Bows: are they underpowered?

Darkpower Alchemist

Darkpower Alchemist

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jan 2006

NYC

The Circle Of Nine[NINE]

E/N

I have a comment...what???

The bow itself isn't the issue, but the skills that are useful,imo.

Evilsod

Evilsod

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2006

England

Lievs Death Squad [LDS]

Quote:
Originally Posted by RhanoctJocosa
GWO FAILS.

They (and anyone else who thinks bows need to be buffed) don't understand how rangers work.

<3 Way to jump on the bandwagon... idiot.

Amy Awien

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

Quote:
Originally Posted by chesterocks7
Anet did not create the ranger, just like they did not create the warrior or assassin, they chose how to integrate it into their game. they obviously based it on an already extensively used idea. Idea's with room for interpretation, and in those backgrounds rangers commonly wield swords more then bows. No, a battle mage may not fit with the idea of rangers, but a swordfighter - with affinity to tracking and nature survival - certainly would.

Besides, they got away with turning monks into healers ...

Fishmonger

Fishmonger

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jul 2006

P/W

Maybe increase range on bows? I don't care how strong you are, my shortbow can launch further than your spear. Or maybe increased speed (Legolas, anyone?)

Amy Awien

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

Yesssss! That would be neat.

jesh

jesh

Forge Runner

Join Date: May 2005

San Diego, CA

Penguin Village

Mo/

If both Ensign and Epinephrine say it, it's 99% likely to be true. Whether Arena Net will do anything about it is another matter.

Killed u man

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2006

Rspike is already overpowered in PvP, so adding range/dmg isn't an option, it would imbalance PvP even more... Rangers arn't underpowered in PvE, Ele's etc are just overpowered... Why run a ranger with some bleeding/posion skills, when u can have a fire ele with Arcane Echo => MS and SF? Making the ranger stronger isn't a solution...

Div

Div

I like yumy food!

Join Date: Jan 2006

Where I can eat yumy food

Dead Alley [dR]

Mo/R

Bows are underpowered in pure damage in a similar way wands are underpowered in pure damage. They have much more utility than other weapons and that makes up for the lesser damage. I feel like they're rightfully underpowered compared to others because they can serve many purposes (degen, interrupts, help with spikes).

With the introduction of spears and scythes, bows feel even weaker...

October Jade

October Jade

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Jul 2005

drifting between Indiana and NorCal

Does there exist a good explanation for why we have five different types of bows? I'm not one to be unappreciative of utility, but it just seems out of place within the context of other weapons.

My thought on the matter is that back when we only had Prophecies, ANet feared that rangers might become jealous of warriors. These classes were the only two options for non-spellcasting roles, and warriors had a choice of three different weapons in which to specialize. ANet then decided to offer slight variations in bow performance in order to quash potential whining from rangers.

As I said, it's nice to have options. However, it seems readily apparent that the mechanic was later deemed unnecessary. No similar variation was introduced with daggers, scythes, or spears...not to mention that one of the bow types turned out to be nigh useless.

In my opinion, it should be an all-or-nothing proposition. Either provide weapon tweaks for all classes, or make just a single form of each (in GW2, clearly...it's too late for this game). Given the de-emphasis upon equipment that GW boasts, I lean harshly toward the latter.

Larqh

Larqh

Ascalonian Squire

Join Date: Jul 2007

R/

Maybe someone else has said this and I missed it, but...

Have anyone EVER played an RPG where a bow did the same damage as say a sword? I know I sure haven't.

Some Guru Named Kai

Some Guru Named Kai

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Jul 2006

westAscalon4lyfe?

Giggity Giggity [GOO]

W/

Who uses a bow anyway on a Ranger

It's +5e sword + blood offhand, ftw!

moriz

moriz

??ber t??k-n??sh'??n

Join Date: Jan 2006

Canada

R/

Quote:
Originally Posted by Larqh
Maybe someone else has said this and I missed it, but...

Have anyone EVER played an RPG where a bow did the same damage as say a sword? I know I sure haven't. neither have i. however, in Lineage II, bows deal significantly more damage than swords.

Div

Div

I like yumy food!

Join Date: Jan 2006

Where I can eat yumy food

Dead Alley [dR]

Mo/R

Quote:
Originally Posted by October Jade
Does there exist a good explanation for why we have five different types of bows? I'm not one to be unappreciative of utility, but it just seems out of place within the context of other weapons. I would assume anet created the ranger with the thought that it'll be a good utility class in mind. They made it so bow damage isn't very high, but gave it a very wide class of skills. They made recurve bows for good interruption, longbows for pulling, flatbows for taking down long-range immobile enemies, hornbows for helping warriors with spikes (which turned out to be useful in rspike), and shortbows as an all purpose short ranged bow. No other class in the game is able to have so much utility in providing spike support, interrupts, conditions, etc. while having such great defense (with it's WS line).

haggus71

haggus71

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jun 2007

FotS

First of all, IMO bows are just fine for their purpose. From what I've seen, GW designs everything on a TEAM basis. the ranger is the part that drops interrupts and degen from a distance, slowing the opponent while the warrior/assassin/dervish goes in for the kill. Rangers have more options for these purposes than anyone.

Secondly, "a shot from a bow can knock down a person in real life"? So you are saying a bow can do what a 9mm hollow point can't. Interesting. IF you want to get into real world damage, a spear has enough heft and power in the trained arm to guarantee a KD. Read the Illiad sometime. it was based on what happened in actual combat in Greece, and all the heroes had SPEARS. The bow was meant for long range slowdown of bodies of troops, allowing the chariots and hoplites to close the gap. Once the warriors met, the archers' job was over. Bows are meant for accuracy which is gained through experience(Marksmanship and Experience?). Ask someone to poke you in the chest with a stick, then hit you with their fist, and tell me an arrow will do more than a spear.

Please....PLEASE don't argue with real life about a game; but if you do, at LEAST learn something about physics first.

There are plenty of us that have no problem with the ranger's bow damage and skills. Some people should just stick to the Warrior/Dervish if they want that "wow" effect, and leave the thinking to the big boys.

Epinephrine

Epinephrine

Master of Beasts

Join Date: Mar 2005

Ottawa, Canada

Servants of Fortuna [SoF]

Quote:
Originally Posted by haggus71
Please....PLEASE don't argue with real life about a game; but if you do, at LEAST learn something about physics first.
Advice you should probably follow.

Quote: Originally Posted by haggus71 The bow was meant for long range slowdown of bodies of troops, allowing the chariots and hoplites to close the gap. In ancient Greece perhaps, but read the battle of Agincourt for an example of the power of the longbow in later eras.

I did longbow archery for several years, dabbled in armoury, studied physics and actually tested arrow penetration on various materials including armours. I'll tell you straight up that an arrow is far more damaging than a spear, especially versus armour. I'd like to see you shove a spear through a steel sheet, a feat easily accomplished with a bodkin arrow.

One fact is that a longbowman can easily kill an armed and armoured opponent before they even reach melee range. In fact, he can kill several. Clearly this wouldn't be a good thing for an RPG, since your warrior would have an arrow through his chest at 100 yards away and would collapse, dying. But don't spout crap about the spear being more damaging - the spear was used largely because it took no skill.

If you want to discuss the real performance of the bow, I assure you that it was a far more lethal tool than any of the other weapons in the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis, Gerald of Wales
[…] in the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuirasses, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal.

—Itinerarium Cambriae, (1191)

Quote:
Originally Posted by haggus71
There are plenty of us that have no problem with the ranger's bow damage and skills. Some people should just stick to the Warrior/Dervish if they want that "wow" effect, and leave the thinking to the big boys. Yeah, you clearly think things through.

To those bringing up the myriad conditions rangers can inflict, look at what the other weapons can do. Most weapons can inflict most conditions now, the situation has changed from when the first GW hit the shelves.

haggus71

haggus71

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jun 2007

FotS

Yes, and the English longbows that were capable of such feats were 6-7 feet in span, used by men trained from boyhood to handle a bow with a pull force of as much as a hundred and fifty pounds. (one was even pulled recently at 200 lbs.)They could fire at estimated ranges of 180-250 yards.(got that from the same wikipedia article you got your quote) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_longbow

however, the range at which most attacks were made points out the kills were not due to the accuracy of the archers, but the massive amounts of arrows ("a cloud of arrows") in one volley. They tell how a good archer(which I assume you are) knows that accuracy and range are not the same thing. that shot you talked about came from the air in a volley, seeing as it penetrated "his thigh high up". I never argued an arrow can't be deadly. The argument was about an arrow having the KD ability of a spear. My point about the 9mm was it can penetrate very well, but a .45 is used for stopping power, Which is why the SEALS went to .45 HK USPs. They were safer inside ships, where there is a lot of stuff you don't want to penetrate, and they have stopping power that a nine doesn't. What you are arguing goes against physics to say a spear can't stop you in your tracks as well as an arrow. Force equals mass times acceleration, and an arrow would have to accelerate damn fast to equal a spear.

Oh, and if you use the argument of its decent in an arc, I can use the same with a Javelin, which the Zulu used effectively as recent as the 19th century against the British.

Yes, I think things clearly through.

Epinephrine

Epinephrine

Master of Beasts

Join Date: Mar 2005

Ottawa, Canada

Servants of Fortuna [SoF]

What you are interested in is momentum (mv) and impulse (change in momentum over time). In a sense impulse is related to the F=ma equation, in that the deceleration of the arrow/spear is the rate of change on momentum.

I agree that when it comes to pure momentum a spear has the edge, I mistook your statement "Ask someone to poke you in the chest with a stick, then hit you with their fist, and tell me an arrow will do more than a spear." to be about damage, which is the subject of the thread really, rather than specific to knockdowns.

As to accuracy/range, I can lob an arrow a huge distance in a cloud, sure, and score kills that way at a range far outside my actual accuracy. I own a 50 pound, a 70 pound and a 102 pound longbow; I am out of practice and can't pull the 102 pound bow, but I can still handle a 70 pound bow well enough, and it has plenty of acceleration. When I was shooting I wasn't by any stretch the best in the area, but could relatively consistently hit a playing card at ~100 feet. And I wasn't that good.

The english longbowmen had to be able to hit a man sized target at 100 paces (roughly yards) 12 times in a minute. One could assume that that represents a certain degree of accuracy.

Anyway, real world physics agrees that a KD from the momentum alone would be unlikely with an arrow - but it would also be virtually impossible to "concuss" a target with an arrow. More likely you'd drive it through their head. Likewise, you can KD with a sword or dagger... Bull's strike?

The only real way to examine it is in the game world; realistically an archer would simply kill a foot target before he got anywhere near him. That makes no sense in GW.

To balance the weapons requires looking at how they work in game, and it's not easy. I have to confess I'm not sure what exactly is needed, but the fact that bows have a very narrow range of use in PvP, and that it is continually being supplanted by other weapons for these roles suggests something is amiss. Bow attacks that are actually worth using would be a step in the right direction.

Lord Feathers

Lord Feathers

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Jan 2007

ROAR - Rangers of Ascalon Return

R/P

Rangers are best used for interupts and applying conditions and their bow attacks represent that. Does everything have to be a cookie cutter build ?

Warskull

Site Contributor

Join Date: Jul 2005

[out]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensign
Yes, bows are underpowered. The only reason Burning Arrow is the elite of choice on a Ranger is because it's the one skill that enables a Ranger to actually kill things. Otherwise you're a couple of good interrupts on a hard target but not much else. I have to disagree with you on this one. Bow output less auto-attack DPS than pretty much everything except wands. We have all known this forever. However, the bow's role isn't attack pressure.

Bows have 3 strong elite choices (crip shot, burning arrow, BHA.) The interrupts aren't just good, they are great.

Bows do damage via degen pressure. Burning does add up to be a lot of damage over time. Apply adds up also (really not too viable on a non-ranger primary.)

Bows can also output nasty damage in short bursts with glass arrows+conjur in a spike like format. Push their DPS up too much and their spiking ability gets too dangerous.

The ranger as a whole is nothing to be scoffed at, they have some extremely strong utility and versatility. Heck, rangers are a big part of the reason people are running such hyper defensive runners at the moment. A Burning Arrow ranger is very strong as a soloist character.

Sure Bow DPS is lacking, but that isn't what bows are about anymore.

Tegato

Academy Page

Join Date: Jun 2006

~

Mo/

Well, if you look at the bow only, it is weak compared to other weapons used. But then again, if everything was meant for DPS, then what's the point in having variety? Like others, the bow is very powerful in it's ability to spread conditions, quick recharging interrupts, and overall, very versatile.

Now let's see, if you look at the ranger as a whole, they are very powerful, and possible on par with other professions in terms of damage. Thumpers do a massive amount of DPS and pressure, as well as pack hunters. Trappers can spread massive conditions, snares, and even be used to defensively, or offensively. And yes, there's the Burning Arrow and the Broad Head Arrow, such powerful skills. And you have the touch ranger, although considered noobish, it is a very creative design which offers high DPS with incredibly healing.

I don't play a ranger for damage. I play it for it's ability to screw people over.

Issac

Issac

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Oct 2006

Earthrealm

W/A

I don't think bows are underpowered, the damage isn't as high as other weapons but the damage isn't bad. Plus you can interrupt and ad conditions so it evens out.

TheOneMephisto

TheOneMephisto

Forge Runner

Join Date: Nov 2005

I'm sure that this has been said over and over again by decent players, but I just want to emphasize it.

Bows are a utility/disruption weapon. They are not meant for damage. If they did decent damage, along with having access to the most efficient condition spreading and best interrupts in the game, they would be ridiculously overpowered. You don't need damage when you have 2 of the best skills in the game, savage shot and dshot, on one bar.

Epinephrine

Epinephrine

Master of Beasts

Join Date: Mar 2005

Ottawa, Canada

Servants of Fortuna [SoF]

Right, obviously every build should be dshot and savage. God forbid that a ranger be used for ANYTHING else.

When will people get that the condition angle is a weak argument, thanks to all the new condition delivering skills (like Ebon Dust Aura, Wounding Strike, Crippling Slash, Harrier's Grasp etc.), the improved condition removals, better party-wide healing/condition handling options (whether LoD, paragon skills or Extinguish etc.) and so on. Rangers are behind the power curve, and are largely used for interrupt and burning arrow since in a split the skill is of some use. Apply Poison, while an amazing skill really, is available to any X/R and can be delivered faster with a spear.

I'm not saying they are useless, there are a build or two that can be played, but they're exactly the same builds pretty much, and the ranger is pretty pigeonholed.

Warskull

Site Contributor

Join Date: Jul 2005

[out]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Epinephrine
Right, obviously every build should be dshot and savage. God forbid that a ranger be used for ANYTHING else.

When will people get that the condition angle is a weak argument, thanks to all the new condition delivering skills (like Ebon Dust Aura, Wounding Strike, Crippling Slash, Harrier's Grasp etc.), the improved condition removals, better party-wide healing/condition handling options (whether LoD, paragon skills or Extinguish etc.) and so on. Rangers are behind the power curve, and are largely used for interrupt and burning arrow since in a split the skill is of some use. Apply Poison, while an amazing skill really, is available to any X/R and can be delivered faster with a spear.

I'm not saying they are useless, there are a build or two that can be played, but they're exactly the same builds pretty much, and the ranger is pretty pigeonholed. You really underestimate the burning arrow. Burning arrows is one of the most flexible builds out there. It is one of the strongest soloists, provides interrupt and degen utility at the stand. Few builds have such balanced power between splitting and stand play. You can make builds that truly excel at splits/ganking, but rarely do they play well at the stand. When playing a BA I know I have a pretty decent shot at beating anything thrown at me in small split situations.

Yes, we have other strong condition skills. However at 12 spec (what most BA run these days) you get a total of 82 extra damage out of burning arrow. It can be removed, but the burning is short duration and it usually only saves your around 28 damage.

In the right build a well placed daze from BHA will cause things to die. Daze is pretty dangerous.

No class can apply a covered cripple as often as a crip shot. Crip shots are hell on flaggers. Even if he can't kill the flagger he can probably get you a boost by sheer virtue of crippling the flagger all the way in and out if you give him the opportunity.

Not every class can afford apply poison. 15 energy is a lot for a warrior or dervish. In addition warriors and dervishes are melee classes that don't have the time to spend 2 seconds putting up a prep. Paragons really need to be constantly building adren. I haven't seen /R with apply poison really ever work. Apply poison is costly and takes time to put up.

If you buff most bow attack skills, they just get used for ranger spike.

People may say bows are underpowered, but ask any top player if rangers are viable. They'll all still admit rangers are a viable and strong class.

Epinephrine

Epinephrine

Master of Beasts

Join Date: Mar 2005

Ottawa, Canada

Servants of Fortuna [SoF]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warskull
You really underestimate the burning arrow. Burning arrows is one of the most flexible builds out there. It is one of the strongest soloists, provides interrupt and degen utility at the stand.
No I don't, it's about the only solid GvG ranger build out there atm.

Quote:
In the right build a well placed daze from BHA will cause things to die. Daze is pretty dangerous.
BHA in GvG? unlikely. Yeah, you can run up and use it point blank, but that's really obvious, and from a range you shouldn't ever succeed, since someone will be watching and the target will strafe. If you want run-up-and-touch shutdown the blackout mesmer is a better option. BHA is questionable in (decent) PvP. Heck, you should always know when there is an incoming diversion or BHA, and it's not hard to tell if you are the target of BHA.

Quote:
No class can apply a covered cripple as often as a crip shot. Crip shots are hell on flaggers. Well, you can technically get them off every few seconds, yeah.

Quote: Even if he can't kill the flagger he can probably get you a boost by sheer virtue of crippling the flagger all the way in and out if you give him the opportunity. Umm, cripshot is the least of my problems as a runner. Sure, it can be annoying, but if their cripshot is mauling me something is going wrong, seriously. Cripshot can be useful, true, and I'm glad they reduced the cost back down to 10 - it wasn't really viable at 15 anymore. Still, you can do a pretty good job of playing the "hamper a runner" role with so many builds; Me/A, E/Mo, W/A and so on, many of which will have better DPS while doing so or better defensive abilities.

Quote:
Not every class can afford apply poison. 15 energy is a lot for a warrior or dervish. It's not so bad for a dervish, with 4 pips of energy and their cheap enchantments.

Quote:
If you buff most bow attack skills, they just get used for ranger spike. Yep. Spike will exist in GW in any form that delivers damage at a range, see air spike, rit spike etc... Dual Shot is the biggest culprit here, giving an easy way to up damage and double all the mmany bonuses a ranger can stack.

Quote:
People may say bows are underpowered, but ask any top player if rangers are viable. They'll all still admit rangers are a viable and strong class. They're viable in one or two roles, yes. Yet "top players" like Ensign (I somehow think he's qualified) have expressed the opinion that there is something lacking in the ranger at present.

==========

I am not suggesting that simply boosting damage is a solution - that will create huge ranger spike problems; if anything you want to increase the rate of attack slightly and make using attack skills easier. Increasing attack rate wouldn't help spike builds much since they rely on using a dual/interrupt mostly, and that gap is determined by the speed of the interrupt, not by the bow's inherent attack rate. What it would allow is the use of more attack skills in a period of time and would up the base dps slightly, allowing people choosing to try to get some damage out of a bow a decent chance. Since you wouldn't be altering the recharge of skills like dshot and savage it wouldn't bump the number of interrupts available in a period of time, but would allow a ranger to more often make use of attack skills. I haven't fully thought it out, it might require reducing attack damage or preparation bonuses slightly (again helping prevent the use of r-spike alone) to balance it out, but the long period between bow shots seriously limits how effective attack-based damage can be. The fact that +damage attacks abound in the ranger line yet are seldom used demostrates how weak they are.

Increasing the attack rate, reducing slightly the damage boost from preparations and making it possible to more effectively use bow attacks to pressure (not spike) by making them affordable might be a solution.

Evilsod

Evilsod

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2006

England

Lievs Death Squad [LDS]

I think your meaning of flexible differs to mine... the build is 7/8 skills set in stone. The only skill that ever changes is the res signet so i've been told. It allows you to play in different places and be effective... but the build itself doesn't change. And this build is based entirely around 1 skill...

If it wasn't for Burning Arrow rangers wouldn't even exist in 9/10 teams. And even then they're not really that useful in 8v8 situations when your team is forced to stick around and fight. They can add in the odd interrupt... yet i've seen Mes and /Mes do the same thing. But they're pretty useless. Burning Arrow... the excellent spike assist skill, hit by Restore Condition, that skill is common enough. Mending Touch also.

A warrior is probably at a stretch to use Apply... but why would they? They don't need a 15e poison when the chances are they'll pressure a single target until it becomes too dangerous to follow, change to help spike or are forced to change through prot skills. Paragons can easily afford it with GftEs and has the range too for decent spread.

Quote:
People may say bows are underpowered, but ask any top player if rangers are viable. They'll all still admit rangers are a viable and strong class.
The class is viable, not the weapon. BA, BHA, Cripshot and Glass spike assist are the only bow builds left. There are more gimmick builds involving other classes weaponry or trap/spirit builds than there are for bows. When a class so frequently turns to another classes weapon to be useful, how the hell can you continue to say the bow is 'perfectly fine the way it is'.

Quote:
If you buff most bow attack skills, they just get used for ranger spike. [skill]Keen Arrow[/skill][skill]Dual Shot[/skill][skill]Forked Arrow[/skill][skill]Glass Arrows[/skill][skill]Order of Pain[/skill][skill]Conjure Frost[/skill]
And the new 1, Sloth Hunters Shot.

Keen Arrow does more damage than almost every other attack skill in the game. The same is said for Sloth Hunters Shot if it remains the same. Dual Shot and Forked Shot, overbuff each arrow with FW/Winno, etc, some major damage. Glass Arrows/Conjure Frost spike builds.

People say that so often... "Oh no we can't buff Ranger skills cos someone might use them for something!". The non-elite attack skills are as pathetic as they come. Who the hell is gonna use Power Shot as a Ranger Spike skill unless for some reason they buff it to do +60 damage?

I'm still sticking with the skills need buffing and the refire speed needs improving, not the bos base damage.

Yue

Yue

The Cheese Stands Alone

Join Date: Dec 2005

A Chair

Delta Formation [DF]

R/

"However at 12 spec (what most BA run these days) you get a total of 82 extra damage out of burning arrow. It can be removed, but the burning is short duration and it usually only saves your around 28 damage.
"

10 spec for BA, Warskull.

Bloodied Blade

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2006

R/

I think I'd like to see the range buff on bows scale much better than it does (with regards to +height fired from = +range).

As to those who are touting rspike as the reason bows can't be buffed- Ranger spike is not as overpowered as you seem to think it is. Anyone with a decent knowledge of class mechanics can overcome it quite easily.

I can completely understand where Evilsod is coming from, but I don't agree that bow damage should be increased. You cannot increase base bow damage and expect an immediate effect of "WoW Hunter" in auto-attack. If you expect the ranger to do massive amounts of damage, and want it buffed to do so, then the base damage of both the bows themselves, and the skills in the marksmanship line, needs to be reworked.

Personally, I am content with the fact that I do not expect my ranger to do amazing damage, I expect foe-crippling utility from it.

Have fun...I'm probably done with this thread, I don't really browse guru much anymore because I have other stuff to do.

Warskull

Site Contributor

Join Date: Jul 2005

[out]

Quote:
The class is viable, not the weapon. BA, BHA, Cripshot and Glass spike assist are the only bow builds left. There are more gimmick builds involving other classes weaponry or trap/spirit builds than there are for bows. When a class so frequently turns to another classes weapon to be useful, how the hell can you continue to say the bow is 'perfectly fine the way it is'. How many elites do axe warriors run? How about sword warriors and hammer warriors? Warriors tend to have narrow use of elites, yet I don't see anyone complaining that axes or hammers are underpowered.

As for flexibility, the BA role performs wells in a number of different roles. They can serve as degen pressure, a strong split character, and a strong disrupter.

As for buffing the non-elite attack skills. They are either going to be condition skills, worse than the ranger spike skills, or start getting used for ranger spike. If you buff power shot to not be as good as dual shot for damage, why would I ever run it? If you make power shot better than dual shot, then I am going to make it my new spike skill.

People are seriously selling rangers short here.

Evilsod

Evilsod

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2006

England

Lievs Death Squad [LDS]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Warskull
How many elites do axe warriors run? How about sword warriors and hammer warriors? Warriors tend to have narrow use of elites, yet I don't see anyone complaining that axes or hammers are underpowered.
Oh what a great comparison... Axe Warrior run Eviscerate... pretty much it. Sword Warriors run Cripslash, Hammer Warriors on the other hand i've seen using Earthshaker, Devastating Hammer and Backbreaker. What does this have to do with anything? We're saying bows are underpowered... your saying axe warriors have only 1 good elite. Suggesting a warrior is underpowered is laughable, that or the part where Warriors can easily solo spike casters has been a joke these last 2 years.

Quote:
As for flexibility, the BA role performs wells in a number of different roles. They can serve as degen pressure, a strong split character, and a strong disrupter. They gank because they can survive well and kill off the NPCs easily, hardly surprising that they can kill single Rangers who have absolutely no real defence. Degen pressure? Isn't that usually because they can't really get by to kill NPCs so they have nothing better to do? Split... well thats the same as Degen pressure, still not related to the bow since its all degen. And disruption is just a Ranger thing.

Quote:
As for buffing the non-elite attack skills. They are either going to be condition skills, worse than the ranger spike skills, or start getting used for ranger spike. If you buff power shot to not be as good as dual shot for damage, why would I ever run it? If you make power shot better than dual shot, then I am going to make it my new spike skill.

People are seriously selling rangers short here. God here we go again... the conditional skills are mostly bollocks. The conditional is usually way too awkward and tends to only apply conditions anyway, usually bleeding. When Screaming Shot is changed to fire 2 arrows, 1 dealing Bleeding 1 dealing Deep Wound, then maybe we will. I'm still waiting to see a replacement for Dual Shot/Forked Arrow + Savage Shot. Keen Arrow was short lived since all buffs are amplified per arrow. Sloth Hunters Shot is overpowered, its damage is extreme for an easy condition. Seriously... stop trying to say R-spike will become overpowered, getting very boring hearing half the reasons for this been about R-spike. Bring this point up when Izzy ups Power Shot to +60 and makes Punishing Shot +50.

Ensign

Ensign

Just Plain Fluffy

Join Date: Dec 2004

Berkeley, CA

Idiot Savants

The skills available are more important than the properties of the weapon itself. Hammers would not be used, ever, if it weren't for the unique knockdown abilities of the weapon. Bows, as weapons, are terrible, but Distracting Shot and Savage Shot are awesome and require bows, as do the best Ranger elites.

If you looked at everything in a vacuum, spears and scythes are clearly overpowered while bows and hammers are underpowered, from looking at their weapon properties alone. You can't look at them in a vacuum though, and when you take the skills each weapon enables into account the entire package tends to balance out - the weak weapons have the best skills, the best weapons have the weakest skills (except Scythe, but, yeah), and on the whole every weapon has its place. That's balanced right?

Evilsod

Evilsod

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2006

England

Lievs Death Squad [LDS]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensign
The skills available are more important than the properties of the weapon itself. Hammers would not be used, ever, if it weren't for the unique knockdown abilities of the weapon. Bows, as weapons, are terrible, but Distracting Shot and Savage Shot are awesome and require bows, as do the best Ranger elites.

If you looked at everything in a vacuum, spears and scythes are clearly overpowered while bows and hammers are underpowered, from looking at their weapon properties alone. You can't look at them in a vacuum though, and when you take the skills each weapon enables into account the entire package tends to balance out - the weak weapons have the best skills, the best weapons have the weakest skills (except Scythe, but, yeah), and on the whole every weapon has its place. That's balanced right? The Hammer obviously requires a unique condition, that is, knockdown, to be used. But then again... Shock Axe? Its not quite as good but it does make Hammer less desirable, especially with the lack of a shield.
But interrupts really aren't unique enough... i mean Hammer gets the knockdowns and it seems pretty much all anti-knockdown skills aren't used anymore so theres your interrupt + a little disabling. Even spear has an interrupt, albeit crap. But i'm sure you of all people would know that Thumpers are very likely to hit you with Hammer Bash purely to interrupt a vital skill if its cast time is long enough to hit.

I would agree that if you just looked at the weapons then Scythe and Spear are clearly overpowered... but really bow is definatly underpowered. Purely looking at attack speed, bow is absolutely awful. But even if you compare some of the skills... i mean Spear has skills with 1/2 cast time that actually do damage, not interrupts, Scythe has 3/4 skills that do damage and are spammable, Axe and Strength have 1/2 cast skills for damage. Punishing Shot is completely out of date now, what is the point of using it... Glass Arrows gives ~+17, Punishing does +21 and doesn't help with the first skill. Forked Arrow not working on a hex is just too far, with an enchantment the reason is obvious but with a hex its almost a useless skill with hexes easily lasting 20-35 seconds.

The weak weapons having the best skills just doesn't work with the bow... i mean the bow is a weak weapon, before it use to be a mediocre weapon, its damage is poor, its refire is abysmal. Its new skills seem to be getting stronger and stronger, but its old skills just don't change... pretty much all Prophecies Marks skills are useless. The balance has really gone to pot... i'm not saying damage needs to be increased on the bow, but its attack speed really needs looking at, so do the skills.

ifthen

Pre-Searing Cadet

Join Date: Aug 2007

Spaz

R/E

There’s just no question that Ranger DPS sucks.

Most people that say hunters are fine say something along the lines of it would be OP if rangers could do ever good dps. With the new professions, Rangers being perma-slotted into degen or interrupt bots just doesn’t cut it. It’s one dimensional and particularly not fun.

Monks can smite like bananas if they chose to spec that way and focus less on heal/prot. Why do people have an issue with Rangers having the OPTION to dps?

Rangers don’t need a big boost. They need some small overall buff, and some conditional option to do decent dps. I think three things could happen that would not _completely_ change the Ranger roll or balance.

1. Increase bow refire rates across the board (especially with short/recurve).
2. Buff the pure dmg attacks (power, marauding, etc), but not the degen/disrupts.
3. Create a new prep that does _good_ (ie better than GA) direct damage, but gets wiped on use of not just barrage, but also any interrupts (and possible any condition application). That way Rangers have the option to dmg while still holding on to their hallmark skills, but they couldn’t do everything at once.

??Ripskin

??Ripskin

Jungle Guide

Join Date: Jul 2006

Mo/

Quote:
Originally Posted by ifthen
There’s just no question that Ranger DPS sucks.

Most people that say hunters are fine say something along the lines of it would be OP if rangers could do ever good dps. With the new professions, Rangers being perma-slotted into degen or interrupt bots just doesn’t cut it. It’s one dimensional and particularly not fun.

Monks can smite like bananas if they chose to spec that way and focus less on heal/prot. Why do people have an issue with Rangers having the OPTION to dps?

Rangers don’t need a big boost. They need some small overall buff, and some conditional option to do decent dps. I think three things could happen that would not _completely_ change the Ranger roll or balance.

1. Increase bow refire rates across the board (especially with short/recurve).
2. Buff the pure dmg attacks (power, marauding, etc), but not the degen/disrupts.
3. Create a new prep that does _good_ (ie better than GA) direct damage, but gets wiped on use of not just barrage, but also any interrupts (and possible any condition application). That way Rangers have the option to dmg while still holding on to their hallmark skills, but they couldn’t do everything at once. I coulda sworn I was just reading on the WoW guru..

ifthen

Pre-Searing Cadet

Join Date: Aug 2007

Spaz

R/E

I read like 2 pages of that dreck and gave up. If you are suggesting I lifted it, er no. If you are suggesting that it's an insightful, welcome solution echoed by others, then cheers to you.

moriz

moriz

??ber t??k-n??sh'??n

Join Date: Jan 2006

Canada

R/

your opinion of yourself is certainly high. sorry to burst your bubble, but your post is not that insightful.

before continuing to argue that bows are underpowered, please remember the underlying principle of GW: teamplay. not every class is supposed to pump out good DPS. there is always room for support characters. that's what the ranger (and the bow) is for.

if you are still not convinced, let me draw examples from another game. in lineage 2, bow damage is absolutely off the charts. its so high, that traditional melee characters will use them in pvp. obviously it won't happen in GW, but the point still stands: you cannot mix a class with excellent team support, interruption, and degen with a high damage ranged weapon.

Francis Demeules

Francis Demeules

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Jan 2006

Canada, Qc

[Holy]

Me/Mo

The damage of the bow varies how high you are against a target and players still don't see it? You shoot far and have high damage but accuracy will drop instead... its fair enough. Boosting the damage of the bow is simple rediculous seriously in GW. Like Moriz said, its a team game. You want the damage, you need a teamwork, not by yourself.

Amy Awien

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

Quote:
Originally Posted by moriz
before continuing to argue that bows are underpowered, please remember the underlying principle of GW: teamplay. not every class is supposed to pump out good DPS. there is always room for support characters. that's what the ranger (and the bow) is for. I suppose that is why you see so many Rangers in teams, man they're all over the place, PvP is completely dominated by teams with (at least) one or two Rangers and in every PvE outpost people are shouting GLF Ranger.

Try again. Rangers are rather rare, there must be a reason for it, and that is certainly not because they are so overpowered.

Evilsod

Evilsod

Banned

Join Date: Mar 2006

England

Lievs Death Squad [LDS]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Francis Demeules
The damage of the bow varies how high you are against a target and players still don't see it? You shoot far and have high damage but accuracy will drop instead... its fair enough. Boosting the damage of the bow is simple rediculous seriously in GW. Like Moriz said, its a team game. You want the damage, you need a teamwork, not by yourself. I must be missing something here... when did PvP maps actually have cliffs of a decent height? Terrain works against a Ranger almost all the time when it comes to PvP, groups either seek higher ground, hide behind walls or stay on bridges so the games useless RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GOed up obstructions coding comes into action and everything misses. And what moron actually fights a Ranger willingly at the bottom of a huge hill anyway.

moriz

moriz

??ber t??k-n??sh'??n

Join Date: Jan 2006

Canada

R/

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amy Awien
I suppose that is why you see so many Rangers in teams, man they're all over the place, PvP is completely dominated by teams with (at least) one or two Rangers and in every PvE outpost people are shouting GLF Ranger.

Try again. Rangers are rather rare, there must be a reason for it, and that is certainly not because they are so overpowered. vD's AT build always features a BA ranger. there are tons of top pvp guilds running rangers. just yesterday, i saw a single cripshot in top gvg dominate and turn the tide of the entire battle by interrupting key skills on 5 different targets. a few months ago, i saw eF run two rangers (BHA and cripshot, when it was still 15 energy too) and delivered some serious asskicking. and that's just a few of the examples.

instead of bemoaning the supposed lacking of the rangers, maybe you should... what's the phrase.... learn2play?

as for the reason why rangers are rare: people are stupid, and don't know how to play them. also, there are only 5 open spots on any gvg team (3 of them are taken up by monks and runner), so there's not always room for a ranger.

lastly, i never said they are overpowered. they are currently right where they should be. people should just play to their strengths (disruption, movement control, degen, being annoying, being hard to kill) and not force them to fulfill a role they are not designed for (as in straight up damage and spiking).