Bows: are they underpowered?
GeniusLoci
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomway Ftw
I really don't see a way that you can have rangers deal marksmanship damage without it either being about flare spamming like usage of attack skills
It's the same question that paragons, sword warriors and anyone but Hammer wielders ask. I mean my Para is doing like ...well 10-15 tops lately? And she is isn't even in lategame areas 
So yeah, I think bows are just fine, you need skills for them and you have such skill.
So yeah, I think bows are just fine, you need skills for them and you have such skill.
Evilsod
Bows causing knockdown would be ridiculously overpowered... just look at Tundra Giants.
glountz
The question asked by the OP is not good.
Taking bows characteristics out of their context is IMHO completely stupid.
Yes, bows, with nothing else with them, suck more than scythes, axes, hammres and swords.
But less than daggers which, with no skills, suck even more.
And I don't speak about wands.
Would you, for the sake of weapon balance, boost the damage of wands/staff to 19-35 as they have the same refire rate of the hammer?
This is plain stupid.
The skills associated with the bows, that is spirits or preparations, attack skills (okay they mostly suck excepted for interrupts) completely change the game.
You just trying to say: look at the dagger: they are two-handed, make them deal 14-27 damage (which with 30% double strike equals roughly hammer's one)!
No way.
Taking bows characteristics out of their context is IMHO completely stupid.
Yes, bows, with nothing else with them, suck more than scythes, axes, hammres and swords.
But less than daggers which, with no skills, suck even more.
And I don't speak about wands.
Would you, for the sake of weapon balance, boost the damage of wands/staff to 19-35 as they have the same refire rate of the hammer?
This is plain stupid.
The skills associated with the bows, that is spirits or preparations, attack skills (okay they mostly suck excepted for interrupts) completely change the game.
You just trying to say: look at the dagger: they are two-handed, make them deal 14-27 damage (which with 30% double strike equals roughly hammer's one)!
No way.
TedTheDead
Well last night in AB I was called a "Fire Arrow Kurdick" more than once if that has any berring on it.
Bows are fine. Their auto damage is respectable and they have quite a bit of nasty condition and interrupt capabilities on top of it. Add in the fact they can make themselves near impossible to hit for long stretches of time....I say bows and rangers overall are just dandy.
And in PvE there is always barrage. You dont need much more than that, I love that skill when killing monsters.
Bows are fine. Their auto damage is respectable and they have quite a bit of nasty condition and interrupt capabilities on top of it. Add in the fact they can make themselves near impossible to hit for long stretches of time....I say bows and rangers overall are just dandy.
And in PvE there is always barrage. You dont need much more than that, I love that skill when killing monsters.
Evilsod
Anyone gets pissed at people who interrupt them... i've had touch rangers getting ridiculously annoyed at my Mesmer pre-MoP nerf. Much like people get extremely frustrated if you Migraine them and power return them until there team dies.
Glountz what was the point in your post? You basically said that a dagger does crap damage, when its damage comes entirely from a chain of attack skills... which funnily enough can do alot of damage, and possibly kill a player in 1. Whereas a bow does naff all damage with its attack skills because they pretty much all suck.
Glountz what was the point in your post? You basically said that a dagger does crap damage, when its damage comes entirely from a chain of attack skills... which funnily enough can do alot of damage, and possibly kill a player in 1. Whereas a bow does naff all damage with its attack skills because they pretty much all suck.
XvArchonvX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilsod
Glountz what was the point in your post? You basically said that a dagger does crap damage, when its damage comes entirely from a chain of attack skills... which funnily enough can do alot of damage, and possibly kill a player in 1. Whereas a bow does naff all damage with its attack skills because they pretty much all suck.
I thought he was pretty clear on saying that comparing weapons alone is pointless because without skills are very imbalanced.
You have been complaining about the bow being underpowered and now you are saying their skills suck, but which is it that needs buffing? Should A-net buff the bow itself (which is what the topic of the thread seems to be about) or do they need to buff the skills? These two things are very different entirely. If you only buff the bow itself and, say, give it a better refire rate, then builds like BHA, Choking Gas, etc become a LOT more powerful than before. If you buff the base damage, then you buff all damage builds. If you buff the skills, which ones do you buff? All of them? Should a bow get damage from it's base attack (i.e. make the bow a c-space dps weapon) or should it get it's dps from it's skills (much like it currently does)? If you believe that bows in general needs to do more damage, where should a ranger stand as a damage dealer? Should they deal more dps than a paragon? Warrior? Assassin? Dervish? Should it be able to spike as well or better than these classes? What about pressure? If so, is this fair to those classes?
You have been complaining about the bow being underpowered and now you are saying their skills suck, but which is it that needs buffing? Should A-net buff the bow itself (which is what the topic of the thread seems to be about) or do they need to buff the skills? These two things are very different entirely. If you only buff the bow itself and, say, give it a better refire rate, then builds like BHA, Choking Gas, etc become a LOT more powerful than before. If you buff the base damage, then you buff all damage builds. If you buff the skills, which ones do you buff? All of them? Should a bow get damage from it's base attack (i.e. make the bow a c-space dps weapon) or should it get it's dps from it's skills (much like it currently does)? If you believe that bows in general needs to do more damage, where should a ranger stand as a damage dealer? Should they deal more dps than a paragon? Warrior? Assassin? Dervish? Should it be able to spike as well or better than these classes? What about pressure? If so, is this fair to those classes?
Quaker
I think this whole discussion is pointless. Any class has to be assessed on the basis of ALL applicable aspects - weapon(s), skills, armor, range, skill of the player, etc..
And, of course there's always what I call the Teen Factor (teenagers always seem to think in extremes) - if a weapon does 2 less damage than another weapon, than it's "crap" - if it does 2 more, it's "uber" - there's no middle ground.
Most of the complainers just simply seem to not know how to play a ranger, so they blame the weapon. These are usually the same people who can't do anything unless they find a "build" for it somewhere - the people who think that the ONLY way to do TotPK is the standard B/P,mm,orders,monk group. (They don't believe me when I say I've done it several times with just heroes and henchies.)
A while ago, people were complaining about Assassins being "useless" in PvE, and yet I managed to take mine all the way through Cantha and Elona, before any buffs were done.
On the other hand - I suck at Paragon and Ritualist, but I don't blame the class (I may have simply not tried hard enough)
Yada, yada, yada - even this post is pointless.
And, of course there's always what I call the Teen Factor (teenagers always seem to think in extremes) - if a weapon does 2 less damage than another weapon, than it's "crap" - if it does 2 more, it's "uber" - there's no middle ground.
Most of the complainers just simply seem to not know how to play a ranger, so they blame the weapon. These are usually the same people who can't do anything unless they find a "build" for it somewhere - the people who think that the ONLY way to do TotPK is the standard B/P,mm,orders,monk group. (They don't believe me when I say I've done it several times with just heroes and henchies.)
A while ago, people were complaining about Assassins being "useless" in PvE, and yet I managed to take mine all the way through Cantha and Elona, before any buffs were done.
On the other hand - I suck at Paragon and Ritualist, but I don't blame the class (I may have simply not tried hard enough)
Yada, yada, yada - even this post is pointless.
LifeInfusion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longasc
Just because Hero Battles work so well with Pack Hunters does not mean that bows suck big time.
That brings us to the question: are spears balanced in comparison to melee weapons, with the near constant Aggressive refrains up?
-Scythes: 9-41 (hits up to 3 targets)
-Bows: 15-28
-Axes: 6-28
-Spears: 14-27
-Swords : 15-22
-Wand/Staff: 11-22
-Daggers: 7-17
-Hammers: 19-35
-Scythes: 9-41 (hits up to 3 targets)
-Bows: 15-28
-Axes: 6-28
-Spears: 14-27
-Swords : 15-22
-Wand/Staff: 11-22
-Daggers: 7-17
-Hammers: 19-35
Evilsod
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaker
Quote:
http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...&postcount=181|
You have been complaining about the bow being underpowered and now you are saying their skills suck, but which is it that needs buffing? Should A-net buff the bow itself (which is what the topic of the thread seems to be about) or do they need to buff the skills? These two things are very different entirely. If you only buff the bow itself and, say, give it a better refire rate, then builds like BHA, Choking Gas, etc become a LOT more powerful than before. If you buff the base damage, then you buff all damage builds. If you buff the skills, which ones do you buff? All of them? Should a bow get damage from it's base attack (i.e. make the bow a c-space dps weapon) or should it get it's dps from it's skills (much like it currently does)? If you believe that bows in general needs to do more damage, where should a ranger stand as a damage dealer? Should they deal more dps than a paragon? Warrior? Assassin? Dervish? Should it be able to spike as well or better than these classes? What about pressure? If so, is this fair to those classes?
My stance on bow skills been generally crap, especially in comparison to each other hasn't changed. Either the bow needs an increase in damage, the refires need to be looked at or the skills actually need some attention. I hardly see an increase in maybe 0.25s is really going to have much of an effect on Choking Gas... as for the BHA. Most condition removals have a cast of 0.75s, your gonna be firing an interrupt off to make sure it gets hit either way.
XvArchonvX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evilsod
Most condition removals have a cast of 0.75s, your gonna be firing an interrupt off to make sure it gets hit either way.
Just a small note here. BHA causes dazed...dazed causes spells to take twice as long to cast...
As for the rest, I'll just settle on saying that the bow is fine, but there are some Marks skills (particularly the damage dealing ones) that could use a buff. Nothing else for me to say here really.
Soulsmasher
Bows doing more damage? That would make every non-ranger QQ like no other, a skilled ranger doesn't need massive damage to cause headaches, just like a mesmer.
LifeInfusion
Looking over the GWOnline thread recently, I find these snippets from posts:
And all the Spears vs Bows debate proves is that Spears need a nerf not Bows need a buff. The bow was perfectly fine before Nightfall.
http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...&postcount=171 Quote: |
Quote:
that's right, i would choose the one handed, faster, stronger, less likely to be dodged, with little start up lag and little cool down... spear. http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...&postcount=326
Quote: First off, the point of this thread is that the ranger bow does less damage over time (DPS) vs even a wand.
No use of skills, just basic damage.
BUT, we are told, we have range.
BUT, it is countered, so does a spear, which is actually a one hand.
The range of a spear, vs the range of a short bow are evenly matched.
Supposedly those two have the same levels of damage output, even though a max bow is slightly higher then a max spear. http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...&postcount=331
Quote:
|
I think skills are a serious part of the issue. Look at Mighty Throw, it owns anything in the bow ranger arsenal by damage alone, plus only costs 2 adrenaline, plus takes 3s to cast vs. 2.4s on any normal ranger attack with a recurve/longbow. Or Spear of lightning compared to penetrating/sundering shot. It has 5% more armor penetration, costs only 5e, and has more +damage. Plus spears have deep wound skills, stance ending skills, and even a non-elite burning skill.
http://guildwars.incgamers.com/forum...&postcount=345 Quote:
The argument over at GWO is basically that spears don't need energy (half of the attacks are adrenaline attacks) and that they only use one hand.
Another problem is the ability to keep an IAS all the time for minimal investment, since the paragon is designed for shouting/chanting and Aggressive Refrain keeps the IAS up with nearly no drawbacks (especially with cheap Adrenaline based shouts like Go for the Eyes and Watch Yourself). Of course, it is easier to nerf spears than buff bows and bring back 3-2-1 Rspike in PvP. Quote:
Quote: Originally Posted by Malos If you want to talk about adding a KD and Deep Wound ability to the bow then you would be talking about having to rebalance the game because of the ability to spread conditions with Fevered Dreams. The whole point of them not being able to KD and inflict Deep Wound is because Anet did not want one class being able to deal out all of the conditions. Can you say WARRIOR?  Quote:
Not so many attacks get crits. it's like asuming one will have high enough L-ship for GftE and 16 in Spear mastery.
LifeInfusion Quote:
|
