Ranger Archive
Thread: A New Vision for Ranger
There are several areasI think we should excel in, and these are important in both PvCreature and every other type of combat:
- Stealth/Avoidance- Being able to get into and out of hostile areas is a great tactic. If your enemy thinks they're facing only 5 enemies, but comes to find themselves surrounded by Rangers with other weapon skills, you have the upper hand. The same is true when hunting. Being able to set up in the proper positiion is important. If you're getting eaten, you can't get to the perfect spot.
- Speed/Movement- Sometimes, being able to get away from a larger enemy force is a tactic too. If you can draw away some enemies without taking much damage, you weaken the enemy by sapping them of numbers. This also applies to creatures.
- Recon unit- knowing your enemies weaknesses (only one doctor, all melee fighers, etc.) can allow your force to better choose their weapons and targets. Again, this is true for hunting animals as well. It's better to know the resists of the critter you're going to attack in advance.
- Battlefield Control- whether fighting creatures or people, being able to set up a field of ground traps ahead of time, or being able to hold an enemy in place long enough to regroup is an important tactic. If you have control of a situation before the damage starts getting done, you can win more easily.
- Trailblazer- By setting up camps, you can "lead" your group to strategic locations. Setting up forward camps that stay up in combat also gives you an advantage as you have a set spot to drag your wounded back to.
As you're reading this list, you may notice that none of what I think should define a Ranger has to do with dealing damage. However, I do believe there should be a Ranger weapon (I'm still in love with my double cross-bow idea. The point of this isn't to make someone a better hunter. It's to make a person who is choosing Ranger for the reasons listed above, and not the harvesting bonus a chance to do damage if the situation calls for it. Now a few caveats to the Ranger weapon-- limited Range, forces a Ranger to take a risk to use it, ensuring it's only used tactically. Medium damage/no specials. After thinking about it, this is basically just another survival tool for those who aren't hunters. A double crossbow would also be perfect as a stealth weapon, allowing you to shoot traps without giving your position away.
Justification and Conclusion
I realize that this may be a hard sell, but Ranger shouldn't be all about hunting. The fact is that we have potential for so much more. I personally would love to have a role in the shutting down of a base. As we know, BE's are going to be crafting the meds in the new system (see the CU upgrade thread in the In Development section). I think that they are becoming more of a crafting profession as we should be pushing to be more of a combat profession. Perhaps we could acquire a unique part in the shutdown process. Imagine sneaking up to a base, heart pounding, hoping the turrets don't spot you, then pulling out your double crossbow and using a special trap on them so their damage is reduced, then sneaking into the base and pulling the plug on a defensive system, just as your team storms from the outside...
I also think opening Rangers up to new and exciting templates should be a goal of ours. It's not that I don't like being a hunter, it's just that with a real identit that's rooted in tactical gameplay, we have a lot more options open as for "roles". Just like any combat profession can stack any way they choose to fill the "role" they want to be, Rangers shouldn't be forced into a single role. We should be able to stack with anything to fill our own role. Individualism is great and having a profession that can be about combat without having to be about DPS is a great goal in my mind. But being able to stack with anything, to have any roll that a person chooses-- that is the best reason I can think of to make Ranger a combat profession. Diversity is a wonderful thing, especially when it comes to templates.
I hope you weren't crushed under all these words. i am passionate about this game and this profession, andI know many of you are too. i simply think when looking at the game, it makes more sense to move away from an artificial restriction such as "creature-only". that idea is at the root of many problems and is the reason Rangers aren't as involved in the CU as they should be. Anyway, thanks for reading.
Message Edited by Phenix1050 on 03-29-2005 12:21 AM
I really don't mind the current system, or at least something that the current system could easily become, in that it is or could be a combat *support* profession. I see CH the same way; using pets to tank and apply states can support any combat profession, but you've got to be really patient to use CH as a standalone combat profession. If ranger were to be capable of supporting combat in a similarly effective way (which it sortof is now, but not in a way that justifies the skillpoint cost), I would be happy with it.
On the other hand, the idea of making ranger a profession that really can stand alone also intruiges me. The problem is that for that to happen, in my opinion we would have to have some damage-causing capability. I think there are quite a few ways this could happen. We could get bear traps, stake pits, poison darts, etc. We could get a pillbox or hunting blind style camp with static gun turrets usable by party members regardless of their skill level (I'm thinking something on the damage output order of a combat profession using weakish normal attacks here, not like current faction turrets or anything). Basically anything that would allow us to do damage for ourselves without requiring a combat profession to back it up, and fits into an "outdoorsman" sort of theme.
I think that the combat *support* ranger can safely be a "state applying" ranger as I believe that you are suggesting. One big benefit I can see with that method is that it really wouldn't take a whole heck of a lot of work and addition from the current ranger to make it happen. In many ways, scout/ranger already fills that niche, it's just that there is no demand for those capabilities since a buffed master combat character can take on practically anything in the game by themselves. In other words, to convert existing rangers into your state-applying, recon-enabling characters, the devs would just have to make traps stick to NPCs/players and add a few more types of traps, give us some speed boosts, and make conceal take us off of or disguise us on the radar.
Turning ranger into a standalone profession, on the other hand, would require a pretty major revamp on the order of what is planned for smugglers. I think it could be really neat if done correctly, but I have a feeling that our reality is that the devs wouldn't consider it worth doing such a large conversion of the profession when they might be able to get away with something smaller.
I respectfully disagree with you vision of what a ranger should be. We wound be able to find a common ground on this, so lets just leave it at that.
CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
Well Phenix hits the mark as usual, apart from one point, why no specials for our weapon!
Because we aren't supposed to be a pure combat-dealing profession. The trade off for not having specials is abilities like stealth, trapping (ground traps) camping, etc, etc.
Consider smuggler, if you will. They don't match Rifleman in terms of power, but they have other thing to make up for it, in terms of spice, slicing, selling faction, and the new stuff they'll be getting. There has to be a tradeoff for all of that stuff. I don't think that tradeoff should mean that we have no offensive capabilities in our tree, but I also don't think a Ranger by themselves should be a killing machine. We should NOT be a stand-alone profession, in that Ranger, by itself, won't allow you to go toe to to with someone in PvP. I see us as a tactics-based combat class. Stealth and guile overcoming raw power. But by itself (i.e. not with a combat class) ranger should be pretty weak. A Ranger/doctor should have a few offensive capabilities, but they shouldn't be as powerful (in terms of damage) as a Rifleman/Doctor. But then again, we're not all about damage, we're about state attacks and controling an area, and stealthily moving in.
I'd love to hear some more opinions...especially from some old-timers.
Message Edited by Wilhelmy on 03-27-2005 10:06 AM
Wilhelmy wrote:
Ok first of all not only us but even the devs have to think is what is a ranger in todays society that we live and what was a ranger centuries ago.... to get what ranger would be in a futuristic world like star wars .... so before we get to SWG a ranger today is a member of the armed forces but not only as an ordinary profession part of infantry like a rifleman is but as one of the elite special forces in the army ... now a ranger got to be all that because of years and years of learning training and developing survival technics not just in the wilderness and foreing terrains but also on foreign territory such as bases cities ,....
Now those are surviving technics now we get to the roles .... a ranger primary role today would be recon which may include recover and assault.
Now lets go a little bit to some of the roles we have on SWG
Tracking: now you are able to track basicly any lifeform but you only get direction and distance, have to unmount everytime while a surveyor is able to track resourses while mount. The way I see it as a master ranger this should not be an issue at all ! another thing and i believe this have to do with the animation .... a ranger when it tracks looks at the horizon to see where things are now we all know that a ranger tracks by studing the terrain for possible ground vibration fallen objects footprints smell,... so i would see first the need to wider range, the need to actual special waypoint, being able to track while mounted ! different animation in the case would be something like the Lord of the rings the Two towers like when aragorn ( a true ranger) put his ear on the ground and felt vibration and also by sampleing the terrain was able to ping point where the orcs were.First off, just say no to Waypoints. Dumbing down the game is NOT what I want for Rangers. A true Ranger doesn't need a freaking WP to tell them the exact location of a creature. You have a compass and a map that tells you your exact location. how hard is it? Second--this is Star Wars, not LoTR.
Cammo: a little effective against other creatures. Now, one of my biggest disapointment on this is the fact that we use camuflage on the armed forces and it is not just to hide from wild creatures but to hide from enemies, now the way I see cammo should be agree with what everybody has been proposing taking you out of the radar but one thing you are all forgeting is that a cammo kit is also suppose to make you look different or more a like the enviroment. the way i see that is everytime you put a cammo kit on you should also be hard to see by anyone around you and to that i propose the Predator invisibility device so, you would not be completly invisible but you would be hard to see looking like a moving glass sculpture. Also with that the abilitie to decise himself as Imperial or rebel by wearing factional uniform and having a different simbol for a certain ammount of time (would be good for a quick getaway when pvp is effective lol) If you still send information to the client, there are packet-sniffers that will tell people where you are and make your invisibility moot. You can't have "some" invisibility. any MMO with stealth will tell you that packet sniffers defeat all attempts unless you don't send any info at all. Secondly, wearing different factional uniforms....where exactly do Rangers get justification for this? Seems like a smuggler skill.
Traps: Ok, come on we all know if i make a hole on tthe ground and cover with leaves anyone not just creatures will probably fall. So, it is not just used for creatures but humans as well I hope the Dev team gets this one above all lol
Weapons: Currently none. Now bounty hunter and smmugler have their own little pistols why cant we have our own little rifle tree (since rifleman ranger is the best combo) Because Ranger should be accesible for all professions. Making one combo better is the best way to kill us as a profession. Which is why I discussed opening it up to MORE professions. That was one of the main points of my post.
Frontiering: I would propose we change this title to jungle or foreing terrain training 1, 2, 3, 4 tittle being Jungle surviver or Foreign terrain master or surviver. here we could include all the creature knowledge terrain negociations, forageing camps, surviving tool creation ability (really like that proposal) of course we could divide in 2 trees like stealth and jungle training or foreing terrain training.
well here are my suggestions it was not perfect like i wanted to putted out but im at work right now so is hard to type and get a lot of details on subject though i believe yopu can all understand where im comming from and where I want and we all want our profession to go
Hopefully CSR will get this ! as well as Gizmos Force ranking Ideas for a future Jedi revamp that you are all welcome to check it out at
Gizmo's FRS Jedi revamp Proposal
thank you all
later
Phenix1050 wrote:
CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
Well Phenix hits the mark as usual, apart from one point, why no specials for our weapon!
Because we aren't supposed to be a pure combat-dealing profession. The trade off for not having specials is abilities like stealth, trapping (ground traps) camping, etc, etc.
Consider smuggler, if you will. They don't match Rifleman in terms of power, but they have other thing to make up for it, in terms of spice, slicing, selling faction, and the new stuff they'll be getting. There has to be a tradeoff for all of that stuff. I don't think that tradeoff should mean that we have no offensive capabilities in our tree, but I also don't think a Ranger by themselves should be a killing machine. We should NOT be a stand-alone profession, in that Ranger, by itself, won't allow you to go toe to to with someone in PvP. I see us as a tactics-based combat class. Stealth and guile overcoming raw power. But by itself (i.e. not with a combat class) ranger should be pretty weak. A Ranger/doctor should have a few offensive capabilities, but they shouldn't be as powerful (in terms of damage) as a Rifleman/Doctor. But then again, we're not all about damage, we're about state attacks and controling an area, and stealthily moving in.
I'd love to hear some more opinions...especially from some old-timers.
Im just saying that with specials, within the confines of the Cu that have been outlined to the community, i.e. wind up and wind down times, the idea of not having specials doesnt sit right, If they are too powerful as you suggest they may be, they can have long wind up and wind down times. And they will be more useful in conjunction with my other ranger skills. There is really no point to a weapon if you cant do different things with it. Im not talking about 10 different attacks like a normal elite combat profession, just 2 or 3. Of the top of my head -
1. Poison tipped. Ranger dips arrow tip into container of poison, takes aim, fires, and begins to ready another shot.
2. Weak-point. Ranger aims carefully at the weakpoint of the creatures anatomy, fires, and begins to ready another arrow.
3. Explosive charge. Ranger carefully attachs a small charge of Tibanna gas to the arrow head, aims and fires, then begins to pull a new arrow from his quiver.
In fact, looking at those 3 "Weak-point" now becomes a special like "aim" for marksman. Delaying an attack to find the weakspot will cause more damage upon a hit and can be used in conjunction with the other attacks to make them more powerful, but as a tradeoff much slower.
Ill think about this some more, see what I cna come up with - Got to convince luminarys like you!!
And i really dont see us as a stand-alone profession, except against creatures who are more stupid than NPCs and players (well some players anyway). Im not talking Krayts here - but rancors certainly.
N.B. I am not fixated on a weapon, I think everything else needs to be fixed to, as camps are useless, mask scent is better than camo, and traps are really hit and miss.
With these working and a weapon we should be able to do what we are meant to do (creature-hunting). I dont mean make us creature centric- but make us capable of doing what our profession description sayss we should do! With these skills that we have against creatures, we can fight in all other areas.
I see our combat as a mix of sneaky attacks utilising camo, slow but effective bow-shots, and the use of the correct trap and the right moment. This will not make us more powerful or less powerful than any other combat profession, in any arena,just different. With combat skills that are indicative of the rangers path as a wilderness, survival type.
An example of how other combat styles differ would be me as a Master pistoleer walking up to a squad of 10-20 stormies and killing them with 5 fanshots from my DE10 (got to get them lined up in front of you though), compared to a Master Rifleman shooting them one by one and taking ages to do so. Now compare us in a hunt against a Krayt. The Riflemans T21 powers through the Krayts health while i look down the barrel of my DE10 to see if it isnt blocked cause i dont seem to be doing anything!!!
That shows that different skills and weapons will always be more effective in certain situations (which i believe is what the CU is trying to achieve to a greater extent from the press releases). Combat skills should never as you say be "equal". We should be different, effective to some degree, in most areas, but more applicable to some than others. In this manner i see ranger asa kind of one target killer, using his many wilderness survival and combat bow skills he hunts down and kills big game with brains as well as brawn.
A good 20th century analogy would be 2 snipers stalking each other through a war- torn city or landscape. they use cover and concealment, line-of-sight, even smell, in conjunction with booby-TRAPS to cover their positions whilst they try to outsmart their prey. Thats us fighting sentient creatures. When we as Rangers fight non-sentients it should be like the hunter stalking his prey, concealing himself, using lures, traps, and a weapon to get the kill of his intuitive, elusive prey.
If you dont think this kind of combat fits the ranger description and would be fun well, I dont know what to say!
But anyway, keep up the good work Phenix!
Phenix1050 wrote:if traps did more damage, and could cause death, I'd be with you. But, i thought about it-- and forcing a Ranger to choose between damage and states is actually a unique idea and is exactly what seperates us from "pure" combat classes. You can dizzy a creature...or hurt it. But not both. TACTICS, my man.
Allowing a Ranger to choose between damage and states is what adding an extra combat profession should bring. If you want more combat options than you can get with only traps, you pick up a combat profession to complement Ranger. Otherwise you will get a jack of all trades and a master of none profession. As long as you can kill stuff that you should be able to kill with nothing more than your trapping skill (as is currently possible, a CDEF does the damage), you don't need more. Adding a pure damage option is likely to make the other skills less powerful so, if you do decide to pair Ranger with a combat profession, you are likely to lose out on the skills that matter. Those that don't choose to pair Ranger with another combat profession can still be effective but they lose out on some tactical choices. The skill system is there to give you another layer of tactical choice. If you want the tactical choice of doing damage or using traps, you pick up a combat profession. If you are happy with just the tactical choice of traps for combat, you choose whatever else you want to go with Ranger.