Expertise - Guild Wars Guru archive powered by Guild Wars Legacy

Desert Rose

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2007

08 Feb 2010 at 20:12 - 81

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

The builds don't have to be comparable to show the point, primary assassins have their place and are in no way threathened or outclassed by R/A's.

The main reason for the nerf is not if R/A are able to outperform A/X but that R/As are too effective compared to the abilites a player must have to use it properly.
You use expertise to be able to spam attack skills of your secondary profession that would be too expensive for the primary profession. In the end you HAVE to spam your attack skills because otherwise it wouldn't make sense to use ranger as the primary profession in the first place. Builds that require you to spam your skills instead of thoughtfully use them can never be good for the game.
While I don't support OP suggestion I have to admit that I can only come up with a weak argument against it: Removing possibilities how a player can utilizes his character is bad.

Quote:

Melee rangers have played their part since the early days, and have seen complaints similar to yours, but never did they outperform the melee primaries.

Well, you're forgetting that many melee ranger build cannot compete against the real melee professions because often key skills from those melee ranger (team) builds got nerfed.

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

08 Feb 2010 at 20:43 - 82

This attack chain can not be repeated endlessly and if you could attack continuously, a primary assassin is as good at it as the ranger (sins do get more damage from their daggers then rangers). By the nature of their primary attribute, sins will have energy-management equal to a ranger when attacking (and hitting), more damage per hit and actually more energy with appropriate skills.

Specific skills were nerfed/downtuned because they were simply to strong, yes. It has been argued that this would also be the case with this build - and to be honest, it's the sin-skills that are obscenely good.

Reverend Dr

Forge Runner

Join Date: Dec 2005

Super Fans Of Gaile [ban]

W/

08 Feb 2010 at 21:17 - 83

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

This attack chain can not be repeated endlessly and if you could attack continuously, a primary assassin is as good at it as the ranger (sins do get more damage from their daggers then rangers). By the nature of their primary attribute, sins will have energy-management equal to a ranger when attacking (and hitting), more damage per hit and actually more energy with appropriate skills.

This is 100% incorrect. Points put into expertise will yield better energy results than points put into critical strikes.

Furthermore Ranger primaries will have an extra 30 armor against elemental damage sins will not and easy access to expertise based defenses that work well in 8v8 while Sin critical strike based defenses are not worth a slot in 8v8.

Bobby2

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2007

Delayed in order to meet ANet's high standards

[MaSS]

W/E

08 Feb 2010 at 21:25 - 84

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Removing expertise would make rangers impossible, 3 pips is insufficient to even feed 5 E skills, let alone the 10 and 15 E that are usually present in most builds. Removing expertise only from melee attacks may not hurt bow rangers, but it woul invalidate melee rangers, if you feel 4 pips + critical strikes are insufficient for assassins then how insufficient would 3 pips + nothing be?

Shattering Assault at 4 energy....... tends to make 3 pips more than sufficient.

Also, explain what's bad about nerfing melee rangers to oblivion

33% IAS + 75% block is (still) ridiculously strong for a melee character

Sharkinu

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Dec 2008

Romania

Smells Like Bear Spirit [Norn]

R/

08 Feb 2010 at 22:33 - 85

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby2

33% IAS + 75% block is (still) ridiculously strong for a melee character

For 11 sec every 45sec?
That skill already got nerfed 2 weeks ago.

maxxfury

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Apr 2006

[DVDF] Gp

Me/A

08 Feb 2010 at 22:52 - 86

Quote:

to be honest, it's the sin-skills that are obscenely good.

The 1/2 activation attack skills are the major problem..

The Drunkard

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2007

Still looking

Rt/

09 Feb 2010 at 04:17 - 87

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Well, then don't call people baed for having their own opinions. Anyway, no need to nurf expertise because of some less brilliant build. If it's brainless yet difficult to counter that is because of the 'unblockable' that's on the sin skills more then because of expertise.

No, it's not. Try activation speeds and IAS. SA sins before the dagger update used lightning to rack up a lot of unblockable dps, now they don't need to use an IAS any more and can just spam until the monks run out of energy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

(sins do get more damage from their daggers then rangers).

The extra damage comes from runes...and 3 extra points of damage isn't enough to say rangers are weaker than sins.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

By the nature of their primary attribute, sins will have energy-management equal to a ranger when hitting,

Fixed that for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

and actually more energy with appropriate skills.

You just said that sins need aditional skills to get more energy.

Thank you Captain Obvious, now tell me how many sins in pvp (GvG/Ha) use critical eye over other skills (ie coward!, dash, etc.)? From observing matches, they seldom use crit eye.

Have you even played as a R/A or are you just theorycrafting?

Del

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Sep 2009

In a van, down by the river.

RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO if I know, ask Lynette.

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 04:21 - 88

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Drunkard

Have you even played as a R/A or are you just theorycrafting?

obviously just theorycrafting. (and badly)

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 08:33 - 89

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

Please, please tell me you're not that dense.

Did I did not start that quoted section with "Removing expertise would ..."?

Without expertise aplying to it, Shattering Assault would not be 4 E and 3 pips would be insufficient. Are you that stupid? What has this forum come to if even the baed trolls don't know how to read anymore?

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Drunkard

Fixed that for you.

There already was 'and hitting' in there, wasn't there. Another troubled reader or just looking for something to bitch about?

Quote:

now tell me how many sins in pvp (GvG/Ha) use critical eye over other skills.

They obviously don't need it and from this we may conclude that they're not that starved for energy.

I don't see many R/A's in GvG btw.

Quote:

Have you even played as a R/A or are you just theorycrafting?

For some reason, it didn't stick yo my bar.

Desert Rose

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2007

09 Feb 2010 at 11:20 - 90

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

For some reason, it didn't stick yo my bar.

Then you really should use your time to try out the shatter combo on a sin and then on a ranger insteat of posting here; if you don't inform yourself you cannot contribute to the discussion and are nothing more but a troll.

Morphy

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2009

The Netherlands

Not going to keep up with that anymore

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 14:22 - 91

Alright Amy Awien, to shut you up, here are the test results:

I ran a Ranger using Zealous Daggers with the standard R/A build which can be found on PvXwiki. I spammed every skill literally on recharge, using Shattering Assault as much as possible (as it costs the most). I could go on for 75 seconds before I reached zero Energy, of course reaching a point where I could still go on using skills, though less spammy.

Then I ran an Assassin with a similar set-up, replacing Lightning Reflexes with Critical Eye and obaby you're not going to like what you hear. I could only go on for roughly 25 (!) seconds before reaching a point similar to that for the Ranger, where I could still use most of my bar but not on recharge anymore.

Just for the record, Assassins actually need to hit their opponents to get most of their energy, Rangers just for the 1 energy from Expertise. In reality, Assassins will perform even worse. Other than that, 75 seconds of energy is roughly equal to having enough Energy for the entire battle. 25 seconds of energy won't make you last in a longer battle or even a normal one.

Seriously, enough of the theorycrafting. I have empirical evidence showing you're wrong. The current Ranger build far outclasses the Assassin build and by "far outclassing it" I mean "curbstomp and teabag it". Far superior energy management, +30 armor against Elemental Damage and Lightning Reflexes are the upsides to the Assassin build, which doesn't have any upsides to compensate.

Since neither build should even exist, removing the Energy bonus for secondairy skills is a fair enough nerf for this particular build. Since only spambuilds such as this one and maybe some kind of R/D with 5 attack skills or something (such as the old Escape Scythe) are actually affected by this nerf, it's perfectly fair.

Tenebrae

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2007

Spain

LHV

R/N

09 Feb 2010 at 15:19 - 92

Still with this BS ?

Asking for an ENTIRE ATT LINE NERF because of 1 build ( yeah or whatever ) is stupid. Hey , touchers still exist ! lets nerf BLOOD MAGIC ¿?¿?¿?¿?¿?¿? . No , just no . You just cant nerf something that affects 100 things just because of 1 thing , its nonsense and never gonna happen unless Anet ppl smokes too much weed and drink a hell lot of booze.

Seriously , its the same river of QQ when touchers came out and you see them nerfed ? no , so get over it and move on.

Morphy

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2009

The Netherlands

Not going to keep up with that anymore

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 15:33 - 93

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenebrae

Still with this BS ?

Asking for an ENTIRE ATT LINE NERF because of 1 build ( yeah or whatever ) is stupid. Hey , touchers still exist ! lets nerf BLOOD MAGIC ¿?¿?¿?¿?¿?¿? . No , just no . You just cant nerf something that affects 100 things just because of 1 thing , its nonsense and never gonna happen unless Anet ppl smokes too much weed and drink a hell lot of booze.

Seriously , its the same river of QQ when touchers came out and you see them nerfed ? no , so get over it and move on.

Uhm, Touchers shouldn't actually exist. No-one complains about them because there are so much better builds out there, but they're still gimmicky as hell.

If you would nerf Vampiric Touch and Vampiric Bite to a level that they wouldn't be useful anymore, I don't think anyone would care. You see, these skills only lead to gimmicky "spam-me-on-recharge" builds.

It's the same for Expertise affecting attack skills from other professions. It only really hits the excess of evil, the most gimmicky of builds. Builds that no-one would miss except for the PvE players that somehow miss this change shouldn't apply to them (=PvE).

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 17:11 - 94

Fine, lets go empirical
Well, I made a little test myself, with this R/A and some random assassin build, using the haphzard collection of assasin skill I have available atm - and without PvE skills . The Sin build never ran out of energy (kept a full bar actually) and easily managed around 100 dps. The ranger did run out of energy (I admittedly did not have zealous daggers) after a while and managed like 50-60dps

I don't see R/A outclassing A/x yet, I have the empirical evidence to show you're mistaken.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

You're the stupid little twit

Right, I see you can't admit a mistake.

Morphy

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2009

The Netherlands

Not going to keep up with that anymore

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 17:14 - 95

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Fine, lets go empirical
Well, I made a little test myself, with this R/A and some random assassin build, using the haphzard collection of assasin skill I have available atm - and without PvE skills . The Sin build never ran out of energy (kept a full bar actually) and easily managed around 100 dps. The ranger did run out of energy (I admittedly did not have zealous daggers) after a while and managed like 50-60dps

I don't see R/A outclassing A/x yet, I have the empirical evidence to show you're mistaken.

Right, I see you can't admit a mistake.

What build, exactly?

MagmaRed

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Mar 2007

Our Crabs Know True [LOVE]

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 18:04 - 96

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Fine, lets go empirical
Well, I made a little test myself, with this R/A and some random assassin build, using the haphzard collection of assasin skill I have available atm - and without PvE skills . The Sin build never ran out of energy (kept a full bar actually) and easily managed around 100 dps. The ranger did run out of energy (I admittedly did not have zealous daggers) after a while and managed like 50-60dps

I don't see R/A outclassing A/x yet, I have the empirical evidence to show you're mistaken.

Right, I see you can't admit a mistake.

Although I'm not arguing that R/A is good, or bad, your 'test' is flawed. And although a R/A build may be VERY different from an A/x build, using the same build for both is only effective if the build is designed for them specifically. I'd say run your test using the PvX R/A build and do it again with an A/x build designed for a similar use (RA for example). But read what I bolded, and see if that makes you proud of your proof.

Reverend Dr

Forge Runner

Join Date: Dec 2005

Super Fans Of Gaile [ban]

W/

09 Feb 2010 at 18:09 - 97

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

this R/A and some random assassin build, using the haphzard collection of assasin skill I have available atm

Why would you use random skills? It sure isn't hard to run out of energy when all of your skills have 12-15 second recharges, it sure is easy to run out of energy when your attack skills are on 1-4 second recharges.

And that is infact the issue, that expertise is always better for spamming skills, skills that derive their total power from frequency of use rather than individual effects. If you are bringing skills that cannot be spammed as evidence into an issue about spamming skills, I really don't know how to begin to tell you that it isn't relevant.

Even then there have been many reasons listed why R/A's are superior to A/x. The only one you have attempted to address is the energy issue. Now you haven't, even in your own little theoryworld, shown that A/X has better energy management than R/A, just that it has enough to get by. That has sure convinced me that A/X is superior to R/A.

Ugh

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jun 2009

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 18:29 - 98

How about we delete HA and call it a day? All it brings us are gimmicks and elitism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby2

Shattering Assault at 4 energy....... tends to make 3 pips more than sufficient.

Also, explain what's bad about nerfing melee rangers to oblivion

33% IAS + 75% block is (still) ridiculously strong for a melee character

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

Please, please tell me you're not that dense.

You guys are good at reading.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morphy

Alright Amy Awien, to shut you up, here are the test results:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Well, I made a little test myself

I'm not saying either of you are lying, but a test needs proof to be convincing.

The Drunkard

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2007

Still looking

Rt/

09 Feb 2010 at 23:29 - 99

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

For some reason, it didn't stick yo my bar.

Right, so can I assume you're theorycrafting then? Please stop because it's not contributing to the discussion at all and is just turning it into a flamefest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

They obviously don't need it and from this we may conclude that they're not that starved for energy.

I don't see many R/A's in GvG btw.

Because the escape nerf flushed them out. They still are a problem though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Fine, lets go empirical
Well, I made a little test myself, with this R/A and some random assassin build, using the haphzard collection of assasin skill I have available atm - and without PvE skills . The Sin build never ran out of energy (kept a full bar actually) and easily managed around 100 dps. The ranger did run out of energy (I admittedly did not have zealous daggers) after a while and managed like 50-60dps

I don't see R/A outclassing A/x yet, I have the empirical evidence to show you're mistaken.

Post the builds you used please, until then I refuse to believe any tests that you've ran.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenebrae

Asking for an ENTIRE ATT LINE NERF because of 1 build ( yeah or whatever ) is stupid.

I concur. However, this suggestion is to stop ranger melee builds from spaming skills on recharge without any punishment, not to destroy the ranger's primary attribute. Please read the thread.

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

09 Feb 2010 at 23:36 - 100

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

Why would you use random skills? It sure isn't hard to run out of energy when all of your skills have 12-15 second recharges, it sure is easy to run out of energy when your attack skills are on 1-4 second recharges.

You're right and to be honest, they weren't completely random, I picked them for their short recharge time so that there would be a skill in the chain available at any time, I just don't have that many assassin skills unlocked:

Jagged Strike & Golden Lotus Strike as Lead Attacks (GLS returns E)
Fox Fangs as off-hand
Death Blossom as dual attack

Way of the Assassin
Critical Eye

Conjure Lightning

I'm sure it's a poor build that can be improved, but I was pressed for time and wouldn't have made it had I jumped around to buy the skills for one of the PvX RA builds. A constantly full E-bar implies there's too much E-management which probably compromised damage and utility. When I have time I'll try out one of the A/x's from PvX.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

what mistake? and don't take my goddamn quote out of context then pretend you have a solid point. twit.

I am not the one taking text out of context. Read back please, here it may help, if I just put things together

Me: "Removing expertise would make rangers impossible, 3 pips is insufficient ..."

Bobby2, while quoting my statement about removing expertise: "Shattering Assault at 4 energy....... tends to make 3 pips more than sufficient"

Me, referring back to my quoted statement about removing expertise: "It wouldn't be 4 E if expertise didn't apply to it."

You: "Please, please tell me you're not that dense"

Me, thinking it might help if I explain the context: "Did I did not start that quoted section with "Removing expertise would ..."?" Without expertise aplying to it, Shattering Assault would not be 4 E and 3 pips would be insufficient.

Ugh

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jun 2009

R/

10 Feb 2010 at 01:40 - 101

If anyone's interested, I did some quick tests with the builds being kept as close as possible.

I did the ranger first and spammed until I ran out of energy. Then, I did the sin and spammed for about the same amount of time. For both, I used Zealous Daggers, used slot 7 on recharge, and used the elite skill (its name escapes me :/ ) as often as possible. I did two trials with each and posted the trial with the highest DPS.

Basically:
The sin has a bit better damage and longer-lasting conditions.
The ranger has more survivalibility and is probably more reliable.

R/As are better, but I wouldn't say they "curbstomp and teabag" sins. And, sins are able to do the things an R/A does for long periods of time.

I still think R/As should be nerfed, but preferably by the nerfing of the sin skills, as a nerf to expertise could just result in R/As being replaced by A/Xs.

Del

Desert Nomad

Join Date: Sep 2009

In a van, down by the river.

RED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GORED ENGINE GO if I know, ask Lynette.

R/

10 Feb 2010 at 04:18 - 102

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

I am not the one taking text out of context. Read back please, here it may help, if I just put things together

Me: "Removing expertise would make rangers impossible, 3 pips is insufficient ..."

Bobby2, while quoting my statement about removing expertise: "Shattering Assault at 4 energy....... tends to make 3 pips more than sufficient"

Me, referring back to my quoted statement about removing expertise: "It wouldn't be 4 E if expertise didn't apply to it."

You: "Please, please tell me you're not that dense"

Me, thinking it might help if I explain the context: "Did I did not start that quoted section with "Removing expertise would ..."?" Without expertise aplying to it, Shattering Assault would not be 4 E and 3 pips would be insufficient.

lololololololololololololololololololololololololo lol make rangers impossible? what the hell are you on about? we're talking about making expertise only affect ranger attacks, not removing it as a whole, and yes, you still took what i was saying wrong, i was also implying that you're dense for thinking that fixing expertise would make rangers impossible. no honorable player cares is this shitter build gets nerfed. honestly.

Reverend Dr

Forge Runner

Join Date: Dec 2005

Super Fans Of Gaile [ban]

W/

10 Feb 2010 at 04:38 - 103

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

I just don't have that many assassin skills unlocked:

only Ian Boyd is allowed to theorycraft like this

IrishX

Frost Gate Guardian

Join Date: Jan 2008

W/

10 Feb 2010 at 04:53 - 104

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

only Ian Boyd is allowed to theorycraft like this

All 20 people left who get this chuckled.

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

10 Feb 2010 at 08:11 - 105

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugh

If anyone's interested, I did some quick tests with the builds being kept as close as possible.

Thank you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

lololololololololololololololololololololololololo lol make rangers impossible? what the hell are you on about?

If you actually read the posts you quote or reply to you wouldn't be making such dumb remarks.

Quote:

i was also implying that you're dense for thinking that fixing expertise would make rangers impossible

Liar, you replied to something else:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

It wouldn't be 4 E if expertise didn't apply to it. You only read a couple of random of words from the post you quoted?

Please, please tell me you're not that dense.

Btw, I commented on both possibilities, you combined parts of both comments, and then you have the nerve to talk about taking things out of context. You're just filth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reverend Dr

only Ian Boyd is allowed to theorycraft like this

Thank you for showing what kind of coward you are

At least I go out and actually try some things out, with whatever is available. You're probably still trying to figure out how to make a new character.

LazyLink

Academy Page

Join Date: Jul 2005

Ascalon Dung Warriors

R/Mo

10 Feb 2010 at 08:54 - 106

No, rangers should not be limited to bows. Rangers sacrifice damage for energy management.

Tenebrae

Forge Runner

Join Date: Feb 2007

Spain

LHV

R/N

10 Feb 2010 at 10:10 - 107

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Drunkard

I concur. However, this suggestion is to stop ranger melee builds from spaming skills on recharge without any punishment, not to destroy the ranger's primary attribute. Please read the thread.

Read the thread please , i was here even before you lol.

Punishment is energy and MAIN RANGERS att is some sort of e-management so yes , it DESTROYS rangers att when using melee attack skills.
They spend a bloody whole lot of points just for that , endurance and being capable of spam skills while others cant , thats the whole point of expertise so nerfing one of its few ways it work ( yes , because doesnt work on spells nor other class stances ) its simply destroys it but not entirely.
If you destroy Expertise to work on melee attacks you destroy R/A , R/W and R/D just because some QQ.

Yes , i said QQ , because R/A are not unstoppable . They are not a blood spike before nerf that was just spam spam spam and theres nothing you can do . Rangers can be hexed as hell , snared , crippled , blinded ..... the ONLY thing they cant be is blocked ( with THAT build ).

So just for 1 build ( or a very few ) nerf a whole att in any way is stupid , just as stupid as removing KD from the game because Magehunters W are very powerful. No, just no.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LazyLink

No, rangers should not be limited to bows. Rangers sacrifice damage for energy management.

And we got a winner.

Morphy

Wilds Pathfinder

Join Date: Nov 2009

The Netherlands

Not going to keep up with that anymore

R/

10 Feb 2010 at 15:46 - 108

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

You're right and to be honest, they weren't completely random, I picked them for their short recharge time so that there would be a skill in the chain available at any time, I just don't have that many assassin skills unlocked:

Jagged Strike & Golden Lotus Strike as Lead Attacks (GLS returns E)
Fox Fangs as off-hand
Death Blossom as dual attack

Way of the Assassin
Critical Eye

Conjure Lightning

I'm sure it's a poor build that can be improved, but I was pressed for time and wouldn't have made it had I jumped around to buy the skills for one of the PvX RA builds. A constantly full E-bar implies there's too much E-management which probably compromised damage and utility. When I have time I'll try out one of the A/x's from PvX.

Ah yes. To fuel a build with this kind of energy management and DPS you have:

1. Sacrificed Shattering Assault, an important piece of the build that gives you the opportunity to deal with Guardian and the likes
2. Added a Conjure to your build, which can be stripped easily and really forces you to run a Shocking weapon.

You sacrifice utility and survivability to gain Energy - which isn't a problem on Rangers anyway - and DPS, which you won't get through as much as your Attack Skills are much easier to stop (your duals are blockable).

A bit hard to compare but the survivability of the R/A build is worth a lot. Please only use skills that are irremovible, it will make the comparation more fair.

Desert Rose

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2007

10 Feb 2010 at 15:59 - 109

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ugh

Basically:
The sin has a bit better damage and longer-lasting conditions.
The ranger has more survivalibility and is probably more reliable.

R/As are better, but I wouldn't say they "curbstomp and teabag" sins. And, sins are able to do the things an R/A does for long periods of time.

I still think R/As should be nerfed, but preferably by the nerfing of the sin skills, as a nerf to expertise could just result in R/As being replaced by A/Xs.

You overlooked one thing while concluding: The master of damage is a stationary target that never blocks or hinders your attacks in any other way.
Try the two builds against the two monks again (maybe you have to decrease dagger mastery to not kill them instantly) and see how long your energy lasts then.

Bobby2

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2007

Delayed in order to meet ANet's high standards

[MaSS]

W/E

10 Feb 2010 at 17:29 - 110

The fact that this discussion is still going makes me laugh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby2

Shattering Assault at 4 energy....... tends to make 3 pips more than sufficient.

Amy, this wasn't exactly a reply to your statement. The astute reader might have realized I stated this to imply that Rangers are currently more suited to handling expensive skills like these than Assassins. Though granted, I admit it was a bit vague.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Fine, lets go empirical
Well, I made a little test myself, with this R/A and some random assassin build, using the haphzard collection of assasin skill I have available atm - and without PvE skills . The Sin build never ran out of energy (kept a full bar actually) and easily managed around 100 dps. The ranger did run out of energy (I admittedly did not have zealous daggers) after a while and managed like 50-60dps

I don't see R/A outclassing A/x yet, I have the empirical evidence to show you're mistaken.

To call comparing a standard SA Ranger bar to whatever Sin build you conjured up empirical evidence doesn't do much for your credibility, as people have pointed out. I'm not going to BHA Conjure Beastmaster you on this but at least you could make an effort to keep the builds as close to each other as possible.

Being:

Crit @ 12+1
Dags @ 12+1+1

Leaping Mantis
Exhausting
Jagged
Fox
SA
Dash
Res
LR..... the only comparable skill the Sin has available is Critical Defenses.

To make a long story short: no, it can't keep up with the Ranger energy-wise.

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

10 Feb 2010 at 19:00 - 111

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby2

Amy, this wasn't exactly a reply to your statement. ...

Ok.

Quote:

... empirical evidence doesn't do much for your credibility ...

I used the wording from Morphy, curious why you only respond like this with me.

Empirical evidence to measure the quality of a build in real game circumstance can not be provided by us with individual 'tests', you'd have to observe many, many matches.

Quote:

... but at least you could make an effort to keep the builds as close to each other as possible. ...

Well, no. If you want to compare R/A and A/x then you should not gimp the latter - or your comparision will fail by design.

Quote:

To make a long story short: no, it can't keep up with the Ranger energy-wise.

The tests from Ugh showed the SA assassin could keep up. Granted, Master of Damage is not a match, but - except for theoretical arguments - there is no validation or test available for the view that R/A SA > A/x

Quote:

Originally Posted by Morphy

Ah yes. To fuel a build with this kind of energy management and DPS you have

I've already stated that the build was rather adhoc and that e-management was overdone, but the point is that other builds have other uses and primary sins have more options for dagger builds, Shattering Assault is not the holy grail of daggers and rangers, though strong on this dagger build, do not outclass primary assassins.

Quote:

Please only use skills that are irremovible, it will make the comparation more fair

Lightning Reflexes can also be removed. Yes, enchantments and stances can be removed, but that is not a good reason to ignore them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Del

if you were any good at playing ranger you wouldn't be daft enough to say rangers are impossible just because only bow attacks would be affected by expertise.

I never said that, but obviously the wording of what I did say was too complex for you to comprehend.

And since you will never be able to understand normal english I see no reason to continue trying to communicate with you. Goodbye troll.

Desert Rose

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Sep 2007

10 Feb 2010 at 20:46 - 112

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Well, no. If you want to compare R/A and A/x then you should not gimp the latter - or your comparision will fail by design.

Yes, you don't have to copy the R/A build one-on-one, but the A/X should be at least able to do what the R/A can; I've already stated that on page 3.
As a sidenote: Your sin build is also a weaker version of another recently nerfed R/A build. If you replace Escape with Expert's Dexterity it's properly still more powerful than your sin build.

Quote:

Empirical evidence to measure the quality of a build in real game circumstance can not be provided by us with individual 'tests', you'd have to observe many, many matches.

Do you really thing that the guys and gals that use(d) melee rangers never tried out sins/dervishes instead of rangers?

Bobby2

Furnace Stoker

Join Date: Jun 2007

Delayed in order to meet ANet's high standards

[MaSS]

W/E

10 Feb 2010 at 21:33 - 113

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

Quote:

Originally Posted by me

To make a long story short: no, it can't keep up with the Ranger energy-wise.

The tests from Ugh showed the SA assassin could keep up. Granted, Master of Damage is not a match, but - except for theoretical arguments - there is no validation or test available for the view that R/A SA > A/x

In a world without Blind and anti-melee hexes, you'd be correct. The Ranger and Assassin would be about equal in maintaining energy.

As it stands the Assassin's and Ranger's respective means of energy management relate very differently to what's going on around them. A 5 energy attack, say Jagged Strike, that misses due to whatever reason is just a 2 energy loos for the Ranger. A Sin that suffers the same is down 5, with only 1 extra pip of regen to make up for it.

So yeah, I'd say Rangers are just plain better at dagger pressure - and that's not even taking higher AL and access to block stances into account.

Kattar

EXCESSIVE FLUTTERCUSSING

Join Date: Mar 2007

SMS (lolgw2placeholder)

Me/

11 Feb 2010 at 12:10 - 114

Just a note: if you can't have a discussion without it turning into arguments full of personal attacks, then you won't be allowed to have any discussion at all.

Keep it clean and civil.

drkn

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jan 2009

Wroc??aw, Poland

Midnight Mayhem

Me/

11 Feb 2010 at 12:38 - 115

Quote:

I still think R/As should be nerfed, but preferably by the nerfing of the sin skills, as a nerf to expertise could just result in R/As being replaced by A/Xs

Quote:

Profession: R/

and let you still exploit expertise with spirits, /d, /w, or /n toucher?
expertise is overpowered, same as soul reaping, when compared to other primairy attribute bonuses and both should be toned down.

Sharkinu

Lion's Arch Merchant

Join Date: Dec 2008

Romania

Smells Like Bear Spirit [Norn]

R/

11 Feb 2010 at 13:17 - 116

Quote:

Originally Posted by drkn

expertise is overpowered

Rangers are the only profession with 3 pips of energy regeneration. Yes, paras and warriors have 2 pips, but they have adrenaline skills so they dont need energy.

And making expertise only affect rangers skills is a bad idea already explained by others in this topic.

drkn

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jan 2009

Wroc??aw, Poland

Midnight Mayhem

Me/

11 Feb 2010 at 13:30 - 117

Quote:

expertise is overpowered [...] when compared to other primairy attribute bonuses

please read the whole post.
as i don't expect buffing fc/df/sp/... to the sr/exp level, i'd rather see sr and exp toned down.

Ugh

Krytan Explorer

Join Date: Jun 2009

R/

11 Feb 2010 at 14:11 - 118

Quote:

Originally Posted by drkn

and let you still exploit expertise with spirits, /d, /w, or /n toucher?
expertise is overpowered, same as soul reaping, when compared to other primairy attribute bonuses and both should be toned down.

Rangers using spirits, R/Ws, and touchers aren't even used in PvP.

Bunny thumpers used to be used, but I haven't seen one in quite a while (and they weren't OP or as brainless as R/As, anyways). And Touchers used to be OP (in places like RA) before everyone stopped being stupid.

Rangers with spirits (aren't even relevant to this thread, which is about melee skills, and) are only used in PvE for some light farming. They don't even come close to outclassing Rits and neither do Mo/Rts, N/Rts, Me/Rts, E/Rts, or any other profession that can also use spirits (which is pretty much every one but warrior and para).

As for R/Ds, they're not much of a problem either. And the fact that dervs are losing their job to a ranger is probably showing more of a problem with the dervish class being underpowered than the ranger class being overpowered.

Quote:

as i don't expect buffing fc/df/sp/... to the sr/exp level, i'd rather see sr and exp toned down.

Rangers are completely reliant on expertise. Pretty much every ranger build has to have 13-14 expertise or it doesn't work. If it was toned down to 3%, rangers would leave the meta until it was reverted.

I don't have a necro, so I'm not sure how a SR nerf would affect them. But it would probably be bad, too.

Quote:

You overlooked one thing while concluding: The master of damage is a stationary target that never blocks or hinders your attacks in any other way.
Try the two builds against the two monks again (maybe you have to decrease dagger mastery to not kill them instantly) and see how long your energy lasts then.

Good point. I don't really feel like testing again, though.

But, it only takes 1-2 criticals before a sin can chain again and I usually switch targets when my current one starts blocking. So A/Xs still might not be as bad as they may seem.

Either way, R/As are better and should be nerfed.

drkn

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jan 2009

Wroc??aw, Poland

Midnight Mayhem

Me/

11 Feb 2010 at 14:41 - 119

Quote:

They don't even come close to outclassing Rits and neither do Mo/Rts, N/Rts, Me/Rts, E/Rts

just two cents regarding this one: they do outclass me/rts, a lot. been there, seen that.

Amy Awien

Forge Runner

Join Date: Jul 2006

R/

11 Feb 2010 at 17:08 - 120

Quote:

Originally Posted by Desert Rose

Do you really thing that the guys and gals that use(d) melee rangers never tried out sins/dervishes instead of rangers?

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, we don't know what 'they' tried and speculations about them are hardly evidence for one view or the other. As far as trying out builds, there are more A/x builds for PvP then there are R/A builds listed as great, which tells me A/x are (a) at least as good as R/A and/or (b) A/x offers more diversity.

Quote:

As a sidenote: Your sin build is ...

It's nothing like that one, not that it matters.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby2

In a world without Blind and anti-melee hexes, you'd be correct. The Ranger and Assassin would be about equal in maintaining energy. ....

I believe without anti-melee the Assassin has more and better options, though I agree that blind and hexes hurt the assassin more. Trying to put compare them objectively is a lost cause, so we're left with what we each believe to have more effect.