DEVS ARE YOU LISTENING?

[chripsy.1027]

My dearest, dearest, dearest devs.

 

if you are going to make Mesmer Mirage fill an alac role, you MUST also make them equal to Renegades. They must have equal CC so they are accepted in CM fractals, and they must have some form of bubble with the same uptime that is used by renegades on Boneskinner so they are accepted for Strikes. So far we are excluded from a lot of game content, rendering us useless.

 

What exactly where you trying to achieve by giving us 10 man alac? Are we even accepted as part of the meta in raids?

 

[phokus.8934]

Cue Homer Simpson disappearing into the bushes because that's ANet when it comes to Mesmer feedback.

[Hirosama Nadasaki.6792]

Before they even do anything I'd like an explanation on why Mirage is the alac role for mesmer instead of chrono. You know, the espec that introduced alac in the first place?

[Moradorin.6217]

4 hours ago, chripsy.1027 said:

My dearest, dearest, dearest devs.

 

if you are going to make Mesmer Mirage fill an alac role, you MUST also make them equal to Renegades. They must have equal CC so they are accepted in CM fractals, and they must have some form of bubble with the same uptime that is used by renegades on Boneskinner so they are accepted for Strikes. So far we are excluded from a lot of game content, rendering us useless.

 

What exactly where you trying to achieve by giving us 10 man alac? Are we even accepted as part of the meta in raids?

 

They were trying to throw a bone to alac to shut people up. For a few days the dps + boons was so overtuned half the Mesmer community said nerf me. So now that bone has just enough meat to give alacmir some niche play without making it good enough for general meta only for the standard confusion friendly boss encounters. IMO it was more to attempt to deflate motivations of Mesmer community to keep asking for trait fixes, one dodge removed/reworked, etc more than anything.

 

Personally, I cannot help but keep seeing it as CMC being unable to admit he may have made a errors with the changes made for "tradeoffs" in the infamous Feb 25 patch. Now we seem to have an expac being made with apparent plans to try and double down on the same bad game design concepts instead of trying to actually fix  and replace core traits and alter especs in ways that make them viable some times better options that dont make core suck or what ever. I dont even care at this point. I only use Mesmer for its intended niche uses on those select bosses. It has not been my main for about 2 years now I guess.

 

I know many people will probably flame me but I really dislike CMCs choices. I think he is out to lunch. I think he should drink ALLOT more water!

[Lincolnbeard.1735]

33 minutes ago, Moradorin.6217 said:

I know many people will probably flame me but I really dislike CMCs choices. I think he is out to lunch. I think he should drink ALLOT more water!

Getting CMC on board was one of the worst decisions ANerf made. He might be a cool dude but he's beyond clueless. 

Tbh I don't get what they were thinking like "hey let's get this guy who has 0 experience and never did anything worth mentioning on gw2 and put it on the balance team". Pretty sure they could have gotten someone who already worked on the industry. It's not like this game is complex but w/e.

This train is gonna end upside down that's for sure. 

Edited December 7, 2021 by Lincolnbeard.1735

[mungozen.2379]

Giving the devs the benefit of the doubt, I had assumed that the mirage tweaks were in preparation for the new meta in EoD. That there would be another pass or two on balancing after the new eSpecs were baked settling the meta roles professions can fulfill. 
 

However, I agree that it was confusing to give Mirage 10 man Alacrity over Chrono, but leave both eSpecs lagging behind other Alacrity profs. 

[chripsy.1027]

The devs need to sit down and figure out exactly what role they want each specialisation to have. What's the point in giving Mirage 10 man might when Druid is always going to be chosen over Mirage... Same for Alac Mirage and Renegade. Support Mirage is always unwanted for a lot of the content because there are better options.

They need to make Mirage, or any class/specialisation, equally viable for all content in the game as other specialisations who fill specific roles. Otherwise they just end up being sub-standard and unwanted.

It is like the devs just don't play the specialisation or game at all. They are clueless.

[Blood Red Arachnid.2493]

I wish it had it's 3 second duration back.  Back when alac was first introduced, I made the comment that Mirage shouldn't keep both its alacrity and its damage at the same time.  I expected one or the other to get nerfed.  Anet then nerfed both, making the whole thing just frustrating to build around.  All the complaints I hear about miralac aren't about a lack of CC or bubbles or utility.  They're about the inability to sustain alacrity well.  

[chripsy.1027]

Yes alac uptime is an issue too. Unless you invest more heavily in to concentration, at the expense of damage..... Meaning we are even less viable that Renegade. It is just a mess.

[Mik.3401]

This a hopeless cry in the void unfortunately. A game having devs favouring certain classes is not a game to be taken seriously. They can issue 10 million new black lion skins but it will not change it. Especially in case of Mesmer I can agree with the others here the Miracrity is just there to fill the gap, no further action seems underway in my opinion.

Edited December 9, 2021 by Mik.3401

[chripsy.1027]

I have remove my sigil of concentration and sold all my concentration consumables. I am forgetting about alac mirage now and just going dps. Can't be bothered with the rejection anymore and feeling unwanted / substandard.

[Terrorhuz.4695]

On 12/7/2021 at 7:33 PM, Hirosama Nadasaki.6792 said:

Before they even do anything I'd like an explanation on why Mirage is the alac role for mesmer instead of chrono. You know, the espec that introduced alac in the first place?

I'll be the one to say it

Remove alacrity from mirage (it should be chrono's thing) and give it 1\2 stacks of AoE stab for 3 seconds, or something like this. This way it fullfills a different role and we start to dent guardian's monopoly over stab, in a very different way (not impossible-to-pierce stab for 4-5s every 40s but 1 or 2 stacks over  a much longer timeframe)

Edited December 9, 2021 by Terrorhuz.4695

[Leonidrex.5649]

1 hour ago, Terrorhuz.4695 said:

I'll be the one to say it

Remove alacrity from mirage (it should be chrono's thing) and give it 1\2 stacks of AoE stab for 3 seconds, or something like this. This way it fullfills a different role and we start to dent guardian's monopoly over stab, in a very different way (not impossible-to-pierce stab for 4-5s every 40s but 1 or 2 stacks over  a much longer timeframe)

it wont work, heal fb can upkeep almst permanent stab uptime with elite and 1 utility, all the while getting perma might and quickness, and even having ~10k dps if you really want to 😄

[Reteiel.7063]

Just the fact we have a spec dedicated to the manipulation of time and somehow mirage is the one that ended up being the alacrity is so aggravating to me. Starting to feel like anet wants people playing only two of the available classes and its so draining wanting to play anything else, knowing that nothing ever gets fixed or changed.

[SoulGuardian.6203]

6 hours ago, Reteiel.7063 said:

Just the fact we have a spec dedicated to the manipulation of time and somehow mirage is the one that ended up being the alacrity is so aggravating to me. Starting to feel like anet wants people playing only two of the available classes and its so draining wanting to play anything else, knowing that nothing ever gets fixed or changed.

This right here I do agree with 100%

 

I'm beggining to see why a lot of people are outraged and angry at them.

 

I didn't see it before, but after proper testing it in beta 4.

There's a lot to answer for.

For instance, how do they replace clones with blades but leave phantasms?

I'm beginning to question their abilities myself.

 

When you give a ranger a hammer instead of a rifle or a pistol, tells you everything you need to know about yhe current state of ANet.

[Alpha.1308]

On 12/9/2021 at 6:30 PM, SoulGuardian.6203 said:

When you give a ranger a hammer instead of a rifle or a pistol, tells you everything you need to know about yhe current state of ANet.

i agree with the rest of what you said about blades/phantasms/anets abilities etc 

 

HOWEVER

i will state that GW1 had rangers with hammers as a popular class due to how Ranger/Warrior interacted 

 

this was a callback and a request, which was fair, to be honest

as much as i will criticize them left and right for their horrible mess of ideas, this one is not one of them 

the specs balance is a separate issue 

[SoulGuardian.6203]

20 hours ago, Alpha.1308 said:

i agree with the rest of what you said about blades/phantasms/anets abilities etc 

 

HOWEVER

i will state that GW1 had rangers with hammers as a popular class due to how Ranger/Warrior interacted 

 

this was a callback and a request, which was fair, to be honest

as much as i will criticize them left and right for their horrible mess of ideas, this one is not one of them 

the specs balance is a separate issue 

Ok cool.

Fair enough, a lot of people requested it.

That's fine, and I respect that.

In My own personal choice and preference though, I never used hammer on ranger back in gw1 and certainly am not going to use it here.

Imo, there's just nothing in Untamed that appeals to me at all.

A "Ranger" is a ranged class in my PoV.

There are many classes that use hammer, with much higher effectiveness, and have toughness, Armour, and Resistance, amongst other boons that do a better job at CqC and tanking.

Ranger, as the name implies, should have ranged weapons.

Ok, I'm fine with sword, dagger, and Axes, but hammer?

 

It's different in Scrapper, because of its effects aswell as the blunt damage.

The wrench skin in it suits it well.

 

Anyways, it's just my personal oppinion though, it doesn't really count for anything.

 

It's just the way I see things.

I wouldn't put a Jester fighting in the front line with a sword anymore that I would send a Paladin to make jokes and paper geese to an emperor.

 

This thing of trying to feed you with a one-size-fits-all dynamic bologni... 

Might aswell just End this class restriction thing and give every class, every weapon and get it done with.

 

👍😆

[mungozen.2379]

 

3 hours ago, SoulGuardian.6203 said:

A "Ranger" is a ranged class in my PoV.

 

Ranger, as the name implies, should have ranged weapons

The word ‘Ranger’ has nothing to do with ‘ranged weapons’.  It has always been attributed to someone who protects forests or natural places. 

ranger (n.)

late 14c. (early 14c. in surnames), "gamekeeper, sworn officer of a forest whose work is to walk through it and protect it," agent noun from range

range (v.)

c. 1200, rengen, "to move over or through (a large area), roam with the purpose of searching or hunting," from Old French ranger, rangier, earlier rengier "to place in a row, arrange; get into line,"

Sure Anet didn’t make the most obvious choices for the new eSpecs (and the old ones have also suffered the same after many iterations).  But they are offering a wide range of play styles and mechanics across all professions to suit a lot of different players. 
 

I do agree in general though that some consistency in how all professions approach support balanced against their own DPS and different group sizes and game modes would be a good thing. 

Edited December 27, 2021 by Mungo Zen.9364
formatting on phones sucks

[Walle.6045]

4 hours ago, SoulGuardian.6203 said:

A "Ranger" is a ranged class in my PoV.

Ranger, as the name implies, should have ranged weapons.

Ok, I'm fine with sword, dagger, and Axes, but hammer?

 

A Ranger does not need to be Ranged, that is not at all what Ranger means. 
Words such as Sniper, Marksman, Rifleman, Bowman are ranged. 
 

1 hour ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

 

The word ‘Ranger’ has nothing to do with ‘ranged weapons’.  It has always been attributed to someone who protects forests or natural places. 

ranger (n.)

late 14c. (early 14c. in surnames), "gamekeeper, sworn officer of a forest whose work is to walk through it and protect it," agent noun from range

range (v.)

c. 1200, rengen, "to move over or through (a large area), roam with the purpose of searching or hunting," from Old French ranger, rangier, earlier rengier "to place in a row, arrange; get into line,"

Sure Anet didn’t make the most obvious choices for the new eSpecs (and the old ones have also suffered the same after many iterations).  But they are offering a wide range of play styles and mechanics across all professions to suit a lot of different players. 
 

I do agree in general though that some consistency in how all professions approach support balanced against their own DPS and different group sizes and game modes would be a good thing. 

 

This ^ 
It's taken even further going back to Tolkien, Aragorn was a Ranger of the North, the Rangers helped to guard the Shire, Bree, and other areas around Eriador. Aragorn and the other Rangers used a bunch of different assortment of weaponry. 

[Salt Mode.3780]

But u wanna know what doesnt fit the name with the job description....that would be Virtuoso....there is nothing "Virtuoso" about the new mesmer spec. So before this turns into a "Ranger" problem because you guys don't have it really bad and based on the changes that were given fixed many nuances you guys had at release, I am sure that your class at least is being worked on.

[mungozen.2379]

Just now, Salt Mode.3780 said:

But u wanna know what doesnt fit the name with the job description....that would be Virtuoso....there is nothing "Virtuoso" about the new mesmer spec. So before this turns into a "Ranger" problem because you guys don't have it really bad and based on the changes that were given fixed many nuances you guys had at release, I am sure that your class at least is being worked on.

You just don’t understand genius I guess. That is fair tho, many artists are misunderstood, both in methods and output. Virtuoso fits since it’s so good but no one gets it. 

[SoulGuardian.6203]

30 minutes ago, Walle.6045 said:

A Ranger does not need to be Ranged, that is not at all what Ranger means. 
Words such as Sniper, Marksman, Rifleman, Bowman are ranged. 
 

 

This ^ 
It's taken even further going back to Tolkien, Aragorn was a Ranger of the North, the Rangers helped to guard the Shire, Bree, and other areas around Eriador. Aragorn and the other Rangers used a bunch of different assortment of weaponry. 

Yes, thank you for that explanation.

I know what a ranger is pretty well.

Having one in my family... and I can assure you that he never used a hammer unless for building something. 

 

Please don't try twist facts in order to make it a more plausible reason why rangers should use hammer.

 

Also there are various types of Ranger.

As Zen said in quote bellow a forest guard.

I can assure hammer is not their choice of weapon.

The other type of Ranger is an Army Ranger.

They also would not carry a hammer around as a main weapon.

 

They both use primarily ranged weapons.

Bows, crossbows, rifles, and pistols.

Also knives and little else.

 

I have no idea where you two got the idea that the copy and paste description of a ranger justifies it using a hammer as a main weapon. 

2 hours ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

 

The word ‘Ranger’ has nothing to do with ‘ranged weapons’.  It has always been attributed to someone who protects forests or natural places. 

ranger (n.)

late 14c. (early 14c. in surnames), "gamekeeper, sworn officer of a forest whose work is to walk through it and protect it," agent noun from range

range (v.)

c. 1200, rengen, "to move over or through (a large area), roam with the purpose of searching or hunting," from Old French ranger, rangier, earlier rengier "to place in a row, arrange; get into line,"

Sure Anet didn’t make the most obvious choices for the new eSpecs (and the old ones have also suffered the same after many iterations).  But they are offering a wide range of play styles and mechanics across all professions to suit a lot of different players. 
 

I do agree in general though that some consistency in how all professions approach support balanced against their own DPS and different group sizes and game modes would be a good thing. 

So I don't write the whole thing again, I'll keep to facts.

 

My brother was an Army ranger.

Never once he had to rely on a hammer as a main weapon.

Sniper rifle, shotgun, pistol, grenades and combat knife. Never a hammer. 

One of my best friends is a forest ranger.

The only time he uses a hammer is to fix something. 

 

Ok, Nice try though... ish.

There's just no relevance at all.

 

I already said that I know I'm not going to accomplish anything.

ANet is not exactly famous for changing a weapon after it has been announced.

 

The Bunnythumper is here to stay; or at least it seems that way.

But this is my oppinion, and again, it means exactly squat to them, but it's mine.

That's it.

No point in going any further with this, because it's not really going to get us nowhere.

 

I just won't use it, just like Scourge, Spellbreaker, and forgot the other one.

That's it, that's all there is to it.

Edited December 27, 2021 by SoulGuardian.6203

[mungozen.2379]

21 minutes ago, Walle.6045 said:

It's taken even further going back to Tolkien, Aragorn was a Ranger of the North, the Rangers helped to guard the Shire, Bree, and other areas around Eriador. Aragorn and the other Rangers used a bunch of different assortment of weaponry. 

Soooo, Tolkien books were written in the 1940's, Ranger is circa 14th century or 500 years earlier.  Tolkien actually developed his world in his books by basing them upon the stories, fables and lore of European countries.  Grimm's Fairy Tales, published about 100 years before Tolkien (in 1810), is one of the first collected works of these stories that Tolkien would use. 

 

2 minutes ago, SoulGuardian.6203 said:

I have no idea where you two got the idea that the copy and paste description of a ranger justifies it using a hammer as a main weapon. 

No justification, but rather, pointing out that Ranger has a different definition than what you were presenting, and it thereby doesn't associate with an exclusively 'ranged' playstyle.  

But you know who does have the most ranged playstyle options?  Mesmer and highlighted by it's new eSpec Vitruoso!!!  Maybe this is the prof you should consider playing in EoD over Ranger.

 

[Salt Mode.3780]

20 minutes ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

You just don’t understand genius I guess. That is fair tho, many artists are misunderstood, both in methods and output. Virtuoso fits since it’s so good but no one gets it. 

Well then I guess this spec needs to completely die for it to show its genius.

[Walle.6045]

19 minutes ago, Mungo Zen.9364 said:

Soooo, Tolkien books were written in the 1940's, Ranger is circa 14th century or 500 years earlier.  Tolkien actually developed his world in his books by basing them upon the stories, fables and lore of European countries.  Grimm's Fairy Tales, published about 100 years before Tolkien (in 1810), is one of the first collected works of these stories that Tolkien would use. 

 

Yes, but almost all Archetype for classes in gaming culture derive from Tolkien, which is the point that was being made. 

DnD was heavily inspired by Tolkien and took a lot from it. Which in return was then applied into MUDS which in return was applied into games such as Ultima and Everquest which again was then taken and applied into WoW and GW.