Ranger Archive
Thread: Limiting us from 2/3 of the game.
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
BioEngine wrote:
Have we answered your question yet?
I was trying to get a feel for what the community thinks...I think I have.
Of the 100 people that post, there are 100 different opinions.
I don't think the Devs could do anything with that information.
Keep at it.
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
Of the 100 people that post, there are 100 different opinions
nah, you just have to see past the subtle variations.
some people said: I agree with everything Phenix said. others said Phenix is right. These are really the same opinion-- "Phenix is correct". There was the person who said that I was their chosen diety. and the person who sacrificed a goat in my honor. I would also put these in the "Phenix iscorrect" category. There was one or two people who said something different, like "I'm not 100% sure that Phenix is right" and somebody who mentioned something about pookie butt, but I think we can safely put those into the same category "crazy bastages".
See, when you narrow it down, there are really only two opinions. People who agree with me, and people who aren't healthy in their minds.
Phenix1050 wrote:
See, when you narrow it down, there are really only two opinions. People who agree with me, and people who aren't healthy in their minds.
Been away for months now, so just bear with me.
The Ranger profession has no direction whatsoever. As a community, no one seems able to decide what the thrust of the profession should be. If all these people that have been members of this community for going on two years now can't clearly make up their minds on what a Ranger should be, then how can the devs figure it out.
Some want creature-centric. Well, Creature handlers are a part of that domain as well. As is every combat profession that can slaughter the creatures endlessly. So what makes us different? If we gave the group a bonus to creature killing, then we are really no different than Squad Leaders. That won't fly. We can't tame creatures. CH's own that.
Camps do nothing.
Traps seem to be no better than the specials that the combat professions now have.
Ranger still seems to be nothing more than an organic resource gatherer still.
I believe this profession could just be scrapped and no one besides this community would really notice.
If the developers allowed traps to be used on NPC's and PC's then that would make Ranger a bit more useful, but then you would have those who would complain that Ranger is then overpowered.
Honestly, I see no future for this profession. I could be wrong though and the devs could put something together that is really awesome and I will eat crow then. As I see it, they could give everyone the ability to throw down camps of all sizes depending upon their combat lvl. Give traps to BH's or Scouts.
Well, I guess that's it isn't it. No other abilities really worth passing on. Who wants Rescue? I'm willing to bet no one would take it. Area track...give it to scouts and BH's.
I'm just sick of seeing this profession die a slow slow death. Someone put a bullet in it. Let it die with a shred of dignity.
not sure if you've seen it yet, Carlito, but I started a thread that I think would give us a good role.
Our "content role" could be Big Game Hunter, or Outdoorsman, but this has to be seperated from our "combat role" which I think would be best as the "enhancer" profession.
Ranger could be the equivalent of Enhancer in the Jedi line. It doesn't give a lot of power by itself, but would enhance whatever other profession you chose.
AragornSoS wrote:
The biggest flaw in that whole line of reasoning, tho, is this: when the Bounty Hunter, who's CONTENT is "hunting player/NPC" but whose COMBAT SKILLS are not in any way limited to only 1 type of enemy (creature vs NPC or player), points his or her weapon of choice at a creature... he doesn't "forget" or "lose" all his BH skills. In combat, the skills that allow a BH to take on "boss" mobs and such are just as useful against creatures. They are not prohibited from using their specials, mods, etc when they battle creatures, whereas we ARE explicitly prevented from using what we have currently against NPCs and players. And what we have currently has now be given out to many other professions in the game, so the old arguement of "it would be unbalancing" doesn't even hold water anymore.
As Phen pointed out rather well in several different threads, it would be impossible to bring Ranger up to the level it would need to be in order for us to see an appropriate benefit to spending 140SP and having our combat skills limited to creature only. Since even the highest level creatures cap out in the mid 90's for CL, we'd need to be comparable to something like a CL250-ish character in Ranger vs Creature combat to have that kind of limitation be "worth it". We'd need to be SO much better than everyone else, that either the devs would end up having to balance creatures up to OUR new level, which would make things HORRIBLY out of whack for everyone else in the game, or we'd run around essentially 1-shot killing Gorax, GDKs, Krayts and whatever else we glanced at - which would NOT be fun at all.
Ranger's CONTENT can be wilderness oriented: stealth, survival, trapping, hunting, PvCreature, big game hunting, all of that. Sure. But Ranger's COMBAT SKILLS (or combat support skills for you sticklers that want it to be clear that Ranger on it's own isn't a super uber tank + nuke all in one profession) must be effective in ALL types of combat, just like EVERY other combat and combat-support /combat-enhancing profession. So long as they are NOT allowed to function in all types of combat, Ranger will be severely unbalanced when compared with every other profession in the game.
So... either we become the ONLY ones in the game that can kill, harvest, loot, etc creatures - and everyone other combat profession can NOT do any of that unless they pick up Scout & Ranger... or we get balanced into the CU combat framework, and take on a viable role in all aspects of the game - PvCreature, PvNPC, PvP, GCW, high level content, etc.
Q to the F to the E. Perfectly stated.
And in this we wait (quite some time) on the devs to decide our fate.
Either:
They rework ranger or the CU to fit us into it (which, as things have shown so far will draw our skills/abilities farther away from the spirit of what a ranger is). Making us viable in all three parts of COMBT: creatures, NPC, and player.
Or:
They changemost or all our skills (alter current ones or make new ones with a revamp) to make us into better creature killers and big game hunters. Making us more sought after for resource harvesting, creature attacking groups, creature soloing, ect. But leave us out of or limited in NPC and player combat.
It boils down to what people what from the profession really. Argue the point if you want, but its true. Some want the 'cool' ranger skills and still want to be able to kill anything that moves. Others don't want to lose sight of the spirit of the profession. And others still are really not sure what they want.
Message Edited by ZalokOnan on 09-11-2005 01:08 AM
Rancorrider4 wrote:
AragornSoS wrote:
The biggest flaw in that whole line of reasoning, tho, is this: when the Bounty Hunter, who's CONTENT is "hunting player/NPC" but whose COMBAT SKILLS are not in any way limited to only 1 type of enemy (creature vs NPC or player), points his or her weapon of choice at a creature... he doesn't "forget" or "lose" all his BH skills. In combat, the skills that allow a BH to take on "boss" mobs and such are just as useful against creatures. They are not prohibited from using their specials, mods, etc when they battle creatures, whereas we ARE explicitly prevented from using what we have currently against NPCs and players. And what we have currently has now be given out to many other professions in the game, so the old arguement of "it would be unbalancing" doesn't even hold water anymore.As Phen pointed out rather well in several different threads, it would be impossible to bring Ranger up to the level it would need to be in order for us to see an appropriate benefit to spending 140SP and having our combat skills limited to creature only. Since even the highest level creatures cap out in the mid 90's for CL, we'd need to be comparable to something like a CL250-ish character in Ranger vs Creature combat to have that kind of limitation be "worth it". We'd need to be SO much better than everyone else, that either the devs would end up having to balance creatures up to OUR new level, which would make things HORRIBLY out of whack for everyone else in the game, or we'd run around essentially 1-shot killing Gorax, GDKs, Krayts and whatever else we glanced at - which would NOT be fun at all.Ranger's CONTENT can be wilderness oriented: stealth, survival, trapping, hunting, PvCreature, big game hunting, all of that. Sure. But Ranger's COMBAT SKILLS (or combat support skills for you sticklers that want it to be clear that Ranger on it's own isn't a super uber tank + nuke all in one profession) must be effective in ALL types of combat, just like EVERY other combat and combat-support /combat-enhancing profession. So long as they are NOT allowed to function in all types of combat, Ranger will be severely unbalanced when compared with every other profession in the game.So... either we become the ONLY ones in the game that can kill, harvest, loot, etc creatures - and everyone other combat profession can NOT do any of that unless they pick up Scout & Ranger... or we get balanced into the CU combat framework, and take on a viable role in all aspects of the game - PvCreature, PvNPC, PvP, GCW, high level content, etc.
Q to the F to the E. Perfectly stated.
Aye, totally.
I can just imagine the explosion of righteous indignation the first time a BH or commando pointed their big gun at a critter and got "You cannot use that weapon against creatures" which is, after all, the position which Rangers find themselves in when trying to use their weapons/traps.
Wilderness Survival
The art of survival in any environment. The effective use of various skills both innate and activiated to become the hunter and not the hunted. If creatures/npcs/players come into our domain then they should be on the back foot. You come into a rangers backyard and you should expect hell.
Pathfinding
The art of knowing what is infront of you and in every direction around you. The skills contained in this background give the ranger a vast understanding of what they will come against and a keen eye of how to work against the target's weaknesses. There should be no other better at traversing the world and the rangers role should be 'floating' around the group, scouting ahead and being the eyes and the ears of the group enhancing theirs and your own combat effectivness.
In both of these you can be great hunters, you can be great explorers, great group support and most importantly there is no debate about creature/npc/pvp combat.
Lets leave out gameplay discussion and just focus on what counts and thats nailing down the rangers background. We should be equally effective against both creatures/npcs/players in game, just like every other profession and we can have roles and functionality that really make us unique yet not limited.