Ranger Archive
Thread: Ranger skill point analysis
1. The current Ranger skill set is under powered relative to most professions.
2. Master Ranger is by far the most expensive skill box in the game when prerequisites are taken into account.
3. Ranger is the only profession with a Master prerequisite.
4. The Ranger skill set depends heavily upon the prerequisite skills.
Taken together, these points place Ranger in a difficult situation. While many people want an immediate solution, most of these solutions have problems. If we drop Scout trees from the prerequisites, many Ranger skills will be mostly useless without Mastering Scout (without significant other changes to the profession), thereby removing the short term worth of this method. If we lower the skill point costs of Ranger skills, we "devalue" the profession, potentially jeopardizing the skills we might gain in response to point 1 above.
I personally believe that any skill point reduction is dangerous without profession enhancements coming first. This is not because it will stop the Devs from fixing the profession but because it is definitely a one way path. Currently, Novice Ranger costs 34 more skill points than most elite combat professions and 19 more skill points than the elite hybrid professions. In most cases, this skill point difference will translate into one or two extra branches of an elite profession while Rangers are forced to spend them on two branches of novice skills. Rangers are also forced to spend these skill points before they can benefit from the elite level skills. This could be enough to warrant 4 independently powerful trees, as dabbling to level 4 in a single tree is almost as expensive as mastering most other professions (even for players who already have scout prerequisites). The current Ranger skill tree has 4 significantly different skill branches and the extra skill point cost might allow all of them to be fully fleshed out without overpowering or mixing the trees. They are also varied enough that stacking is not a significant problem (for example, an enhanced form of tracking could be a very useful skill but it wouldn't make our traps/combat abilities significantly stronger). The balance problem lies more in the number of powerful skills versus the combined power of the skills we might have and skill points work well with such balance in mind.
On the other hand, it is possible that Ranger will not be worth the extra skill points even with significant enhancements to the profession. If this ends up being the case then a skill point reduction would still be possible. In such a situation, I would be in favor of the 1 point per skill box cost decrease. In total, we would gain 16 (or 18, if you include novice and master in this) skill points. We would still be the most expensive profession in the game but by a significantly smaller margin. Also, the benefit of this skill point decrease would increase as more Ranger skills are taken, meaning that obtaining only one of the 4 potentially powerful skill trees is still a significant investment.
On my third hand, I am more in favor of a skill point decrease than wasted skills. I would much rather give people the extra skill points so that they can choose what skills they want than see a skill added that is powerful but would be easily available with the extra skill points placed in another profession. Choice is a good thing and should be considered as an alternative to an extra skill to fill up the profession.
EDIT: If they ever reduce the skill points per box (or drop two branches in scout like most combat professions) depending on the amount in the reduction it may be necessary to move some of the skills to the Master Box. Or at the very least move Player Tracking to Master. Its nice being able to track for Bounty Hunters, if the skill could be picked up thru dabbling it would hurt us.
Not trying to state the obvious but what we really need even more than a skill point reduction is a profession revamp (more like an overhaul).
Message Edited by Exterminans77 on 08-16-2005 08:46 PM
I think skill modifiers were placed in the wrong boxes originally.
Master Scout = +20 to Trapping.
Master Ranger = +10 to Trapping.
You don't see that with General Ranged Accuracy in Marksman and Pistoleer / Carbineer / Rifleman, do you?
I fully believe that any changes that involve reducing the number of skill trees that Rangers take in scout would neccesitate an entire revamp of the scout profession. As you and others have stated, simply removing the trees does nothing for the Ranger profession, since so many of our mods require the mods from scout to be effective (trapping is an excellent example, as is camping.
The best way, in my mind to do this would be to break the profession into a system that's kind of like Medic-- to get to the elite skills, you take two trees of the novice profession. I'd also seperate terrain negotiation from crawl speed and break some I'd break it down like this--
1 Wilderness Survivalline. This line would include +20 to TN and +20 to crawl speed. It would also include harvesting and foraging modifiers and camp schematics and camping modifiers. This line would take scouting XP to fill.
1 Combat Survival line. This would include trapping, +20 to TN and +20 to crawl speed, melee andrangeddefense mods and mask scent modifiers. This would require combat XP to fill.
1 Wilderness kismet line. This would include small bonuses tothe level of pet a person can control(+1 in each box). It could also include some other creature-related skill bonuses. This would take scouting XP to fill.
1 WildernessLeadership line. This would include small bonuses to group TN, and perhaps other SL-related skills. This might seem like stepping on SLtoes, but it's based upon the premise that SL would getwork done on them.
Master Scout- this would giveand extra +10 to TN and crawl speed, extra trapping mods and mask scent mods, an extra+1 to pet control level anda little bit of the skills from other professions.It would take scouting XP to fill.
BH could take the WildernessSurvival line or the Combat Survival line
Rangers would take Combat Survival and Wilderness Survival
Squad Leaders would takeWilderness Leadership
Creatrue Handlers would take Wilderness Kismet and Wilderness Survival
Bydoing it this way, Ranger SPs are reduced. Also, bymaking us take a line that takes combat XP, we would connect Ranger to combat in a meaningful way. This would go a long way into making Ranger what it's worth. We'd also hold onto our skills such as camping,trapping, harvesting and camoflage, but we cost the same as most Elite combat professions. Building upon that base we'd have a much better footing for asking for some of the changes that we want.
Nemo0, I agree with you.
I know that we -- and the Devs -- will need to analyze the entire Ranger Structure and the relationship between Scout and Ranger. Technically anyone could get to Master Scout and do something else but to go on up to Master Ranger is a challenge that needs to be evaluated carefully. Everything has a direct relationship on up the individual trees (trapping, harvesting, survival, etc,). Combat has to have some kind of relationship too--based on Ranger. We are completely laid out as non-combat but most of us see more combat than anyone else. 
Being MA should add some huge bonuses to ourmarried combat profession not available to other professions purely on the sole fact we know our prey.
Rangers in some form or another -- primarilyagainst creatures, next NPCs, next players -- need to have their abilities in a way that they are ableto overcome the target using their knowledge of the target. A scout would have a very limited skill relationship in this areabut Rangers--especially those that go to Master--should be at the highest point (like legendary hunters and trappers are).
I know--we all know--that that our skills need to be looked at and fixed. It has been a major subject of many discussionson our forum for a very long time. Many people have put a lot of hard work into bringing it to fruition.
/bow to Owen (as an example)
In the end, however, no matter what improvements we get, I find it hard to believe they would be a fair trade for the expensive cost and effort invested to become Master Ranger as compared to the other professions. A skill point reduction at that point is the only next step (but after the fixes
). In the mean time we stick together.
After all, we do that better than any other profession class.
Let's look at two of the lines I think we can drop...Exploration and Survival
Exploration includes the mods for Burst Run Efficiency (BRE), Maskscent (as well as the skill) and TN. I have never heard anyone fight to have BRE added to their profession, nor have I heard cries to nerf Scout/Ranger for their BRE uberity. Frankly, I don't think we would even miss this. As for Maskscent, we have it's bigger and better brother, Camo. Why can't we just get by with camo? Finally, there's TN. We all know what TN over 50 does, so why hold on to it? Add another +5 TN somewhere in Ranger, and we have, arguably, the full benefit of TN.
Survival includes the mods for Camping and Foraging (including the skill). All the camping mod really does is allow you to use bigger and better(?) camps. Simply making camps certed (tied to a skill box, not the mod) would negate the need for Scout Camping. Then there is my old buddy foraging. Since Scout level foraging can acquire all of the things that Rangers use (the foods and bait), why do we need that mod when we get a similar amount of foraging from Ranger (they would have to add the foraging skill itself to Ranger)?
If you removed those two lines as prereqs, you are now on par with other professions, you can still have a valid point with the devs that Ranger needs work, and if you want better TN, BRE, Foraging, or the MS skill, you have the choice to train in them.
One thing though: If somone decides to get those Scout skills under your proposal, they should get a distinct advantage over those that don't. As they work currently, you won't see that.
Seiryuu wrote:
That is good reasoning Calc.
One thing though: If somone decides to get those Scout skills under your proposal, they should get a distinct advantage over those that don't. As they work currently, you won't see that.
Well right, but that is more of a revamp issue than SP issue. I agree with the peeps who think that Scout needs some work. Oh, and this isn't a proposal, more of what I would like to see IF I decide to support a SP reduction
. I am flakey on this subject still.
AgonThalia wrote:
Granted these added skills + defenses would be great, but they dont in my opinion solve the core problem of rangers.
Absolutely right! SP reduction or not, we still need a lot of work.I don't foresee the perfect world scenario happening to Ranger any time soon.
You all do realise that if the developers cared about anything we typed here, they would post /munches on popcorn right?
They don't plan on doing anything with our profession. Just ignoring it for as long as they can. Right now, the main reason that I am sticking with Master Ranger is that it will be extremely difficult to regrind another profession with the xp changes they have made.
BioEngine wrote:
You all do realise that if the developers cared about anything we typed here, they would post /munches on popcorn right?
They don't plan on doing anything with our profession. Just ignoring it for as long as they can. Right now, the main reason that I am sticking with Master Ranger is that it will be extremely difficult to regrind another profession with the xp changes they have made.
That's why I tolerate that god-aweful annoying "Do you want to respec!?" pop up about eleventy-one billion times during each game session... nothing more annyone than seeing that pop up in the middle of a dog fight and obscuring you view of the other guy... but I know I've got that last golden respec if I ever do need it.... or want it... tho I still have little desire to play anything in the game other than Ranger. Or maybe Smuggler, but I wouldn't jump over to that yet either, talk about leaving the frying pan for the fire...