yes yes another ranger thread sorta

Feedback, bugs, and general gameplay related discussion.
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

yes yes another ranger thread sorta

Postby amolol » Wed Dec 31, 2003 6:31 am

ok every one here is shooting for archery upgrades but what they dont see is _rangers_ screaming somthing along the lines of "i dont want to be an archery defined class" so letts look at some pur melee advancements that would benefit not only rangers but maybe warriors and anti/pali's.

first someone posted cleave... nice idea i posted it some time ago

as an upgrade to kick cleave would do more damage than kick and have a higher success rate of landing... much higher.

somone made refrance to pomel also if you check the logs of sojourns idea forum you willl see my idea.

pommel to perform a hilt strike with the pommel of your weapon. this would be like a higher rate version of sheild punch while doing some extra damage would have a chance to stun (based on wgt of the weapon). i had sugested this as a 2h sword ability only but i can see it on a 1h slasher aswell.

i think we would all like to see rangers get trip.

somthing so that roges and bards dont feel left out on.

DAGGER PUNCH: see pommel.

now somthing i personaly would like to see is a _TRUE_ missile shield. now im not saying just arial attacks here but also arial based magic spells like magic missile/earth darts/ sticks to snakes/ totem darts/ would be like 1/1 arrows whereas the higher grade version of these spells force missiles that flaming acorn one ect ect would be like 2/2 or 3/3 arrows.
this is my personal stand point and i expect fully to be flamed and in general disrespected for this one.

have fun reading through adding on flammong off different ideas.
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce

myspace.com/tgchef
Delmair Aamoren
Sojourner
Posts: 604
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Contact:

Postby Delmair Aamoren » Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:50 pm

funny man. archery is currently what defines rangers. most rangers know/accept this.

melee is a close second, but really, seriously... yah umm, ok, so much for that point..
belleshel
Sojourner
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Northeast

Postby belleshel » Wed Dec 31, 2003 2:56 pm

We do?
Yayaril
Sojourner
Posts: 2551
Joined: Sun Feb 18, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Green Bay, WI

Postby Yayaril » Wed Dec 31, 2003 5:01 pm

8)

Delmair speaks for all the rangers.
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Wed Dec 31, 2003 9:40 pm

question delmair... do you even play a ranger? if so is it above lvl 2? if not dont comment. note i said that the general voice of those who play rangers is that they dont want to be an archery defined class....
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce



myspace.com/tgchef
mynazzaraxxsyn
Sojourner
Posts: 479
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:00 pm
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby mynazzaraxxsyn » Wed Dec 31, 2003 10:53 pm

amolol wrote:the general voice of those who play rangers is that they dont want to be an archery defined class....


Then don't play a ranger? I mean now as it is a ranger is defined as a useless class. I'd personally rather be defined as an archer then a waste of hard drive space and bandwith.
Lilithelle stops using a softly throbbing piece of flesh.
Gura group-says 'ill go solo the biznatch, just don't tell Stamm'
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'is it bad that the two words i think of when i see yer title are hottub and cthulhu? :('
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Wed Dec 31, 2003 11:21 pm

Myna...really. . wow. Trying very hard not to flame you. . . but that was quite an uninsightfull comment. Currently rangers are not defined. What we're trying to do is explore the options, and what most rangers are saying is that we would rather not be defined by archery alone. Saying that we shouldn't play a class based on something that has not yet happened, and is still under discussion is pretty silly. I do not want to see archery be forced down all of our throats as our 'niche' without any discussion or other options.

But thanks for your advice. I'll go play a cleric instead of ranger cuz you say I should accept the proposed yet unofficial role of 'archer'.

Have a nice day!

Lost
mynazzaraxxsyn
Sojourner
Posts: 479
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:00 pm
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby mynazzaraxxsyn » Wed Dec 31, 2003 11:33 pm

First off Waelos I have a decent ammount of respect for you, mostly because you've stuck with rangers through the thick and thin and have been one for as long as I remember seeing your name on who.

Now about my post. Most of the mud (rangers included) seem to think that rangers are useless execpt for defending 1w (if needed I can include specific quotes). Delmair/Dalar/whoever says archery already defines a ranger. So I stated that rangers can stay useless or accept that they're archers. If they don't like that play another class.

Shrug.

Flame me I don't care.
Lilithelle stops using a softly throbbing piece of flesh.
Gura group-says 'ill go solo the biznatch, just don't tell Stamm'
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'is it bad that the two words i think of when i see yer title are hottub and cthulhu? :('
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Wed Dec 31, 2003 11:38 pm

I appreciate your respect and I wish to reciporocate it in at least by not responding to your posts with flames. I don't see why you would say that because Delmair and Dalar say archery should be our niche that we should accept it as thus or move on. No offense to our good friends Dalar and Delmair. . . but who are they to determine the fate ofa class? I just think it is noteworthy that those people who play the class really do not want to be saddled with archery as their niche, and wish to continue having a bit of diversity, albiet a more usefull diversity I am not saying that archery needs to be yanked. Maybe rogues should get their throwing daggers back. I would be saddened to see the ranger as the "dual wield masters" (as they were intended to be, at least for all of these years hehe) go down the drain. I dont think that archery should replace ranger melee. It should do about the same damage, have some quirks that make it desirable in some situations over melee, and add a few more skills to the class. Thats about it =)

Hab a day!

Lost
mynazzaraxxsyn
Sojourner
Posts: 479
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:00 pm
Location: Ixarkon
Contact:

Postby mynazzaraxxsyn » Wed Dec 31, 2003 11:42 pm

Oops, it was delmair who said that rangers' niche was archery in this thread nothing from dalar about it. My mistake there.
Lilithelle stops using a softly throbbing piece of flesh.
Gura group-says 'ill go solo the biznatch, just don't tell Stamm'
Kossuth responds to your petition with 'is it bad that the two words i think of when i see yer title are hottub and cthulhu? :('
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Thu Jan 01, 2004 1:01 am

the thing that confuses me most is the fact that people who dont play rangers are trying to dictate the direction they go. i dont think they should have anything to do with how rangers evolve. these infact are prolly the same ppl who refuse to bring a ranger on zones....

myn i understand where you sit on this. but i dont agree with it. for a long tme multiple people have asked for a ranger specialization beit archery or dual wield. i think that would be a good first step. now in the interest of making it fair this should be a questable option at oh say lvl 25-30? mebbe 20 i dunno wichever it is felt that someone can get a good grasp of what they want to do. then add in a quest for either or... if need be i will write the zone and quest for each.. at this point it would be a low lvl remort.. kinda like the lich quest one would either go to blade dancer/singer or to bowman/archer

aech class would have different skills witch i will prolly com up with at a later date.

any way thats my 2 cents... so um who wants the change?
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce



myspace.com/tgchef
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Fri Jan 02, 2004 7:14 pm

Actually, if you took the time to ask some of the older rangers that still play what they think defines the class, you'd get an answer of versatility in the majority of the answers somewhere in the rambling. Threads that talk about totally removing some of our melee abilities typically wind up with rangers mentioning that they don't want to lose their flexibility like that.
amolol
Sojourner
Posts: 688
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2002 5:01 am

Postby amolol » Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:14 am

i agree that versatility is one of our best aspects. but i also agree that rangers should be able to have a choice in a speciality or keep the versatility. this way every one is happy. but i also thing that rangers need an upgrade. so basicly thats what i think. i just made this post because every one was saying archery is all a ranger is good for.
i dont know what your problem is, but i bet its hard to pronounce



myspace.com/tgchef
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Postby Ambar » Sun Jan 04, 2004 5:44 pm

gonna be honest here and say i have only really seen high end rangers since i started playing good race, but from what i have seen they really need no upgrade ... EXCEPT skill caps maybe ... their warrior skill caps could be raised a bit, and why can't their rescue be on par with, or MAYBE a tad lower than warrior?

Thalidyrr was my only tank for about 41 levels and he did fine, after that he was my prime tank when we were grouped, and he did fine then too ... hasted, embodied, and stoned he did just as good as any other tank i had duirng my leveling ...

Maybe it's the lower end rangers that are doing the (for lack of better word here sorry no thesaurus at hand) complaining, and perhaps that does need to be looked at ...

Bottom line .... as rangers are, they are pretty versatile .. they can arch when they want, dual when they want, and bash or rescue when they want ... you have GOT to rememebr they are NOT tanks but hitters, and deal incredible damage when treated as hitters and kept hasted (shoosh thal i haste you when i rememebr to:P)

I think we are so set on wanting melee *fixed* we dont use our assets as well as we possibly could ... the other day we CRUISED thru Cave City with a paladin tank and a ranger lurer ... we only had a couple deaths, and had we started the zone right at pop, we would have completed it in one pop ...

I don't play a Ranger (i have nancing issues really) so maybe I shouldn't comment, but these are all based on my personal experience with my own personal ranger (Thalidyrr)

In a nutshell .. raise their skill caps .. that's all I see wrong ...

-Jennifer
"When a child is born, so is a grandmother."

-Italian Proverb
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Dalar » Sun Jan 04, 2004 7:04 pm

I wouldn't give Thal that much credit. Elders is decked out w/ the top dam gear and we had nokie/pava. That's 4 khanjaris and 2 BC daggers.
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.
Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Postby Ambar » Sun Jan 04, 2004 8:26 pm

Dalar wrote:I wouldn't give Thal that much credit. Elders is decked out w/ the top dam gear and we had nokie/pava. That's 4 khanjaris and 2 BC daggers.


nods i know .. im just re-stating the fact rangers are effective as-is

and he was my only tank 1-41 and pretty much my only tank affter that, barring a different one here and there when iw asnt solo
"When a child is born, so is a grandmother."



-Italian Proverb
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Sun Jan 04, 2004 10:00 pm

Thing is Amb, that rangers are actually great levels 1-41. ARchery works fine for xp, the mobs they're tanking are wusses, casters actually focus on keeping them spelled (you'll notice ANY class tanks pretty good with spells). The real drawback is levels 41 (well, 46+) on up. There isn't a specific thing rangers are wanted for in a group. There are a few rangers who have fought hard to carve their own niche into groups of friends.

Thats all for now!=)

The LoSt
Hyldryn
Sojourner
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Maryland

Postby Hyldryn » Sun Jan 04, 2004 10:09 pm

Waelos wrote:There are a few rangers who have fought hard to carve their own niche into groups of friends.


NICHECARVING
Ranger Applied skill.

Syntax: innate nichecarving <person>
Aggressive: Sometimes
Class/Level: Ranger 50th

When nichecarving, the ranger gathers information from his/her surroundings and fashions it into useful interpersonal relationships.
Waelos
Sojourner
Posts: 499
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA

Postby Waelos » Sun Jan 04, 2004 10:14 pm

*LAUGH* Hyld... that is priceless! ;)

lOst

Return to “T2 Gameplay Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest