Don't Talk Until You Are One...

Archive of the Sojourn3 Gameplay Discussion Forum.
Aderon
Sojourner
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2001 5:01 am
Location: NY

Don\'t Talk Until You Are One...

Postby Aderon » Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:37 pm

I have been reading these posts about rangers really for the first time today. I have never really had time, I work two jobs and try to level myself when I have free time. However, I have noticed a lot of people posting on the fact that Rangers are ok, they would group with Rangers, etc. But this is not necessarily true. I personally love my ranger. I played a sorc on Sojourn and a Shaman after they were created in Toril (very usefull classes I may add). I have not seen such an unecessary class as Ranger until I played one. Rangers tend to be high level not because they are good to group with but because they exp a lot and make their own groups. Anyone who knows me will tell you I am always making an exp group. I only learned EM this wipe but was leading EXP in there soon after starting. I hardly ever get a tell that says hey we need a ranger. I also have high level rogue friends that suffer a similar fate, however, they are called to pick now and then. So I sympathise with you Rogues but you hit like a Mack Truck... Rangers however are never called on to tame a mount :P I feel like this will change once Range is inserted for now the simple fact is, IT IS NOT IN. So do not post that you think Ranger is ok, do not write that you would group with a ranger and mostly do not say they hit as hard as rogues. Unless you have played the class and others to match it up to, do not make comments. I know some immortals play rangers and I trust them to make decisions on the class. But for those of you who do not, I don't listen to a word you have to say. Ranger has to change. There is no dispute but even if it does not, I will still play it. Even though I know an enchanter with more HP than my Ranger, I still love it. So rock on Rangers, keep our fingers crossed that things will change but until then, I don't wanna hear side comments from an Orc. That is all. Thank you.

Aderon Greystorm
The Forrester Lost in the Woods :P

P.S. Don't think I am all complaints and no action, I have several productive suggestions on how to help the class just like Belle posted but this post is not the time or the place to post them.
Trogar
Sojourner
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Trogar » Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:19 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Aderon:
I have not seen such an unecessary class as Ranger until I played one. Rangers tend to be high level not because they are good to group with but because they exp a lot and make their own groups. </font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

WOAH! I disagree sir. I think rangers are a mighty fine class on Soj3. Both rangers and rogues can get 6 hits per round right? That's major damage in the age of shieldblock when warriors get 3 1h slashes per round.

I use to play a ranger at the end of soj1 / begining of toril as my first char. At that point in time they were a horrible class. Monks outhit them, and rangers had rediculously poor skills. I eventually rolled a warrior in flustration of poor ranger skills hehehe. But monks are gone, and rangers can seem to rescue and bash better then when I was a ranger.

I like the ranger class. I almost always have a ranger in my group.

If only range weapons were back. I wanna hit Cave city now hehe. I think there's some more stuff coming too.

Trogar
sok
Sojourner
Posts: 1578
Joined: Mon May 21, 2001 5:01 am
Location: santa ana, ca, usa
Contact:

Postby sok » Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:23 pm

i had a ranger once. lvl him fasted. of couse i was decked. so i'm relieved that i can post here and have u read it. 1st off the easiest: ranger nake has to have more hp than enchanter of same lvl. if not than god's plz fix right away cuz it's a bug. but if u comparing yourself w/ hit/dam vs higher lvl enchanter w/ hp eq, than it's not a good point. i think when folks talked about high lvl ranger they assume that other people of other class put in as much time. if u put in as much exp time in enchanter as u did your ranger would u be of same lvl, i think is point trying to be made.
Blung
Sojourner
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: San Diego, CA,

Postby Blung » Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:44 pm

Give me a break on the ranger being weak. I don't see REAL high level ranger such Ladorn, Belleshel etc... complain about ranger being weak? I think some goodie are just spoiled. In my opinion, I think Gods should zang ranger from good race and give it to evils.

Blung take no prisoner
snow
Sojourner
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Cambridge, MA, US
Contact:

Postby snow » Wed Jul 18, 2001 12:09 am

I love my ranger. I just wish there was a ranger-esque class for the evil races.

I think other MUDs have given the drow a ranger class and called it 'hunter.'

Would love to see that here.
Aderon
Sojourner
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2001 5:01 am
Location: NY

Postby Aderon » Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:39 am

Firstly, I think you missed my point Blung... The point of my post was I did not want to hear evils posting about how Rangers were ok. Maybe you should talk to some of these "REAL high level Rangers" before you post? And yeah good idea, give ranger to evils:

Rangers abhor evil, and seek to erradicate it from the face of Sojourn. They
do not consort with evil beings at all, regardless of the reason. All
Rangers must maintain a "good" alignment or risk losing their God granted
powers and be turned into simple warriors.

That is from help Ranger... I don't know many evils who abhor evil do you?
Secondly, I love my Ranger or I would not be playing it. Period.

Aderon
Azralek Silvermist
Sojourner
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Baltimore,MD
Contact:

Postby Azralek Silvermist » Wed Jul 18, 2001 3:00 am

Been playing a ranger as my primary and a warr as my secondary since soj I
simply put.

Incarnation 1 Rangers were a poorclass and had miserable lifes hands down
Monks and alignment restriction were 2 of main reasons
a third was no outstanding special skills

Incarnation 2 Rangers were actually asked fro groups fo reaasons other than there is no one better.
monks were gone and rangers now had the capability to do damage

This Incarnation Rangers have been further fine tuned and improved.
While we are missing archery it is coming and other than that the class has been stripped of all its previous handicaps.

I understand where you are coming from Aderon
but it looks like things will be better this time around.

Don't beat on Aderon guys 3 years of playing the class when it was broken left a lot of us rather jaded.

Azralek Silvermist - >past

"oh you got a evil warrior in the group.. its kewl i never really wanted to do jot again anyway"

Azralek Silvermist -> present (hopefully)
"Oh you want me to shoot stuff full of holes ? .. brt"
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Wed Jul 18, 2001 11:31 pm

Blung: Pardon my french, but ARE YOU FREAKING BLIND OR SOMETHING!?!?!? Bell and Ladorn HAVE posted stuff about rangers being underpowered. Ladorn's only done it once because like ALL the other rangers except for Bell, Sarvis, and I, he doesn't care for all the ignorant crap and whining that people seem to relentlessly SPEW as if it's international bitching month!

Azralek: I agree with what you said. Although I still question exactly how much use rangers or rogues will have with most of the damage coming from spells now, I'm willing to see what happens and offer feedback to the gods. I actually think we we may have been worse off last time around since invokers were so sickeningly overpowered, but at least now all the spell damage isn't entirely centered on one class (though I do question giving druids so many damage spells since I don't think people took druids into groups to nuke, but I could be wrong).

And jaded isn't the right word for it I think. From what I've observed, it's more like manic-depression. Manic whenever there's talk of an upgrade, depressed every other time. Seriously, all you non rangers should try talking to all the high level rangers that have been here since Toril. The whole class seems like it needs a dose of prozac every now and then (though I've gotten more optimistic within the past few weeks thankfully).
belleshel
Sojourner
Posts: 526
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Northeast

Postby belleshel » Wed Jul 18, 2001 11:50 pm

1) I think we are in better shape then last incarnation.
2) How can you judge how powerful a class is when its most important skill is not implemented? It's like lyt coming out and saying elementalists are underpowered...
We just have to wait, trust me I'll be the first one in line to talk with miax/shevy if things aren't up to par, but until we see the whole class, lets not be hasty to judge.
Belle
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:05 am

I think the problem is that we are all getting pretty impatient about waiting for our class to be complete. It's all fine and good to say we will be balanced when we get archery... but we've been waiting for it for 2 months, and it looks like it'll be at least another month. In the mean time we must be underpowered by default... heh. Image

Sarvis
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Thu Jul 19, 2001 12:45 pm

I'm not a ranger, nor do I play one, so I guess you can just Ignore everything I say Aderon "But for those of you who do not, I don't listen to a word you have to say." directly quoted from your opening statement.

Granted since I have never played a ranger, feel free to tell me if the below facts I am going to mention are true or not.

1) Rangers can recognize what spells are being cast by a mob. Again, since I have only seen logs- this is my assumption. But Rangers have a distinct advantage, say over, rogues or warriors, when they see Tiamat begins casting a spell called 'Incendiary Cloud', They can flee out, long enough for the spell to go off and come back in. A warrior/Tank Has to eat that spell in the ass or the group gets wasted. Now if the ranger sits there and eats that cloud in the butt and they arent wearing hp gear, then too bad, just dont complain about rangers not having enough hps for those mobs.

2) Though I havent tested rogue very far in this matter, Dual Wield seems to be ruled by the Rangers. Warriors at one time were decent at it (which I dont know why this was downgraded to the pitiful levels it is now, since they are the 'masters of melee') 6-7 attacks a round, combine that with a dopple, and you have extreme melee damage.

3) Thac0. This is sheer speculation, but since you are comparing melee damage rangers vs rogues, I can only assume that a rangers base Thac0 is better than a Rogues. The thing that balances this out is the rogues ability to backstab. But straight up rangers should be doing the same if not more melee damage, discounting specials.

4) Spells. Compared to a warrior with no healing abilitys other than sitting on his ass, or regaining moves, or buffing yourself with barkskin, or the various other spells a ranger gets, there is no comparison. Seems that all the focus of complaints is on a Rangers ability to melee, and you just discount the ability to cast spells (and recognize spells being cast) and dont even bring it into the Balance Equation.

5) Archery. Been pretty much stated since opening that its not in yet, but will be. Be patient. IMHO, without archery Rangers are still crack-daddies that deal a buttload of damage.

6) Again this is just rumors and stuff that I have heard, so I dont know for a fact. But I have heard of some weapon, Windsong? maybe that supposedly only a ranger can use, and gives them more attacks? Sounds pretty pimpish to me, and something great to look forward to.

Oh well, prolly more to follow but I am too tired to document this better,

Garosh
Faedril
Sojourner
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 6:01 am
Location: MI

Postby Faedril » Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:12 pm

One thing to keep in mind... There really are not a ton of zone groups going on for the good side at the moment. The ones that exist are taking the big rogues and rangers. (at least this is what I assume from having looked at logs and the players eq in question.) Until there are more of these groups, don't expect to be invited to do something by someone you don't group with on a regular basis. Rangers won't be left out. Also, for XP, 3-4 men groups are most efficient. That leaves room for one "hitter". So, do a who rogue ranger sort, then do a who lead sort and figure out your probability of being invited to a group you aren't leading based on how many exist and how many comparable hitters are on. Personally, any class that can solo to 40 is not underpowered... *Poke Belleshel* Anyway, any upgrade to Rangers should include the !war proc being removed from Windsong since you string pluckers won't need it anymore... *cackle*
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:08 pm

1) Rangers can recognize what spells are being cast by a mob. Again, since I have only seen logs- this is my assumption. But Rangers have a distinct advantage, say over, rogues or warriors, when they see Tiamat begins casting a spell called 'Incendiary Cloud', They can flee out, long enough for the spell to go off and come back in. A warrior/Tank Has to eat that spell in the ass or the group gets wasted. Now if the ranger sits there and eats that cloud in the butt and they arent wearing hp gear, then too bad, just dont complain about rangers not having enough hps for those mobs.

True, so can all other casters. Err... from the logs I've seen Tiamat doesn't cast inferno all that much. She just breathes at you... we can't see that coming any more than you can. Not to mention the fact that if you are fighting a mage and it starts casting you pretty much know it's going to be an offensive spell even without spell recognition.


2) Though I havent tested rogue very far in this matter, Dual Wield seems to be ruled by the Rangers. Warriors at one time were decent at it (which I dont know why this was downgraded to the pitiful levels it is now, since they are the 'masters of melee') 6-7 attacks a round, combine that with a dopple, and you have extreme melee damage.

Rangers get 5 attacks per round, with haste. Grey Elf rangers get an occasional 6th attack. Halfling rogues consistantly get that 6th attack...

3) Thac0. This is sheer speculation, but since you are comparing melee damage rangers vs rogues, I can only assume that a rangers base Thac0 is better than a Rogues. The thing that balances this out is the rogues ability to backstab. But straight up rangers should be doing the same if not more melee damage, discounting specials.

Supposed to be abouyt the same I believe... but discounting specials is discounting a LOT.

From Yayaril's post in the damage thread:

At level 36:
Normal pierce- 20-32 damage
Circle: 80-120 damage
Backstab(per blade): 140-220 damage

With comparable eq, hit and dam I'd get 300 damage in 2 rounds. A rogue would get 300 + 120 damage from circle. In a battle that lasts 10 rounds I get 3000, the rogue gets 4200.

Even when archery does come in we are supposed to be slightly behind the damage a rogue does with melee. It's just supposed to narrow the margin a bit since we have a higher hp value and spells and such.

4) Spells. Compared to a warrior with no healing abilitys other than sitting on his ass, or regaining moves, or buffing yourself with barkskin, or the various other spells a ranger gets, there is no comparison. Seems that all the focus of complaints is on a Rangers ability to melee, and you just discount the ability to cast spells (and recognize spells being cast) and dont even bring it into the Balance Equation.

Warriors are _necessary_ for a group. Rangers are considered an auxiliary class, and therefore don't get nearly as many groups. Enter THAT into the balance equation...

5) Archery. Been pretty much stated since opening that its not in yet, but will be. Be patient. IMHO, without archery Rangers are still crack-daddies that deal a buttload of damage.

We deal less damage then probably every class but warriors, paladins and clerics. And that's only if the clerics don't use their damage spells...

6) Again this is just rumors and stuff that I have heard, so I dont know for a fact. But I have heard of some weapon, Windsong? maybe that supposedly only a ranger can use, and gives them more attacks? Sounds pretty pimpish to me, and something great to look forward to.

A quest item that's really hard to get shouldn't matter to the balance equation. But even if you insist that it does I believe it is elf only, so I can't use it.


Sarvis
Nokie
Sojourner
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Contact:

Postby Nokie » Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:32 pm

I cannot sit back and watch such misinformation.

As a halfling rogue, Let me state that we do not get 6 attacks a round (hasted) consistantly. That's just plain false. As a matter of fact, I'm going to do some log analysis and post some real numbers for you.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>[i]Rangers get 5 attacks per round, with haste. Grey Elf rangers get an occasional 6th attack. Halfling rogues consistantly get that 6th attack...
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>



[This message has been edited by Nokie (edited 07-19-2001).]
Nokie
Sojourner
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Contact:

Postby Nokie » Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:48 pm

Looking through my log of the fights in the Temple of Blipdoolpoolp last night, here are the number of attacks I got while hasted over 50 rounds:

6, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 4, 6, 5, 6, 6, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4, 6, 5, 5, 6, 6, 4, 5, 5, 6, 5, 5, 6, 5, 4, 5, 6, 4, 6, 6, 5, 5, 6, 4, 4, 5, 6, 4, 5, 3, 3, 5, 4, 6, 5

That averages out to 4.9 attack per round.

This was counting total number of attacks, inclusing misses.

Nokie's offiense skill is 90, 1h piercing is 99, double attack is 57, and dual wield is 98.

6 attacks per round consistantly my foot!

Nokie 'No you don't!! That belongs to me!' Quickfingers
Tzat
Sojourner
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Kingston, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Postby Tzat » Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:07 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>We deal less damage then probably every class but warriors, paladins and clerics. And that's only if the clerics don't use their damage spells...
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh, i _really_ doubt clerics do more damage than rangers even if we max out on damage spells :P

I guess thats pretty much irrelevant to this discussion tho Image
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:14 pm

*nod* Tzat. Chuckle.. Cleric damage spells are not that good, especially now with the big downgrade to holy word.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:26 pm

Hrm... is that the cap for rogues on Double attack Nokie? Or have you just not gotten it that high yet... because if that gets up into the 90's your average will be closer to 5.9. Also we have no idea if you were hasted or not looking at just those numbers. If you were unhasted for 30 rounds and hasted for 20 your average will appear lower than if you were hasted for the entire thing.

If that is the cap on double attack it seems wrong. Should be higher if you guys are supposed to be the melee masters of the game...

Sarvis
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:26 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
True, so can all other casters. Err... from the logs I've seen Tiamat doesn't cast inferno all that much. She just breathes at you... we can't see that coming any more than you can. Not to mention the fact that if you are fighting a mage and it starts casting you pretty much know it's going to be an offensive spell even without spell recognition.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was comparing Rangers to Rogues and warriors in this sense. I can only see if its offensive about half the time, the rest, I just see Soandso begins casting a spell.
And that tiamat example, was just a name I stuck in there instead of MoBX begins casting, figured that was obvious but you can debate it if you want.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Rangers get 5 attacks per round, with haste. Grey Elf rangers get an occasional 6th attack. Halfling rogues consistantly get that 6th attack...</font>


From what I have seen there are a lot of 6 attacks with an additional 7th thrown in for grey elf ranger on occasion.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Supposed to be abouyt the same I believe... but discounting specials is discounting a LOT

With comparable eq, hit and dam I'd get 300 damage in 2 rounds. A rogue would get 300 + 120 damage from circle. In a battle that lasts 10 rounds I get 3000, the rogue gets 4200..

Even when archery does come in we are supposed to be slightly behind the damage a rogue does with melee. It's just supposed to narrow the margin a bit since we have a higher hp value and spells and such.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds pretty balanced to me if true. Since the common motto seems to be, the more hps you have, the less damage you do. Sounds like you want to keep the more hps and still have more melee potential damage.


<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">
Warriors are _necessary_ for a group. Rangers are considered an auxiliary class, and therefore don't get nearly as many groups. Enter THAT into the balance equation...</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
yeah..warriors are necessary if you dont have a mounted paladin or anti to tank.
But even comparing that is riduculous. I dont know if you are saying you want Rangers to Tank like a warrior, fight better than a warrior, do more damage than any class, get more attacks than any class, toss in Heal like a cleric, nuke like a wizard, lay hands like a paladin, archery specialization, shoot..give em moonwell too.
I really dont understand how you can think rangers are under-balanced as is. If anything is Under-balanced its a Warrior.(flame flame flame burn burn burn nod self)


<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">We deal less damage then probably every class but warriors, paladins and clerics. And that's only if the clerics don't use their damage spells...</font>

WAH!!!!! boooohooo!
then maybe instead of complaining about your damage you should be wondering why a "WARRIOR" is doing prolly the least amount of damage in melee fights? HRM?


[Quote]A quest item that's really hard to get shouldn't matter to the balance equation. But even if you insist that it does I believe it is elf only, so I can't use it.[/QUOTE}

One example of a weapon. Last I saw all melee fighters were defined by their weaponry and armor. So including items into the balancing factor is a completely valid reason.


Garosh



[This message has been edited by Garosh (edited 07-19-2001).]
Nokie
Sojourner
Posts: 786
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Contact:

Postby Nokie » Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:35 pm

For all of the numbers I quoted, I WAS hasted.

I have no idea what the skill caps are, but if my double attack is that low at level 50, then I suspect it's a rather low cap...

What is a high level ranger's double attack I wonder? Something to think about.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>Hrm... is that the cap for rogues on Double attack Nokie? Or have you just not gotten it that high yet... because if that gets up into the 90's your average will be closer to 5.9. Also we have no idea if you were hasted or not looking at just those numbers. If you were unhasted for 30 rounds and hasted for 20 your average will appear lower than if you were hasted for the entire thing.

If that is</B> the cap on double attack it seems wrong. Should be higher if you guys are supposed to be the melee masters of the game...

Sarvis
</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:17 pm

Garosh:
<i>I was comparing Rangers to Rogues and warriors in this sense. I can only see if its offensive about half the time, the rest, I just see Soandso begins casting a spell.
And that tiamat example, was just a name I stuck in there instead of MoBX begins casting, figured that was obvious but you can debate it if you want.</i>

I've never seen a mob cast a non-offensive spell in combat...

Sounds pretty balanced to me if true. Since the common motto seems to be, the more hps you have, the less damage you do. Sounds like you want to keep the more hps and still have more melee potential damage.

Actually this thread is about people like you not making assumptions about a class you don't play and don't really know how it works. Belleshel's other thread is just saying we want our skills implemented. How much would you warriors bitch if you were waiting for shieldpunch for 3 months?

<i>yeah..warriors are necessary if you dont have a mounted paladin or anti to tank.
But even comparing that is riduculous. I dont know if you are saying you want Rangers to Tank like a warrior, fight better than a warrior, do more damage than any class, get more attacks than any class, toss in Heal like a cleric, nuke like a wizard, lay hands like a paladin, archery specialization, shoot..give em moonwell too.
I really dont understand how you can think rangers are under-balanced as is. If anything is Under-balanced its a Warrior.(flame flame flame burn burn burn nod self)</i>

No, you missed the point. Warriors will get invited into any group almost constantly. Rangers either make their own, solo, or sit at the fountain. I don't want to be a better basher, rescuer or even know how to shieldpunch. But I would like to be invited into groups more than once a month. No one ever seems to consider that as part of a classes balance though for some reason...

<i>WAH!!!!! boooohooo!
then maybe instead of complaining about your damage you should be wondering why a "WARRIOR" is doing prolly the least amount of damage in melee fights? HRM?</i>

Umm... because it's your job to take damage, not to give it. Last I recall warriors could dual wield too if they wanted, giving them the same potential damage as rangers in melee. Guess you're all to busy shieldblocking and bashing though...

<i>
One example of a weapon. Last I saw all melee fighters were defined by their weaponry and armor. So including items into the balancing factor is a completely valid reason. </i>

Fine, but I still can't use Windsong.

Nokie:
<i>For all of the numbers I quoted, I WAS hasted.
I have no idea what the skill caps are, but if my double attack is that low at level 50, then I suspect it's a rather low cap...
What is a high level ranger's double attack I wonder? Something to think about.</i>

A lot higher than that I'm sure. Like I said, you guys probably should have a higher double attack cap if you are supposed to be the melee damage people. *shrug*


Sarvis
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:27 pm

You should pay attention to mobs more.. since they cast non offensive quite often.
Full heals, armors, coldshields, globes, lots of things.

Even when its offensive spells they are casting, I only know about half the time if they are. So I have to sit there and cringe and wonder if Bigbadassmob is casting an armor on itself or about to incinerate me Image
So being able to tell the spell name is a major advantage I think. How many trolls would have dodged a few incendiary clouds if they could see that? Image

I completely stated that I havent played a ranger, only my observations.

As far as to why you dont get a group or whatever, its like you said. Rangers are an auxilary class, they dont have a KEY Necessary position in a group, they are extras. You add a rogue, ranger, invoker, necro for damage. On the same token, fighting huge mobs, with a cleric, a warrior, and an enchanter takes forever, so those groups do need someone to kick out damage.
If you arent getting into groups, maybe its a personal problem Image


As far as dual-wielding. I have tried quite a bit to increase this skill, but at 42nd level the only gains I have gotten are through training it at the warrior guild, and its a big fat whopping 26. Seeing how most of my skills let me train to about 2/3rds the max the skill can be, this doesnt give me much in the way of actually possessing this Skill. Ranks right up there with headbutt as far as useful skills.

oh well Image
Garosh
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:43 pm

I thought we were talking about spells in combat. Mobs never cast armor or heals or anything while they are fighting...

I don't have too much of a problem getting groups as long as I do a who lead and start sending tells to people. But no one ever seems to do a who ranger when they are forming a group, they all just do who war, who cleric, then who shaman, then druid (seriously, we need a who healer Image )

Sarvis
Azralek Silvermist
Sojourner
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Baltimore,MD
Contact:

Postby Azralek Silvermist » Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:55 pm

Oh i can assure you garosh that never in my life have i gotten 7 attacks so since that is applicable only to 1 of the 3 races playing a ranger and only including riposte
is not true for the majority of the class.

for pure melee with equal hit and damage rogues and rangers should be about equal.
rogues dont master dual but up to the last wipe rangers didnt master double attack

still only comprehensive data parsing will say for certain.
Zrax
Sojourner
Posts: 593
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fairborn, OH, USA
Contact:

Postby Zrax » Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:11 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>I thought we were talking about spells in combat. Mobs never cast armor or heals or anything while they are fighting...
Sarvis</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What are you talking about?? you obviously have never fought a cleric mob that had fullheal. You are discrediting yourself with untrue statements. Try posting about thing like this when you have experience fighting caster mobs higher level than Black Griffin Road mobs.
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:14 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>I thought we were talking about spells in combat. Mobs never cast armor or heals or anything while they are fighting...

Sarvis</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


I have seen many mobs, IN Combat cast armor, vitality, fireshield, coldshield, globe on themselves.
I know I havent been imagining this.
Its possible in the last few days with the new routines they dont anymore..but sure does seem like they do to me.
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:19 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Azralek Silvermist:
<B>Oh i can assure you garosh that never in my life have i gotten 7 attacks so since that is applicable only to 1 of the 3 races playing a ranger and only including riposte
is not true for the majority of the class.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess I have miscounted if thats the case.
But I could have sworn I saw a grey elf ranger hit 7 times in a round, that wasnt tanking without a riposte? Yo Ilshadrial, did I miscount?

Garosh
Jegzed
Sojourner
Posts: 1240
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Jegzed » Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:47 pm

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Sarvis:
<B>I thought we were talking about spells in combat. Mobs never cast armor or heals or anything while they are fighting...
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ROFL Image Cluebie!

/Jegzed
Cirath
Sojourner
Posts: 517
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Cirath » Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:00 pm

Ya know, its funny. I have been playing evil aligned characters the entire time ive been mudding, and the few times i did try to get a group i was almost always turned down or asked to leave because a ranger was either in the group or about to join, yet they complain that they never get groups. Now, it is true, they did get sowed up as hitters by monks, but it was only recently that rogues could even come close to doing an equal amount of damage because of upgrades. Until align restrictions were lifted i always saw rangers getting groups over me.

i just wish my rogue could cast spells and tank even a little bit in addition to hitting so i could get to complain as much.

Cir - anoyed assassin

P.S. there was a time before the downgrade of rogue ranged that i would outdamage warriors 5-10 levels higher tham me when using darts so you arnt the only ones hurt by the loss of ranged
Aderon
Sojourner
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2001 5:01 am
Location: NY

Postby Aderon » Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:24 pm

7 attacks??? That is not happening from what I see and I am a grey elf Ranger...
In refrence to Sarvis and Garosh discussing casting mobs: We all know mobs cast more than offensive spells in battle, especially with the new AI, they do not just go through the same set of motions. In fact, most mage mobs will shield first before casting offense if allowed to cast in battle. Now to discuss Garosh's replies. You and I both know that if you see a mob casting an offensive spell, nine times out of ten if you flee 1. You flee into something just as bad if not worse; 2. The tank bites it and it will DIM or track to you (no need to point out how PWT helps this); or 3. You PANIC but can't make it out of there :P God help the cleric that flees when a mob casts chain lightning Image This just popped into my head by the way so it may seem like I am rambling, however, when I was fighting a wizzie recently and the tank missed two bashes it casted Nightmare. The spell took one round to get off beating me hard. Then stunned me after it hit. The mob the casted it again killing me. There was no time to flee and if I had, option 2 in my list would have surely happened Image That is all.

Aderon Greystorm, The Forrester Lost in the Woods
Blung
Sojourner
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: San Diego, CA,

Postby Blung » Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:49 pm

Hey Sarvis, why dont u give yourself a break? Are you just plainly blind or what? u obviously clueless. Your fellow rangers is not even backing u up. You can call me what u want. Unlikely those nice people that posted the reply. I'm a straight forward, drop the hammer on you toes kind of guy.


Blung take no prisoner.
Ladorn
Sojourner
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Rockville, MD

Postby Ladorn » Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:36 pm

Sigh. I hate arguing, but this has gone on long enough! Hehe. It's just a game have some fun people. But I'll give you my take on rangers from a(the) ranger! I got over 32 days playing time already, so I hope you won't discredit me like some other rangers. I will state some facts. Rangers are an auxiliary class. Even moreso than pals and antis. In fact I would consider pals/antis essential for certain zones. Rangers will never be essential. Rangers are just cool to have for exp'ing. Fact is everyone considers us a hitter which is fine by me, but we are lacking some hitting skill that gives us an edge. Sure we will eventually get archery, but what do we have right now? Nothing. We have not one unique skill that is useful. Innate tame mount? Useless! Innate wood carving? Great rp skill, again rarely used. Then we have the surprise skill. Uh what's it do? Everyone of our numerous skills some other class has as well. Rogues, antis, pals all have more unique skills and innates that are useful. Trip, poisons, vital strike!!, lay hands, mounted combat(with flank blocking), lifetap. Anti's have 3 unique spells to their class, pal's have 1 unique spell, rangers have _zero_ unique spells. Rogue's vital strike can bash a dragon for 2 rounds, warriors cannot even shieldpunch a dragon. I've seen a vital strike bash twice in one round. Sure this skill happens so rarely, but at least there's a chance of it happening. No other class can bash a mob twice in one round, nor can they bash a dragon. Rangers have no stunning skills. Shieldpunch for warriors, charge for anti/pal, trip for rogues. Also people tend to forget about pal and anti 2h bonus. I know pals and anti's can survive with a 14-16 hitroll. I am at 33/27. I know a pal that has like 16/36. Even though I get 2 more attacks, pals and antis usually tank so they can riposte and usually 2h weapons have a higher dieroll than 1h weapons. Ok not the 1h weapon I use, but for most other rangers. And when a ranger's not hasted, forget about it. I am sure a non hasted ranger will do less dam than a tanking pal/anti. I do admit that a hasted ranger and rogue's damage might be comparable w/o circle, bs, poisons, vital strike etc, but that's hard to compare, because I have yet to see a rogue not circle.

Need I go on? Rogues have less hp? Er not so. They have _more_ hp than grey elf rangers, which there seems to be quite a few of these days. Only a grey elf rogue falls behind on hp to a grey elf ranger. I believe a halfling, human and dwarven rogue all have _more_ hp than a grey elf ranger. I am pulling moreso for the mid level grey elf rangers more than anyone. What are they to do? I will agree that rangers do solo a lot better than rogues and also better than warriors. I solo'ed my way up to level 38. But it's been stated time and time again, this is a group oriented mud! Rangers need help with groups. I am sure you will not see more than 2 rangers in a 15 man group, so what are the next generation of rangers supposed to do? I guess they could explore and start a group of their own, but it's really hard trying to lead and get people to trust you as a leader. Honestly I feel sorry for all rangers except me and Belleshel. I don't see why a leader would choose a ranger over a rogue, especially if the rogue has more hp and the group has a druid already. I guess the main reason is the ranger is a friend.

Ok let's talk about ranger spells. They're really cool, we have loads of utility spells, det magic, DI, sense life, bless, bark, vigs, cure crits, invis, faerie fire, str, dispel magic, just to name a few of ones I use a lot. But again most of these spells I cast on myself. I always have det magic, di and sense life up. But this is a group oriented mud and in groups I rarely cast di because I think all mages and shamans have di's mem'ed. The only spell I use a lot in groups is bark. I'll admit occasionally I di a person and do some det magics, but that is it. With druidic barks being better ac and shorter pray time, there's not even a need for a ranger bark. Our 9th and 10th circle spells are useless. Call lightning(area spell) has gotten me into 2 deaths(my fault) but it's rather useless. Transport via plants is a cool spell, but I really haven't found a great use for it. Pass without trace is nice, but only works outdoors. Only two good outdoors zones are grey cloak and jot. I've used it maybe once in each zone since I've gotten it 3 weeks ago. I would like to see some more useful spells. Some ideas I have are, self-haste, enhanced bless, summon scout(a la summon shade). Or if we are not to have unique spells give us some druidic spells. I can't think if anything fair for us to have, maybe sunray. Another problem is spell circles, 3rd circle I got bless, di, sticks to snakes and faerie fire. I can only mem 5 spells. 6th I got barks and dust devil(which can be useful to disarm) But I usually mem all 4 barks. Honestly I love rangers, I've played one up to 50th level 4 times now. I'd always be a ranger and I think they've upgraded some since Sojourn1 days, but the fact is the other classes got much more of an upgrade so it makes us look bad.

I want bards and elementalists to be looked at first. I don't mind if warriors are tweaked a little to be more fun, because even though they are essential they do seem boring. During alpha I had a windsong and I had some decked out eq. I think I had about 640hp with 30/36 hit/dam and windsong. I could solo most classes except one ogre warrior. She beat the crap outta me repeatedly. I had haste and dragonscales and I still lost. Squids were second toughest for me to kill.

This post was just to clear some things up. Oh yeah there is no way a grey elf ranger can get 7 attacks w/o counting riposte or kick or some proc I guess. Also it doesn't really matter much if I do recognize a spell. I have yet to flee out because I recognized a spell. I guess you could use it at rhemo's but I tog a wimpy of 300 and there's no way I get clouded for that much with prot fire and ss eq on. I'm not trying to attack other people or be an super powerful class. I think we definitely should at least get switch targets added to our repertoire.

Also please don't think I am whining. I am sticking up for all the other rangers out there. I am seriously having a lotta fun this wipe. I group with people that I get along with and I consider them knowledgable and laid back about mud'ing. I mean I don't have much to complain about(except vital strike!) because I am level 48 with about 500hp and 33/27 hit/dam with lots of room for improvement. But there are tons of mid level rangers with maybe 30/20 hit/dam and 350hp struggling to find groups. Just hear them out and try not to laugh. I love how the gods are tweaking everything and listening, but once archery is in we will truly see how useful rangers really are. I for one will probably only use it to lure and when my globe runs out. I prefer melee over ranged. I don't like stray arrows hitting tracking mobs in adjacent rooms.

Damn this post is long. I'm sure I've forgotten some stuff. Have fun mud'ing!

-Ladorn Silverlake

PS Sorry for such unorganized thoughts.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:37 pm

*blush* Ok, so ONE of my points was bad. Sue me... though in all fairness the last time I fought a cleric mob he didn't need to heal himself during combat.

Blung: WTF!?! I haven't said shit to you and now you accuse me of calling you names? Yeah, I was wrong on one point... but right on the other 5... and I'm being backed up by the other rangers on at least one. Everyone seems to have decided to ignore all the others.

Everyone:
When all is said and done it doesn't matter if you think rangers are overpowered or underpowered. What matters is that several of our skills haven't been implemented, and all we want is for them the BE implemented.

Miax:
Do us a favor, yank shieldpunch, bash and parry for 3 months and see if the warriors just shut up and take it. My bet is that they'll complain even more than the rangers do... anyone care to take me up on that?

Sarvis
Gindipple
Sojourner
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: O' Fallon, MO. USA
Contact:

Postby Gindipple » Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:42 pm

Laugh, yea it's long.
Ladorn I'd want you in my group if you played a bard.
Knowledge is king!
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:22 pm

Blung: We don't feel the need to constantly yell "me too" like brain dead 11 year olds on AOL. Silence means lack of objection since unlike SOME people, a lot of us don't like butting into a thread to fill it up with meaningless crap in what's basically a middle school popularity contest.

Anyway, back to actually intelligent posts . . .

Garosh, I'll address your points and misconceptions one by one. I will tell you straight out that the actual experience of playing a ranger and what someone thinks it might be tend to be very different experiences. This was something that got pouned into me quite a bit back on Toril when I first decided it would be neat to play a ranger Image

"1) Rangers can recognize what spells are being cast by a mob. Again, since I have only seen logs- this is my assumption. But Rangers have a distinct advantage, say over, rogues or warriors, when they see Tiamat begins casting a spell called 'Incendiary Cloud', They can flee out, long enough for the spell to go off and come back in. A warrior/Tank Has to eat that spell in the ass or the group gets wasted. Now if the ranger sits there and eats that cloud in the butt and they arent wearing hp gear, then too bad, just dont complain about rangers not having enough hps for those mobs."

When's the last time you saw people fleeing out of a nasty mage mob in a zone? As has been echoed already, it tends not to be a smart thing to do. Especially since we're going to need to maintain doing damage to do our job. Once we're out of the room, we can't tell if the mob's finished casting (unless we here a death scream from the tank, which means even bigger trouble) so we may well walk back into a cloud or acid storm or blacklight etc. And since clerics don't get sorcerous spell knowledge eighter, they're likely to be sitting in the room with the tank. If the tank goes, then the mob will switch to the cleric. One of our jobs is a tertiary rescuer. We're not doing our job if the cleric gets womped on cause we fled the room. Sure, it's nice to know if a mob is putting up shield but in zone situations we're all globed anyway. If anything, sorcerous spell knowledge just gives us a better idea of what we're about to get nailed with, not be able to run out scared.

"2) Though I havent tested rogue very far in this matter, Dual Wield seems to be ruled by the Rangers. Warriors at one time were decent at it (which I dont know why this was downgraded to the pitiful levels it is now, since they are the 'masters of melee') 6-7 attacks a round, combine that with a dopple, and you have extreme melee damage"

As Nokie's skill numbers show, rogues equal rangers in terms of dual wield. Warriors can still pick up a two hander if they don't need to tank for a fight and do comparable damage. Actually, more apparently in Sojourn 2 thanks to being able to ditch more hitroll in favor of dam than a ranger. I'm guessing that this is no longer the case but it's still an option if you don't need to be the primary tank or shieldpunch. It's not something many warriors will do very often, but it's still an option for you whereas no ranger can tank a lot better than normal simply by putting a shield.

"3) Thac0. This is sheer speculation, but since you are comparing melee damage rangers vs rogues, I can only assume that a rangers base Thac0 is better than a Rogues. The thing that balances this out is the rogues ability to backstab. But straight up rangers should be doing the same if not more melee damage, discounting specials."

And what rogue worth taking along is going to not be using their specials? Yes, we can dump more hit for damage than a rogue but a rogue can circle every two rounds, getting off a single quasi-backstab if successful or at least an extra hit even if the skill doesn't succeed. That more than outweighs the bit of extra damage we'll get from slightly higher dam. They can also trip if needed, basically a backup bash that isn't as reliable as a real bash but MUCH more reliable than a ranger's dual wielding bash. And if you get the mob paralyzed, then the rogues are gonna have a field day since backstabs almost always hit a paralyzed mob and dopplegangers join in (our dopplegangers don't even kick when ours do Image). Backstab, disengage, repeat until para wears off. Immense amount of damage.

"4) Spells. Compared to a warrior with no healing abilitys other than sitting on his ass, or regaining moves, or buffing yourself with barkskin, or the various other spells a ranger gets, there is no comparison. Seems that all the focus of complaints is on a Rangers ability to melee, and you just discount the ability to cast spells (and recognize spells being cast) and dont even bring it into the Balance Equation."

Ah, the spells. I remember how cool I thought being able to cast spells and supposedly being a warrior was. Then I started getting the crap beat out of me by mobs that conned need some luck when I was level 17. I'll give you a list of the spells I've normally kept memorized and how I've used them.

1st circle:
Detect magic- Nothing really needs to be said. Not having to have a mage DM you saves a little bit of time and annoyance.
Shillilegh- Weak damage spell, but it lets me kill Miplit's parrot in between rounds. I'll summarize the use of all damage spells in general below.
2nd circle:
Goodberry- Nice to supplement forage. Nothing real special though. I've yet to create a goodberry that actually can heal. I've tried in a variety of rooms and weather conditions. I'm guessing that healing berries may be a druid only thing.
Detect Evil & Detect Good- I hardly cast these anymore. Mainly for when I'm curious about how a mob will push my align or I just wanna practice divination spells.
Sense life- This can quite useful. Being able to see cold blooded creatures that don't show up on infra along with hiding rogues can be handy in certain situations but normally only when I'm exploring. Otherwise, just another parlor trick.
Create water- Sometimes I forget to how much water is left in my flagon. That's when this comes in handy since I'm too weak to carry around a barrel easily. Still, nothing real powerful.
3rd circle:
Detect invis- Same comments as for detect magic. Makes talking to mages a bit easier since they sometimes forget they're invis. Useful, but nothing I can't just get a mage to cast on me if I couldn't do it myself.
Faerie fire- Nowhere near as useful as it might seem. All I ever use it for is if I'm soloing a rogue mob to keep it from hiding. It takes too long to cast in battle, meaning that I can't cast it in between combat rounds even if I make my quick chant and in an exp group I won't be able to stop to mem it back anyway. Solely something for lower level rangers to play with or dealing with rogue mobs solo (since I can't simply bash them to keep them from hiding) and in the latter case it doesn't prevent a rogue from backstabbing me as I enter.
Sticks to snakes- Our most useful damage dealing spell IMO. And totally worthless now unless I'm bored and decide to beat on lowbie mobs. Needless to say, I never keep this memmed anymore.
Bless- +1 hit is +1 hit. That means that it's useful if I have time to cast it and mem it back, but since that's a rare occurence I normally don't bother with it since it's just +1 hit. It has a short duration that never increases. I'll cast it in zones, but it's not like it's tough for a cleric to cast it on a warrior if it's requested.
4th circle:
Invis- See detect magic and detect invis. It's good for exploring, getting past aggros (as a side note, most mobs that protection from animals would protect me from don't DI anyway), and can keep me alive from some tracking mobs if things go to hell. This is probably one of our most useful spells. But only when solo or something's gone wrong. It's not like it'll keep things from going wrong in the first place. In that aspect, it's kind of like word of recall. It's handy, but it's use is limited.
Cure serious- Yes, we can heal ourself. I'll get to why this isn't necesarily so great of an ability later. I still keep it memmed since I can't bandage in mid battle but this can be cast without disengaging.
5th circle:
Vigorize critic- Useful for those long runs between places since this takes up the same slot as heal for clerics. Useful, but hardly a superb ability since a cleric can dump heals, mem vigs, cast those, and then get heals back faster than we can use this without playing with our spell slots. The other two spells we get in this circle are pretty much useless.
6th circle:
Barkskin- Yay. We get an armor type spell. Big deal. It doesn't save us from eating damage solo anywhere NEAR as well as flankblock or shieldblock. It's useful, but not an uber spell like many seem to think since our defensive skills suck and by the time we get it AC is no longer the prime factor in lessening damage.
Dust devil- Useful on occasion since it lets me kill Miplit's parrot in ONE casting! And occasionally disarm a mob, but not often (it was toned down A LOT from its obscene success rate on alpha). Not like I have these memmed anyway since you warriors seem to think bark is more important than me screwing around with this spell and I only have 3 6th circle spell slots at level 44.
7th circle:
Dispel magic- This actually is useful now. Since rangers don't need to ditch a full heal slot to mem this like clerics, we can unsilence people in mid battle if they actually consent us. Useless in a solo situation though, which is what you seem to be thinking of mainly when you think of our spells.
8th circle:
Cure critic- Whee. Another healing spell, this time 5 circles after clerics get it. I keep it memmed just cause I don't want to have empty slots staring back at me and sometimes the clerics are too busy healing other people after a fight.
9th circle:
Call lightning- Useless, but fun to play around with. Sure I can't even kill a 3rd level mob if it's indoors, but I still manage to amuse myself with it. Needless to say, it's pretty much useless for anything serious. Well, except nuking Miplit's parrot.

As you can see, our most useful spells tend to be utility spells that aren't life saving types and barkskin if we're in a group. Yes, the damage spells come in handy when solo as do the healing spells, but we NEED those healing spells when soloing because we get beat up A LOT more than you without shieldblock or flankblock and subpar dodge and parry skills. The damage spells help out, but only when we're bored and can't find a group at low-mid levels and only because we need to make the fight as short as possible to avoid being killed without a third defensive skill to fall back on and not being able to bash (bashed mobs take extra damage) and being able to be bashed (paladins can be thrown off, but have a chance to remain mounted against a successful bash). When's the last time you saw a ranger tossing a damage spell in MS or on pirate ship? Remember, this mud is a group oriented mud and you won't hit high levels solo as a ranger. Yes, Belleshel was able to solo til around 38 but that's only because Bell refused to sit around the fountain when there weren't any stoners and instead decided to just mass slaughter mobs 8 levels lower than herself for exp. The rest of us really couldn't solo past 30. And that was also when we were erroneously given flankblock which we no longer have, a testament to just how powerful shieldblock and flankblock really are. I'd suggest playing a ranger until level 36 some day if you don't believe me and judge for yourself. Our spells may look neat on paper, but the reality of it is much different.

"5) Archery. Been pretty much stated since opening that its not in yet, but will be. Be patient. IMHO, without archery Rangers are still crack-daddies that deal a buttload of damage."

Archery is really a double edged sword. I don't recall if you were around back when it was first made useful, but there are A LOT of places we learned not to use it the hard way. It will do more damage than melee, but the chance for a stray arrow makes it suicidal in situations where, say, you could aggro Kotchsie and have him dim into the group while in the middle of another fight in Jot. In general, you probably won't see that kind of situation because we've all learned when NOT to use archery, which in some zones is very frequent. It's not even usable in some zones period. Even with airy water, missile weapons don't work in SG and arrows burn up in midair on fire plane.

"6) Again this is just rumors and stuff that I have heard, so I dont know for a fact. But I have heard of some weapon, Windsong? maybe that supposedly only a ranger can use, and gives them more attacks? Sounds pretty pimpish to me, and something great to look forward to."

And as I recall, you have something called Twilight. Or if that's not to your taste, there's always the Enchanted Gythka. Or possibly you'd prefer Rockcrusher. Or Avernus in the future? Image

Anyway, Windsong is but one super weapon remarkable mainly because most single handed weapons aren't that great. The blur proc is nice, but it's just a proc, not something you can depend on. And also rather hazardous if you're fighting a shielded mob and your globe falls. It's a lot better than other single handed weapon procs, but that goes back to what I already said. The quest itself requires about 15 items (no, I didn't typo that. Thankfully, a few are easy to get and none are rareload) and human rangers can't use it. (hmmm . . . anyone know what Adriorn used? Yes, I know I'm horribly mangling his name) There are plenty more spanky two handed weapons in the game for a warrior to use if they can sacrifice the use of a shield against a mob.

Anyway, I need to free up the phone line now so I'll have to get back to this thread later.
Cirath
Sojourner
Posts: 517
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Cirath » Fri Jul 20, 2001 12:36 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ladorn:
<B>
Need I go on? Rogues have less hp? Er not so. They have _more_ hp than grey elf rangers, which there seems to be quite a few of these days. Only a grey elf rogue falls behind on hp to a grey elf ranger. I believe a halfling, human and dwarven rogue all have _more_ hp than a grey elf ranger. I am pulling moreso for the mid level grey elf rangers more than anyone.

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


i beg to differ. i asked around and it seems that grey elf rangers average around 1.5 - 2 hp more per level than me (a human rogue with good con) and half elf and human ranger average more than my antipal :P

the only rogues that i talked to that got more hp than even elf rangers per level were dwarves.

Cir - man of a million titles
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Fri Jul 20, 2001 12:40 am

Yee Haw..off to play a terribly underpowered ranger..weeeeeeee!

Garosh
Garosh
Sojourner
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu May 10, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Plano, TX, USA

Postby Garosh » Fri Jul 20, 2001 12:41 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Garosh:
<B>Yee Haw..off to play a terribly underpowered ranger..weeeeeeee!

Garosh</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well shoot..they seem pretty strong..

all I had to do was start rolling one and the mud crashed...
Thats power man!

Garosh
Blung
Sojourner
Posts: 185
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: San Diego, CA,

Postby Blung » Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:26 am

Hey Sarvis, you finally get over it. Damn thick skull. As for u Trel, I dont need to reply to clueless/meaningless post after a few others already trying to point out how cluessless he is and he still keep arguing about it. All he need is a slap in the face to wake him up. Damn I must be alright as an 11 years old kid. In the same game as a 50 years old man - Trel? How about a few round in the arena with me old man, you can try to teach me a trick or 2. If needed I can provide you with a cane, or I can try to drag you there if ur legs can't hold up.
Thank you, drive thrus.


Blung take no prisoner.
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Sun Jul 22, 2001 12:34 am

Blung: You're not worth my notice and I don't take anything you say seriously, including your weak threats and pitiful insults and neither do a lot of other people, evils included.

Cirath: You do have a skill called evasion that in theory should let you survive longer than your hitpoints alone would indicate. Since the skill's been bugged for a while we probably can't determine just how effective it is, but since areas are the traditional bane of rangers (not that many hp, tend not to slough off hit/dam for hp gear) it should at least partially even the hp gap. Until we can get some solid figures though, any arguments about the extra hps we get is kinda murky.
Grungar
Sojourner
Posts: 967
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Somewhere on the east coast, usually.
Contact:

Postby Grungar » Sun Jul 22, 2001 1:16 am

Actually, during Alpha, as a dwarven rogue with 100 con naturally, I only had 405 hps at level 40, and that was with quite a bit of +hp gear on.

A grey elf warrior (forget who it was) and I were the only ones in one of the Brass runs we tested that had below 500 hps.

I believe in that same group, you, Ladorn, were keeping up with the invoker for damage. Things have probably been tweeked since then, of course.

Tilandal, a pal of mine and a 1/2 elf ranger, has at least 20 hps more than I do, and he's a level lower than me.

Am I complaining? Nah. Rangers are a subclass of warrior, and thus have more hitpoints.

I've been invited into....... two groups thus far (that weren't people I know in real life). I basically soloed my way up to level 17 or 18, and after that, things started hitting too hard for me to kill in one run. I couldn't even finish off a level 19 mob in one run. Now I can, now that I'm 22. Anyways, yeah. I need to find someone to teach me the zones so I can lead. Wouldn't that be scary, people following me to their deaths? Image

- Grungar "Huh?" Forgefire
Tasan
Sojourner
Posts: 1710
Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Fridley, Mn USA
Contact:

Postby Tasan » Sun Jul 22, 2001 2:59 am

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Cirath:
<B>
i beg to differ. i asked around and it seems that grey elf rangers average around 1.5 - 2 hp more per level than me (a human rogue with good con) and half elf and human ranger average more than my antipal :P

the only rogues that i talked to that got more hp than even elf rangers per level were dwarves.

Cir - man of a million titles</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, you asked me what my average was, but you never even considered the fact that my con has been at the highest notch from level 1. You didn't ask what my con was, and since your con is good, what does that mean?

Twyl
Azrael
Sojourner
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Azrael » Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:05 am

Aderon, I know it was an old reply, but what Snow was saying was that they should have an evil class *similar* to Rangers, ie Hunters. Yes, an evil Ranger would be a joke, but an evil tracking bastard who stalked goodies around and had two big bad scimitars, that could be a Hunter. What class would say, Zaknafien or Berg'inyon play if they felt like joining the ranks of Sojourn? I think the Hunter class would be an excellent idea. The Drow need a good melee class.

- Azrael, Smurf's Bane
Azrael
Sojourner
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Azrael » Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:28 am

I'm sorry, I forgot something. Blung, I don't think the power of Treladian's legs or lack of has anything to do with the power of the Ranger he plays. Perhaps you should leave his age out of the discussion.

- Azrael, Smurf's Bane
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Jul 22, 2001 3:40 am

Zak and Berg'inyon were both warriors. And Zak would be good, not evil.

Sarvis
Azrael
Sojourner
Posts: 4
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Azrael » Sun Jul 22, 2001 4:13 am

Hmm... actually, yeah, you'd be right. Well, maybe make the Elven and Drow warriors a bit more effective. Make them terrific hitters or something.

- Azrael
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Postby Sarvis » Sun Jul 22, 2001 4:28 am

Heh... I think that's one of the things the extra attack for high dex was supposed to accomplish. Image

Sarvis
Treladian
Sojourner
Posts: 1163
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Treladian » Mon Jul 23, 2001 9:58 pm

Sarvis: Supposed to, but hasn't seemed to. The crit bonus that stronger races get is pretty nice too. As an Melandra put it, it seems the only people that care about the dex attack are the people that don't get it Image

Azrael: Heh, I am by no means old. Maybe more mature, but that's a different can of worms Image

Twyl: Having that con from level one wouldn't mean anything actually. Con notches are completely retroactive and don't affect the die roll for the hp per level at all. Some people just roll low or high a lot and wind up above or below average though. That sounds like what Cirath's numbers are being affected by. The halfling and human rogues I now group with have almost the exact same hit points I had back when I played a grey (ie, 6 hp per level after 25).
Aderon
Sojourner
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2001 5:01 am
Location: NY

Postby Aderon » Tue Jul 24, 2001 9:37 am

I still can't believe I started such a big thread... Yall take yourselves too seriously.

Aderon
Guest

Postby Guest » Tue Jul 24, 2001 12:51 pm

Blung, if you continue with the flaming and the insults, something is going to have to be done about your posting, be it editing or suspending you for a while.

You might want to look into the concept of "if you don't have anything good/constructive to say, don't say anything"

Mask

Return to “S3 Gameplay Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests