Ranger Archive
Thread: Combat Perk/Idea for Rangers
Squidwalker wrote:Now let me ask you rangers this. If we had to swap out a current skill mod in ranger, for say "mounted combat" what would you feel comfortable dropping?
Erm, nothing.
We need improvements, not replacements. There's hardly enough to Ranger atm to justify 140 skill points and surely not enough to justify that we need to trade... that's absurd
Add it to the 'Frontiering' tree, lots of empty space there
Let me add that I think Master or Novice Rangers should be able to have a mount AND a pet out at the same time. Especially now that they've given us trapping/harvest droids... don't tell me a CL 10 mount is going to make me overpowered. 140 skill points!
Oku Kee'lus
Klif_Hangar wrote:
It would also be nice if rangers could throw traps while mounted. (Can we now? I've never thought to try it before) I can see it now, a whole battalion of cupa-mounted rangers cresting a hill and charginga krayt
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
Nemo0 wrote:
With our current skill set as far as creatures are concerned, I'd say that we are the hunter, not the rancher. We never try to take care of animals or grow them or anything similar. We go out in the field to study them and kill them. Sort of like a safari leader. There is nothing stopping us from knowing how to fight off a mount but I don't necessarily see why it would be part of our skill set. If it has to go to a single profession that is in the game, I would argue for CH (more like the rancher than us). But it doesn't have to go to any single profession.
Bingo! As far as me bringing up the rancher, I wasn't meaning to campare Rangers to Ranchers, I just tried to come up with an RL example of someone who rides mounts.
Rangers are the supreme masters of nature, correct? Thus riding Mounts would be second nature to them. I am NOT in favor of taking taming or Mount abilities away from CH tho.
I am not sure what you base the yellow sentence on. I am a geologist so I should be able to climb any mountain? That doesn't hold water...
Alright straight out of SCOUT HUNTING 4:
Unconventional Hunting Methodology represents the scout integrating his/her own experiences with book-learned knowledge. The scout has invented and mastered way of handling creatures that his/her peers may be unaware of. This capability imparts a very high ability to harvest organic resources and identify creature statistics.
I am not saying give us the CH juice. Refer to upper posts. Befriend....and so on!!
Kiryoku wrote:
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
The biggest issue I can think of is kiting. Tell me why itisn't a problem, OR tell me how you wouldpreventkiting froma mount.
anything that postures down or knocks down will get somebody off a mount... works for the kunga, i don't see why it wouldn't work for a player too...
anybody else been clothes-lined by the kunga on their speeder?... man that hurts...
buzzlo wrote:
CALC WROTE:
Rangers are the supreme masters of nature, correct? Thus riding Mounts would be second nature to them. I am NOT in favor of taking taming or Mount abilities away from CH tho.
I am not sure what you base the yellow sentence on. I am a geologist so I should be able to climb any mountain? That doesn't hold water...
Alright straight out of SCOUT HUNTING 4:
Unconventional Hunting Methodology represents the scout integrating his/her own experiences with book-learned knowledge. The scout has invented and mastered way of handling creatures that his/her peers may be unaware of. This capability imparts a very high ability to harvest organic resources and identify creature statistics.
I am not saying give us the CH juice. Refer to upper posts. Befriend....and so on!!
. ALso, the description of camolague in game says that it masks you fro NPCs, so we know that the ingame descriptions are screwy (not so much screwy, but flat out ignored).
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
buzzlo wrote:
CALC WROTE:
Rangers are the supreme masters of nature, correct? Thus riding Mounts would be second nature to them. I am NOT in favor of taking taming or Mount abilities away from CH tho.
I am not sure what you base the yellow sentence on. I am a geologist so I should be able to climb any mountain? That doesn't hold water...
Alright straight out of SCOUT HUNTING 4:
Unconventional Hunting Methodology represents the scout integrating his/her own experiences with book-learned knowledge. The scout has invented and mastered way of handling creatures that his/her peers may be unaware of. This capability imparts a very high ability to harvest organic resources and identify creature statistics.
I am not saying give us the CH juice. Refer to upper posts. Befriend....and so on!!
Ahhh...good work, BUT that means Scouts should get the ability
Calc, not to be your devils advocate, but if we can't make stuff up on our own, and we can't base things off of the skill descriptions ingame, and we can't extrapolate our uses of said skills in the game, then we are never going to come up with ANYTHING for ranger. What is the purpose of these forums, what is the purpose of a coorespondant? You are leaving us no options here. And the devs aren't coming up with anything either. Or at least they aren't telling us, which is just as bad. So, I ask you again, give me a reason why attacking with specials from a creature mount should not be part of ranger.
I understand you wanting to have a good case to stand on before you take it to the devs, but you are cutting us, or me and my ideas, down left and right. They told us, despite ingame text, that camo is not supposed to work on NPC. So after much debate and many posts logically with RL and game examples and SW examples to show it should, we came up with something. We came up with outdoorsman, based on what little direction the devs gave us about our profession and skills. So now, we are trying to do the same thing with yet again, no input from the devs.
To make matters worse our own coorespondant cuts us off at the knees, and holds back ideas, so they never make it to the devs.
You say that because of just what the profession is and what its about in general, with out using game data, that CH should get mounts. But myself and several others came up with equally valid reasons along the sam non game data terms why it should go to ranger.
Then when I gave reasons and examples using game data and profession skills such as TN, Creature Knowledge and Survival, that they didn't fit. Here is what you said.
Creature Knowledge: This only about halfway convinces me. Who can (usually) ride horses better? A zoologist who works in a labora Rancher who rides horses everyday?Who would you think would be more agile in the saddle?
TN: I can buy that Rangers know the correct path over terrain and therefore can negotiate it by foot, animal, or vehicle better than the average Joe, BUT that only explains why mounts shouldn't slow down when we are on them. It really doesn't address the combat side of things, which is the point of this thread.
Survival: No go on this one...I don't think it relates to the argument.
I think I proved your zoologist thing can be looked at either way. TN "only about halfway convinces me." Your answer to Survival I feel is not even an answer, unless maybe you're TH. Oh was that my outside voice? If you look purely at the skill the descriptions and names of the skill boxes needed for CH and Ranger, the ones in Ranger fit way better. There is zero in the descriptions or names of skill boxes in CH that even comes close to make you think they would be able to fight "themselves" from a mount. If you look at the skill box names and descriptions of ranger though, you can at least see the possibility and some connection to it. The scout skill that CH, ranger of course also has and then some.
So can you come up with anyway to connect or make plausable the ingame info for CH to have this ability. You seem against ranger, but I'm curious about your logic of CH.
I personally, do not want to be a cavalry soldier. My Ranger is supposed to be a hunter on his off days and a Guerilla soldier in his prime (still waiting for that day to come
). I don't see how calvary fits into either one. Its kind of hard to hide in woods from a group of enemy soldiers (or creatures for that matter) while you are on horseback. I'm supposed to be camo'd up wazoo, hiding in the bushes and ambushing any fool who comes my way, not parading around on horseback shooting things. What I'm getting at here is how do you see your Ranger? Do you want your Ranger to be a calvary soldier possibly at the expense of some of our other skills?
Scarin wrote:
I think this thread has become more about making arguments and counter-agruments than the original idea. Don't get me wrong Squid, I think its a cool idea but is this really worth it for a Ranger?
I personally, do not want to be a cavalry soldier. My Ranger is supposed to be a hunter on his off days and a Guerilla soldier in his prime (still waiting for that day to come
What I'm getting at here is how do you see your Ranger? Do you want your Ranger to be a calvary soldier possibly at the expense of some of our other skills?
WHERE in our class description does it say we are to be Guerilla warriors? NO WHERE does it say we ambush PEOPLE.
Greenmarine even said Rangers have ZERO PVP potential in his eyes.
Mounted Combat is for fighting Creatures, YES it may be used in PVP but as anyone who has had a speeder blown up on them knows a mount in PVP is crazy.
Many people want to define Ranger as what THEY think it is. Ranger has been re-defined with this game and is STILL being re-defined even today.
Adding Mounted Combat will not HURT Ranger, it will ONLY help us.
IF you see Ranger as ANYTHING other than a creature tracker/killer then you are basing your opinion on something OTHER than the Game Skills provided for Ranger.
Which is NOT a bad thing to do.
THAT is why some of us want to ADD to the RAnger class, like Mounted Combat, Weapon Skills, Hunting Blinds and so on.
Calc, I think you are doing a GREAT Job, keep it up. We know YOU are in our Corner, thanks.