Ranger Archive

---

Bravo12 wrote:

I will stick by one of my older ideas that your other elite profession defines your role. A Ranger/Creature Handler would be the wilderness expert, animal tracker/trapper/harvester, etc. A Ranger/Rifleman would be the big-game hunter, human tracker, sniper. A Ranger/Carbineer would be the military elite survivalist soldier.

Each specific combo of Master elite professions in the game should have a unique ability to be gained.

---

It used to, still does to some degree.

The problem is the other professions we're balanced in the CU – both in terms of skill point cost and combat mods.

Picking up Ranger as your support/defining/unique-profession in addition to your other elite ( mostly combat ) profession will leave you at a distinct disadvantage. Especially since the game is being balanced around these new templates. We're underpowered, it's that simple.

---

Bravo12 wrote:

I will stick by one of my older ideas that your other elite profession defines your role. A Ranger/Creature Handler would be the wilderness expert, animal tracker/trapper/harvester, etc. A Ranger/Rifleman would be the big-game hunter, human tracker, sniper. A Ranger/Carbineer would be the military elite survivalist soldier.

Each specific combo of Master elite professions in the game should have a unique ability to be gained.

---

I would have to agree with this. Sadly, this isn't the direction the producers are taking the game.

/sigh
/remembers the good old days when skills mattered, not CL

I'd say I'm probably in favor of a survivalist "role" for us, with perhaps a slightly higher emphasis on the special ops type role. Along the lines with what Phen, Owen & others have said in the past... I'd like skills that work in PvP, PvNPC ANDtherefore help me to be a better big game hunter... my special ops/stealth/recon skills should make me a better hunter. I'd rather not see us continue down the path of creature-only, as that will forever gate us from 2/3 of the game. There's no reason we couldn't or shoulnd't have strong skills and abilities that translate well into all facets of the game. I guess I'd see us as defense 3 or 4 (out of 5), crowd control / state applications 4 or 5, and offense probably a 1. We're not strong, we're stealthy and we are great at getting info, controlling mobs, applying states to assist us in combat, and hardy mo-fos, especially in the wild. If you want higher damage, pair Ranger with a higher damage profession (Ranger / Rifles).

I see the Ranger half of me allowing me to set traps, get around and avoid agro when I want to, engage when I want to, and apply states when *I* decide to. If I want to nuke something, I'll use my T21, my LD1, my DC15, my.... you get the picture. My Ranger skills in and of themselves shouldn't be necessarily "high damage", they should COMPLIMENT my damage skills from Rifleman in my case, and allow me to apply those skills with an almost surgical precision. I should be able to couple up Ranger with any combat profession, and when my group executes an attack, the folks on the defense should be sitting there saying "Dang... must have been a Ranger on thier team". I won't use the Ranger half of meto lay out lots of damage , but to make it easiesr for me (as a rifleman) to lay on damage, and for my group to lay on TONS of damage, quickly and precisly and with great effect.

The way i see it, is that if we present a unified front, and develop a players' view of what we want to play, then we can develop ideas techniques and proposals so that we can try to have as much control as we can when they decide to give us more usefulness.

personally, I would like the survivalist, but honestly, my heart is with the big game hunter.

the big game hunter is more in line of what i feel a ranger should be, but the survivalist seems to be more useful in a round about kind of way.

being an 'Antarian Ranger', I prefer the special-ops style for the Ranger profession (and I do really think that was the intent with the Ranger profession, that is to augment our PvE creature skills with skills useful vs players) - basically Scout is for creature combat, Ranger is for all mob/player combat types.

It is very true though, and that is Ranger is way too creature specific, and its non-creature specific elements have been thoroughly diffused, and Ranger has got to find a spot on the CU combat schematic for any of these great ideas to ever make it into the game.

The ideas presented here are great steps towards defining a combat role for Rangers.

Message Edited by Bravo12 on 09-06-2005 08:10 PM

Wayfairing: Concealment and movement while prone. Description says creatures and NPCs, we think it should work on players too by 4th level or at master. Really needs a togglable burstrun in there.

Frontiering: Nothing target-specific about this line, it's an out-of-combat line and no reason to limit to one or the other type of target.

Tracking: People at box 1, Players at box 4 (hence good arguement for camo working against players at Wayfairing 4).

Trapping/Resuce: Traps: Apply the exact same states that other players can apply to ALL targets, therefore pigeonholeing us unfairly and counter to the stated goals of devs to reduce the number of "special cases" ie: the devs wanted all vehicles to be repairable to eliminate special cases, and there are 30+ spawning methods in-game, they want to reduce to about 3. Originally, Rescue could even cause a player to switch targets to the ranger, allowing us to rescue NPCs that someone was attacking but was quickly "fixed". Last time it worked, rescue could still save players from NPCs.