Ranger Archive

I agree in principle with Cuchulainn (great name btw)

Here are some things that we all know about rangers:

We are not unique

We are, at this point, super scouts

It is the complementary weapon profession that we chose that makes us effective hunters (and when i say hunters, i mean dealing enough damage to take down a target)

It is the skills we gain as rangers that assist and complement our hunting, traps, tracking, creature knowledge.

Rangers have more potential than we know what to do with.

Ok, now here is my point.

I do not like the idea of the bow. For the main reason that Ranger, by itself should NOT be a damage dealing profession, this is the reason for the weapon professions.

It will tend to pigeon hole the rangers into a ranged profession, a Bow in the hands of a ranger/ pikeman will do very little to help the melee ranger.

Ideally, rangers will receive a certification for a specialized tool that will help them hunt, I personally like a trap launcher. This will add range, accuracy and chance to hit for the rangers already using traps. The only problem that i see with this would be the weapon switch delay.

Nevertheless, i salute your idea and will wholeheartedly support any idea that would make rangers better as a profession.

(another thing, US Army rangers are an easy comparison to make, however, i tend to see the ranger as more of an SAS or Spetznaz (sp) unit.

US Army Rangers are a broadsword, trained to kill people and break stuff, US Special Forces, SAS, Spetznaz are more like scalpels, delivering surgical strikes via stealth, cunning and accuracy.

That is how i see the ranger.

Draknev
The Last Ranger Correspondent
Subterfuge and Sabotage, Concealment and Camouflage:
Colonel: Rebel Alliance

If we get ZERO combat abilities (besides a lame to-hot with normal ranged attacks), then we are not a combat profession. Let's see you take Master Ranger and Doctor and go kill stuff. We are survivalists. We are skinners and recon. We are not combat.

---

Puck_Starfire wrote:
If we get ZERO combat abilities (besides a lame to-hot with normal ranged attacks), then we are not a combat profession. Let's see you take Master Ranger and Doctor and go kill stuff. We are survivalists. We are skinners and recon. We are not combat.

---

Puck, this is what is wrong with the profession, not what is right with it. I'm bound by an NDA, but trust me when I say the traditional defenition of what defines a combat profession is being changed in the Combat Upgrade. We need to see beyondthe "combat only deals with doing damage" mentality. The fact that we inflict states, the fact that we must enter combat to level up, the fact that every skill of ours relates, in a meaningful way, to combat makes us a combat profession. The fact is that there are only 4 types of gameplay-- combat, healing, crafting and social. A "support" profession is always "combat support". There is no "healing support" profession or "social support" profession. We are combatants. Ranger doesn't have to be a damage-dealing class, but another tool that allows Rangers to survive even if they don't pick up a combat profession is important.

I don't define Ranger as what they are now, which is basically just a skinner. I define us by what we could and should be, which is a unique combat profession. Should we still be ABLE to skin? Yes. But should that be our defining trait? I don't think so. Skinning animals isn't any fun. But hunting them is. I get no enjoyment out of pushing my /harvest meat button. However, it is the hunting, the killing that provides the fun for the game. Isn't it bad that to be a good Ranger you're FORCED to take a combat profession? No other profession is forced to pick up another to be effective. A doctor can choose to be a healer/crafer, or a healer/ resource collecter or anything else, and they'll still be just as good at healing. Ranger, on the other hand, is a 140 point skill sink that decides the direction you have to take to do your job.

Having a bow doesn't mean you couldn't also have a melee weapon. Having ONLY a bow is a bad idea. Having a close-range weapon would also be usefull.

BTW, whoever used the scalpel as an anology has exactly the right idea. I don't want us having damage output equal to that of a Rifleman. But being able to do damage even if you're a Ranger/Dancer is important. Why shouldn't that be a valid playstyle? Why should that combination be able to do 100% of the dancers' job, but 0% of the Rangers' job?

The effect of a weapon switch delay could be reduced if the trap launcher worked more like a commando's rocket launcher, as traps that we use now also do, only commandos get a better animation with the way they'll lay down their flamethrower next to them while firing the RL. Just a random thought that came up when reading this thread.

I agree with you Phenix. Trust me, I would LOVE to see Rangers be more than skinners. I enjoy all things about Ranger. Yea, I mostly skin right now because thats what my guild and the server needs. But I also love to throw up a basic camp from time to time and watch the animals play. Actually I think I do more tracking than skinning. But yes, I would love to see the Ranger become useful for more than FOTM skinning.

---

CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
Um Tarnak, I never said anything about one shot kills in the game - that was a real world example, and that goes for the bit about the arrows too.

---

If a bows usefulness in RL have no bearing on bows in SWG, then why did you bring it up in the frist place.
Face it, even RL armies do not issue bows and arrows to thair troops. Bows are a horribly inefficient weapon for killing anything that can fight back. It had its use in the past before more effective weapons was developed.

---

CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
We need an ancient weapon, from a more civilised age.

---

An ancient weapon from a more civilised age? That sounds like how light sabres are descried... (sorry could not resisted that one)

---

CuchulainnDarklight wrote:
And, i can put 10 arrows within 50 cms of each other at 60 m in 1 min easy in RW and I only learnt how to do it at school as a laugh years ago and I m not Grizzly Adams either, with a modern high-tech composite bow.

---

But if a assault rifle with a silencer can put 30+ bullets with in 50 cm of each other is that nor more efficient? And, for how long can you keep that up if you target is shooting back at you? Even with out you target shooting back your arm will grow tired, long before the arm of the one using the assault rifle does.
And is SWG we have weapons far better then assault rifles.

If it is irrelevant for rangers having weapons in SWG then do not bring it up as a argument in a debate about it.

---

Phenix1050 wrote:
I'm bound by an NDA, but trust me when I say the traditional defenition of what defines a combat profession is being changed in the Combat Upgrade.

---

If a debate of ranger efichency when fighting creatures are infringing on NDA territory then we need to stop this debate all debates like it until the NDA is lifted.
Owen-Lars should simply post something like "This topic can not be properly debated until after the CU." And then a forum moderator should lock the debate.

There is no sense in debating something that we have no information about, that is what the Jedi and BH forums are for.

---

AgonThalia wrote:
I agree in principle with Cuchulainn (great name btw)

Here are some things that we all know about rangers:

We are not unique

We are, at this point, super scouts

It is the complementary weapon profession that we chose that makes us effective hunters (and when i say hunters, i mean dealing enough damage to take down a target)

It is the skills we gain as rangers that assist and complement our hunting, traps, tracking, creature knowledge.

Rangers have more potential than we know what to do with.

Ok, now here is my point.

I do not like the idea of the bow. For the main reason that Ranger, by itself should NOT be a damage dealing profession, this is the reason for the weapon professions.

It will tend to pigeon hole the rangers into a ranged profession, a Bow in the hands of a ranger/ pikeman will do very little to help the melee ranger.

Ideally, rangers will receive a certification for a specialized tool that will help them hunt, I personally like a trap launcher. This will add range, accuracy and chance to hit for the rangers already using traps. The only problem that i see with this would be the weapon switch delay.

Nevertheless, i salute your idea and will wholeheartedly support any idea that would make rangers better as a profession.

(another thing, US Army rangers are an easy comparison to make, however, i tend to see the ranger as more of an SAS or Spetznaz (sp) unit.

US Army Rangers are a broadsword, trained to kill people and break stuff, US Special Forces, SAS, Spetznaz are more like scalpels, delivering surgical strikes via stealth, cunning and accuracy.

That is how i see the ranger.

---

Message Edited by JokitoRoyo on 03-28-2005 09:28 AM