BroncoAndy wrote:
This thread makes baby Jesus cry.
QFT. Rangers are not Archers. Bow DPS should not equal melee DPS.
EricaBlueStars wrote:
All I'm asking is make bow damage at least on par with melee, so we have a choice. Right now, sure you can bow well once an hour. Other than that if you want to use your bow, you make your whole group/raid lose a good chunk of dps.
Touchy subject but honestly I don't see that happening. Using a bow is purely situational and should not be a means of replacing what we already have. We use every single type of weapon with the exception of nearly all h2h. Quite possibly though you should really take a look at the class. We are a class that uses all weapons.. we are not a pure archer.
In before the move to the ranger forums
Klonn_Darkbane wrote:
and 1000/hit, no misses and no fizzles, no mana (or end?) consumption, no cost (endless quiver?), no recast delay, without any chance of getting hit, repeatedly without pushing a key (after the original autofire) certainly isn't a bad amount of damage. Short of a focussed necro DoT, is there anything else even close?
Archery never misses?
Whatever you're smoking, PLEASE share with the rest of the crowd!
TECCA1rz2tbs3owns wrote:
i say increase bow and throwing dps for all classes
Kill the ranger double damage bonus on non-moving, non-rooted mobs, and double everyone's archery damage table. Rangers should not be affected by this (they'll still hit as hard) but everyone else's archery damage will double. We'll still be doing double the archery damage that anyone else can do, if they're shelling out the coin for 13 damage arrows per shot and ahve the same bow, and we'll still be double attacking 24% of the time that they won't be, so its not like we'd be giving up a large portion of our archery lead on everyone else.
roth wrote:
Klonn_Darkbane wrote:and 1000/hit, no misses and no fizzles, no mana (or end?) consumption, no cost (endless quiver?), no recast delay, without any chance of getting hit, repeatedly without pushing a key (after the original autofire) certainly isn't a bad amount of damage. Short of a focussed necro DoT, is there anything else even close?Archery never misses?Whatever you're smoking, PLEASE share with the rest of the crowd!
Sorry, you are right. I forgot that it is possible. The high end rangers I know have ridiculous values for ATK... Haven't looked recently, but about a year ago I noticed that top ATK on almost all servers was a Ranger's. Doesn't mean never miss, tho.
LMAO But hey! lets not forget that all those trick shot aa's actually lower our dps because of the "ghost shots" that do not hit or anything. They just fire with no hits or misses even registered
I did say "if" and I also said not every mob, not every pull. Now you qualify and say "non-disc autofire". So apparently you don't suck, you do know how she does it. /shrugI was only saying I've seen it happen.and 1000/hit, no misses and no fizzles, no mana (or end?) consumption, no cost (endless quiver?), no recast delay, without any chance of getting hit, repeatedly without pushing a key (after the original autofire) certainly isn't a bad amount of damage. Short of a focussed necro DoT, is there anything else even close?
I did say "if" and I also said not every mob, not every pull. Now you qualify and say "non-disc autofire". So apparently you don't suck, you do know how she does it. /shrug
I was only saying I've seen it happen.
I guess my point is I think you're exaggerating, or basing your claims on more "eyeballing" than facts. Have you ever actually parsed your friends dps? I know necros aren't in the best shape when it comes to group dps (sort of stuck in a hard to balance place, because their solo dps and raid dps are exceptional), but you claimed earlier that your friends auto-fire dps keeps up with or outdoes your own, which I just can't believe. During discs or while chain nuking, yeah, maybe. But I don't think that qualifies as just autofire dps and certainly can't be done often, given the main disc in that sequence has around a 35 minute reuse, with max AAs. I just can't imagine autofire dps alone with a group bow can even come close to a necro.
roth wrote:Klonn_Darkbane wrote:and 1000/hit, no misses and no fizzles, no mana (or end?) consumption, no cost (endless quiver?), no recast delay, without any chance of getting hit, repeatedly without pushing a key (after the original autofire) certainly isn't a bad amount of damage. Short of a focussed necro DoT, is there anything else even close?Archery never misses?Whatever you're smoking, PLEASE share with the rest of the crowd!Sorry, you are right. I forgot that it is possible. The high end rangers I know have ridiculous values for ATK... Haven't looked recently, but about a year ago I noticed that top ATK on almost all servers was a Ranger's. Doesn't mean never miss, tho.
I don't believe attack has anything to do with misses. Attack increases how likely you are to hit a mob with a higher damage interval, unless my memory is failing me.
Frobus wrote:
Klonn_Darkbane wrote:roth wrote:Klonn_Darkbane wrote:and 1000/hit, no misses and no fizzles, no mana (or end?) consumption, no cost (endless quiver?), no recast delay, without any chance of getting hit, repeatedly without pushing a key (after the original autofire) certainly isn't a bad amount of damage. Short of a focussed necro DoT, is there anything else even close?Archery never misses?Whatever you're smoking, PLEASE share with the rest of the crowd!Sorry, you are right. I forgot that it is possible. The high end rangers I know have ridiculous values for ATK... Haven't looked recently, but about a year ago I noticed that top ATK on almost all servers was a Ranger's. Doesn't mean never miss, tho.I don't believe attack has anything to do with misses. Attack increases how likely you are to hit a mob with a higher damage interval, unless my memory is failing me.
Buffs and stats are what do it... atk is just for dmg. Correct me if I am wrong, please.
bulletproof69 wrote:
Frobus wrote:Klonn_Darkbane wrote:roth wrote:Klonn_Darkbane wrote:and 1000/hit, no misses and no fizzles, no mana (or end?) consumption, no cost (endless quiver?), no recast delay, without any chance of getting hit, repeatedly without pushing a key (after the original autofire) certainly isn't a bad amount of damage. Short of a focussed necro DoT, is there anything else even close?Archery never misses?Whatever you're smoking, PLEASE share with the rest of the crowd!Sorry, you are right. I forgot that it is possible. The high end rangers I know have ridiculous values for ATK... Haven't looked recently, but about a year ago I noticed that top ATK on almost all servers was a Ranger's. Doesn't mean never miss, tho.I don't believe attack has anything to do with misses. Attack increases how likely you are to hit a mob with a higher damage interval, unless my memory is failing me.Buffs and stats are what do it... atk is just for dmg. Correct me if I am wrong, please.
ATK = how much dmg your hits does
ACC = how often you hit
There is buffs who do both.
Stand corrected, then. Will have to look up how rangers stack up in accuracy.
However, be that as it may, you can miss, but that's a nice diversion from the point.
Stand corrected, then. Will have to look up how rangers stack up in accuracy.However, be that as it may, you can miss, but that's a nice diversion from the point.
Nice diversion?
Archery dmg doesn't need to be boosted and even if it was there is no reason to make it as much as melee. Then we go back to the days of old where we had lazy people who would sit back and /autofire and go take a nap.
Klonn_Darkbane wrote:Stand corrected, then. Will have to look up how rangers stack up in accuracy.However, be that as it may, you can miss, but that's a nice diversion from the point.Nice diversion? Archery dmg doesn't need to be boosted and even if it was there is no reason to make it as much as melee. Then we go back to the days of old where we had lazy people who would sit back and /autofire and go take a nap.
Yes because shooting the bow takes way less effort than standing next to the tank instead of behind him and hitting auto attack.
The game has 8 melee classes if you include the ranger. The game needs a class who is good at ranged dps with a bow. If its not going to be the ranger, they should put one in. I say the easy change is just making the bow as good, or slightly less than melee and then its up to the player what they do. I see no good reason still to not buff bow damage in this whole thread.
No reason to really respond to this post it's inappropriate but I'm bored.
Couple of comments being a long-term ranger. Remember that there are a lot of variables in gear, play style, guild targets, etc. If you are a raiding ranger, I would think you'd be a lot more unhappy with the recent spell "adjustments" than any bow issue (yeah I want my mist back). As for 4X exp not working solo, that would be overcome with a merc and be unbalanced, obviously.
Ranger's weren't originally intended to do as much bow damage as melee damage, rangers were warrior/druids. Tanks that gave up plate armor for the ability to cast spells. The bow was concieved as a tool for pulling and to allow some ranged play, not as a dps tool. It was later changed to make it higher dps based on the dynamics of gameplay. I can assure you, back in the day, all you did was get some arrows cheap and pull with it. It's much better now than ever before.
Rangers dps on raid mobs with a bow for several reasons, and can do quite well if they are capable with barrage, have max'd range aa and a decent bow. If they are just using auto-shoot and going afk, well that's different but don't blame the bow. The main reason I often range is a) you can keep your eye on things better and avoid cf's, b) you can sustain decent dps with disc and activated aa's and spell-casting that rival pure melee, and c) you don't die nearly as often from over-agro, or even worry about it.
Bigger heals? More bow damage? Sheesh the least of our worries. Current mobs getting to camp per pull 1/2 dead without headshot in current expansions? lol
I say give all bow using classes AM 1/2/3 AA and make a throwing AA like AM 1/2/3 for the throwing classes but then give rangers AM 4/5/6. Also give every class that can do ranged weapon attacks X2 damage vs stationary targets and give rangers an AA that lets them do the X2 even if the target is moving.
There's at least 5 advantages for being able to DPS from range with a bow compared to melee:
1. Bow damage creates practically no aggro.
2. Range damage avoids AE rampage (though it's not rocket science to avoid it, can't beat never have any possiblity of getting hit by it).
3. Avoids any short range AEs (not common but it's something you get for free).
4. Generally have a better vision of the raid when you have distance away from the boss (hard to survey the raid with the boss in your face).
5. More places to spread out to minimize damage from virus/targetted AEs.
Now most of these advantages aren't that big of a deal, but they're advantages nonetheless. The DPS increase for meleeing tends to outweight these advantages, but if bow damage is as high as melee (or even better), there would be no reason to ever melee a mob, and then you'd just be a Wizard that carries a bow and wears chain.
AutomaticWarrior wrote:
There's at least 5 advantages for being able to DPS from range with a bow compared to melee: 1. Bow damage creates practically no aggro. 2. Range damage avoids AE rampage (though it's not rocket science to avoid it, can't beat never have any possiblity of getting hit by it). 3. Avoids any short range AEs (not common but it's something you get for free). 4. Generally have a better vision of the raid when you have distance away from the boss (hard to survey the raid with the boss in your face). 5. More places to spread out to minimize damage from virus/targetted AEs. Now most of these advantages aren't that big of a deal, but they're advantages nonetheless. The DPS increase for meleeing tends to outweight these advantages, but if bow damage is as high as melee (or even better), there would be no reason to ever melee a mob, and then you'd just be a Wizard that carries a bow and wears chain.
True, they would need to increase aggro. But really melee don't pull aggro from decent tanks anyway. And bow damage would be at or below melee damage.
Casters are ranged dps, just with spells. They share advantages you listed...the only ranged advantage the bow has over a caster really is that you can shoot further away, so you might be able to avoid larger AEs. They could always put a range required for the bow damage boost to stop that though if its really a problem.
Also, each class has their own ups and downs. That would be a pro for a ranger, they have their cons. Ranger FD is nice.
AutomaticWarrior wrote: There's at least 5 advantages for being able to DPS from range with a bow compared to melee: 1. Bow damage creates practically no aggro. 2. Range damage avoids AE rampage (though it's not rocket science to avoid it, can't beat never have any possiblity of getting hit by it). 3. Avoids any short range AEs (not common but it's something you get for free). 4. Generally have a better vision of the raid when you have distance away from the boss (hard to survey the raid with the boss in your face). 5. More places to spread out to minimize damage from virus/targetted AEs. Now most of these advantages aren't that big of a deal, but they're advantages nonetheless. The DPS increase for meleeing tends to outweight these advantages, but if bow damage is as high as melee (or even better), there would be no reason to ever melee a mob, and then you'd just be a Wizard that carries a bow and wears chain. True, they would need to increase aggro. But really melee don't pull aggro from decent tanks anyway. And bow damage would be at or below melee damage. Casters are ranged dps, just with spells. They share advantages you listed...the only ranged advantage the bow has over a caster really is that you can shoot further away, so you might be able to avoid larger AEs. They could always put a range required for the bow damage boost to stop that though if its really a problem. Also, each class has their own ups and downs. That would be a pro for a ranger, they have their cons. Ranger FD is nice.
The question is what would having Rangers being some kind of 'caster with bow' get you that you haven't have before? What is gained by reworking bow aggro/damage mechanisms to bring bow damage to below your melee damage? The advantages for range DPS is relatively small so if there is any reasonable DPS difference between melee and bow, you'd probably stick with meleeing for the DPS. But, if there isn't any significant DPS difference between melee and bow, then you'd always bow because you get a few extra advantages for free.
In the end you're just looking at a lot of work with no obvious benefits. Even if they did everything right in this 'bow revamp' you're unlikely to have any meaningful impact on the game, and it sure won't be easy.
Hurrrrrr I have no idea what I'm talking about so I'm going to call people names. DERP DERP DERP
I love it when people drink and post.
Yes because shooting the bow takes way less effort than standing next to the tank instead of behind him and hitting auto attack.The game has 8 melee classes if you include the ranger. The game needs a class who is good at ranged dps with a bow. If its not going to be the ranger, they should put one in. I say the easy change is just making the bow as good, or slightly less than melee and then its up to the player what they do. I see no good reason still to not buff bow damage in this whole thread.
Why do we need an archer class? Is it because bows are that cool or something?
We need an archer class just as much as we need a chucker class whose primary DPS form is throwing. We don't have one of those at all, do we? At least we kinda have archery covered by us rangers - and we know better than to expect a return of archery as a primary form of damage.
And, if you'd read the thread, I already gave a couple good reasons not to bump archery, one of which was answered by someone else : ranger archery is too frigging good compared to everyone else's ... and the other reason is that there are too many problems with the archery mechanic as currently instituted in EQ to increase it.
By the way ... 3 priests, 4 casters, 4 not-so-pure melee, 5 hybrids .. I see 9 melees if you include rangers, 8 if ya don't ... might want to get yer classes straight.
EricaBlueStars wrote:Yes because shooting the bow takes way less effort than standing next to the tank instead of behind him and hitting auto attack.The game has 8 melee classes if you include the ranger. The game needs a class who is good at ranged dps with a bow. If its not going to be the ranger, they should put one in. I say the easy change is just making the bow as good, or slightly less than melee and then its up to the player what they do. I see no good reason still to not buff bow damage in this whole thread.Why do we need an archer class? Is it because bows are that cool or something?We need an archer class just as much as we need a chucker class whose primary DPS form is throwing. We don't have one of those at all, do we? At least we kinda have archery covered by us rangers - and we know better than to expect a return of archery as a primary form of damage.And, if you'd read the thread, I already gave a couple good reasons not to bump archery, one of which was answered by someone else : ranger archery is too frigging good compared to everyone else's ... and the other reason is that there are too many problems with the archery mechanic as currently instituted in EQ to increase it.By the way ... 3 priests, 4 casters, 4 not-so-pure melee, 5 hybrids .. I see 9 melees if you include rangers, 8 if ya don't ... might want to get yer classes straight.
Bard is the only one out of all those that isn't nearly as big on melee, so I didn't include them, but thanks for thinking I didn't know of bards...I got this game a little late, in 1999.
Almost all MMOs set in fantasy times with swords, magic, etc have a class who uses mostly the bow. EQ2, DDO, WoW, UO, AoC, etc. Some people like to use the bow rather than melee. Yes, bows are cool. Why is melee so cool that we need everyone to either melee or use spells? Who are you to say there should be no physical ranged class because YOU don't like them? Its not like I just created the concept of archers in MMOs, its pretty standard.
Archery isn't too good. Its damage is cut in half if the mob isn't being tanked. That doesn't happen with melee chasing a target as its being kited, or a necros dots, or a mages/wizards nukes, etc. Its only a disadvantage a ranger with a bow gets.
I didn't say everything should remain the same, just increase ranged damage to be the same as melee. They should make changes to allow people to use the bow if they want and not nerf themself horribly. Can you explain to me how having 9 melee makes sence, rather than 8 and 1 who can either melee or use the bow? I don't understand where people like you get their reasoning.
bulletproof69 wrote:Klonn_Darkbane wrote:Stand corrected, then. Will have to look up how rangers stack up in accuracy.However, be that as it may, you can miss, but that's a nice diversion from the point.Nice diversion? Archery dmg doesn't need to be boosted and even if it was there is no reason to make it as much as melee. Then we go back to the days of old where we had lazy people who would sit back and /autofire and go take a nap.Yes because shooting the bow takes way less effort than standing next to the tank instead of behind him and hitting auto attack.The game has 8 melee classes if you include the ranger. The game needs a class who is good at ranged dps with a bow. If its not going to be the ranger, they should put one in. I say the easy change is just making the bow as good, or slightly less than melee and then its up to the player what they do. I see no good reason still to not buff bow damage in this whole thread.
At least when you are in melee range you have to pay attention to the direction the mob is facing, Wild ramp, aggro, Ae's and anything else that happens up close. Sitting in the back with the wizards is a joke. As long as you are facing the mob you can sit WAY DOWN RANGE and not do a dam thing but /autofire and walk away... it's very unlikely that the mob is gonna move to your backside or out of your field of view. Face it, if you would rather sit back and do nothing then you should have rolled something else.
I kick lazy rangers from my groups for this too.... are they afk? Heck, we sure don't know.. they haven't moved off the mount or that same spot for a few minutes... but they keep firing and producing nothing but mediocre dps. Grow a pair and get your butt into the fight
EricaBlueStars wrote:bulletproof69 wrote:Klonn_Darkbane wrote:Stand corrected, then. Will have to look up how rangers stack up in accuracy.However, be that as it may, you can miss, but that's a nice diversion from the point.Nice diversion? Archery dmg doesn't need to be boosted and even if it was there is no reason to make it as much as melee. Then we go back to the days of old where we had lazy people who would sit back and /autofire and go take a nap.Yes because shooting the bow takes way less effort than standing next to the tank instead of behind him and hitting auto attack.The game has 8 melee classes if you include the ranger. The game needs a class who is good at ranged dps with a bow. If its not going to be the ranger, they should put one in. I say the easy change is just making the bow as good, or slightly less than melee and then its up to the player what they do. I see no good reason still to not buff bow damage in this whole thread.At least when you are in melee range you have to pay attention to the direction the mob is facing, Wild ramp, aggro, Ae's and anything else that happens up close. Sitting in the back with the wizards is a joke. As long as you are facing the mob you can sit WAY DOWN RANGE and not do a dam thing but /autofire and walk away... it's very unlikely that the mob is gonna move to your backside or out of your field of view. Face it, if you would rather sit back and do nothing then you should have rolled something else.I kick lazy rangers from my groups for this too.... are they afk? Heck, we sure don't know.. they haven't moved off the mount or that same spot for a few minutes... but they keep firing and producing nothing but mediocre dps. Grow a pair and get your butt into the fight
Yes I should have rolled another class...oh wait, I have every class in the game already created. Lowest level are a few 45s I sac'd. Not that its hard to get that high, specially these days. I guess I'm stupid for thinking there should be more to EQ than healing, melee, or casting. How close minded of me.
roth wrote:EricaBlueStars wrote:Yes because shooting the bow takes way less effort than standing next to the tank instead of behind him and hitting auto attack.The game has 8 melee classes if you include the ranger. The game needs a class who is good at ranged dps with a bow. If its not going to be the ranger, they should put one in. I say the easy change is just making the bow as good, or slightly less than melee and then its up to the player what they do. I see no good reason still to not buff bow damage in this whole thread.Why do we need an archer class? Is it because bows are that cool or something?We need an archer class just as much as we need a chucker class whose primary DPS form is throwing. We don't have one of those at all, do we? At least we kinda have archery covered by us rangers - and we know better than to expect a return of archery as a primary form of damage.And, if you'd read the thread, I already gave a couple good reasons not to bump archery, one of which was answered by someone else : ranger archery is too frigging good compared to everyone else's ... and the other reason is that there are too many problems with the archery mechanic as currently instituted in EQ to increase it.By the way ... 3 priests, 4 casters, 4 not-so-pure melee, 5 hybrids .. I see 9 melees if you include rangers, 8 if ya don't ... might want to get yer classes straight.Bard is the only one out of all those that isn't nearly as big on melee, so I didn't include them, but thanks for thinking I didn't know of bards...I got this game a little late, in 1999.Almost all MMOs set in fantasy times with swords, magic, etc have a class who uses mostly the bow. EQ2, DDO, WoW, UO, AoC, etc. Some people like to use the bow rather than melee. Yes, bows are cool. Why is melee so cool that we need everyone to either melee or use spells? Who are you to say there should be no physical ranged class because YOU don't like them? Its not like I just created the concept of archers in MMOs, its pretty standard.Archery isn't too good. Its damage is cut in half if the mob isn't being tanked. That doesn't happen with melee chasing a target as its being kited, or a necros dots, or a mages/wizards nukes, etc. Its only a disadvantage a ranger with a bow gets.I didn't say everything should remain the same, just increase ranged damage to be the same as melee. They should make changes to allow people to use the bow if they want and not nerf themself horribly. Can you explain to me how having 9 melee makes sence, rather than 8 and 1 who can either melee or use the bow? I don't understand where people like you get their reasoning.
Actually that statement is just the opposite. Archery dmg isn't cut in half for a mob not being tanked, it's a bonus for rangers to do double the dmg to a tanked mob.
Ok mr. technical...the assumed bow damage is with a mob being tanked. I already went over that it only does 2x while tanked, and half that while not. I even said it should stay that way, and have the modifier while being tanked beefed up. Thanks.
doesn't Dex or Agl play into it?
AFAIk dex increse the crit chance with a bow, i dont think dex or agi increse hit chance in any way, but str do effect how hard you hit but honestly check with the ranger community for that stuff im no ranger =)
For how safe it is, bow dps is very adequate as is. That said, rangers who can't be bothered to get in and melee and hold the group/raid back by bowing non-disc'd get on my nerves. Its a lazy playstyle (yes there are situations that warrant it, but those are the exception rather than the rule). To beef up archery to make it a full time lazy playstyle I feel is a waste of resources and effort that could be better spent on other parts of the game. Not to mention it is a very small portion of the ranger community that would want this change, and I'm sure the cost in other areas of the class would be significant if it were to happen.Ranger ≠Archer, not historically and not in game. Archers may have a role in other games, but they were created and balanced around those roles. To try to shoehorn an existing class into that role is just silly, and everquest has more than enough classes to balance without adding another one.
Deidlit wrote:
Well said. Especially considering balancing issues, if anything like this was to be implemented, other aspects of the class will suffer for it.
I would rather see our DoT's increased ever so slightly, I'm only a 66 level Ranger mind you, but my best dot does 170 damage per tick? and I think that might be crit
As for bow damage I think it's where it needs to be, I can do a very decent amount of damage with my bow, it Crits a whole bunch (maxed Bow AA's for level), I can do more damage Ranged than Melee when parsed.
Even if archery was increased it would still not be a lazy playstyle, the game has changed a lot since PoP which some of you seem to forget. We are usually now in melee trying to keep the mob in our crosshairs, clicking all of our abilities, and chain nuking. Even right now when we use a bow we still do this, and I'm sure the devs would take it into consideration should they boost archery to take into account all of that. So while yes if it was boosted some would afk shoot, but you could still pick them out simply because if that is all they did their dps would still be bad.
Archery isn't really going to be made any more powerful than it is now while under disc. PoP was a fluke, and the reason why is that sony has a splintering telephone pole rammed sideways up their butts when it comes to mana-free, low-aggro DPS.
I'd rather see archery improved as a whole, and made more useful for all classes that can equip bows, before going for any further ranger-specific benefits from using archery. Basically what this means is overhauling the system rather than continuing to graft fluff modifiers onto an ailing, outdated code (trick shot, bow mastery etc).
Even if archery was boosted when not under disc......there'd still be way too much to do to be effective and AFK-autofirers would still be obvious
dbl dmg is removed when ROOTED... has jack squat to do with being tanked or not. Considering that we do a very large chunk more than any other class with ranged... you won't be seeing it getting boosted to melee.
Yoscorio wrote:
Would be nice if bow damage was made relevent again, unfortunately, I don't see it happening anytime soon.It does drive me freakin crazy to see some of our guild rangers bowing on major end-game raid fights. Sure, they might be burning their bow disc, but more than likely even with their disk their melee dps would be higher, especially if they're in a melee dps group.
It does drive me freakin crazy to see some of our guild rangers bowing on major end-game raid fights. Sure, they might be burning their bow disc, but more than likely even with their disk their melee dps would be higher, especially if they're in a melee dps group.
Without using bow disc (Trueshot), we put out about 2/3 the DPS we can while meleeing.
The main problem I have with melee DPS is that if the raid mob I'm meleeing picks me for Rampage (or goes Wild Rampage), I can easily get one-rounded since I can't take the damage like plate classes can. If I actually survive it then I'm sucking mana from the healers that is better utilised on actual tank classes.
Range DPS is a viable alternative, but I wish it were more on an even par with what we can output via melee.
The choice is all I really want.
Hatsee wrote:
Right now though we do use bows at times, on a short fight with a bow and disc etc we do quite well, we're probably fine in terms of archery damage right now under disc.Also I'd rather not be forced to use a bow, not sure how everyone else feels about it.
Right now though we do use bows at times, on a short fight with a bow and disc etc we do quite well, we're probably fine in terms of archery damage right now under disc.
Also I'd rather not be forced to use a bow, not sure how everyone else feels about it.
And I'd rather not be forced to melee, but we aren't actually forced to do either, are we?
if they up bow damage, i am very sure we'll loose melee damage . that will make a ton of rangers quit .
most people that started a ranger in the past 8 years or so and stuck to it ,know they are a melee class, that can optionally use a bow to do still decent dps .
EQ has no archer class, and if you'd read these boards for a while ,you know that devs have answered that it's very time ( and money ) consuming the rebuild the engine to make a viable archer class ,with all the bugginess surrounding archery.
buginess as in, not being able to shoot a mob if a matchbox is in the way , his tailhairs touches a wall ,Z axis problems ,and of course the almost no aggro it makes ( and i am sure there's more still ,i dont use my bow a lot ,never have, even in the PoP era . )
and yes, they have tried to add aggro to archery, and it was horrible . every fight usually had all rangers dead in the first 20 seconds ,because we all were summoned after 2 arrows .
in short, rangers are a melee class ,with a lot of options, including shooting a bow decently , and we like it that way .
if almost all other MMO's have an archer class, what's keeping you in EQ then if you like being an archer so much ?
Roxasz
ranger since 2000
Tanthulas wrote:
Yoscorio wrote: Would be nice if bow damage was made relevent again, unfortunately, I don't see it happening anytime soon.It does drive me freakin crazy to see some of our guild rangers bowing on major end-game raid fights. Sure, they might be burning their bow disc, but more than likely even with their disk their melee dps would be higher, especially if they're in a melee dps group. Without using bow disc (Trueshot), we put out about 2/3 the DPS we can while meleeing. The main problem I have with melee DPS is that if the raid mob I'm meleeing picks me for Rampage (or goes Wild Rampage), I can easily get one-rounded since I can't take the damage like plate classes can. If I actually survive it then I'm sucking mana from the healers that is better utilised on actual tank classes. Range DPS is a viable alternative, but I wish it were more on an even par with what we can output via melee. The choice is all I really want.
If bow damage is equal to melee, bow is always better because it's safer. There is no choice here.
Right now your choice is basically do subpar damage while avoiding AE rampage and have practically no chance of getting aggro, versus doing better damage with increased risk. That's a fair tradeoff I think.
Wait until more people are on the hatelist before engaging and you will avoid standard rampage.
Wild rampage is an antimelee mechanic intended to cause healing stress or to kill undergeared/inattentive melee.
If you want to avoid Wramp, enjoy your almost entirely agroless DPS while maintaining better survivability than the other ranged classes, who may do more ranged damage but generate a LOT more agro doing it and are limited by mana.
Do you see that the whole point here is that there is a trade off? That is the essence of choice. If there was no tradeoff, there really wouldn't be much point to the choice.
Without using bow disc (Trueshot), we put out about 2/3 the DPS we can while meleeing. The main problem I have with melee DPS is that if the raid mob I'm meleeing picks me for Rampage (or goes Wild Rampage), I can easily get one-rounded since I can't take the damage like plate classes can. If I actually survive it then I'm sucking mana from the healers that is better utilised on actual tank classes.Range DPS is a viable alternative, but I wish it were more on an even par with what we can output via melee. The choice is all I really want.Hatsee wrote:Right now though we do use bows at times, on a short fight with a bow and disc etc we do quite well, we're probably fine in terms of archery damage right now under disc.Also I'd rather not be forced to use a bow, not sure how everyone else feels about it.And I'd rather not be forced to melee, but we aren't actually forced to do either, are we?
How well are you geared? How many of your defensive AA's have you gotten?
I can tell you that, with a mix of SoD t5 group non-visibles, and working on converting my MMM visibles to Crystallos visibles, I can take a few rounds of wild rampage. Also, so far, given how sporadic wild rampage is, unless its hitting for 7k or more, I can usually ignore it with Guardian or Group Guardian running, maybe popping a heal potion. For what its worth, my raid experience is up to Crystallos, Rottrued/Malarian, and attempts (none successful) at the Kith raid.
Right now, there are two main types of dps classes : melee and caster. Outside of an itemisation screwup at Sony we have always been primarily a melee dps class, supplemented by spells. Nowadays, given the lack of a melee damage disc we seem to be more spell based than melee based on burns, but that's beside the point. We are not and never were intended to be primarily archers - no one was.
So .. yes, by your choice as playing a ranger you are "forced" to melee. You could have chosen a caster and been "forced" to toss nukes, dots, debuffs, etc. at mobs all this time.
That ranger that was pulling mobs and consistantly bringing them into camp at low health or killing them...sucks. Only explanation as to how it's being done is he/she is snare pulling the mob, then bowing and nuking it the whole way back to camp. Particularly if they are pulling animal (low hp) mobs, you could definitely bring them into camp consistantly low health or even kill a couple.
The whole question would be...why? They are low experience to begin with even if you are solo, and with a group they are crap. Also, if you're going to be a good puller, you are better using melee dps on the mob that is in camp until it's down to 50% or so and then going to grab the next mob (timing varies depending on the group/location of course). Point being that for the time that you are doing melee dps you are probably doing roughly four times the dps you are doing while you are kiting with half damage archery dps. If you want to kite, then go off and solo. If your job is to pull for a group, don't screw around trying to dps the mob- just get it to camp where your group can unleash their full dps on it. Particularly in this case where one of your group mates is a necro- by bringing them in at low health you have basically reduced the necro's dps to nothing since they'll never have time to stack some dot's on it before it's dead. Better off to the let the necro pull and stack dots on the way in while you do melee dps 100% of the time.
But anyway, enough about crappy rangers.
Regarding increasing archery equal to melee...no thanks. The last time they tinkered with increasing aggro on ranged damage as a way to tinker with risk vs reward all the rangers and int casters were getting summoned everytime they crit'd. It wasn't pretty.
boukk_sebilis wrote:
i d love ranger to be tuned as a Bow main dmg class, or if rngr community is against it, dev creating a 100% bow class.
Neither is going to happen for two reasons:
1. The current crop of Devs do not want an Archery Class (this may, in part, be due to the second reason).2. The archery code is totally borked. Hate generation cannot be scaled properly, it is either too little or too much in relation to damage inflicted. Arrows poof out of existance as if they were never fired. There are line of site issues where you can cast a nuke on a target but get message about not being able to see the target when you try to shoot it with an arrow.
If there are any changes to archery to be made, (or any similar ranged attacks) it needs to apply to all classes, not just rangers.
Any ranger that is sitting back and using their bow (non-disc) on a raid mob, better have a darn good encounter mechanic reason for doing so, and most likely needs an arse-chewing from the raidleader for doing significant sub-par DPS.
.
markthis wrote:
If there are any changes to archery to be made, (or any similar ranged attacks) it needs to apply to all classes, not just rangers.Any ranger that is sitting back and using their bow (non-disc) on a raid mob, better have a darn good encounter mechanic reason for doing so, and most likely needs an arse-chewing from the raidleader for doing significant sub-par DPS. .
I have nothing at all against using archery on the trash. Its simply easier, and the trash dies in a short enough period of time that the dps lost by not meleeing is, quite simply, irrelevant. Against a raid target, however, there had better be a very significant reason for using archery instead of melee, and depending on the event, perhaps even under disc. If its a permarooted or pinned mob, then using barrage + sureshot + melee should be better than barrage + sureshot + archery (sureshot without being able to use barrage is a waste, imo).
As for your other point ... I've made several posts on that very same theme, going into some greater detail as to just what I feel needs to happen. In short, boost other classes archery dps, allow them to narrow the gap (non-disc, a warrior with same bow and arrow would do what, 15%? 10%? - I know its less than 20%, thanks to Bow Mastery and Ranged Finesse - of the dps a ranger would, against a mob where we get the double damage bonus), FIX the problems with archery that are stated elsewhere, and then see what improvements are needed for archery as a whole, and then for the ranger class specifically.
I have to respectfully disagree with some of you. Tracking and Archery were traditionally the defining characteristics of Rangers (we had access to the best bows and the farthest reaching and most customizable tracking).
I would argue that prior to GoD, Trueshot and archery were intended to be our defining characteristics. We were meant to be archers with the ability to melee (hence our paper tank status).
Arguably this has changed... for better or for worse is another matter of opinion. Post GoD, especially OoW, we were modified to be melee DPS'rs in response to classic DPS class malcontent at ranger's newfound DPS priority status. Since we were never placed on par with other DPS classes (at the very least not intentionally), I don't see the problem with allowing us to do equivalent DPS with a bow. It balances.
I don't see the problem with an archer class... it really functions similar to a healing class, or a nuking class, or even a pet class.... we sit back and let our skills do the work from afar. I do agree, however, that the archery code is skrewed and should be addressed in terms of hate generation and line of sight issues. Indeed those should be fixed first before rectifying DPS issues (we'd have to pay alot more attention to what we're doing).
Archery currently is nothing more than the old school classic EQ system with a whole lot of modifiers and bonus abilities tacked onto it.
Reworking archery from the ground up would be the best way to make archery useful to all classes that have it.
Agreed but I still think ranger's should receive a superior benefit.
(side note to my above comments: even our class icon is a bow =D)
hey i'll help you Hawk ,we're not called RANGErs for nothing uh ?
you know the class icon for a pally is a helm ? i dont see them headbutting everyone though ....
and while we're at it ,i've seen female necroMANcers as well.
we are a melee class ,with the added possibility ( started in Luclin ) to use a bow better then anyone else ,and well, that's what we still are .
in other words, you got it backwards ,we're not meant to be archers with the ability to melee, we're meant to be meleeers with the ability to use archery .
and lets face it ,defining a class on a disc that can be used once every 72 mins is a bit slim, isn't it ?
Roxasz.
The Paladins graphic is in fact a helm WITH FEATHERED WINGS and when I look at it I think of a holy or virtuous knight.
The Ranger graphic is a bow and quiver and when I look at it I think of archery.
The graphic does give a impression that I think is to help lure you in to reading the class discription so you can make your class choice.
All I can say is I like being able to do the kind of damage I can do with archery, could it be better yes for sure but it should be better across the board for all classes, not just for rangers. Also if archery or ranged combat was improved for all classes I can't see why any class would have to give up anything as it would only be unbalancing if a single class got a boost in ability.
Hawk050 wrote:
I have to respectfully disagree with some of you. Tracking and Archery were traditionally the defining characteristics of Rangers (we had access to the best bows and the farthest reaching and most customizable tracking).I would argue that prior to GoD, Trueshot and archery were intended to be our defining characteristics. We were meant to be archers with the ability to melee (hence our paper tank status).Arguably this has changed... for better or for worse is another matter of opinion. Post GoD, especially OoW, we were modified to be melee DPS'rs in response to classic DPS class malcontent at ranger's newfound DPS priority status. Since we were never placed on par with other DPS classes (at the very least not intentionally), I don't see the problem with allowing us to do equivalent DPS with a bow. It balances.I don't see the problem with an archer class... it really functions similar to a healing class, or a nuking class, or even a pet class.... we sit back and let our skills do the work from afar. I do agree, however, that the archery code is skrewed and should be addressed in terms of hate generation and line of sight issues. Indeed those should be fixed first before rectifying DPS issues (we'd have to pay alot more attention to what we're doing).
Oh so many false premises in this post, where to begin ...
Tracking was one of the defining characteristics of rangers - once they got it fixed. It took them a couple expansions to fix it however - I started playing in Dec 2000, shortly after Velious came out, and our tracking ability was the worst of all three tracking classes. We had the greatest range, but the window was fixed, could not be sorted nor resized, and with the thing functioning as "normal" tracksort, we'd literally see a bat that just spawned halfway across Butcherblock, and not see the one that just popped 5' away. They initially had DRUIDS the best trackers - shortest range meant they could actually track the things nearby, rather than the stuff that just popped in the middle of nowhere - and Bards had a higher skill than Druids to ensure that they were worse trackers than Druids. Yea, it was originally a defining characteristic ...
Archery was originally nothing better for us than for anyone else, outside of itemization. Then came Trueshot, and then the double damage to non-moving, non-rooted targets which was our original Jolt. Trueshot, with its 2 minute duration 67 minute reuse, became a characteristic of the class - not archery in and of itself. Many a ranger would use summoned arrows for regular archery (Tolan's Darkwood Bracer, a Kunark item, not an original item) and 8 damage arrows they fletched for TS burns. Due to the cost of arrows, however, we were still a melee class between Trueshot burns.
Things have changed - twice. I'll grant you that it is arguable whether the change TO archery as a focus and then back FROM it were good things or not. Pre-PoP we were better at melee than archery. Luclin's AM3 and EQ made archery far far more viable, once you hit 59 (which was a LOT harder back then), but even though it opened up all sorts of solo kiting opportunities, it still took Trueshot to really shine with archery. It took PoP bows (not just elemental bows, the twisted one from PoN was big as well, and the BFT which came out during PoP IIRC, though elemental bows were the biggest culprits) for non-disc archery to come into its own. Here's the kicker though - if you had access to elemental melee weapons, in addition to your elemental bow, melee was still superior outside of Trueshot. Most people at the time, however, weren't as big into raiding as they are now.
Since then, archery has held itself relatively steady (with very minor upgrades here and there, the biggest being the disc upgrades) while melee and then spell dps have shot up to overtake the non-raiders non-disc archery.
As far as "the archer class" abilities ... pure speculation.
Sadly, Paladins are more likely to receive in-game helms with feathery wings that produce those annoying flapping sounds and allow them to soar above the battlefield while stunning mobs with bursts of fireballs from their eyes and healing the raid with bolts of divine lightning from their holy arses before archery becomes any more of a practical tool for any of us, at this point.
