Hopes for new Ranger Land Spear

[CETheLucid.3964]

11 hours ago, Levetty.1279 said:

More projectile based ranged attacks

Get closer.

[Fenris.8563]

On 6/6/2024 at 3:27 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

The ironic thing is that ranger might well be getting to the point where it genuinely is pushing towards having too much melee. They've currently got sword, greatsword, dagger, hammer, mace, and it looks like spear will be melee as well. Meanwhile, the ranged weapons are shortbow (condi), longbow (power), axe (hybrid) and staff (support). That's still better off when it comes to ranged weapons than some (including, ironically, elementalist and engineer), but they're coming due for another ranged weapon.

Would be ironic if they end up getting land speargun before rifle.

Nothing ironic about it!  A lot of people seem to confuse "range" with "Ranger".   The job/title/word "Ranger" has nothing to do with 'ranged weapons'.   Here is the actual definition:
 

a keeper of a park, forest, or area of countryside.

"park rangers"

 

So the idea of a "Ranger" is really someone who is more "closer" or "in-tune" with the wild.  Not someone who uses ranged weapons particularly.  Which is probably why they do not and likely will never (Unless all weapons get unlocked for all classes, which I hope happens in general even though I have no desire to use guns.) allow Rangers to wield guns, as guns would be more of an "unnatural" or "opposite" type of weapon as to opposed to someone closer to nature, who utilizes nature.  

[Fenris.8563]

From the looks of it, they're striking damage for sure.  However, I want as much versatility as possible.  So I am hoping just like we kind of get the "option" for (Ranged or melee), it would be nice to get an option for striking and/or condi as well. 

 

One thing that could be really cool, is if the Untamed version can have say striking when the Ranger is untamed, and condi when the pet is untamed sort of thing.   I think that would be interesting.  I'm really glad we're getting both ranged/melee options for skill 1 though.  That's huge.  

[draxynnic.3719]

10 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

Nothing ironic about it!  A lot of people seem to confuse "range" with "Ranger".   The job/title/word "Ranger" has nothing to do with 'ranged weapons'.   Here is the actual definition:
 

a keeper of a park, forest, or area of countryside.

"park rangers"

 

So the idea of a "Ranger" is really someone who is more "closer" or "in-tune" with the wild.  Not someone who uses ranged weapons particularly.  Which is probably why they do not and likely will never (Unless all weapons get unlocked for all classes, which I hope happens in general even though I have no desire to use guns.) allow Rangers to wield guns, as guns would be more of an "unnatural" or "opposite" type of weapon as to opposed to someone closer to nature, who utilizes nature.  

I think you've completely missed the point I was making. Hint: You basically just preached not just to the choir, but the freakin' bishop.

[mirage.8046]

Spear sounds just as cool as what I initially wanted, but hey, this looks to be a quirky fun weapon for WvW! It's not like ranger could've gotten something dumb like rifle or pistol. Focus could've been interesting though. Melee is cool as long as there is something unique and brings its own playstyle. 

I'm interested in using relic of unseen invasion with this weapon for the memes coupled with smokescale. Lots of lots superspeed and some stealth. <3

[Dean Calaway.9718]

I hope it doesn't have the awful visual effect we saw on the trailer.

[Beddo.1907]

5 hours ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

I hope it doesn't have the awful visual effect we saw on the trailer.

Which one?

[Dean Calaway.9718]

10 hours ago, Beddo.1907 said:

Which one?

The massive green aura around the spear, and the warclaw spirit seems a lot more obnoxious than the bear on greatsword, it's bad enough Soulbeast has a permanent effect while merged.

[Beddo.1907]

4 hours ago, Dean Calaway.9718 said:

The massive green aura around the spear, and the warclaw spirit seems a lot more obnoxious than the bear on greatsword, it's bad enough Soulbeast has a permanent effect while merged.

That's pretty mild, compared to other classes.

[Frozey.8513]

On 6/7/2024 at 8:56 PM, Fenris.8563 said:

Nothing ironic about it!  A lot of people seem to confuse "range" with "Ranger".   The job/title/word "Ranger" has nothing to do with 'ranged weapons'.

A lot of people played the original Guild Wars where Ranger was the Archer class. With the current state of Ranger in GW2 it could be argued that whole Archer identity is up for grabs should Anet decide to make bow-based playstyle a thing. Then again it's been 10 years since Longbow was last time added to a class, so it's not looking like they are in any hurry. 🙃

[Fenris.8563]

On 6/8/2024 at 12:44 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

I think you've completely missed the point I was making. Hint: You basically just preached not just to the choir, but the freakin' bishop.

The point you were making is Rangers should have guns because they're "Rangers" (relationship: Ranger/Ranged).  Clearly.

If this is not what you meant, then what in the heck did you mean by this?  It's pretty clear lmao

Quote

  On 6/6/2024 at 3:27 AM, draxynnic.3719 said:

The ironic thing is that ranger might well be getting to the point where it genuinely is pushing towards having too much melee. They've currently got sword, greatsword, dagger, hammer, mace, and it looks like spear will be melee as well. Meanwhile, the ranged weapons are shortbow (condi), longbow (power), axe (hybrid) and staff (support). That's still better off when it comes to ranged weapons than some (including, ironically, elementalist and engineer), but they're coming due for another ranged weapon.

Would be ironic if they end up getting land speargun before rifle.

 

Clearly, if anything, you misread my explanation of what a "ranger" really is.  It has nothing to do with "ranged weapons" in particular. 

 

 

[Fenris.8563]

6 hours ago, Frozey.8513 said:

A lot of people played the original Guild Wars where Ranger was the Archer class. With the current state of Ranger in GW2 it could be argued that whole Archer identity is up for grabs should Anet decide to make bow-based playstyle a thing. Then again it's been 10 years since Longbow was last time added to a class, so it's not looking like they are in any hurry. 🙃

Understandable, but I would say they clearly have different/more aspirations for the class in this game that has less limitations as the original GW.  I think the point they've made in the way they designed it in this game is "It's not about the ranged attack.  It's about a type of class that is 'close' with nature in general" and that the bow is actually a weapon that typically is centered around nature.  Which IMO is the only reason why they even gave us a ranged weapon.  Same with axes which we throw.  I believe it's just the right type of fit.  Whereas a gun is less 'natural' IMO. But this is just me thinking lol

[Trejgon.9367]

19 minutes ago, Fenris.8563 said:

The point you were making is Rangers should have guns because they're "Rangers" (relationship: Ranger/Ranged).  Clearly.

If this is not what you meant, then what in the heck did you mean by this?  It's pretty clear lmao

One does not have to take the name ranger to imply range, to find class balancing to be unhealthily melee-centric. There are a lot of non-ranger classes that also have people raising similar complain.

And while it is true that, let's say warrior has it worse, it does not mean that rangers are in a good spot either.

[mirage.8046]

Ranger obviously nothing has to do with 'range.' It's an ignorant argument to emphasize ranger's ranged capabilities. They are like hunters, pet owners, master of the forest, a protector of a national park. Read a book. 

What ranger could benefit from is either non-ranged skills or more sources of the unblockable buff to override projectile reflects. I'm not gonna say ranger will ever get weapons like scepter, trident, or rifle to bypass it, but there aren't many melee weapons left either. Off-hand sword is the last one yet to be added. While ranger has flexibility with its range and melee weapons, it isn't necessarily any better than what other classes have.

What will Untamed's ambush be for terrestrial spear, though, interestingly enough? Im hoping a ground-targeted leap that creates a shockwave.

Edited June 10 by mirage.8046
forgot about Untamed

[draxynnic.3719]

7 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

The point you were making is Rangers should have guns because they're "Rangers" (relationship: Ranger/Ranged).  Clearly.

If this is not what you meant, then what in the heck did you mean by this?  It's pretty clear lmao

 

Clearly, if anything, you misread my explanation of what a "ranger" really is.  It has nothing to do with "ranged weapons" in particular. 

 

 

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Mate, I've been on the "ranger doesn't mean ranged attacks" side of the fight for (checks join date) longer than you've been on the forum. Similarly, I've also been defending for years the validity of ArenaNet's decision that gunpowder weapons are disfavoured by the profession that is themed around being close to nature. I've been somewhat coming around lately to rifle in the form of a portable sylvari mortar plant or an insect hive hidden inside a handgun-like exterior instead of an actual gunpowder weapon, but that still involves turning it into something uniquely ranger rather than what most of the rifle proponents are asking for.

Hence my comment about preaching to the bishop. Want to explain to me the finer details of the process of sucking eggs too? Perhaps a dissertation on the safety measures to be taken when living in a country that's infamous for its venomous snakes and spiders? 🤣

The irony that I was referring to was that with all the people who've been demanding gunpowder weapons for ranger, and justifying it on the basis that ranger should have more ranged weapons, it would be hilarious if ArenaNet goes "we'll give you land harpoon gun instead". Since it technically still fits the bill of giving ranger another ranged weapon while still holding their ground on withholding gunpowder weapons from ranger. 

[Fenris.8563]

On 6/10/2024 at 5:01 PM, Trejgon.9367 said:

One does not have to take the name ranger to imply range, to find class balancing to be unhealthily melee-centric. There are a lot of non-ranger classes that also have people raising similar complain.

And while it is true that, let's say warrior has it worse, it does not mean that rangers are in a good spot either.

That's exactly what it is though.   The #1 indisputable reason why people ask for guns for ranger is "It's a ranged weapon for a RANGER why don't we have it!?!?!?"  This is undeniable.  It is literally the first argument from every single person who wants  guns.  

I don't see how Rangers aren't in a good spot. I love Ranger.  It's my main and I can't even get away from it to play other classes.  It's fun to me, I do fine in PVP  and absolutely dominate PVE content. It's only about to get better. 

[Trejgon.9367]

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

That's exactly what it is though.

As far as I kept track on this thread, no, not really, not in the case of the one fellow you were responding to.

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

The #1 indisputable reason why people ask for guns for ranger is "It's a ranged weapon for a RANGER why don't we have it!?!?!?"  This is undeniable.  It is literally the first argument from every single person who wants  guns.

Argument, which the fellow you responded to in this thread did not use. He in particular stated, that he finds the balance between ranged and melee options to be unhealthy for the overall class balancing. You cannot just go and assume everyone is using that one particular argument just because it is silly popular. And you can cut the hyperbole, because there is a number of people out there who don't care about the class name, and just want the gun because they genuinely believe that it could supplement class fantasy well, between beastmastery, wilderness survival and nature magic.

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

I don't see how Rangers aren't in a good spot.

That may be your perspective but it is not shared by everyone.

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

I love Ranger.

I love the class too, but that does not mean I think it is in best place it could be balance-wisely (not sure if guns would fix it tho tbh).

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

It's my main and I can't even get away from it to play other classes.

It used to be my main since the very beginning of the game. Unfortunately I don't think I can claim that anymore, and recently I have hard time to get myself play the ranger, when for other classes, I get more fun synergies available, and in particular I can't recall much of instances where core synergy for my OW PvE build being flat out removed from PvE, because of some druids in PvP.....

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

It's fun to me

That's great for you :)

9 hours ago, Fenris.8563 said:

and absolutely dominate PVE content. It's only about to get better. 

Tbh when it comes to my PvE "domination" my most recent buildcrafting theories could be summed up with "so much effort in that ranger build, only for that other character to outdo it easilly while putting in no effort". but I do hope it will get better, in particular I am looking forward to see how the new spear ends up handling.

[Fenris.8563]

On 6/18/2024 at 3:43 AM, Trejgon.9367 said:

As far as I kept track on this thread, no, not really, not in the case of the one fellow you were responding to.

Argument, which the fellow you responded to in this thread did not use. He in particular stated, that he finds the balance between ranged and melee options to be unhealthy for the overall class balancing. You cannot just go and assume everyone is using that one particular argument just because it is silly popular. And you can cut the hyperbole, because there is a number of people out there who don't care about the class name, and just want the gun because they genuinely believe that it could supplement class fantasy well, between beastmastery, wilderness survival and nature magic.

That may be your perspective but it is not shared by everyone.

I love the class too, but that does not mean I think it is in best place it could be balance-wisely (not sure if guns would fix it tho tbh).

It used to be my main since the very beginning of the game. Unfortunately I don't think I can claim that anymore, and recently I have hard time to get myself play the ranger, when for other classes, I get more fun synergies available, and in particular I can't recall much of instances where core synergy for my OW PvE build being flat out removed from PvE, because of some druids in PvP.....

That's great for you 🙂

Tbh when it comes to my PvE "domination" my most recent buildcrafting theories could be summed up with "so much effort in that ranger build, only for that other character to outdo it easilly while putting in no effort". but I do hope it will get better, in particular I am looking forward to see how the new spear ends up handling.

I can't even waste my time with this.  You are literally lying in your first 2 responses so I'm just not going to spend any time on this.  This is ridiculous lmao I mean we can all see what he freaken said.  

Edited Wednesday at 03:16 PM by Fenris.8563

[Fenris.8563]

On 6/10/2024 at 5:46 PM, mirage.8046 said:

Ranger obviously nothing has to do with 'range.' It's an ignorant argument to emphasize ranger's ranged capabilities. They are like hunters, pet owners, master of the forest, a protector of a national park. Read a book. 

What ranger could benefit from is either non-ranged skills or more sources of the unblockable buff to override projectile reflects. I'm not gonna say ranger will ever get weapons like scepter, trident, or rifle to bypass it, but there aren't many melee weapons left either. Off-hand sword is the last one yet to be added. While ranger has flexibility with its range and melee weapons, it isn't necessarily any better than what other classes have.

What will Untamed's ambush be for terrestrial spear, though, interestingly enough? Im hoping a ground-targeted leap that creates a shockwave.

Exactly.  It's nice to have someone making sense here. 

As far as weapons/abilities go I think it's our abilities (and/or pets) that need tuning. Not the weapons we use.  We should have off-hand sword, and honestly, I feel we should get shields too. I think having our pets become much more tanky would be a good start in the right direction for balance.  It should scale better for PVP, and WvW.  If our pets can die seconds into a fight, and they're that crucial for us, then I think maybe that's where the focus needs to be.  Stop making pets a weakness and start making them more of a strength.  

 

[draxynnic.3719]

Pets in sPvP are already at a point where it's not worthwhile targeting them because it's easier to kill the ranger than to knock out the pet. WvW is a bigger issue due to how many effects flying around, though.

[Trejgon.9367]

On 6/19/2024 at 5:07 PM, Fenris.8563 said:

I can't even waste my time with this.  You are literally lying in your first 2 responses so I'm just not going to spend any time on this.  This is ridiculous lmao I mean we can all see what he freaken said.  

You can't waste your time, except you do waste your time writing up a post that you won't waste your time and baselessly accusing me of lying - which is to everyone to see as you say.

Draxynnic stated that ironically enough we are getting to the point where ranger as a class is too melee centric. You then jumped on the name, which Draxynnic did not even mention. I came to comment, that name confusion is not required element to believe that class may be too melee centric to be healthy. Draxynnic even responded to you elaborating, that he did not in fact mean the name connection, because he was arguing with people that ranger does not mean range (distance of engagement) long before your forum account was created.

You are seeing argument that not only is not there, but the author of the post where you are seeing it have explicitly told you was not there, and your best retort to being pointed out it is not there is accusing people of lying.

And the fact that you are saying that "we can all see what he said" is super ironic, because yes, everyone with basic ability to read English can go to the post, read it, and see for themselves, that Draxynnic did not say anything about name implication.

[Levetty.1279]

On 6/10/2024 at 10:46 PM, mirage.8046 said:

Ranger obviously nothing has to do with 'range.' It's an ignorant argument to emphasize ranger's ranged capabilities. They are like hunters, pet owners, master of the forest, a protector of a national park. Read a book.

Yeah, every class in the game has access to range skills but we should remove all of Ranger's because the Ranger's name doesn't mean ranged.

I mean Mesmer is obviously just another word for ranged, Revenant I believe is the french word for Ranged and Guardian is obviously a clever pun on the mandarin word for "not melee".

🙄

[frazazel.7501]

10 minutes ago, Levetty.1279 said:

Yeah, every class in the game has access to range skills but we should remove all of Ranger's because the Ranger's name doesn't mean ranged.

I mean Mesmer is obviously just another word for ranged, Revenant I believe is the french word for Ranged and Guardian is obviously a clever pun on the mandarin word for "not melee".

🙄

What are you even talking about? No one said that we should remove Ranger's ranged skills.

[Levetty.1279]

Just now, frazazel.7501 said:

What are you even talking about? No one said that we should remove Ranger's ranged skills.

It's called hyperbole based on the kitten argument trolls are throwing around that Ranger shouldn't get any new ranged weapons.

Guess what else Revenant isn't actually the french word for ranged.