Ranger Archive

Alrighty then...

A big thanks goes out to everyone who participated in the first formal vote in this here Ranger forum.

The results:

Side Number of Votes Percent of Votes

PvE81 72.32%

PvP 31 27.68%

----

To have voted in these proceeding, a player must have posted at least once prior to the vote call.

There were:

• eight ineligible votes for the PvE side


• one ineligible vote for the PvP side


• one voter who did not choose any side at all and could not be tallied

In general:

• Most everyone kept their answers short andsweet. I received onlya couple of diatribes in the mail


• Only one person misvoted (sending in multiple votes). But that was fixed up to his satisifaction.


• Several posters sent me 8 identical messages... But I rack that up to a problem with Lithium

All in all, I believe the process worked quite well...

• But unless it's absolutely necessary, let's stick to informal polling, shall we?

Good Hunting.

Hmmm... Should have put the question that was askedin that post.

----

What should be the Developer's currentpriority for our profession: PvE or PvP?

----

So I guess the question is why is PvE so popular among Rangers? Is it because we're player types who like PvE and took the Ranger path because Rangers are suppose to be better at PvE than other classes or are we so weak at PvP, that we don't even bother with it?

One of the other voters pointed out to me that66% of the forum are most interested in PvE (from an official poll).

I expected our percentage to be higher than that... And indeed it was: being 72%.

• I suspect that many players pick up Ranger with the idea of the Wilderness Adventurer in their heads... So they have less emphasis on PvP, and more interested in advantages against creatures.

There is still a good chunk of the forum population however that has PvP on their minds, and I hope we can push their agenda as well.

Not a very surprising outcome to be certain. I would have counted for a PvP vote, but since I am in the slow process of surrenduring Ranger I didn't think it would be fair. The point I wanted to make is that I do not think that a Ranger needs to focus on either. We already know which upgrades will eventually come our way...new camps, traps, enhanced tracking...but who is to say they must make them PvE OR PvP. A Ranger is a symbol of diversity and survival, and I see no reason that development efforts cannot include both the PvP and the PvE side.

One conclusion I am certain of though, is that Ranger was never intended for melee classes. To those that make it work more power to you, I hung in there as long as I could. Good luck Rangers to those who see it through. I have no doubt that this profession is a diamond in the rough to many and will have it's moment to shine.

i voted PVP, i'm a master how much pve is there left? This isn't Eq there are no dragons to go slay here, same old critters you've been killing since you started. Making PVE a priority is moronic to say the least. Unless however you want to cancel after a couple of months of play.

Ranger should be the anti-CH to say the least, all the Ch nerfs wouldn't even be needed if this were so.

---

Keito_Temreh wrote:
Ranger should be the anti-CH to say the least, all the Ch nerfs wouldn't even be needed if this were so.

---

Fully agreed and a four-star for that comment. If it were the anti-CH role, half the changes wouldn't be necessary and suddenly, Rangers would be requested on raids and group runs.

---

Keito_Temreh wrote:
Ranger should be the anti-CH to say the least, all the Ch nerfs wouldn't even be needed if this were so.

---

This is one of the reasons I took up Ranger when I started. I knew I was going to get into PVP at some point and knowing how popular CH would be it only made sense to get the pitiful bonus to hit creatures but, sigh, it does not count for PVP just like traps... Yes I am one of the master rangers that goes trap what is that and why bother using it.

why wont the devs understand that? They are just lazy and wont fix the programming that read ALL pets (creature,faction or droid) read the same. I think if creature pets were treated the same as other animals, rangers would be ten times more viable for pvp.

"They are just lazy and wont fix the programming that read ALL pets (creature,faction or droid) read the same."

Yes... Way to rally support from the developers...

During Beta,pets were apparently susceptible to traps.

• However experience exploits by using traps on pets forced the developers to remove the functionality.

Until they have time to re-evaluate their stance on pets versus traps, we are stuck with it... Hopefully it will not take long for them to return to that game system.

The problem with traps on pets wasn't that they worked, it was that you got xp for using it. I could use a bonespur on my own pet, enrage it to do 3x damage, and get the xp for it (all three changed). Multiple exploits rolled into one.

The "obvious" change was to not let us use traps on our own pets and to not give xp for using it on anyone elses. Unfortunately the devs were a bit overworked during beta and I think the obvious solutions were not easy for them to see after months of little sleep...

I would have voted PvE, except I gave up after the messenger refused to show up after 20 minutes on several occassions. I don't see why our priorities need to be mutally exclusive though. If roughly a third of our members are interested in PvP, shouldn't a third of our issues be as well?

I would've voted PvP, but thanks to a buggy firewall, I haven't been able to post until now.

This game is about PvP. Sure you've got some people that decide not to declare faction and just sit around and do crappy missions all day, but the real substance in this game is the player interaction, and because of that I think rangers need to turn that way as well. Rangers are the only semi-combat (and I say semi because although we don't have direct combat abilities, the abilities we do get enhance our combat readiness) class that can do absolutely nothing in PvP, except track players, which in my eyes, isn't a whole lot (thank you radar).