Jump to content
  • Sign Up

I see big "Sic 'Em!" problem


Evil.1580

Recommended Posts

Everyone knows that using "Sic 'Em!" is essential to most rangers.Because of that, its CD should be reduced to 20, maximum 25 sec. so rangers can use it more often.Rangers can't simply pray doing mediocre damage only once every 35 sec.We, rangers, deserve more consistent damage buff but 20-25 sec. is kinda acceptable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

@"bOTEB.1573" said:I am completely serious about the post.My ranger feels super weak without "Sic 'Em!".And when this skill has so big CD ranger profession is barely playable outside of PVE.

There are serious suggestions on this forum to delete the entire skill, and you want to... buff it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Yannir.4132 said:

@"bOTEB.1573" said:I am completely serious about the post.My ranger feels super weak without "Sic 'Em!".And when this skill has so big CD ranger profession is barely playable outside of PVE.

There are serious suggestions on this forum to delete the entire skill, and you want to... buff it?

I feel like hes having a playful stab at the people who think even the slightest shave to Sic Em will destroy all viability for ranger.

Or atleast I hope so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Nimon.7840" said:Sure, make cd 20 seconds but the dmg modifier only 2-5%

The only thing that makes burst DPS ranger semi-viable is "Sic 'Em!".Please, enough nerfes for the soulbeast.No one wants him to DPS in raids, they prefer Weavers - fact.No one wants him to DPS in WvW squads, they prefer Scourges, Weavers - fact.It is not even in top tier in PvP - fact.If ANET nerf "Sic 'Em!", in any way, burst DPS ranger will become trash tier and good for nothing.Now if ANET reduce the CD of "Sic 'Em!" ranger will get on the same tier as most other professions, because they will be able to sustain good damage for longer (overall) time.Come on, I mean, even after the yesterday's nerf "Arc Divider" is still more powerful than "Sic 'Em!".Why would ANET want to make the single buff skill, that makes burst DPS ranger viable, even worse than a direct damage skill?There is no logic, guys!Please, agree that reducing the CD of "Sic 'Em!" is a good option here.Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with that if and only if they make sure that sic'em and one wolf pack can't be used AT THE SAME FUCKING TIME. One wolf pack damage should be modified according to the number of allies in the area. if there's not then, nothing should happen.And moreover, they MUST completely remove unstoppable union. WTF is a skill that can bypass an active defense skill? Unstoppable union make sic'em sb cheesy as fuck. How are you supposed to reach a ranged class if you can t even block his skills?...Or maybe, Anet should create a new type of blocking skills that can actually block unblockable skills...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@beatthedown.2651 said:

@Eugchriss.2046 said:I would agree with that if and only if they make sure that sic'em and one wolf pack can't be used
AT THE SAME kitten TIME
. One wolf pack damage should be modified according to the number of allies in the area. if there's not then, nothing should happen.And moreover,
they MUST completely remove unstoppable union.
kitten is a skill that can bypass an active defense skill? Unstoppable union make sic'em sb cheesy as kitten. How are you supposed to reach a ranged class if you can t even block his skills?...Or maybe, Anet should create a new type of blocking skills that can actually block unblockable skills...

Please be a troll please be a troll

It's getting kinda funny now. But players having actual meltdowns about low/mid tier builds isn't anything new. We just had a small balance patch about overperforming classes. Guess what they did not nerf. I don't even play Sic em since it's just inferior in most cases to standard boonbeast. There are also other classes who can fulfil the damage dealer role way better.

You see, that s the problem. You guys are focusing on the wrong issues. Who cares if it a low/mid/god tier builds? If a skill has an issue no matter what tier it is, it needs to be fixed. it's not because a build does less damage than other classes that it shouldn' t be nerfed.

It's exactly this way of thinking which lead us to power creep: class A does 10 damages whilst class B does 5. ok let s buff class B. Now it does 15, but class A still does 10. So let s buff class A too etc...

You guys should stop focusing on the tier and more about the skill. If renegade has an S-tier skill, renegade or not, that skill should be nerfed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Eugchriss.2046 said:

@Eugchriss.2046 said:I would agree with that if and only if they make sure that sic'em and one wolf pack can't be used
AT THE SAME kitten TIME
. One wolf pack damage should be modified according to the number of allies in the area. if there's not then, nothing should happen.And moreover,
they MUST completely remove unstoppable union.
kitten is a skill that can bypass an active defense skill? Unstoppable union make sic'em sb cheesy as kitten. How are you supposed to reach a ranged class if you can t even block his skills?...Or maybe, Anet should create a new type of blocking skills that can actually block unblockable skills...

Please be a troll please be a troll

It's getting kinda funny now. But players having actual meltdowns about low/mid tier builds isn't anything new. We just had a small balance patch about overperforming classes. Guess what they did not nerf. I don't even play Sic em since it's just inferior in most cases to standard boonbeast. There are also other classes who can fulfil the damage dealer role way better.

You see, that s the problem. You guys are focusing on the wrong issues. Who cares if it a low/mid/god tier builds? If a skill has an issue no matter what tier it is, it needs to be fixed. it's not because a build does less damage than other classes that it shouldn' t be nerfed.

It's exactly this way of thinking which lead us to power creep: class A does 10 damages whilst class B does 5. ok let s buff class B. Now it does 15, but class A still does 10. So let s buff class A too etc...

You guys should stop focusing on the tier and more about the skill. If renegade has an S-tier skill, renegade or not, that skill should be nerfed.

But "Sic 'Em!" is not S-tier.If it is S-tier what are Arc Divider and many other stronger skills, double S-tier, which were triple S-tier before the nerf?You can't expect such skills to be nerfed when the game is full of other, a lot stronger and ridiculous skills.Soulbeast must perform 3-4 combo skills to achieve the damage, which is only for specific time frame, that some professions can achieve with 1 skill.Then you call it "blatantly OP".Well, it is not OP, in fact it needs a little buff compared to all other ridiculous skills around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's how I feel about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P0OVZd8MWc

Just to be clear on my stance:

I believe Sic Em range needs to be halved. This would allow the Ranger to maintain its damage output but force the Ranger to get closer range to use it, providing more counter play for close range classes that may catch it using gap closers or short range teleports. Most of the complaining is about Rapid Fire 1500+ range anyway. In close range its DPS is no more or less functional than a Herald or Holo ect ect, after it uses Sic Em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:It's pretty simple 40% strait damage modifier is to high. It should be dropped to 15 or 20% to be in line with other professions. 40% is fine on the pet though which is what it was intended for when It was created.

I mean its not 40% when used in beastmode, its closer to 25% actually. Problem is ranger dmg is shiet without those insane modifiers because weapon skill scaling is Bad compared to lets say warrior who can run 2 qol/utility lines and still do oneshot dmg with one skill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:Here's how I feel about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P0OVZd8MWc

Just to be clear on my stance:

I believe Sic Em range needs to be halved. This would allow the Ranger to maintain its damage output but force the Ranger to get closer range to use it, providing more counter play for close range classes that may catch it using gap closers or short range teleports. Most of the complaining is about Rapid Fire 1500+ range anyway. In close range its DPS is no more or less functional than a Herald or Holo ect ect, after it uses Sic Em.

I can basically put sugar videos like this for any profession.But if you search for a video without cuts and just 20-30 min straight gameplay, either PvP or WvW, you will understand that your posted video is not the reality.Oh wait, I am pretty sure you already know this ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"bOTEB.1573"

Just to be clear on my stance:

I believe Sic Em range needs to be halved. This would allow the Ranger to maintain its damage output but force the Ranger to get closer range to use it, providing more counter play for close range classes that may catch it using gap closers or short range teleports. Most of the complaining is about Rapid Fire 1500+ range anyway. In close range its DPS is no more or less functional than a Herald or Holo ect ect, after it uses Sic Em.

It doesn't need anything else done to it. The above ^ would be the safe fix, taking no risks in destroying the class like they did with DE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:@"bOTEB.1573"

Just to be clear on my stance:

I believe Sic Em range needs to be halved. This would allow the Ranger to maintain its damage output but force the Ranger to get closer range to use it, providing more counter play for close range classes that may catch it using gap closers or short range teleports. Most of the complaining is about Rapid Fire 1500+ range anyway. In close range its DPS is no more or less functional than a Herald or Holo ect ect, after it uses Sic Em.

It doesn't need anything else done to it. The above ^ would be the safe fix, taking no risks in destroying the class like they did with DE.

Yeah, I have to say, the thing that disgusted me about that video was the damage at high range on the longbow. Longbow is already the longest distance weapon, but giving it a massive damage burst like that basically gives nobody else counterplay unless they specifically have reflects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Vagrant.7206" or if they stand behind an object, which there are plenty of in every map, unblockables don't go through them, and there is no CD to do it.

The biggest problem with these GW2 projectile debates is that most of the player base does not see GW2 as an LOS game. Due to the elongated HoT Bunker meta, where all ranged attacks were gimped beyond belief, most of the player base grew to know this game as "A game where you go to a node in the middle of a field and use your melee bruiser against other melee bruisers, while never worrying about gimped ranged." So this built an expectation in the minds of the player base, where they believe this is how the game should be. If this were a fps game, and players came in fully expecting to have to move behind objects to block ranged, and to have to be sneaky to approach something with a gun, when they have a melee attack planned, no one would be complaining.

Now my question to you is: How is this game any different than the synergy & dynamic of a first person shooter's: Melee Strike > 1 Shot Snipers > Assault Rifle Mid Range > Melee Strike? This game works the exact same way. Your Heavies are usually the strong Melee range, usually packing a lot of CC and single strike kill opportunity. Your Snipers are DEs and Soulbeasts. Your Mid Range Assault Rifle guys are the Reapers & Berserkers, which counter all the powerful 1v1 heavy duelists in team fight mid range with lots of AoE. Not many people have noticed that this game is a certain trend where Heavies > Mediums > Lights > Heavies. There are a few exceptions but normally this true, and it is in my opinion no different than a fps: Melee > 1 Shot Snipers > Assault Mid Range > Melee.

I'll tell you what I think the difference is. I think the difference is that we have the idea of "The Bunker" in this game. It makes people believe they should be able to play a build that is neigh invulnerable and if a single person can kill them, quickly at that, they get salty.

In my opinion, people need to recognize everything I've pointed out ^ and understand that this is more of a game flavor issue, than it is a balance issue. Nothing is stopping any of you from utilizing anti LOS. In fact, the good players that do utilize anti LOS, are the reason why DPS Soulbeast isn't viable in upper tiers or serious AT play. A lot has changed since PoF release. High powered ranged exists now. If you want to explain to Arenanet why it doesn't "feel good" in this game, that's great. But I feel that player's shouldn't be turning it into a balance issue, because they expect to free cap mid in the open, and not worry about any pressure off node. <- This is just reluctance to recognize how the game needs to be played in PoF. It isn't the HoT Bruiser/Bunker meta anymore.

Aside from what the players who refuse to pay attention to LOS play want to believe, Ranger is not competitive next to: FB, Scourge, Herald, Spellbreaker, Scrapper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP is holding himself back a bit too much. Clearly Sic’Em is required to normalize Soulbeast’s damage to put it on an equal playing field, but this buff is too small. The skill is only ever used on Soulbeast, so we should really remove the skill and incorporate the 40% damage buff to the minor adept trait. Then, as long as the player is merged with his pet, he will maintain the equivalent Sic’Em damage boost to allow them to be even slightly viable. Boom, balanced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:Here's how I feel about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P0OVZd8MWc

Just to be clear on my stance:

I believe Sic Em range needs to be halved. This would allow the Ranger to maintain its damage output but force the Ranger to get closer range to use it, providing more counter play for close range classes that may catch it using gap closers or short range teleports. Most of the complaining is about Rapid Fire 1500+ range anyway. In close range its DPS is no more or less functional than a Herald or Holo ect ect, after it uses Sic Em.

Herald or Holo is in no way able to put out this amount of damage though. it's actually ridiculous how this is still in the game lmaoI literally got mad in their place watching this video

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:Here's how I feel about it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6P0OVZd8MWc

Just to be clear on my stance:

I believe Sic Em range needs to be halved. This would allow the Ranger to maintain its damage output but force the Ranger to get closer range to use it, providing more counter play for close range classes that may catch it using gap closers or short range teleports. Most of the complaining is about Rapid Fire 1500+ range anyway. In close range its DPS is no more or less functional than a Herald or Holo ect ect, after it uses Sic Em.

funny that you would suggest a "half its range"-nerf and proceed by posting a video that shows mainly sub 1k range sic em kills.

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...