me that ranged is fine the way it is.

@Devs: Please fix the weird way ranged shots cause aggro I've tested this with a few buddies before I was on my repeater rogue and they ran up (a pure WF barb, an pure WF FvS and a Monk) I waited until he was at about half health...fired ONE volley (3 bolts if it didn't bug) and it charged me like the other 3 didn't exist.

Brennie
03-04-2011, 05:40 PM
... No?

If and when ranged gets fixed, I expect Manyshot to get an overhaul as well. Currently, manyshot is ranged damage x4 for 20 seconds. If ranged becomes more viable, then obviously Decent damage x4 s downright ridiculous.

If and when ranged gets fixed, manyshot will end up being a "nice boost" to ranged instead of the only way to give meaningful ranged DPS, as it is right now.

If and when ranged gets fixed, Melee rangers will likely have a lot less incentive to use manyshot for anything other than against targets they cannot or would prefer not to melee.

Rangers in DDO have always had both ranged and melee capabilities. In some ways, its meant to help compensate for the loss of some PnP Ranger abilities (like Animal Companion and Tracking), but mostly its meant to help balance them against more Top-End DPS oriented classes.

Your suggestion would make Archer-type rangers anathema to every PUG group out there. No high level group would want an Archer who cannot even pull out a couple blades as necessary, especially against raid bosses. And, infact, my Arcane Archer character would likely be shelved if i had to rely on ranged DPS as an all-the-time combat style (Keeping in mind that 3 feats go to AA, 1 to toughness and 1 to improved crit, leaving 2 feats to help out with melee DPS... which, without GTWF, just isn't going to cut it).

There are some great suggestions in this thread about how to tweak the Ranger class to make them better balanced, well rounded, and viable (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=302409). I encourage you to see what you think of the suggested ranged adjustment (There are several more scattered throughout the response posts as well, many of which are insightful and great suggestions).

Requiro
03-04-2011, 06:03 PM
(...)
Your suggestion would make Archer-type rangers anathema to every PUG group out there. No high level group would want an Archer who cannot even pull out a couple blades as necessary, especially against raid bosses.
(...)

Here your logic is wrong. When ranged will be viable combat style, AA and Deepwod Sniper toons should relay mostly on ranged weapons. Just like any close combat class use mostly melee weapons now.

In other word: In perfect DDO, melee and ranged are both viable combat style. Toon with proper PrE supposed to be master of that style. Without, just good DPS. Ranger with both will be overpowered in that perfect DDO :)

Failedlegend
03-04-2011, 06:06 PM
Your suggestion would make Archer-type rangers anathema to every PUG group out there. No high level group would want an Archer who cannot even pull out a couple blades as necessary, especially against raid bosses.

Edit: Requiro said it better

Zenthalas
03-04-2011, 06:09 PM
Actually it's level 2 when Rangers select which Combat Style they will choose.

Combat Style (Ex)
At 2nd level, a ranger must select one of two combat styles to pursue: archery or two-weapon combat. This choice affects the character’s class features but does not restrict his selection of feats or special abilities in any way.

If the ranger selects archery, he is treated as having the Rapid Shot feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.

If the ranger selects two-weapon combat, he is treated as having the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, even if he does not have the normal prerequisites for that feat.

The benefits of the ranger’s chosen style apply only when he wears light or no armor. He loses all benefits of his combat style when wearing medium or heavy armor.

justhavinfun
03-04-2011, 06:27 PM
A well run AA rarely has to pull out swords. I ran a AA ranger to 20 and usually only used swords against mobs that had a high dr to piercing. Was actually told many times to put my swords away. Was also the only player in the group I ran with that was allowed to use a bow, even against Harry. It all depends on the play style and if the group is willing to make a few minor adjustments.

Doxmaster
03-04-2011, 06:46 PM
Also a note to some people: A melee character that uses manyshot than goes back to meleeing is NOT a ranged character so stop telling me that ranged is fine the way it is.


No one has ever said this. I believe this is a case of intentionally creating an argument that is easily conquered by the OP's base argument (although the defense against said argument is poor in this case), but I have no wish to remain on this topic for long. I simply wanted to bring attention to it.

At any rate, would this not be a pre-emptive nerf? Assuming a nerf IS necessary, the period of time between now and when ranged combat is fixed might be a year or more; it is difficult, if not impossible, to tell when the Devs will really get to work on fixing ranged combat. What do you purpose we do about that minor problem?

Arsont
03-04-2011, 06:50 PM
/not signed.

Kobold do not want!

No, no and no. I could go through and give all my reasonings with why I disagree with this suggestion, but it ended up being a massive wall of text, so I discarded the post.

Instead, I'll simply say that:
I like my rangers the way they are.

Even with both sets of feats, you can only do one at a time. Choosing a Prestiege also narrows what you can do/can do well. An AA/Deepwoods in the perfect, balanced DDO will still do more ranged damage than a Tempest, and the reverse is true. In this perfect DDO, an AA will -have- the feats, but could very well never have to use them. Likewise, a Tempest would -have- Manyshot (As well as the other ranged feats), but would never have to use them (I'm sure Dps junkies would be able to show how unless you have such and such a bow, with X gear, Y to-hit and Z arrows, factoring in the weapon swapping time, you'll lose however much dps over staying in twf mode, considering Tempest). Of course, they could, but since they're most likely not geared for it, and still missing some of the ability, they'll do less than if they were using their preferred weapon style. Limiting the class do either/or not only limits the practical draw and versatility, but also the play style.

Please don't cramp my playstyle. Let rangers keep their feats.

Brennie
03-04-2011, 07:17 PM
Here your logic is wrong. When ranged will be viable combat style, AA and Deepwod Sniper toons should relay mostly on ranged weapons. Just like any close combat class use mostly melee weapons now.

In other word: In perfect DDO, melee and ranged are both viable combat style. Toon with proper PrE supposed to be master of that style. Without, just good DPS. Ranger with both will be overpowered in that perfect DDO :)

Mostly, but not always.

Even if ranged gets buffed, I severely doubt it will be on-par with melee DPS (I'm honestly hoping for a little behind normally, and a little ahead with manyshot).

In situations like Epic Bigtop, fighting Malicia (big, tough lawful aligned enemy with no DR), I do not think my AA specced Ranger would rather use ranged combat instead of a pair of Epic Brigands Cutlass', outside of manyshot. Removing the option to TWF entirely would be devastating!

Yes, i want ranged to be rebalanced. Yes, I want manyshot/slayer arrow/ranger capstone to be brought in-line for a more generally balanced ranged combat, and YES i want my Arcane Archer to feel comfortable ranging in most situations. But i don't want ranged combat to *just as good* as melee combat, as it would obsolete Melee combat (Who would wanna melee, when you could do as much damage from the farthest draw distance?), and I absolutely don't want to lose the option to jump into melee when ranged stops being my best DPS option.

Quick Note about Manyshot/Ranger Capstone/Slayer Arrow: I love these. They are all fantastic. However, they severely compound the brokenness of ranged combat. Imagine if there was a way for Two Handed Fighters to gain 4x damage for 20 seconds every 2 minutes, to do 500 untyped damage on every vorpal strike AND gain 25% attack speed increase at level 20. That would be downright gamebreaking, right? Well, in a "perfect" DDO where ranged combat had comparable benefits to melee, these bonuses would unbalance the system *just as much*. As such, base ranged combat needs to be brought up a LOT, and the incredible advantages of these 3 items need to be reduced, to make ranged not only better overall, but more balanced and less streaky.

EDIT: By ranged combat being just as good as melee combat, i was speaking more of a Ranged Specced character (Such as an AA Ranger) vs. a melee specced character (Kensai or Frenzied Berserker). However, i do believe a Ranged specced character's Ranged DPS should outpace their own melee DPS in most situations, which is currently does not. Some exceptions should still exist, though, such as beating down clay golems, skeletons, and other tough, pierce-resistant enemies.

Delt
03-04-2011, 07:34 PM
A well run AA rarely has to pull out swords. I ran a AA ranger to 20 and usually only used swords against mobs that had a high dr to piercing. Was actually told many times to put my swords away. Was also the only player in the group I ran with that was allowed to use a bow, even against Harry. It all depends on the play style and if the group is willing to make a few minor adjustments.

No.

licho
03-04-2011, 07:40 PM
But whatfor fix something whats the class feature?
The nice thing about rangers (among many others) is that whichever path they fallow, there is a backup option, which sometimes could be usefull. Being able to switch from melee to range if needed is a way to offset lack of massive dmg of specialized Fighter or lucky SA of rogue.

Of course its not a way of tabletop, but DDO is not tt, and at same points (balance issues) is actually better.

Musouka
03-04-2011, 07:42 PM
Currently rangers have access to ALL their bonus feats which is incorrect at level 1 rangers are supposed to choose to focus on either ranged or melee thus get bonus feats in that category.


Actually, they are supposed to choose their combat style at level 2. Not level 1.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/ranger.htm

I agree that they need to add the separation. It would not be too hard, and it would make prestige enhancements dependent on which combat style you choose. However, I do know why they do have it the way they do. It is all because of the feat exchange why you get both. If you chose it like a feat, you'd be able to change it and changing combat style at level 20 would in turn change multiple feats. It's a bit more coding and work to make it possible, but it's just simpler to keep it as is.

It would not be devastating to a ranger to lose his free TWF bonus if he is specced for an Arcane Archer. Instead it would offer challenge, and cause adaptation. A player still receives 7 general feats. If you want to be able to melee at the same time as range, then spend some feats.

At the same time, they should renew slayer arrow to be much like the Arrow of Death that a pen and paper Arcane Archer gets. Perhaps make it usable once per day or rest, but the AA is only allowed to have 1 Arrow of Death at any given time. At the same time allow Phase Arrows and Seeker Arrows, but I know trying to make a pen and paper Arcane Archer would almost be perfected as a whole separate class. I know all this would be quite difficult to bring into the game, so I don't really see it being something to hope for.

Requiro
03-05-2011, 07:24 AM
Mostly, but not always.

Even if ranged gets buffed, I severely doubt it will be on-par with melee DPS (I'm honestly hoping for a little behind normally, and a little ahead with manyshot).

I agree with you. Ranged never ever should be on-par with melee. The reason in obvious

In situations like Epic Bigtop, fighting Malicia (big, tough lawful aligned enemy with no DR), I do not think my AA specced Ranger would rather use ranged combat instead of a pair of Epic Brigands Cutlass', outside of manyshot. Removing the option to TWF entirely would be devastating!

For now yes. But when they change ranged combat... who know?

Yes, i want ranged to be rebalanced. Yes, I want manyshot/slayer arrow/ranger capstone to be brought in-line for a more generally balanced ranged combat, and YES i want my Arcane Archer to feel comfortable ranging in most situations. But i don't want ranged combat to *just as good* as melee combat, as it would obsolete Melee combat (Who would wanna melee, when you could do as much damage from the farthest draw distance?), and I absolutely don't want to lose the option to jump into melee when ranged stops being my best DPS option.

You still think present day. Again: when they change ranged combat, everythink will change. For now you use to using Bow for Manyshoot and then melee. In my opinion they should change the ranged so much, that when you are specialized in this combat style (AA, Deepwood Sniper) you will have more DPS overall without your melee. You will still do less DPS them melee specialized (like Kensei, Frenzied), but more DPS them your not-specialized melee.

(...)



For more understating. This is what I mean, when I speak about overhaul ranged combat and ranger both combat styles. This is my whish, for my understanding about ranged balance.

Legend:

PrE - mean PrE that will be specialization in combat style
Specialization - mean specialist feats line for one combat style (Ranged, THW, TWF).
No specialization - No feats and no PrE in proper combat style.
Worse or better - all talk in DPS meaning


Ranged combat style:

Specialization and PrE: Little worse then Specialized and PrE melee
Specialization and PrE: Little better then Specialized melee
Specialization and PrE: Much better then non Specialized melee
Specialization only: Average worse then Specialized and PrE melee
Specialization only: Little worse then Specialized melee
Specialization only: Little better then non Specialized melee
No specialization: Much worse then Specialized and PrE melee
No specialization: Average worse then Specialized melee
No specialization: Little worse then non Specialized melee


That why with both combat style in Ranger class, you might consider overpowered. Especially when you will take AA or DS PrE (I assuming that when they change ranged combat style, AA and DS will be complete PrE). With this PrE you will be little worse then Spec and PrE melee, and in the same time you will be still specialized in Melee same as any other class without PrE.

And BTW: What Turbine must do to balance ranged combat? Lots of work (and I know that this is only beginning):

Nerfs: Manyshoot, Ranger Capstone, Slaying Arrow
Improve: Ranged combat RoF, damage and to-hit when stand still, Point Blank Shot (optional)
More work on: complete AA and DS PrE, More unique ranged weapons, Shoot on the run feat.
Optional ides: Anything that nerf kitting (Slower movement rate, bigger to-hit penalty. 5% of autotrip ect.)


After that, we can speak about Ranger combat styles :)

78mackson
03-05-2011, 07:35 AM
A well run AA rarely has to pull out swords. I ran a AA ranger to 20 and usually only used swords against mobs that had a high dr to piercing. Was actually told many times to put my swords away. Was also the only player in the group I ran with that was allowed to use a bow, even against Harry. It all depends on the play style and if the group is willing to make a few minor adjustments.

Someone had fun at someone elses expense.. good thing this other guy didnt even know it.

sephiroth1084
03-05-2011, 07:45 AM
If archery were ever rebalanced to be strong enough to support a character all the time, to be on par with TWF and THF, I would be in favor of this change.

Since that is never going to happen, I am not in favor of this change.

Kriogen
03-05-2011, 07:55 AM
If archery were ever rebalanced to be strong enough to support a character all the time, to be on par with TWF and THF, I would be in favor of this change.

Since that is never going to happen, I am not in favor of this change.
It will never happen. Because if it does, ranged is on par with melee, then melee would die.

In DDO, because of more dynamic combat, you can kite better then in most other (all?) games. If ranged damage would be better then it is now, melee would go extinct fast.

It's on the edge now. One archer doesn't make a big impact in a large group. But start a group where all are 'ranged' (this includes casters) and you wonder why bother with melee. Maybe quest is a couple of minutes longer, but it's many times safer.

Brennie
03-05-2011, 06:36 PM
I agree that they need to add the separation. (...)

It would not be devastating to a ranger to lose his free TWF bonus if he is specced for an Arcane Archer. Instead it would offer challenge, and cause adaptation. A player still receives 7 general feats. If you want to be able to melee at the same time as range, then spend some feats.

At the same time, they should renew slayer arrow to be much like the Arrow of Death that a pen and paper Arcane Archer gets. Perhaps make it usable once per day or rest, (...)

I disagree that they need to add the separation. Rangers thrive on being versatile multi-functional characters, rather than being single purpose. Removing options from the ranger arsenal does *not* help them in any way, and frankly they are not strong enough to handle any more setbacks to their functionality.

It would be devastating. As an Arcane Archer Ranger, you are forced to spend 3 of your 7 feats on AA. If you want to be a GOOD AA, you will most likely also take Improved Crit: Ranged and Toughness. If you want any kind of half-decent melee capability, chances are you also want Improved Crit: Slash or Pierce and Power Attack. Please show me how to fit in the three Two Weapon Fighting feats without a dramatic loss in either ranged combat, melee combat, or survivability?

Your supposed "Fix" to Slayer Arrow would make it one of the worst abilities in the game. A once-per-rest save or die arrow (Which can miss, by the by, either by rollign low on your attack or an enemy simply moving out of the way) to replace the only AA ability that gives any reason to even PLAY a high level Arcane Archer woudl be catastrophic. *Even if* it was was bumped up to be on a relatively short cooldown, similar to True Strike Arrow, it would still be entirely useless against any enemy who cannot be outright killed, making Ranged Rangers useless against every boss ever.

For the record i have nothing against Phase arrows or Seeker arrows. They should find themselves on a short cooldown timer like True Strike Arrow. Seeker Arrow should "find" your target, in exactly the same way Magic Missle does (But with an appropriate attack roll, of course), and Phase Arrow ... actually, bypassing armor is pretty much what True Strike arrow does already, so I don't particularly have a suggestion for this one.


For more understating. This is what I mean, when I speak about overhaul ranged combat and ranger both combat styles. This is my whish, for my understanding about ranged balance.

Legend:

PrE - mean PrE that will be specialization in combat style
Specialization - mean specialist feats line for one combat style (Ranged, THW, TWF).
No specialization - No feats and no PrE in proper combat style.
Worse or better - all talk in DPS meaning


Ranged combat style:

Specialization and PrE: Little worse then Specialized and PrE melee
Specialization and PrE: Little better then Specialized melee
Specialization and PrE: Much better then non Specialized melee
Specialization only: Average worse then Specialized and PrE melee
Specialization only: Little worse then Specialized melee
Specialization only: Little better then non Specialized melee
No specialization: Much worse then Specialized and PrE melee
No specialization: Average worse then Specialized melee
No specialization: Little worse then non Specialized melee


That why with both combat style in Ranger class, you might consider overpowered. Especially when you will take AA or DS PrE (I assuming that when they change ranged combat style, AA and DS will be complete PrE). With this PrE you will be little worse then Spec and PrE melee, and in the same time you will be still specialized in Melee same as any other class without PrE.

And BTW: What Turbine must do to balance ranged combat? Lots of work (and I know that this is only beginning):

Nerfs: Manyshoot, Ranger Capstone, Slaying Arrow
Improve: Ranged combat RoF, damage and to-hit when stand still, Point Blank Shot (optional)
More work on: complete AA and DS PrE, More unique ranged weapons, Shoot on the run feat.
Optional ides: Anything that nerf kitting (Slower movement rate, bigger to-hit penalty. 5% of autotrip ect.)


After that, we can speak about Ranger combat styles :)

I agree with you pretty much 100%. Infact, the post you're quoting, i said as much ^_^ I believe a dedicated ranged build should be better DPS with Archery than it would with Melee. HOWEVER< i believe that, like all weapons, Bows will have times when they are not the best option (Clay Golems, Skeletons, Oozes, whathaveyou) and so having the option to have mediocre Two-Weapon Fighting is a very nice Ranger benefit that is in no way overpowering.

Totally agree that when ranged gets fixed, most of the wildly overpowered (in terms of how they affect ranged combat, not in terms of actual gameplay) Ranged abilities will need a serious rebalancing.


It will never happen. Because if it does, ranged is on par with melee, then melee would die. (...)

I don't believe that was Sephiroths meaning. I seriously doubt he was advocating that Ranged DPS be *the same* as THF or TWF DPS. I think its already been established in everyone's minds that that is a bad idea. Reading his post, i thought he was saying that "if ranged ever became as viable a playstyle as TWF or THF", not that its DPS would be the same, but that it would have competitive advantages.

Hokiewa
03-05-2011, 06:47 PM
No.

/signed

Gremmlynn
03-05-2011, 07:58 PM
I'm about ready to get on board with this plan.

But first I'd have to see some penalties applied to those trying to used ranged weapons vs. melee opponents.
How about -50%AC and -100% fortification for players (mobs are to dumb) wielding ranged weapons when attacked with melee weapons. Something to give those archers a reason to put away the bow when it's inappropriate and pull out the, well I guess CSW wand if the OPs suggestion to make ranged rangers ineffective melee combatants goes through. Fighters at least would still be full time combatants.

Failedlegend
03-05-2011, 08:03 PM
I'm about ready to get on board with this plan.

But first I'd have to see some penalties applied to those trying to used ranged weapons vs. melee opponents.
How about -50%AC and -100% fortification for players (mobs are to dumb) wielding ranged weapons when attacked with melee weapons. Something to give those archers a reason to put away the bow when it's inappropriate and pull out the, well I guess CSW wand if the OPs suggestion to make ranged rangers ineffective melee combatants goes through. Fighters at least would still be full time combatants.

If your not going to say anything useful (whether its for or against the idea) don't bother posting

Doxmaster
03-05-2011, 08:11 PM
If your not going to say anything useful (whether its for or against the idea) don't bother posting

It is his right to participate in this forum, as the private organization that runs it sees fit to allow him to whether we like what he posts or, in this case, dislike it. If he was H4x0r, you'ld be reported 8 ways to Sunday...

rover223
03-06-2011, 07:01 AM
I can remember when no one played rangers because they were under dps and low hp and armour, everyone played either fighters or barbarians in the melee. (Paladins were also poor dps during that time.) The current ranger build works pretty well in my opinion.

Gremmlynn
03-06-2011, 07:43 AM
If your not going to say anything useful (whether its for or against the idea) don't bother postingI'm sorry if you don't find someone pointing out the huge gaping holes in the idea as useful.

Hows this. As it stands Rangers can be good ranged and viable melee combatants, or the can be good melee and viable ranged combatants. The proposal is to make the ranged rangers better at all ranges by making a bow a hybrid ranged/close combat weapon while making melee speced rangers next to worthless vs targets at range.

A better proposal would be to give the ranged PrEs (and others who pay for those feats, rather than getting them as a freebie) improved versions of the various feats while adding incentives to not use ranged weapons in close combat. That way ranged specialists can be improved independent of non-specialists and the game can maintain a semblance of balance and suspension of disbelief.

Also the proposal did a nice job or cherry picking which PnP rules should be enforced by leaving out any sort of equivalent for PnP's attack of opportunity against anyone who can't seem to figure out a bow is a poor choice at melee range.

Talon_Moonshadow
03-06-2011, 08:12 AM
Your suggestion would pick up the Rgr class from the boot print, spit incrusted dirt it is currently in because of bad treatment from other players......and bury it in a common grave without ceremony. :cool:

azrael4h
03-06-2011, 11:38 AM
Your suggestion would pick up the Rgr class from the boot print, spit incrusted dirt it is currently in because of bad treatment from other players......and bury it in a common grave without ceremony. :cool:

No.

This suggestion would rape Rangers, torture them for three weeks, and then toss the dessicated corpse into a ditch to rot and be eaten by buzzards. :cool:

Mister_Peace
03-06-2011, 03:56 PM
Also a note to some people: A melee character that uses manyshot than goes back to meleeing is NOT a ranged character so stop telling me that ranged is fine the way it is.

Your suggestion is something to consider. After all, in PnP Manyshot does not have a cooldown.

Edit: apparently it does have something of a cooldown. Manyshot is used as a standard action, thus can be performed once every round.

NaturalHazard
03-06-2011, 04:12 PM
Your suggestion would pick up the Rgr class from the boot print, spit incrusted dirt it is currently in because of bad treatment from other players......and bury it in a common grave without ceremony. :cool:

yep.......... there for not /signed. hells no!!!

Kominalito
03-06-2011, 04:27 PM
Awesome suggestion broseph. But no. As a pure ranger. No. For reasons that everyone else has eloquently pointed out.

Memnir
03-06-2011, 04:28 PM
This is one case of Turbine getting a house-rule right.

Maybe, maybe, they could change things if/when they get all aspects of Ranged combat working better - but certainly not one moment before that.


http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad116/Memnir/thumbsdown.jpg
.
.
.

Failedlegend
03-06-2011, 09:40 PM
Maybe, maybe, they could change things if/when they get all aspects of Ranged combat working better - but certainly not one moment before that.
[/COLOR]

Yeah I guess I should have clarified things better I meant they should probably changed it when the do their viability pass on ranged because the way rangers work now if both styles become viable they may become crazy OP due to this so instead of limiting themselves due to this they should change it if this is the case instead of saying...oh well guess we cant fix ranged cause Rangers & Manyshot would be OP.

JUst to clarify this is what I mean by viable...not durrr ranged must be 100% what melee does.




Legend:

PrE - mean PrE that will be specialization in combat style
Specialization - mean specialist feats line for one combat style (Ranged, THW, TWF).
No specialization - No feats and no PrE in proper combat style.
Worse or better - all talk in DPS meaning


Ranged combat style:

Specialization and PrE: Little worse then Specialized and PrE melee
Specialization and PrE: Little better then Specialized melee
Specialization and PrE: Much better then non Specialized melee
Specialization only: Average worse then Specialized and PrE melee
Specialization only: Little worse then Specialized melee
Specialization only: Little better then non Specialized melee
No specialization: Much worse then Specialized and PrE melee
No specialization: Average worse then Specialized melee
No specialization: Little worse then non Specialized melee


That why with both combat style in Ranger class, you might consider overpowered. Especially when you will take AA or DS PrE (I assuming that when they change ranged combat style, AA and DS will be complete PrE). With this PrE you will be little worse then Spec and PrE melee, and in the same time you will be still specialized in Melee same as any other class without PrE.

And BTW: What Turbine must do to balance ranged combat? Lots of work (and I know that this is only beginning):

Nerfs: Manyshoot, Ranger Capstone, Slaying Arrow
Improve: Ranged combat RoF, damage and to-hit when stand still, Point Blank Shot (optional)
More work on: complete AA and DS PrE, More unique ranged weapons, Shoot on the run feat.
Optional ides: Anything that nerf kitting (Slower movement rate, bigger to-hit penalty. 5% of autotrip ect.)


After that, we can speak about Ranger combat styles :)

Arsont
03-07-2011, 01:05 AM
I still have to say I like rangers the way they are.

To the people who say that improving ranged combat while letting rangers keep both sets of feats would make them overpowered, I ask "How so"? I honestly don't see it. Sure, they'll be more versatile, but a melee spec'd will still do better melee than ranged, and a ranged spec'd would still do better ranged. So I could use a little elaboration.

donfilibuster
03-07-2011, 04:31 AM
@Devs: Please fix the weird way ranged shots cause aggro I've tested this with a few buddies before I was on my repeater rogue and they ran up (a pure WF barb, an pure WF FvS and a Monk) I waited until he was at about half health...fired ONE volley (3 bolts if it didn't bug) and it charged me like the other 3 didn't exist.

This was from update 5 or so when the monsters were made to react to attacks at distance.
The release notes only had that if the monster saved vs. a spell the caster would still get the attention.

But a lot of players noted changes in all the aggro mechanic as a whole, it is clear that *something* changed.
Since then it is very difficult to keep melee aggro without intimidate and very easy to grab aggro with spells and ranged.

Brennie
03-07-2011, 04:40 AM
Yeah I guess I should have clarified things better I meant they should probably changed it when the do their viability pass on ranged because the way rangers work now if both styles become viable they may become crazy OP due to this so instead of limiting themselves due to this they should change it if this is the case instead of saying...oh well guess we cant fix ranged cause Rangers & Manyshot would be OP.

JUst to clarify this is what I mean by viable...not durrr ranged must be 100% what melee does.

I still don't see the issue.

In the post you quoted, it even states that a Ranged-Specced Ranger should be better DPS with ranged than with their own non-specialized Two Weapon Fighting. In that sense, it would actually be UNDERpowered for them to whip out TWF in all but special situations (Such as enemies that have DR that cannot be broken by ranged weapons, for example). Likewise, a TWF focused ranger would probably only pull out a bow if there was something they simply couldn't get to with melee. And yes, TWF Rangers will probably be better at getting those un-meleeable enemies than a Greataxe Kensai with a throwing dagger, but so what? An AA or caster will still put them both to shame.

Rangers will probably never be as powerful as Barbs or Fighters, and will instead rely on their versatility to be their greatest asset. Being able to pull out a bow when Melee isn't an option, or being able to Two Weapon Fight a beatdown on a giant skeleton or clay golem, only makes Ranger better at being the swiss-army knife character that is already is.

I will sign this only when Rangers can use archery and TWF AT THE SAME TIME. Otherwise, i cannot fathom how being able to switch to a lower DPS fighting style as backup for rare circumstances when its more useful could ever be considered overpowered.

Memnir
03-07-2011, 10:47 AM
Also, just to mention it (not sure if it's been mentioned in this thread yet) - the Devs mentioned a long, long time ago that they gave us both weapon options to make up for the loss of Animal Companions. So, that'd be one more thing they'd have to add to the game - in addition to ungimping Ranged combat - before changing the current way of doing things.

And really... looking at Summons and Hirelings - just like Familiars, I can do without Animal Companions till the fix a lot of pre-existing conditions.


It works just fine as-is. I don't see how decreasing any classes' combat options is a good or desirable thing.

Gremmlynn
03-07-2011, 01:31 PM
It works just fine as-is. I don't see how decreasing any classes' combat options is a good or desirable thing.That's because you don't have OAM (Obsessive Archer Mindset) where you consider ranged combat exclusively the archer's job and the archer's only job.

doubledge
03-07-2011, 02:24 PM
http://www.centernegative.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/life_getting_tough.jpg

Failedlegend
03-07-2011, 02:27 PM
image fail

Preview Post is your friend :D

Musouka
03-12-2011, 12:53 PM
I disagree that they need to add the separation. Rangers thrive on being versatile multi-functional characters, rather than being single purpose. Removing options from the ranger arsenal does *not* help them in any way, and frankly they are not strong enough to handle any more setbacks to their functionality.

It would be devastating. As an Arcane Archer Ranger, you are forced to spend 3 of your 7 feats on AA. If you want to be a GOOD AA, you will most likely also take Improved Crit: Ranged and Toughness. If you want any kind of half-decent melee capability, chances are you also want Improved Crit: Slash or Pierce and Power Attack. Please show me how to fit in the three Two Weapon Fighting feats without a dramatic loss in either ranged combat, melee combat, or survivability?

Your supposed "Fix" to Slayer Arrow would make it one of the worst abilities in the game. A once-per-rest save or die arrow (Which can miss, by the by, either by rollign low on your attack or an enemy simply moving out of the way) to replace the only AA ability that gives any reason to even PLAY a high level Arcane Archer woudl be catastrophic. *Even if* it was was bumped up to be on a relatively short cooldown, similar to True Strike Arrow, it would still be entirely useless against any enemy who cannot be outright killed, making Ranged Rangers useless against every boss ever.


Rangers get spells, they get wild empathy, they get favored enemies, they get evasion, choosing to make them have to use feat slots for melee if they specialize in ranged would not totally disrupt the functionality of a Ranger. I do agree though, that changing the slayer arrows would totally diminish a lot of their damage functionality. The argument about rangers not doing high damage, because they are a distance away from the melee, still stands. They don't have to do HIGH damage, because they shouldn't be sucking down any of the healer's SP as they should not be getting hit. It is possible to be in a group where you actually have a tank that will draw aggro, or even intimidate, away from the rest of the party. Doing this would push people to actually create balanced groups, instead of just a couple powerhouses and a healer.

However, I do digress. Memnir pointed out that Rangers don't have their animal companions. So, this is a makeup for it. I wonder what they're going to do for Druids to make up for that matter.

Failedlegend
03-12-2011, 03:01 PM
However, I do digress. Memnir pointed out that Rangers don't have their animal companions. So, this is a makeup for it. I wonder what they're going to do for Druids to make up for that matter.


Well maybe along with Druid specific spells and shapeshifting they'll give us animal companions too...we can dream :P

FlyingTurtle
03-12-2011, 03:05 PM
I will sign this only when Rangers can use archery and TWF AT THE SAME TIME.

OMG Idea :)

Dual wielding bowswords! PewSlashPew!

Requiro
03-12-2011, 03:28 PM
Well maybe along with Druid specific spells and shapeshifting they'll give us animal companions too...we can dream :P

....and... familiars :D (we can still dreaming, isn't we? ;))

Failedlegend
03-12-2011, 04:31 PM
OMG Idea :)

Dual wielding bowswords! PewSlashPew!

http://i365.photobucket.com/albums/oo93/Failedlegend/Bladebow.png?t=1299969091