Ranger Archive

Thread: Defense bonuses

Telephius
Wed Jan 28, 2004 10:24 pm
#1

Ok I know we get +10 range and melee(or somthing like that at Master)mbut how about we get defense bonuses against poison and disease?


I mean we live off the land and in concept are supposed to be the most adept wilderness survialist so wouldn't we build up imunities against things like disease and poisons. It would help make us better hunters as there are alot of higher up creatures that have poison and disease and if we could resist them it would help make us more adept(or close the gap)at fighting creatures than pure combat templates.


I know there is a suggestion for forage items to reduce the affects of such in SotP, but for some reason I would rather have some passove bonuses, I mean pure combat professions don't have to do training excersies before combat to use their Defense vs dizzy,KD,etc maybe we could have a passive abiltity like this for defense. Heck it could help in PvP slightly to avoid being deathed by CMs (though I wouldn't expect full immunity to the effects of poison just would like resists)


I would suggest if such a thing were to exist it could go into frontiering as thats kinda wilderness survival training line.


just a thought.



Telephius Surtalga
-De Oppresso Liber *DOL* Sunrunner.
-Rebel
-Master Ranger, Rifleman 4/3/3/3 Marksman 4/0/0/4
Takei_Urawaza
Thu Jan 29, 2004 5:13 am
#2

Personally I'd like to see a range of bonuses placed though out the whole of the rangers tree's


RangedAND Melee defence + 40 (spread liberally through the whole class with +10 of that in master ranger)


In the trapping line +40 resistance to poison/disease &stun ( +5,+5,+5,+10 &+15 in master ranger)


with +20 resistance to dizzy, posturchange and blind in the survival like (+5, +5 &+10 in survival 4)


Creature damage mit.1 in tracking 1, C.D. Mit 2 in tracking 3 and C.D. Mit 3 in Master Ranger


Creature Damage resistance (like brawling damage resistance) in wayfairing 2 and 4 (a +10 in each)


As for offensive bonuses they should all be Creature focused I think that +50 to ranged accuracy AND +50 to melee accuracy would work well in the tracking line (+5,+5, +10, +15 and +15 in Master Ranger)


along with a 2 special manuver's in the master ranger box, that are creature only critical hit type strikes that bleed health or action wounds like a disease does, usable by melee or ranged combatants


Anyone care to debate the number's or the locations ? yes, I am aware you could stack them with other classes .. thats the point.. these bonuses still wouldn't be as good as a pistoleer/fencer combo, but combined with any one elite combat profession they should make you better vs a creature than they would be.



Takei Urawaza,

"Healthy people don't invent crutches."
Rhyeal
Thu Jan 29, 2004 6:04 am
#3

I agree with the modifiers...we study the creatures, yet commandos just torch em and kill them faster than we can...even though we spend our life around these creatures...




Rhyeal Shadowblade :: Egone Thale :::: Riflemen :: Rangers :::: Ranger is a Lifestyle, Live it!
"No, I'm not a combat profession, I don't do that anymore."
Puck_Starfire
Thu Jan 29, 2004 3:26 pm
#4

I think when you get into too many bonuses, you get into game imbalance. And not that I'm saying that your proposal would imbalance the game, but I am saying that SOE probably would not consider it because of game balance. SOE seems to have this crusade to not have one profession be stronger than the other. (ie. the Droid Handler idea, nerfing CH pet levels, revamping Chef to make them better)
Takei_Urawaza
Fri Jan 30, 2004 2:19 am
#5

SOE HAVE to consider it, we're ment to hunt creature's, we're ment to be good at hunting creatures.


The only way we're going to be able to do that is if the profession gains a slew of bonuses with there focus toward creature combat.


If SOE don't want to have one class out ballence the other then IMHO we should be asking for MORE bonuses than the ones I've suggested here ... these bonuses are worse than most elite weapon specialists, so by default .. you can become a better creature hunter by choosing 2 weapons specialist classes than by choosing one weapon speciast class and the Ranger.


And thats wrong.. so theres your imballence...





Takei Urawaza,

"Healthy people don't invent crutches."
JBMat
Fri Jan 30, 2004 5:08 am
#6

Rangers already have a slew of bonuses, some of which apply only to some Rangers. Melee Rangers are left in the cold. Rather than thinking up new bonuses (boni ? ) let's get the ones we have working across the board.


Having said that, we should get a bonus v creature poison/disease.


We are Rangers, we know that the fealess whoompus can give out a disease in it's spray (examine would tell us that anyhow) and we should know to avoid it. Common sense. Not a great chance,but a chance. After all, we are the "ultimate creature hunters".


JB
Takei_Urawaza
Thu Feb 05, 2004 8:17 am
#7






JBMat wrote:

Rangers already have a slew of bonuses, some of which apply only to some Rangers.


JB





you what ?


are we talking about the same ranger class here ? there are less bonuses for combat in the whole ranger class than there are in novice marksman.


and the fact that those same meager bonuses don't apply to melee combat aswell it quite frankly deplorable


Could you clarify what you mean by "not thinking up new bonuses" ? Frankly if they're going in there to add a "+10 to melee accuaracy vs creature" then they can spend therest of the 10 minutes putting in my suggestions as well.


I can't .. nay WON'T believe that it's _that_ hard to modify bonuses within a class/table structure.



Takei Urawaza,

"Healthy people don't invent crutches."
Calculus_Entropy
Thu Feb 05, 2004 8:19 am
#8






Takei_Urawaza wrote:





JBMat wrote:

Rangers already have a slew of bonuses, some of which apply only to some Rangers.


JB





you what ?


are we talking about the same ranger class here ? there are less bonuses for combat in the whole ranger class than there are in novice marksman.


and the fact that those same meager bonuses don't apply to melee combat aswell it quite frankly deplorable


Could you clarify what you mean by "not thinking up new bonuses" ? Frankly if they're going in there to add a "+10 to melee accuaracy vs creature" then they can spend therest of the 10 minutes putting in my suggestions as well.


I can't .. nay WON'T believe that it's _that_ hard to modify bonuses within a class/table structure.




We aren't a combat class. Be glad we have ANY combat mods other than creature-type mods.




Calculus Entropy
Ranger Blue Glowie Emeritus
Garindan used /areatrack to find Han.
Takei_Urawaza
Thu Feb 05, 2004 8:40 am
#9








Calculus_Entropy wrote:


We aren't a combat class. Be glad we have ANY combat mods other than creature-type mods.






Oh ? not a combat class ? I assume your about to back that up with a conclusive and air tight arguement that blows me clear out of the water.


I've got one that backs me up that's rock solid mate...


you ?



Takei Urawaza,

"Healthy people don't invent crutches."
AgonThalia
Thu Feb 05, 2004 9:52 am
#10

I have to agree with Calc that Rangers are not a combat class but a combat support profession.

1) We have no weapon certifications upon novice or master, every other combat profession does.

2) We get meager defense bonuses to the creatures that we fight (i agree that there should be more) while other combat classes get defenses for most state attacks

3) With the unfair exception to a ranged bonus to hit, rangers get no real advantage to damage or speed with a weapon of choice

4) Rangers by themselves do no actual damage to an animal unless theres a weapon skill attached to it.

5) The skills that we do have, camo, camps, traps, area track, provide more assistance to a group than to the individual. Solo, throw a couple of traps on a critter and by the time you're done, he's already munching on your head.

6) Terrain negotiation (at the master scout level) helps you get to your prey efficiently and then run away from the prey efficiently.

7) Unfortunatley, the stated intention for rangers to be the ultimate creature hunters is not supported by the skills that are given to us.

8) Although you could argue that the CH's weapons are their pets, look at the other support professions, (SL, CM, Doc...etc) they dont get the protections either. This really shows that rather than a combat profession (which i believe that should be enhanced in our case) we are best suited as the skills now stand as a support prof.


Like others have said, it is not the skills that we as rangers possess that make us the best at what we do, it is how we use the skills we have that make us ultimate creature hunters.



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

Calculus_Entropy
Fri Feb 06, 2004 1:45 am
#11






AgonThalia wrote:
I have to agree with Calc that Rangers are not a combat class but a combat support profession.

1) We have no weapon certifications upon novice or master, every other combat profession does.

2) We get meager defense bonuses to the creatures that we fight (i agree that there should be more) while other combat classes get defenses for most state attacks

3) With the unfair exception to a ranged bonus to hit, rangers get no real advantage to damage or speed with a weapon of choice

4) Rangers by themselves do no actual damage to an animal unless theres a weapon skill attached to it.

5) The skills that we do have, camo, camps, traps, area track, provide more assistance to a group than to the individual. Solo, throw a couple of traps on a critter and by the time you're done, he's already munching on your head.

6) Terrain negotiation (at the master scout level) helps you get to your prey efficiently and then run away from the prey efficiently.

7) Unfortunatley, the stated intention for rangers to be the ultimate creature hunters is not supported by the skills that are given to us.

8) Although you could argue that the CH's weapons are their pets, look at the other support professions, (SL, CM, Doc...etc) they dont get the protections either. This really shows that rather than a combat profession (which i believe that should be enhanced in our case) we are best suited as the skills now stand as a support prof.


Like others have said, it is not the skills that we as rangers possess that make us the best at what we do, it is how we use the skills we have that make us ultimate creature hunters.



Number 4 says it all, but Agon's entire thread said everything I could and more. A combat class deals damage to everything (mobs, PCs, lairs, turrets). We have no skills that deal damage (creature-to-hit is not a skill). I can agree that a creature damage mitigation might be nice, and makes sense. That fits in with the "animal study" idea that is going around. It is my fault for not stating (in my other message)that we are CREATURE combat support class. Combat classes candamage everything, support classes assist while not dealing damage. Also, you never stated with a clear cut arguement that blows me out of the waterwhy we are a combat class. All you stated were mods/skills you would like to see...

Message Edited by Calculus_Entropy on 02-05-2004 01:48 PM



Calculus Entropy
Ranger Blue Glowie Emeritus
Garindan used /areatrack to find Han.
Takei_Urawaza
Fri Feb 06, 2004 8:14 am
#12

Your argueing for the current state of the ranger profession, The original post was geared toward asking for what other defence bonuses should be included, I obliged by suggesting numerable bonuses that I thoughwere in character for a class that the developers had originaly stated as being "the ultimate creature hunting class"


This post is not about present state it's about future state.


The original "ultimate creature hunter" idea was taken by the comunity as being too restrictive and as such the outdoorman proposal was created, a class that act's not only as a support class for groups when out creature hunting, but also, because the outdoorsman includes the original mandate of being able to fight them too it means that we as a class _are_ a combat class.


From the outdoorsman poposal


"He is a keen observer of creature behavior and mannerisms, and during trials of mortal combat, he can use that knowledge to attack and evade creatures of all sizes and shapes."


If we (as opposed tothe group that we're with) are the ultimate creature hunting class, then we must be capable fighters.


like wise from the outdoorsman proposal under the section Combat Proposal


"(This is in line with the ultimate hunter philosophy, with the idea that the profession should be able to hunt creatures better than other purely damaging dealing professions (such as Commando))"


This is ranger we're talking bout here.. me, as a ranger, I should be able to hunt creatures better than a commando. How can I do that if through out the entire of my profession I gain only a +25 to creature accuracy and (as was suggested by the original poster) a bonus to disease/poison.


Further proof that we're a combat class ?


well.. on 01-20-2004Thunder heart posted on the in concept forum a post that was entitled "IC 1-11: Combat Roles; Ranger" so clearly the devs feel that we've got a role in combat. ahh before you say it yes your quite right .. in theory just from that doctors and artisans have "roles" in combat .. one heals people and the other makes weapon power ups, each clearly a "role" in the strictest sence, but, if you look at the questions that are asking in that post the first 4 are clearly asking for opinions on direct combat ability.


So the developers are cleary interested in our opinion on what combat abilities they feel we should have.To me this suggests that they feel we should be included in "the fight" to some degree and they are canvasing what that degree should be from our responce. (granted, this bit = my speculation).


but lets not stop there.. lets look at one of the current class skills.


trapping 1 : rescue. This skill lets me take one for the team. But last time I checked .. my title wasn't kamakazi suiside warrior.


Don't you think that if a person learned how to get the attention of 3 meter tall killer panthers, it might also cross there mind that they'd want to learn how to not get hit by them too ?


I think the way the combat bonuses section of the outdoorman is worded though is responce enough, coupled with the fact that


you (calculus) are the First person to respond to the ranger combat roles post by thunderheart saying you support the outdoorsmanconcept, it is "the best way to answer your questions".


so .. now we've asertained that you agree with the outdoorsmans position on being a part of combat. perhaps we can get this post back on topic and get a bit more discussion on why you think the bonus's I've suggested for the ranger class are, or are not, suitable in making it as capable of creature hunting as a commando.


perhaps when we're donewe can help NRass flesh out that section a bit more so it's a little more detailed as to where we see ourselves than the couple of paragraphs that are currently there.



Takei Urawaza,

"Healthy people don't invent crutches."
Darniaq
Fri Feb 06, 2004 8:28 am
#13




Takei_Urawaza wrote:

Personally I'd like to see a range of bonuses placed though out the whole of the rangers tree's





I agree with your theory Takei, though certainly am not experienced enough to comment directly on the numbers.


We are a support profession right now. But the game is in a constant state of flux. We can't kill a mob, but between our traps and the Creature To-Hit bonuses we already get, we're pretty close. It's not like anyone is arguing that a Ranger/Musician must have a solid role in combat. It's being argued that we could be better at it from the base we're already in.


I love the Outdoorsman proposal. But I've been around the block too many times to think that's ever going to come to us in one fell swoop. We're getting the modular camps (purportedly, and without details) soon. We've already gotten the Camo Kits and something of a profession redesign from way back. We'll get other things as they come along, in response to the community (old and new) and our role in whatever the game is at the time.


I could see us getting Traps that work in PvP, having advanced Traps replaced with stationary ones, having them removed altogether in favor of a combat line, any number of things.


I could see Camo Kits going away in favor of a new Mask Scent line that goes as high as +150 and/or works against NPCs (vs the Scout Mask Line which'd work only against mobs, for example) and removes our presence from the overhead map and the radar.


I would like to see us become more proficient in hunting mobs, and harvesting the results. I would like to see us have, from within the template, some presence in the GCW (mostly Traps against NPCs and players, with tweaks). We can already requisition faction items from an overt-placed camp, which is cool.


Ranger is incomplete. We discuss many ways to continue the path. I agree with your concept of spreading combat bonuses throughout the template since how I view the Ranger, that would benefit both our natural hunting ability and provide something more for PvP.




_____________________________________________
darniaqkihoge
Galentech Industries · Darniaq.com
Bounty Hunter to the Stars!
Eclipse


Page 1 of 2
Previous Next