What next elite spec must have to be worth the purchase... - [Merged] — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home Professions Ranger

What next elite spec must have to be worth the purchase... - [Merged]

Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited February 12, 2021 in Ranger

This is a personal list more than everything else, a list of main factors the next elite spec must include to be worth the purchase...not that I think my opinion should hold any meaning to you but personally I won't need another variant of GS/LB core ranger as it has been with soulbeast and druid in the end.

1 ) Must have access to AoE, in good measure, melee or ranged...with the latter being preferred , ideally without ridiculous cast time/animation

2 ) No pet reliant, I need something openly viable for zerg fights....no something barely usable in a GvG scenario with all godlike support coming from pro FB/tempest/scrappers -a note to those suggesting the root/crows build-

3 ) More condi removal , right now with the current balance it's really really really hard to keep with the condi burst dished out by specs like condi thief , condi herald primarily ...others can be truly a challenge : burning ele , burning guardian , condi core necro/reaper , condi mirage and I feel Anet is planning to release even more condi burst because..why not?! . Not asking ofc for perma resistance or condi immunity....I just need more than what I have now.....ideally they'd balance condis in WvW but..oh well

Don't care about story as I am not pver unless required, got all 7 mounts and all masteries. At this point nothing would interest me more than an elite that will solve some of the ranger ever present issues persisting since launch; not interested in playing another "core ranger" with different pets but same playstyle....I hope for the best and pray for a better opportunity for the whole ranger community with End of Dragons

-A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

<1

Comments

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    In my opinion, number#2 is the most important. I can live without more AoE or more condi cleanse.

    I want the next ranger's e-spec to replace the common pet list by a limited selection of familiar that are nigh impervious to damage but don't do more damage than the mesmer's sword clone Auto-attacking. I don't mind if there is minion utility skills to compensate the loss of damage from the main mechanism (I don't even mind if the utility are beyond useless) as long as the pet/familiar from the main mechanism is nigh impervious to damage.

    Sentinel: (I chose this one because the tengu ranger is called a sentinel in Naphui Quarters)

    Main mechanism: The shaman forsake the common pets and gain access to gain a link with celestial beings' essence. Essences can only be disabled, they do not take damage but deal little to no damage. (4 essences available)

    • essence of kirin: F2: Kirin seal: Passive: The sentinel have increased healing power and concentration (100 each). Active: allies close to your kirin essence are healed every second for 5 seconds.
    • essence of turtle: F2: Turtle seal: Passive: The sentinel have increased toughness and vitality (100 each). Active: Foes close to your turtle essence are slowed and crippled every second for 5 seconds.
    • essence of phoenix: F2: Phoenix seal: Passive: The sentinel have increased condition damage and expertise (100 each). Active: Foes close to your phoenix essence are burned every seconds for 5 seconds.
    • essence of dragon: Passive: F2: Dragon seal: The sentinel have increased power and ferocity (100 each). Active: Foes close to your dragon essence take damage every seconds for 5 seconds.

    Simple and effective. You can imagine a GM trait that share the passive with allies, a GM trait that increase the duration of the Active And the last GM could double the passive effect on the sentinel. Three different gameplay, all potentially useful in every gamemodes (Afterall shared Dragon seal passive is a garantied spot in PvE raids).

    For the fun, you imagine utility skills that interact with your pet instead of being direct skills, let's call those skills: Prayers

    • Heal: Reach to your summoned essence asking for help. Gain health and a boon based on the essence summoned.
    • Reach to your essence making it's next 10 attacks apply torment.
    • Reach to your essence making it burst into an AoE dazing and damaging foes around it.
    • Reach to your essence making it grant endurance and a boon based on the essence to allies around it.
    • ... etc.
  • InsaneQR.7412InsaneQR.7412 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 17, 2020

    I would prefer a warden type e-spec that gets concecrations, double mace or hammer that has decent AoE capabilities and a mechanic that replaces the pet into a form of totem you can comnand in the style of ventaris tablet with good buffs and AoE damage to play with.

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Anything which will alter gameplay significantly is gonna be worth picking up because this game's design philospohy and balance still allows people to have "mains"

    Engineer is gonna be a must have for Engineer fans, because Especs are the only way they are gonna get new weapons to play around with.
    Warrior would be hype to get a ranged option which isn't as bad as their current options.

    Literally any friggin weapon would be great for Rev. Rev is so starved for Weapon loadouts it's not even funny.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • ZeftheWicked.3076ZeftheWicked.3076 Member ✭✭✭✭

    In case you rangers haven't caught on already, you're pretty much "warrior lite" unless it's healing (here you got upper hand). Last xpac warriors got boon hate, which was their weakness before spellbreaker. So this xpac most likely ranger will finally get some. While warrior will probs get some healer spec.

  • anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Before talking about a new spec, ranger needs the class fixed so the actual specs are fun to play.
    To be adding more over a bad and broken foundation doesn't work as we already seen with the last two specs. Same dilemma as with the pets, before asking for more pets i would ask to fix the pets we already have.

  • anduriell.6280anduriell.6280 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited October 29, 2020

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    This here.
    Druid and soulbeast are both reducing your reliance from pets. Druid by reducing the stats of your pet and soulbeast by disabling you to switch pets and giving you the ability to trade your pet for new skills and stat boni.

    Having the third elite spec focusing on pets and increasing their efficiency is the most logical step in my opinion. A spec for people who want to play with pets and actually want a powerful pet at their side. And that playstyle seems to be fairly popular, considering how many people are requesting the return of the famous "bunny thumper".

    That sounds amazing but it will not happen. Or it will be terrible by any stretch of imagination.

    Think about the people already are complaining when any pet overperforms by a bit, increasing their efficiency would just make the forums to be filled with a river of salt and the class be neutered instantly.

    First we need core and actual specs fixed and be fun. Once that is done they can build over the good foundation and anything new coming along the way will be good.

  • Thornwolf.9721Thornwolf.9721 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Arheundel.6451 said:
    2 ) No pet reliant, I need something openly viable for zerg fights....no something barely usable in a GvG scenario with all godlike support coming from pro FB/tempest/scrappers -a note to those suggesting the root/crows build-

    This right here would just ensure I don't both with the spec like I dont bother with soul-beast. I want a pet focused spec with big monsters where we do the CC and work in tandem with the pet; Rather than it just being there by extension due to class mechanics. Or the limp noodle the druid pet has become when specc'd for druid, or the stupid lack of pet for soul-beast and merging with it.

    I play ranger for the pet, thats why I made it. If you want something that doesn't deal with that then soul-beast exists and other classes exist; Your spec would likely push me to just continue on with core or druid and not waste my time. Because thats what this right here would be. And clearly you have very little experience, because ranger laughs in the face of condi as well has plenty of AoE. Heck boon-beast is good in zergs through boonsharing and does a better job at it than herald does; What we need is a stronger CC/Bruiser spec because we right now don't have that. And since they've already done two specs that either disregard or remove the pet, I feel like its time they increase its power and utilize some of the broodmother/alpha models that have been in the game for years.

  • Za Shaloc.3908Za Shaloc.3908 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I agree that the next spec needs to focus on the actual pets, but doing such would probably require a ton of mechanical changes to them and I unfortunately doubt ANet will take the time to do this. I have been playing WoW off and on, and something I really appreciate on Hunters is Kill Command, which actively orders your pet to charge to the desired target. Reminds me a bit of how the Cheetah's F2 functions. It would be nice to have more active skills that directly control the pet and cause it to perform certain actions. Personally I love the challenge of micromanagement and it is a big part of what appeals to me on the class.

  • voltaicbore.8012voltaicbore.8012 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @anduriell.6280 said:

    Think about the people already are complaining when any pet overperforms by a bit, increasing their efficiency would just make the forums to be filled with a river of salt and the class be neutered instantly.

    This is exactly what is going to happen. Even with everything that's been nerfed over the years, bads are STILL complaining about pet cc and getting hits from them. ANet of course seems to agree with the bads, and adjusts the game accordingly. We'll never see a halfway decent pet-centered spec survive in competitive for very long.

    @Pterikdactyl.7630 said:
    I agree that the next spec needs to focus on the actual pets, but doing such would probably require a ton of mechanical changes to them and I unfortunately doubt ANet will take the time to do this.

    100% agree. I, too, desire a more pet-focused spec, but in order for it to work pets need to be fixed on a more fundamental level that ANet (probably correctly) will judge as not worth the time and effort.

    I have been playing WoW off and on, and something I really appreciate on Hunters is Kill Command, which actively orders your pet to charge to the desired target. Reminds me a bit of how the Cheetah's F2 functions. It would be nice to have more active skills that directly control the pet and cause it to perform certain actions. Personally I love the challenge of micromanagement and it is a big part of what appeals to me on the class.

    Well the pet F1 command as well as Sic Em do the same thing, if simply directing your pet to charge a target is all you're looking for.

  • The Boz.2038The Boz.2038 Member ✭✭✭

    Beastmaster. No pet swap; both pets active at same time. Land use spear as weapon, medium or melee range skills. Trainings as new skill types; hybridizations of stances and preparations that affect your pets only, and you through some traits. Heavy use of the attack of opportunity mechanic. Medium mobility, but lots of mobility control, chase and peel. Spirit Of The Pack elite calls two additional spirit copies of each of your pets for a short time.

  • Exo.2143Exo.2143 Member ✭✭

    All I really want is to have a hammer on my Ranger. Single-target CC heavy DPS.

    Please make it happen!

  • All I could want from the new spec is the ability to throw our traps again. I miss being able to do that so much.

  • Teratus.2859Teratus.2859 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Still liking the idea of a Hammer Ranger with a decent bit of CC and damage.
    I'd also be fine with MH Mace as well, might even prefer it because of Axe Offhand combo.

    Main thing I want is to keep my pet swap, I did not like this change to soulbeast and it put me off using it.

  • Raizel.1839Raizel.1839 Member ✭✭✭

    Nothing in particular, the selling point of EoD is other for me, funny/rewarding metas, replayability, beatiful arts, new game changing mechanics (like glider and mounts were).
    All of the above come before elite specs for me.

  • Arcaneus.6931Arcaneus.6931 Member ✭✭
    edited December 6, 2020

    For eles:
    More long range options.
    Don't tie new weapons to elites.
    Ability to specialize in different elements rather than pyromancy.
    Make other elements a viable build choices.

  • kharmin.7683kharmin.7683 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Arcaneus.6931 said:
    For eles:
    More long range options.
    Don't tie new weapons to elites.
    Ability to specialize in different elements rather than pyromancy.
    Make other elements a viable build choices.

    What does this have to do with the Ranger class?

    I am a very casual player.
    Very.
    Casual.

  • MatyrGustav.6210MatyrGustav.6210 Member ✭✭
    edited December 10, 2020

    I personally would love a Shaman class with Cleansing. The pets would be in Spirit form with more resilience to damage. Weapon could be a Sceptor. Utilities could be Meditations.

    If the Espec does away from the Pet system, i could see a shroud type system in place for Morphing. So, instead of calling animals, you Morph into a larger version of the animals. Im not sure how many will be available to choose from but you would equip two to transform into. Energy decreases when being hit as well bringing you back to normal similar to necromancer. Weapon could be a Hammer, also with meditations. call it the Morpher.

  • WILD WARDEN (shaman) spirit pets
    •weapon - focus.
    Used to cc the enemy and improve your pet ability to deliver its dps when needed and give it stability/dmg reduction for a short period while it does so. Could still be dodged blocked or evaded etc

    Traits
    Could be synergy with you and your pet doing combo's which create small cc/burst chains to actualy get the pet to work in pvp/pve when desired. You land the immobilise boom pet teleports in and sticks to target for (x) amount of time doing its thing pet accts more like a temp high stack condi condition then its back to kitten ai pathing could even be like a spirit pet appears in place of your normal pets or you can only take spirit pets

    Elite ability both pets come out at once for a short window of time adjusted dmg down 30% or w/e makes sense less dmg from each pet or you take complete controll of your pet and play throught the eyes of the pet and buff it have control of the abilities and you character follows the pet as if its on a realy short leash

    Would also make a decent class mechanic
    Instead of swopping pets you just have the pet on a leash and you play as the pet with buffed up stats/abilities kinda like necro shroud while leashed your character following the pet copies everything you do ie you jump as pet your character right behind on the leash jumps while leashed to your pet you have one HP bar not two or the damage you take is split between you but lowers the leash duration like shroud so would be about ccing and dodge/evading to keep leash active as long as poss

    Just spit balling ideas open to criticism or improvements on the name or the idea💡

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I just want Bunny Thumper for Ranger.
    Weapon: Hammer
    Utilities: Physical Skills with Life Steal.

    Pets are visually replaced with bunnies, but still retain their regular functions.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Fueki.4753 said:
    I just want Bunny Thumper for Ranger.
    Weapon: Hammer
    Utilities: Physical Skills with Life Steal.

    Pets are visually replaced with bunnies, but still retain their regular functions.

    The part with all pets looking like bunnies can't happen for balancing reasons. You are basically denying the enemy the information about the pet you are using with this.

    But thematically, I agree, the bunny thumper seems like a great option for the next elite spec.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 12, 2021

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Fueki.4753 said:
    I just want Bunny Thumper for Ranger.
    Weapon: Hammer
    Utilities: Physical Skills with Life Steal.

    Pets are visually replaced with bunnies, but still retain their regular functions.

    The part with all pets looking like bunnies can't happen for balancing reasons. You are basically denying the enemy the information about the pet you are using with this.

    But thematically, I agree, the bunny thumper seems like a great option for the next elite spec.

    The bunnies were actually meant as a joke, but they could give them a buff icon that indicates the type of pet.

  • I'm hoping for scepter, as a Zoo Keeper where the Ranger gets Minions as utilities.

  • I was sad when soul beast came along. Pissed enouugh to quit for a while when Druid... or was it Druid then Soul? Bah been too long. I play Ranger for the pets. The basic reskinning of pets was upsetting. Just 1 different skill. Majority of stuff the same according to type. Basically like 8 of hearts, 8 of diamonds, 8 of spades. Yada yada and toss in a joker here and there.

    Beast Echo
    The starting passive unlocks Dual Pets, costs -10% to overall stats. Both pets are already there, able to be switched. This brings both into play on land and in the water. F1->F4 controls the main pet. F5->F8 controls the secondary pet. F4/8 would not switch pets since both are out at this time. Instead the pet chosen would take a 10% stat debuff while the partner pet would gain a 10% buff to it's basic stats. Fighting at full stregnth with the other acting as support and backup.

    The Trait line passively bolsters both pets. Skills will focus on having both pets working in harmony. The Elite skill would combine the use of both at 110% of their base stats for a limited time. (Basically a 20% boost to their stats, stacking with harmonized sharing triggered through F4/8)

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    Above anything else, the elite must not be a duellist spec else we end up with more nerfs to core ranger...it barely holds after all the nerfs it received due to druid (WS and NM nerfs , smokescale dmg reduced close to zero, bristleback dmg gutted) and soulbeast (more nerfs to NM and WS, plus more nerfs to pets: birds, tiger and gazelle dmg nerfs)

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Johnny.1634 said:
    Um what? It NEEDS TO BE PET RELIANT. You understand pets are our class mechanic right? We don't have a single Elite spec that does anything with our pet, its pretty pathetic.
    Druid when released didn't have a single skill or trait that interacted with your pet what so ever. And Soulbeast was made for the "I hate my pet" crybabies....if you don't like pets don't play ranger, simple as that.

    Guild Wars 1 had amazing player and pet synergy, with pet attack skills that basically let you use double the skills other players could at the same time, and majority of pet based builds let your pet provide you with ridiculous amounts of heals and energy regen.
    Sadly with GW2, majority of pets are bugged and ANet has done a pretty awful job at giving Rangers any synergy with their class mechanic. Hopefully this new spec will finally see us actually using our pet.

    This here.
    Druid and soulbeast are both reducing your reliance from pets. Druid by reducing the stats of your pet and soulbeast by disabling you to switch pets and giving you the ability to trade your pet for new skills and stat boni.

    Having the third elite spec focusing on pets and increasing their efficiency is the most logical step in my opinion. A spec for people who want to play with pets and actually want a powerful pet at their side. And that playstyle seems to be fairly popular, considering how many people are requesting the return of the famous "bunny thumper".

    I agree with this. I think it should be the next logical step. Focusing on pet utility to make it a fun partner-focused specialization. We already have two that were not pet focused. Just for simple balance, it is the right way to go. Maybe call it, Hunter, Beastmaster, Warden, etc etc. I think it may be a fun and viable addition.

    "Nothing clears a troubled mind better than shooting a bow. "

  • If you want the next e-spec to be pet focused, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you haven't been here long. Ranger's have been getting wrecked in terms of pet viability since at least late 2012-early 2013. Even in PvE we had dev's back in the day saying that pets could solo entire Dungeons and nerfing them there as well.

    That's my biggest question though, where do pets fit if they aren't going to be focused upon and we already have SB? For Druid/core they are super handicaps in competitive play if you don't take BM (i.e. are a condi-Druid). You can't even make pets short-term use things / invulnerable and/or only provide buffs--in other words just have them replace spirits--as dev's also thought THOSE were too OP and removed their ability to move.

    We all know it though, Ranger needs a sustain spec. Need something to help large scale, but I myself don't ever see that happening as it not only violates Anet's unwritten 'lore rules', it would open the door for thieves to also get a sustain spec. If that happens, well the two professions just keep one-upping each other for eternity...

  • @Johnny.1634 said:
    ...
    Guild Wars 1 had amazing player and pet synergy, with pet attack skills that basically let you use double the skills other players could at the same time, and majority of pet based builds let your pet provide you with ridiculous amounts of heals and energy regen.
    Sadly with GW2, majority of pets are bugged and ANet has done a pretty awful job at giving Rangers any synergy with their class mechanic. Hopefully this new spec will finally see us actually using our pet.

    This statement is false. There were a maximum of 8 skills in Guild Wars 1, of which Charm Animal (and later Comfort Animal [PvE]) were required skills for the Ranger to even have a companion in the first place, which was just another body with a slow attack speed, no attack skills of its' own and its' damage partially dependant on your investment into the Beast Mastery attribute.

    Point being, when staying true to the Guild Wars 1 comparison; the Ranger originally had an optional pet, not one as its' core mechanic.

  • Fueki.4753Fueki.4753 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @JorneMormel.9850 said:

    @Johnny.1634 said:
    ...
    Guild Wars 1 had amazing player and pet synergy, with pet attack skills that basically let you use double the skills other players could at the same time, and majority of pet based builds let your pet provide you with ridiculous amounts of heals and energy regen.
    Sadly with GW2, majority of pets are bugged and ANet has done a pretty awful job at giving Rangers any synergy with their class mechanic. Hopefully this new spec will finally see us actually using our pet.

    This statement is false. There were a maximum of 8 skills in Guild Wars 1, of which Charm Animal (and later Comfort Animal [PvE]) were required skills for the Ranger to even have a companion in the first place, which was just another body with a slow attack speed, no attack skills of its' own and its' damage partially dependant on your investment into the Beast Mastery attribute.

    Point being, when staying true to the Guild Wars 1 comparison; the Ranger originally had an optional pet, not one as its' core mechanic.

    Maybe they were referring to the "Pet Attack" skill category, when they meant "pet attack skills".
    And with "double the skills" they could have meant that those pet skills might be usable at the same time as other skills (I never used Pet Attacks, so I don't know about that one though).

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Gotejjeken.1267 said:
    If you want the next e-spec to be pet focused, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you haven't been here long. Ranger's have been getting wrecked in terms of pet viability since at least late 2012-early 2013. Even in PvE we had dev's back in the day saying that pets could solo entire Dungeons and nerfing them there as well.

    That's my biggest question though, where do pets fit if they aren't going to be focused upon and we already have SB? For Druid/core they are super handicaps in competitive play if you don't take BM (i.e. are a condi-Druid). You can't even make pets short-term use things / invulnerable and/or only provide buffs--in other words just have them replace spirits--as dev's also thought THOSE were too OP and removed their ability to move.

    We all know it though, Ranger needs a sustain spec. Need something to help large scale, but I myself don't ever see that happening as it not only violates Anet's unwritten 'lore rules', it would open the door for thieves to also get a sustain spec. If that happens, well the two professions just keep one-upping each other for eternity...

    That would be a grave mistake, ranger does not need a sustain spec, guys try to understand for people would be far too easy to come up with some broken kitten if a sustain build would be added to ranger....remember what happened with boonbeast and druid bunker before it, nothing good ever comes from having tank sustain builds

    Look at ele, massacrated by nerfs etc etc, this community hates tank/sustain/dmg builds and right now ranger balance hangs on a thread, any more sustain nerfs and the class will collapse in WvW also

    NO to tanks builds, ranger needs non-projectile AoE dmg burst with non absurd cast time , without much sustain because rangers who want to play frontline tanks can still give a go to soulbeast, tweaking the immobilize build is enough to get something working to have fun at least

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Arheundel.6451 said:

    That would be a grave mistake, ranger does not need a sustain spec, guys try to understand for people would be far too easy to come up with some broken kitten if a sustain build would be added to ranger....remember what happened with boonbeast and druid bunker before it, nothing good ever comes from having tank sustain builds

    Look at ele, massacrated by nerfs etc etc, this community hates tank/sustain/dmg builds and right now ranger balance hangs on a thread, any more sustain nerfs and the class will collapse in WvW also

    NO to tanks builds, ranger needs non-projectile AoE dmg burst with non absurd cast time , without much sustain because rangers who want to play frontline tanks can still give a go to soulbeast, tweaking the immobilize build is enough to get something working to have fun at least

    Elite specs released to this point can roughly get seperated into 3 different types: dps, support, bruiser
    All classes to this point got access to 2 of these different playstyles. Some examples:

    • engineer: bruiser (scrapper) and dps (holosmith)
    • warrior: dps (berserker) and bruiser (spellbreaker)
    • ranger: support (druid) and dps (soulbeast)

    What ranger is lacking is the bruiser elite spec, something that enhances this class' survivability and adds more crowd control to it. My best friend mained ranged for years now and she is desperately waiting for this bruiser elite spec to happen. It is the most logical next step for ranger at this point.

    Of course, the spec will still add AoE damage. Bruiser elite specs tend to have alot of cleaving attacks. Just look at daredevil (thief's bruiser spec) or scrapper. But it will most likely not have as much damage potential as soulbeast has, since CC and durability should be the primary functions.

    Anet already did 2 expansions which added bruiser specs to classes. We have no reason to assume that they will simply stop creating bruiser specs.

  • @Arheundel.6451 said:

    @Gotejjeken.1267 said:
    If you want the next e-spec to be pet focused, I'm going to go out on a limb and say you haven't been here long. Ranger's have been getting wrecked in terms of pet viability since at least late 2012-early 2013. Even in PvE we had dev's back in the day saying that pets could solo entire Dungeons and nerfing them there as well.

    That's my biggest question though, where do pets fit if they aren't going to be focused upon and we already have SB? For Druid/core they are super handicaps in competitive play if you don't take BM (i.e. are a condi-Druid). You can't even make pets short-term use things / invulnerable and/or only provide buffs--in other words just have them replace spirits--as dev's also thought THOSE were too OP and removed their ability to move.

    We all know it though, Ranger needs a sustain spec. Need something to help large scale, but I myself don't ever see that happening as it not only violates Anet's unwritten 'lore rules', it would open the door for thieves to also get a sustain spec. If that happens, well the two professions just keep one-upping each other for eternity...

    That would be a grave mistake, ranger does not need a sustain spec, guys try to understand for people would be far too easy to come up with some broken kitten if a sustain build would be added to ranger....remember what happened with boonbeast and druid bunker before it, nothing good ever comes from having tank sustain builds

    Look at ele, massacrated by nerfs etc etc, this community hates tank/sustain/dmg builds and right now ranger balance hangs on a thread, any more sustain nerfs and the class will collapse in WvW also

    NO to tanks builds, ranger needs non-projectile AoE dmg burst with non absurd cast time , without much sustain because rangers who want to play frontline tanks can still give a go to soulbeast, tweaking the immobilize build is enough to get something working to have fun at least

    A melee AoE burst without sustain? That doesn't sound too fun as you get CC'd before you can pull it off...

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    • ranger: support (druid) and dps (soulbeast)

    I think soulbeast have more than enough survivability to have a bruiser playstyle, thought. The spec is far from being frail when you consider defensive pets like black bear, the various stances and the natural survivability of the ranger.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 21, 2021

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    • ranger: support (druid) and dps (soulbeast)

    I think soulbeast have more than enough survivability to have a bruiser playstyle, thought. The spec is far from being frail when you consider defensive pets like black bear, the various stances and the natural survivability of the ranger.

    Having defensive tools doesn't make you automatically a bruiser elite spec, tho.

    Holosmith also does have quite some defense and sustain in their arsenal: heat therapy, photon wall, spectrum shield, hard light arena, light density amplifier, prismatic converter, crystal configuration: eclipse.
    The reason why this elite spec has these tools is not to make it a bruiser, it has been pretty clear from Anet that the intention of this spec is to be a dps machine in the first place.

    These tools are there to enable holosmith to function as a melee dps spec. If you are going into melee to deal damage, you need some survivability to enable you to do so. Unlike a spec like Deadeye, which can attack from afar, this spec has to get close to danger to pull of their damage numbers. And you can't deal damage if you are dead immediately, hence why this class gets these tools. If you are familiar with the terms of League of Legends: holosmith is a skirmisher, a melee damage machine that has defense built into their kit to buy them time to do their thing.

    Looking at soulbeast, I think it is the same for them. They are melee dps machines (dagger as a melee weapon added to them just like sword to holosmith) and they get tools to enable them doing so.

    It's hard for me to imagine that soulbeast was not intended as a dps spec if it straight up outdamages dps specs like holosmith and berserker, which are clearly intended as high damage options for their classes.

    Some more evidence I see in their design:

    • Elite spec weapon: Bruiser specs are usually heavily CC focused, including their weapons. Scrapper, spellbreaker, daredevil are examples of bruiser specs which are clearly intended as these and they all have hard CC located on their elite spec weapons. Soulbeast doesn't have a single CC on their mainhand dagger at all, it is entirely about damage.
    • Minor traits: Both the master and grandmaster minor trait are entirely damage focused (dealing more damage while you have fury, dealing more damage to targets you disabled)
    • Beast attacks: There is a wide array of different pets, therefore you can get many different effects. Secondary effects of the fusion can vary, but one thing is consistent. Fusing with a pet will always give you access to another ability that has the primary function of dealing damage. You can get supportive fusions, tanky fusions, more damage fusions. But they all will deal another damage ability.
    • Defensive mechanics: I already mentioned that holosmith adds more defense to the spec. If we are looking at the defensive options for soulbeasts, we see that they share quite alot of mechanics with defensive mechanics of other dps specs. Examples: eternal bond | dead or alive, dolyak stance | spectrum shield | "rise!"

    You definitely can create a bruiser type build out of soulbeast, but that doesn't mean that it is intended as one. Scrapper is also used in support builds (infamous heal scrapper in WvW), but it is not a support spec like scourge, druid, etc. Anet has been pretty clear that scrapper is intended as a bruiser. So I also always advocate for a proper support elite spec for engineer next. It is the most logical course for these classes.

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    • ranger: support (druid) and dps (soulbeast)

    I think soulbeast have more than enough survivability to have a bruiser playstyle, thought. The spec is far from being frail when you consider defensive pets like black bear, the various stances and the natural survivability of the ranger.

    Having defensive tools doesn't make you automatically a bruiser elite spec, tho.

    Holosmith also does have quite some defense and sustain in their arsenal: heat therapy, photon wall, spectrum shield, hard light arena, light density amplifier, prismatic converter, crystal configuration: eclipse.
    The reason why this elite spec has these tools is not to make it a bruiser, it has been pretty clear from Anet that the intention of this spec is to be a dps machine in the first place.

    These tools are there to enable holosmith to function as a melee dps spec. If you are going into melee to deal damage, you need some survivability to enable you to do so. Unlike a spec like Deadeye, which can attack from afar, this spec has to get close to danger to pull of their damage numbers. And you can't deal damage if you are dead immediately, hence why this class gets these tools. If you are familiar with the terms of League of Legends: holosmith is a skirmisher, a melee damage machine that has defense built into their kit to buy them time to do their thing.

    Looking at soulbeast, I think it is the same for them. They are melee dps machines (dagger as a melee weapon added to them just like sword to holosmith) and they get tools to enable them doing so.

    It's hard for me to imagine that soulbeast was not intended as a dps spec if it straight up outdamages dps specs like holosmith and berserker, which are clearly intended as high damage options for their classes.

    Some more evidence I see in their design:

    • Elite spec weapon: Bruiser specs are usually heavily CC focused, including their weapons. Scrapper, spellbreaker, daredevil are examples of bruiser specs which are clearly intended as these and they all have hard CC located on their elite spec weapons. Soulbeast doesn't have a single CC on their mainhand dagger at all, it is entirely about damage.
    • Minor traits: Both the master and grandmaster minor trait are entirely damage focused (dealing more damage while you have fury, dealing more damage to targets you disabled)
    • Beast attacks: There is a wide array of different pets, therefore you can get many different effects. Secondary effects of the fusion can vary, but one thing is consistent. Fusing with a pet will always give you access to another ability that has the primary function of dealing damage. You can get supportive fusions, tanky fusions, more damage fusions. But they all will deal another damage ability.
    • Defensive mechanics: I already mentioned that holosmith adds more defense to the spec. If we are looking at the defensive options for soulbeasts, we see that they share quite alot of mechanics with defensive mechanics of other dps specs. Examples: eternal bond | dead or alive, dolyak stance | spectrum shield | "rise!"

    You forget that rangers have access to Longbow on core, if you introduce a bruiser spec, you'd be able to be a powerhouse at melee range but still be a threat at range with the right stats/traits like MM-WS-new elite line....let's not give the criers more ammunitions to cry nerfs on ranger; should that happen soulbeast/core ranger and in part druid would suffer from the dip in DPS of longbow.

    I repeat again : Ranger does not need anymore sustain...you know the GW2 community as much as I do..the second you introduce a sustain spec for rangers...it's the second you destroy the class, I am lucky...we are all lucky that ranger is still strong and viable despite the nerf campaigns about boonbeast and druid bunker, the class simply won't survive a third nerf campaign, it already falls behind in PvP, the class is still enjoyable as roamer/harasser in WvW and I want to leave at that

    People should not expect to play a longbow warrior 2.0, the class was meant to be a duellist/survivalist...not a frontline tank and boonbeast proved us all that it can be easily abused, it wasn't fun to fight boonbeast and we're all glad is gone.

    We can already play an excellent bruiser with core ranger...we don't need core ranger 2.0

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Arheundel.6451 said:

    You forget that rangers have access to Longbow on core, if you introduce a bruiser spec, you'd be able to be a powerhouse at melee range but still be a threat at range with the right stats/traits like MM-WS-new elite line....let's not give the criers more ammunitions to cry nerfs on ranger; should that happen soulbeast/core ranger and in part druid would suffer from the dip in DPS of longbow.

    There are other ways to prevent something like this to happen and still release a bruiser elite spec. For example, Anet could install anti-synergy with the longbow as a weapon into the elite spec.

    Which isn't something unheard of, in fact, we already have cases of anti-synergy between elite spec and weapon in the game. Scrapper generates barrier from all strike damage their deal and get no benefits out of conditions. With this, scrapper has a natural anti-synergy with engineer's core pistols, which deal almost no power damage at all.

    Through this design, scrapper builds all are relegated towards power builds, so you don't see any condi bunker scrappers.
    Anti synergy can get put into the game to prevent certain combinations to take over.

    People should not expect to play a longbow warrior 2.0, the class was meant to be a duellist/survivalist...not a frontline tank and boonbeast proved us all that it can be easily abused, it wasn't fun to fight boonbeast and we're all glad is gone.

    No one is saying that such a bruiser elite spec has to function like boonbeast, you know? And the argument that rangers were not supposed to be tanks, but duelists.... the entire point of elite specs is opening up playstyles for the classes which they couldn't fill before. Hence why scourge added support features for necromancer, deadeye gave thief long range attacks, etc.

    What you "expect" a ranger to be doesn't matter here. Anet has set themselves the goal that all classes will be able to fill all of these 3 roles (dps, tank, support) through elite specs. With what I have laid out, a bruiser spec is the natural next step for ranger.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    You definitely can create a bruiser type build out of soulbeast, but that doesn't mean that it is intended as one. Scrapper is also used in support builds (infamous heal scrapper in WvW), but it is not a support spec like scourge, druid, etc. Anet has been pretty clear that scrapper is intended as a bruiser. So I also always advocate for a proper support elite spec for engineer next. It is the most logical course for these classes.

    That's what I don't buy.

    I don't think building an e-spec in a seemingly different direction than what players think is the "right" one is something that ANet don't intend. Soulbeast can be used as a DPS, a bruiser (with control and survivability) and even a support. Claiming Soulbeast is a "DPS" e-spec is arguable, e-specs are meant to be versatile not pigeonholed into a single "role".

    I think ANet envision a gameplay at the basis for e-specs then expand toward different direction to give diversity. Only looking at what is initially envisioned is like looking at the tree (an oak) that hide the forest and then saying that there is only oaks in the forest.

    If we look at the reaper, you'll define it as a "DPS", yet he got plenty CCs on it's weapon (be it chill or pull) as well as minor trait and he even used to have a defensive minor. By your definition it should be labelled as a bruiser, yet most won't go past the single minor that is now a "dps" trait and the fact that the spec is mostly used for damage. I mean, half the traits revolve around control and sustain, how can it be a "DPS"?

    Soulbeast is not very different, sure it look like it's oriented toward damage but how can we ignore that it is heavy on self-sustain and generous on support? I mean, Fresh reinforcement, unstoppable union, second skin, eternal bond, leader of the pack and predator's cunning, those are not what I would call "dps" traits.

    Deadeye? What is Deadeye? it's minors have self sustain, damage reduction and damage increase. It's major have as much support then damage and self sustain. It's weapon have control, damage and defense. It's stolen skills offer support, control, debuff and damage. Even it's utility offer a variety of option. So what is it? 95% of the players will say "DPS", I'd say "support", someone else following your definition of a bruiser could say "bruiser".

    I think it's just shortsighted to put the e-specs into boxes and then think that there is some kind of logic that will determine the box of the next e-spec.

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    That's what I don't buy.

    I don't think building an e-spec in a seemingly different direction than what players think is the "right" one is something that ANet don't intend. Soulbeast can be used as a DPS, a bruiser (with control and survivability) and even a support. Claiming Soulbeast is a "DPS" e-spec is arguable, e-specs are meant to be versatile not pigeonholed into a single "role".

    What I meant is that elite specs are designed around a primary role.
    Yes, there are quite some elite specs which are very versatile. On the other hand, there are also elite specs which are kinda restricted. I don't think I saw berserker ever used in a different way than as a pure dps spec.

    If we look at the reaper, you'll define it as a "DPS", yet he got plenty CCs on it's weapon (be it chill or pull) as well as minor trait and he even used to have a defensive minor. By your definition it should be labelled as a bruiser, yet most won't go past the single minor that is now a "dps" trait and the fact that the spec is mostly used for damage. I mean, half the traits revolve around control and sustain, how can it be a "DPS"?

    Reaper, in my opinion, is a special case. Yes, it started out as a pretty bruiser-esque elite spec. What made me think that Anet intends it as a dps spec now are the changes which they made to the spec over the time.

    They started removing durability from the spec in favour of more damage. There was a trait that reduced damage you take from chilled targets, now it is changed to give more damage against these. They increased the shroud degen in the elite spec, but now you can get bonus ferocity while you are using the reaper's shroud.

    Soulbeast is not very different, sure it look like it's oriented toward damage but how can we ignore that it is heavy on self-sustain and generous on support? I mean, Fresh reinforcement, unstoppable union, second skin, eternal bond, leader of the pack and predator's cunning, those are not what I would call "dps" traits.

    I already mentioned this stuff and compared it to holosmith. Holosmith is heavily dps focused as an elite spec, yet it also has alot of defensive traits in their system, but this is to enable them as a melee dps spec.

    I think it's just shortsighted to put the e-specs into boxes and then think that there is some kind of logic that will determine the box of the next e-spec.

    Fair enough, I just noticed that this point of view also tends to showcase what kind of elite specs I would love to see in the next set perfectly. I also mentioned, my best friend mains ranger for years now and she wants a bruiser elite spec badly.

    I am personally an engineer main since launch and am looking for a proper support elite spec. Scrapper may be used in support builds, but this build even goes as far as accepting that you have dead traits in your build. Also I would enjoy an elite spec that enables me to be a meta healer for PvE endgame content like raids and strike missions.
    Currently we aren't, because we are lacking the necessary boon support. Our healing is sufficient, but not having the ability to share 25 might to the team nor having alacrity or quickness to share makes us pretty undesired. On top of healing scrapper being literally the only healing build which deals absolutely no damage at all, since you are camping the med kit.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    What I meant is that elite specs are designed around a primary role.
    Yes, there are quite some elite specs which are very versatile. On the other hand, there are also elite specs which are kinda restricted. I don't think I saw berserker ever used in a different way than as a pure dps spec.

    Most warrior specs are more often than not used as support thought, Berserker is no exception. I mean, who didn't know about the condi bannerslave berserker (High condi damage throught scorched earth/shattering blow/flaming fury along with great might gen and, well, Banners)?

    I already mentioned this stuff and compared it to holosmith. Holosmith is heavily dps focused as an elite spec, yet it also has alot of defensive traits in their system, but this is to enable them as a melee dps spec.

    Core ranger already had the tools to enable players to use it as a melee dps spec why add more into a spec that would be a "DPS" one.

    Fair enough, I just noticed that this point of view also tends to showcase what kind of elite specs I would love to see in the next set perfectly. I also mentioned, my best friend mains ranger for years now and she wants a bruiser elite spec badly.

    I understand the point but what more do you expect from a ranger bruiser e-spec? I mean, have your main mechanic safe while meleeing? That's what beast mode do. Have more toughness? Soulbeast already grant you 200 from pet, 150 from pack alpha and if you're not happy with that there is another 180 from signet of stone. Damage resistance? Invuln? Stout pet, Dolyak stance, Moa stance for prot... etc. If you want to play bruiser as a soulbeast you certainly have all the tools (and more) for that.

    You can very well make an e-spec traitline with minor traits like "7-10% incoming damage reduction", give the thing a shield that summon a turtle shadow for 3-4s of prot and have everything else oriented toward damage and then exclaim "sure! that's the bruiser", but what would be the point? Would that really make the spec more of a bruiser than soulbeast already is? You'd probably easily end up dishing more damage out of this spec than out of soulbeast, would that be "OK"?

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    Most warrior specs are more often than not used as support thought, Berserker is no exception. I mean, who didn't know about the condi bannerslave berserker (High condi damage throught scorched earth/shattering blow/flaming fury along with great might gen and, well, Banners)?

    I don't consider this to be a support. As you mention, it is basically a condi dps spec. And additionally uses buffs then to enhance the damage of their team as well.
    I am using party benefitting buffs with holosmith as well, for example by using hard light arena. Still consider myself a damage dealer in that scenario, even if I bring some group buffs.

    I understand the point but what more do you expect from a ranger bruiser e-spec? I mean, have your main mechanic safe while meleeing? That's what beast mode do. Have more toughness? Soulbeast already grant you 200 from pet, 150 from pack alpha and if you're not happy with that there is another 180 from signet of stone. Damage resistance? Invuln? Stout pet, Dolyak stance, Moa stance for prot... etc. If you want to play bruiser as a soulbeast you certainly have all the tools (and more) for that.

    You can very well make an e-spec traitline with minor traits like "7-10% incoming damage reduction", give the thing a shield that summon a turtle shadow for 3-4s of prot and have everything else oriented toward damage and then exclaim "sure! that's the bruiser", but what would be the point? Would that really make the spec more of a bruiser than soulbeast already is? You'd probably easily end up dishing more damage out of this spec than out of soulbeast, would that be "OK"?

    I am expecting what is requested by alot of people on this forum already: a hommage to the infamous bunny thumper from guild wars 1.
    Give ranger a hammer with CC abilities (mostly focused on knockdown), physical skills which also enhance their CC and defensive mechanics like blocks, for example.

    Playstyle could resolve around the ranger CCing the enemy while their pets are attacking them. Maybe could build in features like having both pets out for a set time, while they have a stat malus on themselves to not make it overbearing.

    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 22, 2021

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

    A nature offensive mage.

    Inspired from: Leshy warden

    Mechanism: No longer get access to the common pets. Can only choose among 5 generic pets (Leshys who are basically bodiless nature spirits) who deal clone level of damage, are nigh impervious to damage but weak to CCs. (This way you'd actually have something that survive in WvW zergs).
    1 pet per archetype with a F2 having a passive effect on the ranger (same attribute bonus that the soulbeast gain while in beast mode) and an active removing the passive (basically it would work like a signet or a nature spirit). Active should probably be different from the Soulbeast form F2, thought.

    Weapon: Scepter.
    AA: Needle: throw needles poisoning your foes and dealing damage. (like elementalist's earth scepter AA but with poison instead of bleed)
    Brambles: AoE on short CD applying bleed on first strike and then applying more instance of bleed each time a foe move within the AoE (can trigger on the same foe only once every second).
    Pestilence: Deal damage and apply poison. Add an instance of poison for each different conditions on foe.

    Utility: Venom (Effects only shared with pet unless it's traited)

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    Most warrior specs are more often than not used as support thought, Berserker is no exception. I mean, who didn't know about the condi bannerslave berserker (High condi damage throught scorched earth/shattering blow/flaming fury along with great might gen and, well, Banners)?

    I don't consider this to be a support. As you mention, it is basically a condi dps spec. And additionally uses buffs then to enhance the damage of their team as well.
    I am using party benefitting buffs with holosmith as well, for example by using hard light arena. Still consider myself a damage dealer in that scenario, even if I bring some group buffs.

    I understand the point but what more do you expect from a ranger bruiser e-spec? I mean, have your main mechanic safe while meleeing? That's what beast mode do. Have more toughness? Soulbeast already grant you 200 from pet, 150 from pack alpha and if you're not happy with that there is another 180 from signet of stone. Damage resistance? Invuln? Stout pet, Dolyak stance, Moa stance for prot... etc. If you want to play bruiser as a soulbeast you certainly have all the tools (and more) for that.

    You can very well make an e-spec traitline with minor traits like "7-10% incoming damage reduction", give the thing a shield that summon a turtle shadow for 3-4s of prot and have everything else oriented toward damage and then exclaim "sure! that's the bruiser", but what would be the point? Would that really make the spec more of a bruiser than soulbeast already is? You'd probably easily end up dishing more damage out of this spec than out of soulbeast, would that be "OK"?

    I am expecting what is requested by alot of people on this forum already: a hommage to the infamous bunny thumper from guild wars 1.
    Give ranger a hammer with CC abilities (mostly focused on knockdown), physical skills which also enhance their CC and defensive mechanics like blocks, for example.

    Playstyle could resolve around the ranger CCing the enemy while their pets are attacking them. Maybe could build in features like having both pets out for a set time, while they have a stat malus on themselves to not make it overbearing.

    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

    Forgot about drawbacks yes...this time around the drawbacks must be implemented from the start to avoid overnerfing of core specs in the end

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

    A nature offensive mage.

    Druid already does that, it's the "ranger version" of mage, some games call it shaman, others call it druid but it's a nature mage. All we need is either a 2 hand CC melee weapon with defensive physical or preparation AoE ranged

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Arheundel.6451 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

    A nature offensive mage.

    Druid already does that, it's the "ranger version" of mage, some games call it shaman, others call it druid but it's a nature mage. All we need is either a 2 hand CC melee weapon with defensive physical or preparation AoE ranged

    It's poor at doing this job. Beside, granted how player hate on CCs at the moment they might very well be nerfed to the ground in a year or 2.

  • Arheundel.6451Arheundel.6451 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Arheundel.6451 said:

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

    A nature offensive mage.

    Druid already does that, it's the "ranger version" of mage, some games call it shaman, others call it druid but it's a nature mage. All we need is either a 2 hand CC melee weapon with defensive physical or preparation AoE ranged

    It's poor at doing this job. Beside, granted how player hate on CCs at the moment they might very well be nerfed to the ground in a year or 2.

    This community hates on everything everytime, although it would be great if Anet for instance starts nerfing the actual elite and not the core spec. You can explain what you mean by nature mage then

    -A wise man once said- "Fight cheese with cheese or be cheesed in return, mind not those who will accuse you of being a cheese as they like cheese themselves"

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Arheundel.6451 said:
    This community hates on everything everytime, although it would be great if Anet for instance starts nerfing the actual elite and not the core spec. You can explain what you mean by nature mage then

    I was working on it, I'm on my way editing the post talking about "offensive nature mage".

  • Kodama.6453Kodama.6453 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 22, 2021

    @Dadnir.5038 said:

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    Now let me ask you: what do you expect from the next elite spec?

    A nature offensive mage.

    Inspired from: Leshy warden

    Mechanism: No longer get access to the common pets. Can only choose among 5 generic pets (Leshys who are basically bodiless nature spirits) who deal clone level of damage, are nigh impervious to damage but weak to CCs. (This way you'd actually have something that survive in WvW zergs).
    1 pet per archetype with a F2 having a passive effect on the ranger (same attribute bonus that the soulbeast gain while in beast mode) and an active removing the passive (basically it would work like a signet or a nature spirit). Active should probably be different from the Soulbeast form F2, thought.

    Weapon: Scepter.
    AA: Needle: throw needles poisoning your foes and dealing damage. (like elementalist's earth scepter AA but with poison instead of bleed)
    Brambles: AoE on short CD applying bleed on first strike and then applying more instance of bleed each time a foe move within the AoE (can trigger on the same foe only once every second).
    Pestilence: Deal damage and apply poison. Add an instance of poison for each different conditions on foe.

    Utility: Venom (Effects only shared with pet unless it's traited)

    You said that a bruiser spec wouldn't bring something new to the table, since soulbeast can already get played as a bruiser...
    But I think the same argument applies to your suggestion here.

    Theme: The entire vines and thorns theme is already used in druid, I kinda doubt that they will repeat that.

    Mechanism: You even acknowledge that the mechanic is similar to soulbeast in giving you stat boni based on the pet you have chosen...

    Weapon: Seems like the intention is a sole focus on condition damage. Ranger already got a condition heavy weapon with soulbeast, dagger. Why repeat that and why especially repeat that with the exact same condition focus as dagger (bleeding and poison)??

    Utilities: I actually would have loved to see venoms on ranger. Soulbeast was a perfect opportunity for that in my opinion, but they ended up with stances. Now I think that the chances for venoms are really slim. Their gameplay is already there... vulture stance and one wolf pack basically function like venoms already, except that they have a fixed duration instead of applying to x number of next attacks (which works better with rangers multi-hit skills anyway). Even the share function of venoms is already there thanks to the trait that shares stances with allies.

    This spec does not give me anything new for ranger. Theme, mechanics, weapon niche, all is already there in ranger thanks to their elite specs druid and soulbeast.

  • Dadnir.5038Dadnir.5038 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Kodama.6453 said:
    Theme: The entire vines and thorns theme is already used in druid, I kinda doubt that they will repeat that.

    You realise that vine and thorns aren't a 'theme' but part of the ranger's abilities? Ranger is all about animals and plants. I just push things even more toward plant than druid, that's all.

    Should I bring down the bunny thumper idea in the same fashion than you?

    I am expecting what is requested by alot of people on this forum already: a hommage to the infamous bunny thumper from guild wars 1.
    Give ranger a hammer with CC abilities (mostly focused on knockdown), physical skills which also enhance their CC

    Druid already focus on CC he got a whole 3 major trait dedicated to this idea, 2 inbuilt CCs in the avatar, 1 CC on staff and 3 glyphs with CCs. "I kinda doubt that they will repeat that."

    and defensive mechanics like blocks, for example.

    Staff convert projectiles in healing, close enough.

    Playstyle could resolve around the ranger CCing the enemy while their pets are attacking them.

    Not very different from druid. CC then hit from afar while healing your pet. Close enough.

    Maybe could build in features like having both pets out for a set time, while they have a stat malus on themselves to not make it overbearing.

    Sure, so that you got locked out of pet even more in large scale fight. In small scale fight players simply hate being killed by AI which is why druid got it's pets stat nerfed, If you badly want 2 pet at the same time, hyena is there.

    So, I got a plant mage that you feel close to druid in the visual effects it use, while you suggest something close to druid in what it effectively does: CC. Are we even? I do think my suggestion is more likely simply because I do not step onto the gameplay of another e-spec.

    NB.: The argument about "plant" being a druid thematic is like saying elementalist next e-spec shouldn't use fire, water, air and earth as attunment because there is already 2 e-spec that do this.