Ranger Archive
Thread: Creature Centric...
EDIT: Don't proofread AFTER you hit submit.
Message Edited by Calculus_Entropy on 09-08-2005 08:40 AM
Serraphin wrote:Maybe I am confused as well but what i think people mean is that by being "Creature Centric" Ranger does not have enough general combat mods but mods along the lines of imprvoed accuracy versus creatures. Bounty Hunters ont he otherhand have general combat mods. The BH mods improve there combat ability against npcs, creatures, and players.
Yeah, I shouldn't have used the BH example...my point is, they really ARE designed to take to humanoids, they just happen to be good vs creatures (i.e. they aren't limited to NPCs).
The key point here is that creature centric done NOT mean creature only.
Phenix1050 wrote:
BHs cannot be considered "NPC-centric" once they enter combat, however. Their combat specials work against any type of target. So in combat, they are not creature-centric. Their content is "humanoid-centric" since half their content is against Jedi. I won't mind if Ranger CONTENT is creature-centric (that can include harvesting) but in COBMAT, Rangers need to, like all other professions, be able to use their skills against any target.
Fair enough, but how are we different if we can do the same thing as everyone else? Why bother with a profession taht can do the same thing?
Read my most recent thread, Calc.
We can be able to participate in the entire game without being cookie-cutter. By focusing our skillset on enhancement rather than pure damage, we can have a unique "combat role" that doesn't interfere with our "content role" of the Outdoorsman.
??
Creature centric means we should have extra benefits against creatures. Some are currently working (harvesting) and some aren't (examine, to hit bennies). Just because we are creature centric does not mean you can't do well against NPCs however.
My combat profession is MBH with 18 FS boxes and Master Scout/master Ranger. I do decent enough against marks to win solo against all but the "Bosses". Hell, 30k is bad enough in a creature, never mind a mark.
Our traps give us a distinct advantage against creatures. Granted. But we can still drop most NPCs. No, I am not talking about walking SF into the Imp outpost on Talus and expecting to live. Although I have done that and laughed a lot. What I mean is that in most instances, I can drop the same level NPC in a fight.
Honestly, if the BH marks weren't so well paying and dropping decent loot I can sell, I would not bother. In the time it takes me to do one mark mission, I can get 4x the xp in a group, and tons of hides to boot.
I figure we have the best of both worlds, or would if the profession's benefits were not so borked up.
JB
Fair enough, but how are we different if we can do the same thing as everyone else? Why bother with a profession taht can do the same thing?
Phenix1050 wrote:
Read my most recent thread, Calc.
We can be able to participate in the entire game without being cookie-cutter. By focusing our skillset on enhancement rather than pure damage, we can have a unique "combat role" that doesn't interfere with our "content role" of the Outdoorsman.
QFE
*hops on the Phenix bandwagon and kicks back to let him do all the work*
I agree (in the interests of diplomacy I won't say who I agree with 
)
But, yes - Rangers should be creature-centric, but that should not mean exclusivity. And yes, being a ranger does not exclude you from participation in other content, but conversely, it should also contribute to a toons effectiveness in that content, which (apart from a few areas already noted) it does not.
Personally I'm not too worried about the lack of specials (although one or two would be nice) but the lack of general accuracy/defence that ALL (except creature handler) combat professions get is significant - especially given the sp costs.
We needn't worry about being FOTM either, not with the extra sp cost. Bang per Buck for ranger is always gonna be low.
I think the confusion arises when people use the phrase "creature centric" to actually talk about Ranger being "creature limited" currently. I don't mind being "creature centric" or having basic combat skills and mods but EXTRA skills or abilities when it comes to hunting - let us keep the harvesting, make it so we can loot unique organics (or loot more, or better ones, or higher chance), let us loot/craft trophies, let us have a couple skills that are geared to high end creature combat, give us big game tracking like Owen had proposed a while back (I think it was Owen). I DO mind that almost all the skills I have as a combat class are limited to ONLY working against creatures, when no other profession suffers a similar limitation in combat. I still think Ranger should have basic combat mods, and those mods should work in all types of combat - vs creatures, vs NPCs, vs players. Kind of embraces the "genius of the AND", where we can have good skills & mods for general combat AND still be good creature hunters (the best?) AND still not see those skills gimped in 2/3 of the game. Most of what we're asking for is NOT high damage dealing anyways, it's more stealth and avoidance and state application, debuffs, enhancements to ourselves, etc. These things, in my mind, are not mutually exclusive. A front lines stealthy scout/hunter who's super tough and can hold his own against krayts and kimos should be able to use those skills and at least SOME of that "ruggedness" when facing humanoid opponents as well.
Maybe we can all agree that the correct phrase to use is that we don't want to be "creature limited" and have a majority of our skills excluded from 2/3 of the game.
I like this. Calc?
AragornSoS wrote:
I think the confusion arises when people use the phrase "creature centric" to actually talk about Ranger being "creature limited" currently. I don't mind being "creature centric" or having basic combat skills and mods but EXTRA skills or abilities when it comes to hunting - let us keep the harvesting, make it so we can loot unique organics (or loot more, or better ones, or higher chance), let us loot/craft trophies, let us have a couple skills that are geared to high end creature combat, give us big game tracking like Owen had proposed a while back (I think it was Owen). I DO mind that almost all the skills I have as a combat class are limited to ONLY working against creatures, when no other profession suffers a similar limitation in combat. I still think Ranger should have basic combat mods, and those mods should work in all types of combat - vs creatures, vs NPCs, vs players. Kind of embraces the "genius of the AND", where we can have good skills & mods for general combat AND still be good creature hunters (the best?) AND still not see those skills gimped in 2/3 of the game. Most of what we're asking for is NOT high damage dealing anyways, it's more stealth and avoidance and state application, debuffs, enhancements to ourselves, etc. These things, in my mind, are not mutually exclusive. A front lines stealthy scout/hunter who's super tough and can hold his own against krayts and kimos should be able to use those skills and at least SOME of that "ruggedness" when facing humanoid opponents as well.
Maybe we can all agree that the correct phrase to use is that we don't want to be "creature limited" and have a majority of our skills excluded from 2/3 of the game.