Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Is there a server that *likes* rangers?


Laurencius.9258

Recommended Posts

actually you cant force others to accept you. :/ unless you decide to be the commander and lead, so you can choose your own composition.

got to meet ppl half way here.

i.e. people demand a lot from me to open tag, but i do not, because i end up lecturing how easy it is to beat the opposition if we just zerg.

also if the situation is hopeless, and i let things go because the ppl around me wont zerg up, you then get blamed for the loss of x y z when they wont even be on you? people should command and see how difficult it is fighting many.

so i just run my small hidden tag. i know what we can do and face so, we dont get stressed over outnumbered situation and has been pretty pleasant.

still many demand open tag, and i just say no.

although as how i run things, i dont mind a ranger as long as it has smokescale. no smokescale, no slot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Laurencius.9258 said:I've given up playing my ranger. No guild will accept someone who plays a ranger, anet refuses to make them balanced, and I'm tired of being badmouthed.

Rangers are incredibly powerful in their own field. Small scale/roaming is their zone. They're one of the best classes at it. Sorry to burst your bubble, but most guilded groups are going to badmouth anyone who isn't running Scourge/FB/Rev. Why don't you take a thief and try to run with a guilded blob, see how thats received. Does that mean thief needs to be balanced? NO. Because its good at what it does. If you want to blob, don't take classes like ranger or thief that suck at it. Anet aren't going to buff a class thats already incredibly strong in small scale so people can blob with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Knighthonor.4061" said:how about buffing Druid to be healers again

The problem (in a direct sense) is not that the Druid is "bad" it is rather that everything about it is built for PvE raids (much like Zinkz is talking about above). If they are to skill-split it, they'd have to split everything and if they do that they may as well redesign all its mechanics again in a way that is befitting more modes at once. The glyphs were nerfed in favour of spirits. So in PvE most people use spirits but their mechanics with HP makes them instantly disappear to splash damage in WvW.

The special mechanic with the healing form is based on a 10-10 interval (and the ebb-and-flow design of it is cool) the problem is that it also requires generation to fill the bar during the ebb and has a strong limit through decay in the flow. That makes it very problematic for WvW because if you do not have ample things to heal (or take ample damage yourself) it will take longer than 10s to fill the bar and if you get controlled while in form you will lose uptime from your decay. So in PvE raids it may have close to a 10-10 uptime but in WvW it is often closer 20-5 making it inherently far worse due to the chosen mechanics.

They could easily improve the uptime alot or change the uptime to energy decreasing with casts and much of the problems would be solved, allowing you to camp the form far more and thus not be as limited by the ebb of having to rebuild energy. The Druid was initially a pretty well designed class. It wasn't necessarily a better healer then than now, but it had far more mechanics that were useful in both PvE and PvP and only the ones useful in PvP are what Anet targetted when they went to redesign the class to be "more" of a healer. They made it less of everything else without making it more of a healer. It doesn't need to heal more to be more appreciated in WvW (in fact, making it heal more would likely have no impact at all on its use). It needs spirits/glyphs redesigned and/or rebalanced and it needs the energy mechanic to be more evenly effective in different situations (control, active time on target etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont give up playing what you want. Rangers can be very useful when not being in squads (you can easily follow the tag outside the squad) and pewpew stray/overextending scourges or weavers, you can barrage aoe spots weavers or revs cant, you can CC people so others can pick em off easier.You dont need a squad for that. Just learn how to move along the tag, anticipate enemy movement, and the rest is easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Laurencius.9258" said:It's expensive to randomly change servers whenever other players harass me for being a ranger. Does anyone know a server that actually wants rangers for WVW? Thanks in advance!

OK first thing first, I should answer and fix something "There is no server who wants ranger for ZERG play in WvW" If you use ranger for dueling or roaming you might be just fine everywhere. The reason players harrass you for being ranger (although they shouldn't harrass you but tell you nicely) because ranger doesn't bring much to the table when it comes to zerg play.Another reason is the purpose of squad and subparty is to boonshare (especially stability), while ranger doesn't need boonshare. Soulbeast are boonsufficient by yourself thus you don't need to be in squad to function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@subversiontwo.7501 said:

@"Knighthonor.4061" said:how about buffing Druid to be healers again

The problem (in a direct sense) is not that the Druid is "bad" it is rather that everything about it is built for PvE raids (much like Zinkz is talking about above). If they are to skill-split it, they'd have to split everything and if they do that they may as well redesign all its mechanics again in a way that is befitting more modes at once. The glyphs were nerfed in favour of spirits. So in PvE most people use spirits but their mechanics with HP makes them instantly disappear to splash damage in WvW.

The special mechanic with the healing form is based on a 10-10 interval (and the ebb-and-flow design of it is cool) the problem is that it also requires generation to fill the bar during the ebb and has a strong limit through decay in the flow. That makes it very problematic for WvW because if you do not have ample things to heal (or take ample damage yourself) it will take longer than 10s to fill the bar and if you get controlled while in form you will lose uptime from your decay. So in PvE raids it may have close to a 10-10 uptime but in WvW it is often closer 20-5 making it inherently far worse due to the chosen mechanics.

They could easily improve the uptime alot or change the uptime to energy decreasing with casts and much of the problems would be solved, allowing you to camp the form far more and thus not be as limited by the ebb of having to rebuild energy. The Druid was initially a pretty well designed class. It wasn't necessarily a better healer then than now, but it had far more mechanics that were useful in both PvE and PvP and only the ones useful in PvP are what Anet targetted when they went to redesign the class to be "more" of a healer. They made it less of everything else without making it more of a healer. It doesn't need to heal more to be more appreciated in WvW (in fact, making it heal more would likely have no impact at all on its use). It needs spirits/glyphs redesigned and/or rebalanced and it needs the energy mechanic to be more evenly effective in different situations (control, active time on target etc.).

For me when Hot came out I was doing well healing with Druid in WvW. I only stopped playing to focus on my Revenant main. Came back and it was trash. I didn't use Spirits when I played. I had Staffs and Glyphs which could heal allies and blind foes alike. The Staff had projectile protection and was a water field to blast with staff for some good resources regen to transform. Yeah the Auto was bad and other skills were a bit lame except the ranged CC was good for Melee range ally fightersBut the burst AoE heals from Druid was top of the line at first, and the evasion on staff was great for self defense when focused on by enemies, and it blast. But that was nerfed into the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@Laurencius.9258 said:It's expensive to randomly change servers whenever other players harass me for being a ranger. Does anyone know a server that actually wants rangers for WVW? Thanks in advance!

You want a place where rangers aren't scorned? Especially soulbeasts? Come to SoS.. oh wait we're full! :( But you could come to the linked server, (currently SoR). People that scorn rangers with zergs have a faulty way of thinking. Yes I agree that if all you want is to go out and fight in the field forever then you don't want a big squad of rangers... but they DO (at least mine does) a huge amount of damage to a lot of people at once (despite what non ranger players say), and cleaving downs is a great function from the outside of the fight. I also have a decent amount of survivability.... when I'm not targeted that is! lol People see Platinum and above and love to mob them for some reason.

Let's move to the other parts of WvW. Believe it or not WvW is not all about the fights. We actually capture towers and Keeps. Inside these structures is siege, and even with the nasty changes ANet has done to make it harder to 'see' over the wall I can still take down siege that's hitting our group. Add a few more rangers and siege doesn't last more than a minute or two. We are able to get in quicker and alive. Remove all the rangers and try to rely on an ele or two and tell me how well that goes. Ele's can't range like rangers can, they can't fire into a group and hit 5 targets at once and so on... and they can't put out the sustained damage that my ranger can.

If you're good at ranger then nobody I know on my server is going to deny you entry into a squad. Look me up in game and we can chat more if you are serious. Move to SoR then if SoS ever opens you can move here. :)

My ign: Tim Pearces Hearts aka balthazzarr.1349

My ranger is the only class I have been able to successful solo a tower with. Never underestimate the class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@XatraZaytrax.2601 said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@Laurencius.9258 said:It's expensive to randomly change servers whenever other players harass me for being a ranger. Does anyone know a server that actually wants rangers for WVW? Thanks in advance!

You want a place where rangers aren't scorned? Especially soulbeasts? Come to SoS.. oh wait we're full! :( But you could come to the linked server, (currently SoR). People that scorn rangers with zergs have a faulty way of thinking. Yes I agree that if all you want is to go out and fight in the field forever then you don't want a big squad of rangers... but they DO (at least mine does) a huge amount of damage to a lot of people at once (despite what non ranger players say), and cleaving downs is a great function from the outside of the fight. I also have a decent amount of survivability.... when I'm not targeted that is! lol People see Platinum and above and love to mob them for some reason.

Let's move to the other parts of WvW. Believe it or not WvW is not all about the fights. We actually capture towers and Keeps. Inside these structures is siege, and even with the nasty changes ANet has done to make it harder to 'see' over the wall I can still take down siege that's hitting our group. Add a few more rangers and siege doesn't last more than a minute or two. We are able to get in quicker and alive. Remove all the rangers and try to rely on an ele or two and tell me how well that goes. Ele's can't range like rangers can, they can't fire into a group and hit 5 targets at once and so on... and they can't put out the sustained damage that my ranger can.

If you're good at ranger then nobody I know on my server is going to deny you entry into a squad. Look me up in game and we can chat more if you are serious. Move to SoR then if SoS ever opens you can move here. :)

My ign: Tim Pearces Hearts aka balthazzarr.1349

My ranger is the only class I have been able to successful solo a tower with. Never underestimate the class.

I have soloed a tower lord on all classes. What you say is a player issue, not a class issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Voltekka.2375 said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@Laurencius.9258 said:It's expensive to randomly change servers whenever other players harass me for being a ranger. Does anyone know a server that actually wants rangers for WVW? Thanks in advance!

You want a place where rangers aren't scorned? Especially soulbeasts? Come to SoS.. oh wait we're full! :( But you could come to the linked server, (currently SoR). People that scorn rangers with zergs have a faulty way of thinking. Yes I agree that if all you want is to go out and fight in the field forever then you don't want a big squad of rangers... but they DO (at least mine does) a huge amount of damage to a lot of people at once (despite what non ranger players say), and cleaving downs is a great function from the outside of the fight. I also have a decent amount of survivability.... when I'm not targeted that is! lol People see Platinum and above and love to mob them for some reason.

Let's move to the other parts of WvW. Believe it or not WvW is not all about the fights. We actually capture towers and Keeps. Inside these structures is siege, and even with the nasty changes ANet has done to make it harder to 'see' over the wall I can still take down siege that's hitting our group. Add a few more rangers and siege doesn't last more than a minute or two. We are able to get in quicker and alive. Remove all the rangers and try to rely on an ele or two and tell me how well that goes. Ele's can't range like rangers can, they can't fire into a group and hit 5 targets at once and so on... and they can't put out the sustained damage that my ranger can.

If you're good at ranger then nobody I know on my server is going to deny you entry into a squad. Look me up in game and we can chat more if you are serious. Move to SoR then if SoS ever opens you can move here. :)

My ign: Tim Pearces Hearts aka balthazzarr.1349

My ranger is the only class I have been able to successful solo a tower with. Never underestimate the class.

I have soloed a tower lord on all classes. What you say is a player issue, not a class issue.

Maybe, but it made me happy. And I was just showing respect for rangers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@LetoII.3782 said:Way easier on guardian. Easier still on Necro, which is why there's so many roaming necros despite the obvious drawbacks to being a zergless necro.

I sadly love meeting up with minion masters... People don’t realize that they’re not really that good to roam with.

Holy Pete that's an understatement. Minionmancers are best employed as a rally-as-needed for the opponent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Kaiser.9873 said:Rangers get hate for a lot of reasons, but most of it isn't even really the class imo. Much of it is, as Sleepwalker said, the player, not the class.

Commanders are so used to Rangers that play........?poorly?, that they automatically have a bad take on them.

I know at least two commanders that do not want any rangers if the squad is full UNLESS they know the player - and that he is a good ranger. In that case he is welcome to stay.

I think it is a mixture of 'this class does not bring anything other classes can not do better' and 'ranger players are mostly really bad (otherwise they would play something else).' So a known good ranger gets a spot. But a unknown player is kicked out without a fuss if the squad is full and a necro/guard/rev player wants in.

I also know one com who does not give a shit what you are running, as long as you do as told and do not act like a headless chicken. For some reason rangers do not even try to get into his squads. Do not know why. Maybe they want to be headless chickens and he cramps their style too much?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Voltekka.2375" said:Dont give up playing what you want. Rangers can be very useful when not being in squads (you can easily follow the tag outside the squad) and pewpew stray/overextending scourges or weavers, you can barrage aoe spots weavers or revs cant, you can CC people so others can pick em off easier.You dont need a squad for that. Just learn how to move along the tag, anticipate enemy movement, and the rest is easy.

But here's where the trap inherently lays with Commanders disliking Ranger in a zerg. Your not accepted into a zerg. So you don't get the buffs you would get from say being part of the squad. Because you don't get those uptime boons from the other players in your squad, your less likely to survive in a head on engagement with enemy forces. When the smoke clears, the commander looks around, sees the dead Ranger and goes, "Oh, I see the Ranger's sucked again and can't survive...." Are we not surviving because we WERE not part of the squad, and would have received some sort of healing/BOONS, which we didn't. Or did we not survive because we didn't have the "Right Build". Either way, the commander goes, "This is the reason why I don't like Ranger's. They can't survive. They don't give anything to the group....their useless." AGAIN...I blame Anet.

I haven't seen A THING from ONE OF YOU in nearly the last three years that came close to committing to creating a Ranger Build that stands head and shoulders ABOVE the rest of the classes, for a complete and total acceptance of a Ranger into a zerg. I have yet to see a Commander go, "DAMN, we need more Rangers in our group if we're going to win this...." NO, have you seen that? Has Arenanet DEVS seen that? No, they have not. I have not. You have not.

So whose to blame? The Ranger. Or the people that made all the mechanics for Ranger. Whose the more foolish. The fool that plays the class, or the eggheads that created the class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@KeyOrion.9506 said:

@"Voltekka.2375" said:Dont give up playing what you want. Rangers can be very useful when not being in squads (you can easily follow the tag outside the squad) and pewpew stray/overextending scourges or weavers, you can barrage aoe spots weavers or revs cant, you can CC people so others can pick em off easier.You dont need a squad for that. Just learn how to move along the tag, anticipate enemy movement, and the rest is easy.

But here's where the trap inherently lays with Commanders disliking Ranger in a zerg. Your not accepted into a zerg. So you don't get the buffs you would get from say being part of the squad. Because you don't get those uptime boons from the other players in your squad, your less likely to survive in a head on engagement with enemy forces. When the smoke clears, the commander looks around, sees the dead Ranger and goes, "Oh, I see the Ranger's sucked again and can't survive...." Are we not surviving because we WERE not part of the squad, and would have received some sort of healing/BOONS, which we didn't. Or did we not survive because we didn't have the "Right Build". Either way, the commander goes, "This is the reason why I don't like Ranger's. They can't survive. They don't give anything to the group....their useless." AGAIN...I blame Anet.

I haven't seen A THING from ONE OF YOU in nearly the last three years that came close to committing to creating a Ranger Build that stands head and shoulders ABOVE the rest of the classes, for a complete and total acceptance of a Ranger into a zerg. I have yet to see a Commander go, "kitten, we need more Rangers in our group if we're going to win this...." NO, have you seen that? Has Arenanet DEVS seen that? No, they have not. I have not. You have not.

So whose to blame? The Ranger. Or the people that made all the mechanics for Ranger. Whose the more foolish. The fool that plays the class, or the eggheads that created the class.

I actually, and my fellow guild commanders, have actively sought out a couple of particular rangers because they were being head and shoulders over the rest of the classes. (Their character name had Orion in it actually so now I'm wondering...). And have all had instances where we have wished we had one of those rangers because they would have been useful. The thing with ranger that subversiontwo pointed out in the other topic is that they are for the most part self sufficient. The gains they get from the party support are marginal whilst for a scourge they are absolutely necessary. So if you are a commander and you have a scourge and a soulbeast looking for a party slot to get that support, who do you give it to? I personally would give it to the one with the greatest need.

That is not to say soulbeasts cannot shine even more with party support. But a ranger can perform the things it is good at even better under its own leadership with its own small subset of party members rather than looking to be inside a large group under the commander. It's the special forces, not the infantry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@KeyOrion.9506 said:

@"Voltekka.2375" said:Dont give up playing what you want. Rangers can be very useful when not being in squads (you can easily follow the tag outside the squad) and pewpew stray/overextending scourges or weavers, you can barrage aoe spots weavers or revs cant, you can CC people so others can pick em off easier.You dont need a squad for that. Just learn how to move along the tag, anticipate enemy movement, and the rest is easy.

But here's where the trap inherently lays with Commanders disliking Ranger in a zerg. Your not accepted into a zerg. So you don't get the buffs you would get from say being part of the squad. Because you don't get those uptime boons from the other players in your squad, your less likely to survive in a head on engagement with enemy forces. When the smoke clears, the commander looks around, sees the dead Ranger and goes, "Oh, I see the Ranger's sucked again and can't survive...." Are we not surviving because we WERE not part of the squad, and would have received some sort of healing/BOONS, which we didn't. Or did we not survive because we didn't have the "Right Build". Either way, the commander goes, "This is the reason why I don't like Ranger's. They can't survive. They don't give anything to the group....their useless." AGAIN...I blame Anet.

I haven't seen A THING from ONE OF YOU in nearly the last three years that came close to committing to creating a Ranger Build that stands head and shoulders ABOVE the rest of the classes, for a complete and total acceptance of a Ranger into a zerg. I have yet to see a Commander go, "kitten, we need more Rangers in our group if we're going to win this...." NO, have you seen that? Has Arenanet DEVS seen that? No, they have not. I have not. You have not.

So whose to blame? The Ranger. Or the people that made all the mechanics for Ranger. Whose the more foolish. The fool that plays the class, or the eggheads that created the class.

@"Voltekka.2375" said:Dont give up playing what you want. Rangers can be very useful when not being in squads (you can easily follow the tag outside the squad) and pewpew stray/overextending scourges or weavers, you can barrage aoe spots weavers or revs cant, you can CC people so others can pick em off easier.You dont need a squad for that. Just learn how to move along the tag, anticipate enemy movement, and the rest is easy.

But here's where the trap inherently lays with Commanders disliking Ranger in a zerg. Your not accepted into a zerg. So you don't get the buffs you would get from say being part of the squad. Because you don't get those uptime boons from the other players in your squad, your less likely to survive in a head on engagement with enemy forces. When the smoke clears, the commander looks around, sees the dead Ranger and goes, "Oh, I see the Ranger's sucked again and can't survive...." Are we not surviving because we WERE not part of the squad, and would have received some sort of healing/BOONS, which we didn't. Or did we not survive because we didn't have the "Right Build". Either way, the commander goes, "This is the reason why I don't like Ranger's. They can't survive. They don't give anything to the group....their useless." AGAIN...I blame Anet.

I haven't seen A THING from ONE OF YOU in nearly the last three years that came close to committing to creating a Ranger Build that stands head and shoulders ABOVE the rest of the classes, for a complete and total acceptance of a Ranger into a zerg. I have yet to see a Commander go, "kitten, we need more Rangers in our group if we're going to win this...." NO, have you seen that? Has Arenanet DEVS seen that? No, they have not. I have not. You have not.

So whose to blame? The Ranger. Or the people that made all the mechanics for Ranger. Whose the more foolish. The fool that plays the class, or the eggheads that created the class.

Meanwhile, ranger absolutely shines in small groups/roaming/havoc. And "absolutely shines" is an understatement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play a Ranger the majority of my wvw time, simply for enjoyment, but rarely ever join the zerg squad. Even running very glassy I have huge amount of survivability so I'm not needed there and would take up boons and a spot that is better given to a meta class. Rangers do not belong in a zerg generally

Plus i'm forever disappearing to check on a keep/tower, cap a camp and havoc a bit where needed. The only times i will look to join a tag is when the squad is partial, 20/50 or so, and always watch for it filling up so i can leave when i can see that others better suited need the spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gw2 tries to offer every role to every class. Maybe not especially well, yet the ability is there in the traits. This provides the novice buildsmith with an irresistible urge to diversify. This however is anathema to good group play, as any class trying to fulfill multiple roles will do all poorly. Individuals within the group maximize one role and rely on the composition to compensate for each other's weakness in a mutually beneficial way.

A tremendous number of rangers do not understand that they bring only weaknesses to a group when they don't have the ability to deliver downstates reliably, with no excuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LetoII.3782 said:Gw2 tries to offer every role to every class. Maybe not especially well, yet the ability is there in the traits. This provides the novice buildsmith with an irresistible urge to diversify. This however is anathema to good group play, as any class trying to fulfill multiple roles will do all poorly. Individuals within the group maximize one role and rely on the composition to compensate for each other's weakness in a mutually beneficial way.

A tremendous number of rangers do not understand that they bring only weaknesses to a group when they don't have the ability to deliver downstates reliably, with no excuses.

Don’t have the ability to deliver down states reliably? Maybe that does go for most rangers but definitely not all. I down and finish tons. We have the ability. The problem is that way too many people just don’t take time to learn and play it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@LetoII.3782 said:Gw2 tries to offer every role to every class. Maybe not especially well, yet the ability is there in the traits. This provides the novice buildsmith with an irresistible urge to
diversify
. This however is anathema to good group play, as any class trying to fulfill multiple roles will do all poorly. Individuals within the group maximize one role and rely on the composition to compensate for each other's weakness in a mutually beneficial way.

A tremendous number of rangers do not understand that they bring only weaknesses to a group when they don't have the ability to deliver downstates reliably, with no excuses.

Don’t have the ability to deliver down states reliably? Maybe that does go for most rangers but definitely not all. I down and finish tons. We have the ability. The problem is that way too many people just don’t take time to learn and play it right.

I think that was his point.

If you want to play Ranger in a zerg ( specifically with DPS and Longbow in mind ) and you want to contribute, you have to do two things:

  • You don't push when a tag pushes.
  • Stay on the fringe and snipe low health players/players that are falling behind/in the open/off sides

You don't offer anything during a push. Your role is to pressure those who cannot handle being pressured.

Unfortunately, many Rangers shoot at random not staying on any one target for long, and face tank all the damage during a clash instead of kiting or going defensive until there's a better time to. I can say as a long time Necro main that the best Rangers are the ones that won't leave me the fuck alone until I'm dead or forcing them out of their comfort zone if they want to keep hitting me. That means I'm dead or out of the fight and they can still pressure other players during that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LetoII.3782 said:@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

Gimmick builds such as having 10x of the same profession can yield results, based on amplifying effects that would otherwise be less useful when used individually. The whole being greater than the sum of its parts

By contrast, groups that utilize all professions in their composition can adapt to wider variety of situations.

Both compositions in theory can be equally formidable and viable.

but imo the reason we don't see more gimmick compositions is because of scale invariance. Rangers don't have enough tools that can compete in a scale larger than 1v1. So a group of 10 scourges can beat a group of 10 rangers because scourges have more tools in a team fight scenario than rangers do.

Just as an example, a ranger can effectively burst down a player instantly via bursting a single target with rapid fire if used by all 10 rangers at the same time. Meanwhile, Scourges can also burst down a target instantly if they use Desert Shroud at the same time...except it's not just one target but 5. Most ranger skills are single target, while scourges skills are almost all area of effect, making them better team-fighters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"SpellOfIniquity.1780" said:

@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

@LetoII.3782 said:Gw2 tries to offer every role to every class. Maybe not especially well, yet the ability is there in the traits. This provides the novice buildsmith with an irresistible urge to
diversify
. This however is anathema to good group play, as any class trying to fulfill multiple roles will do all poorly. Individuals within the group maximize one role and rely on the composition to compensate for each other's weakness in a mutually beneficial way.

A tremendous number of rangers do not understand that they bring only weaknesses to a group when they don't have the ability to deliver downstates reliably, with no excuses.

Don’t have the ability to deliver down states reliably? Maybe that does go for most rangers but definitely not all. I down and finish tons. We have the ability. The problem is that way too many people just don’t take time to learn and play it right.

I think that was his point.

Maybe I worded it poorly, but yes.What ranger does best is delivering the killing blow. What a ranger requires to fulfill this role is damage stats. Where most fail is mission creep, trying to survive through stats rather than gameplay.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@LetoII.3782 said:@"Balthazzarr.1349" said:

Gimmick builds such as having 10x of the same profession can yield results, based on amplifying effects that would otherwise be less useful when used individually... . ..Rangers don't have enough tools that can compete in a scale larger than 1v1. So a group of 10 scourges can beat a group of 10 rangers because scourges have more tools in a team fight scenario than rangers do.

That's a terrible comparison, there would be 10 dead scourges given the right rangers. That's where so much forum banter fails, not in the class but the players of that class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...