Ranger Archive
Thread: The Ranger re-vamp...Master of the Wild or Tactical Combat Specialist. Post-CU thoughts?
I'm surprised this is still even a question. Being masters of the wild limits us to the wild, while thoseplayers with multiple combat profs which don't specialize one way or the othercan invariably hunt both man and beast better than us. Obviously, myhope is that we take thetactical combat specialist path. To my knowledge, no other prof hunts humanoids okay but finds itself gimped against creatures; I'd like to finally see the opposite no longer true for us.
al-djinn'i
Master Ranger
There have been some suggestions on the Revamp boards that we should also consider the GCW as a reason to implement technological aspects of intel / spying as an extension of concealment and knowledge of our enemies.
Why does it HAVE to be only one or the other? I think the issue for most of us is that gating us with skills that ONLY apply to creatures keeps us from being able to participate in probably 2/3 of the game (anything vs. NPC, PvP, GCW content, etc). Probably the best arguement I've seen is that BH's don't suffer any "penalty" or have useless skills if they decide to hunt creatures vs their marks, but we do. All of my Ranger skills (and admitedtly, they are getting fewer and fewer) are fairly useless once I transition from hunting wild beasts to trying to fight with NPCs and PCs. And that simply doesn't make sense, if a trap can catch a rancor, it can certainly catch that tiny lil bothan coming after me. If the dart can stop a plainswalker or fambaa from a full charge to a dead stop, that itty bitty zabrak running after me is CERTAINLY going to feel the affects of the chemicals as well.
I love the wilderness survival aspect of being a Ranger. I love hunting, exploring, seeing new places, wandering around planets, knowing that I can stop just about anywhere, and if need be I can logout there knowing that when I log in, I'm not going to be something's lunch. But.... I also think that those skills WOULD and SHOUILD translate into usable skills against NPCs and PCs as well. Trapping should at LEAST work against CH pets, and I think that we should at least have some traps that are usable against NPCs and PCs as well. I think that we should have traps that have some ability to damage OR some ability to apply states, it should be our choice (perhaps via experimentation - sacrifice damage for better application of a state for example). I think that if I know how to avoid agro from just about every creature out there, I should certainly be able to camo up and at least have a CHANCE of avoiding those Nightsisters in the wilds of Dathomir, or that Imp or Reb patrol over there on top of that hill in the boonies of Endor.
I don't think our stealth skills should necessarily be a useful within cities (especially proper NPC cities). To me, that's much more the domain of the smuggler and I'd be quite happy if they got some skills in that regard (sneaking around an enemy city). I think we should be the unparalleled masters of the wild environment tho, and we should be able to make our way around those wild areas no matter WHAT is there - creature, NPC or player - with more chance of survival than the "average" player. I don't think we should be offensive powerhouses against NPCs and PCs, I think that is where our skills at personal concealment, surprise, evasion, recon would and should come into play. We should be able to beat them not becuase we can stand and tank and absorb gobs of damage while we dish out even more damage, we should be able to beat them becuase we are able to get in, set traps, use our stealth and smarts to do things to them before they even realize we're there, and then we should be able to melt back into the landscape - or draw them into a trap we've laid out that gives us the edge in the confrontation (by slowing them, applying states, debuffing them, etc).
Where SL's deal with leading the squad into the battle, dealing with formations and picking targets and such, leading the troops, I see the Ranger as the guy out there on point, crawling on his belly up on the rise above the enemy city / encampment / whatever, scouting things out, avoiding creatures and guards alike, perhaps figuring out how best to flank them, perhaps laying some traps out ahead of the engagement, perhaps figuring out who and what is with the enemy group and relaying that info to the SL so they can best pick the targets to take out first to handicap the opposing force. There's a nice complimentary thing that COULD happen with Ranger and SL, and I'd love for us to be sort of the "forward observer" specialist that is able to get in stealthy, get info, relay it back, set some traps, and beat feet out of there before anyone even knows we're around. Then our group hits based on the weaknesses we've identified and using the lay of the land and pre-laid traps to our advantage, and we should still have enough general mods for defense, accuracy and speed to be a viable member of a squad. Not the uber commando death from above nuker that runs in and lays waste to an opposing force, but certainly able to hold our own 1-on-1 and able to use our knowledge of the land to our advantage better than the other guy can.
Rangers would almost certainly, by preference, be the wilderness survivalist specialists that we are currently classified as.
With the advent of war - for the last 20 or 30 years from the clone wars up to the GCW as it currently stands, everyone is affected, drawn in or is in hiding or denial trying to avoid it.
This game is all about our participation in the Galaxy Divided.
How would Rangers abilities, skills and temperaments be best used during a wartime situation by both the Imperials and the Rebels ?
I see Ranger as having predominantly creature centric and wilderness survival skills which have been converted to warlike skills.
You can sort of see that with Areatrack being useful for hunting players.
From a simplistic perspective, how would you see Ranger in comparison to say Squad Leader in terms of War orientation ?
Squad Leader being 100% war orientated
Ranger would be ..... 25% ? 50% ? 75% ?
I think that is a key starting point for defining the role of Ranger in the game. It would then be easy to decide how much general attack and defense modification would be required.
The issue I see is that Ranger is not orientated round a Melee or a Ranged profession - either is viable.
It could be possible to add attack and defense modifications onto your template from Ranger with each skill point spent in an elite Ranged or Melee profession.
e.g. if you took a full Ranged profession you would get 100% of the available ranged attack bonuses from the ranger tree and vice versa for Mellee.
If you took 50% ranged and 50% melee skills, then you would get 33% of each attack bonus from the Ranger tree.
Just a few thoughts ....
Dark_0ne wrote:
From a simplistic perspective, how would you see Ranger in comparison to say Squad Leader in terms of War orientation ?
Squad Leader being 100% war orientated
Ranger would be ..... 25% ? 50% ? 75% ?
The problem with this is that the squad leader can take his team on a big game hunt and not lose anything-- all of his skills will still apply without penalty or problem. All I want is the same option. I don't want 'creature-centric' to be intrinsic to the profession. No other profession is limited in such a way. Creature-centric should be a choice, not a shackle.
al-djinn'i
Do both, split ranger into two different professions: Wilderness Ranger named "Hunter" or "Outdoorsman", and a tactical specialist named "Tactical Ranger" or "Recon Specialist". (Someone please think of better names than these!).
Both types take a different pair of lines of scout as pre-requisits, then this neatly gets around the master scout issue.
And then We'd be able to master both of them! We'd be even Uberer Rangers than ever before! Mwahahahaha!!!!1!11!!1
DaveG wrote:
Do both, split ranger into two different professions: Wilderness Ranger named "Hunter" or "Outdoorsman", and a tactical specialist named "Tactical Ranger" or "Recon Specialist". (Someone please think of better names than these!).
Both types take a different pair of lines of scout as pre-requisits, then this neatly gets around the master scout issue.