Yeah someone pointed that out to me initially the day the patch hit. When I specifically proclaimed how this was going to hurt HR overall.
This narrowed playstyle may be just for testing purposes. But as I said before, it would help if the devs had mentioned that. And alot of people wouldnt go into panic mode.
Where on the other side of the coin, going off of thier track record with other class changes in patch notes. These changes could potentially see thier way to live as well. So its either or.
A bit of communication could go along way specifically for this case.
It's actually the light at the end of the development tunnel for the HR in my opinion.
I've been playing the HR as it is, and I am having fun with it.
However, having said that, I must say that I fully understand the need for options, and the ability to change things up a bit.
As the HR is in beta, what better time to ask for options? If we don't get them, so be it. But it never hurts to ask.
And as an example, I would probably never have played Neverwinter Online, if I were only allowed to play a Rogue in Perma-Stealth mode. I prefer a Rogue with a shortbow, but tossing daggers is fine. If the TR had no ranged damage, I couldn't play it. If the TR only had feats for melee, and not for stealth it would be less enjoyable. If we only had one kind of enchantment, things would get rough. If we only had one type of companion, 0_0 I hate to think what that would be like. If we could only ride horses, (My TR would simply outrun them ;p ) If there were only one dungeon, how often would it get played? If you could only do quests in parties with a single member of each class? How much fun would anyone have? How many people would simply say, that's the way it is, so live with it. or leave it.
The point being, the more variety, or options, the more fun that we all can have.
And, as the old saying goes, "Variety is the Spice of Life."
You are absolutely right. In that line it is possible to have a constructive discussion. With the absurd allegations that were being made before and, astonishingly, presented as facts, it was hard to even bother answering. This is not aimed at you.
The major problem I see with the HR is the lack of shine of some powers. For a power to be on my bar it has to bring something sizable and do so consistently. That is my personal preference. Many of the HR single target ranged powers come short in that aspect. Many of these powers (hindering, hawk, etc...) do slightly more damage than rapid shot would do in the same amount of time (casting animation), and don't really bring something dependable to the table. The mechanics of the game are so that there is no benefit to one 1500 hit in 3 seconds over three 500 hits in the same amount of time. Quite the opposite, feats like the cd reduction on crit, aspect of the serpent, plaguefire and lightning enchantments, bring much better returns from several smaller hits than fewer stronger ones. I can see how people trying to use these powers with the promise of control or damage might be frustrated. It does not mean the class lacks damage, it means those power lack it, or lack enough utility to make them effective. Because of the nature of the game, we are always fighting multiple opponents. A single target skill needs some serious oomph to take the spot of and aoe skill, and many of the ranged single target powers lack that oomph. The at-wills, on the other hand, are superb. Split shot, even nerfed, has got to be one of the most fun and most powerful at-wills out there, with its very respectable damage, the huge area, and huge range.
I have been playing the HR using it's dual-stance to the fullest, my latest HR is only level 15 so far.
One glaring thing I have noticed is the speed. The ranged skills are extremely slow when compared to their melee counterparts.
Go for the eyes, Boo!GO FOR THE EYES!!! (Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
Being able to shoot on the move, in my mind, would be a huge addition to the class. I can understand with at-wills that have a work up, but for quick shot, this should be able to be fired no matter if your moving or standing. Kind of broke my stride, so to speak, to have to stop every few seconds to shoot.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
Being able to shoot on the move, in my mind, would be a huge addition to the class. I can understand with at-wills that have a work up, but for quick shot, this should be able to be fired no matter if your moving or standing. Kind of broke my stride, so to speak, to have to stop every few seconds to shoot.
I'd have to agree. If not with all of the ranged skills, at the very least, with Rapid Shot.
Go for the eyes, Boo!GO FOR THE EYES!!! (Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
It would be a ton of fun, but would create major imbalances in pvp I think. Now a couple of those single target ranged skills could have that non stop mechanic. Not having to stop attacking while moving out of a red area would make up for their low damage.
Yeah, not every skill and encounter, just rapid shot at the very least. Slow you to a GF walk, if need be. Just let them stay mobile.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
I just played a couple of skirmishes. One had a very competent GF. It was flat out damage for 90% of the time. Because of our damage bonus based on distance it was not even worth it to cycle melee in. It was a completely different experience, and I wished at times I had not slotted marauder's and instead had another offensive skill. It was a lot of fun.
The other detail is that split shot can get very wacky in lag, not firing or firing late and making you miss the line-up you had chosen. I never have this lag on live though, so I am hopeful it is just a preview server issue.
I just played a couple of skirmishes. One had a very competent GF. It was flat out damage for 90% of the time. Because of our damage bonus based on distance it was not even worth it to cycle melee in. It was a completely different experience, and I wished at times I had not slotted marauder's and instead had another offensive skill. It was a lot of fun.
The other detail is that split shot can get very wacky in lag, not firing or firing late and making you miss the line-up you had chosen. I never have this lag on live though, so I am hopeful it is just a preview server issue.
That's what I'm expecting to see, personally. Group experiences with the HR look like they will lend heavily to archer style. Let the tanks wade in, and blast from the outside. Much as the CW now does, only more applicable, straight DPS.
Which also begs the question: in a group experience, what does melee style bring to the table?
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
That's what I'm expecting to see, personally. Group experiences with the HR look like they will lend heavily to archer style. Let the tanks wade in, and blast from the outside. Much as the CW now does, only more applicable, straight DPS.
Which also begs the question: in a group experience, what does melee style bring to the table?
In a roundabout way that's what I was getting at, you already have 3 melee classes and no martial range so a hybrid will see little use of it's melee side for a while even with stellar skills.
That's what I'm expecting to see, personally. Group experiences with the HR look like they will lend heavily to archer style. Let the tanks wade in, and blast from the outside. Much as the CW now does, only more applicable, straight DPS.
Which also begs the question: in a group experience, what does melee style bring to the table?
I did play a skirmish as melee spec. The main problem was the lack of mitigation. I ended up spending a lot of time shifting out of red zones and then coming back in. And I even had a gwf which I could shadow and make use of my longer range aoe skills from behind him. Melee has more aoe damage than ranged, but the uptime is much worse due to squishiness and having to be close. Single target I think ranged is way ahead.
So, to answer your question, a melee ranger would do the same job as a cw or gwf, but much worse. At least as things stand now. The damage potential is there, it is just hard to apply it with any consistency. Split the sky and rain of arrows help a lot, albeit not really being melee skills.
0
Options
slambitMember, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Hero Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users, Neverwinter Knight of the Feywild UsersPosts: 282Bounty Hunter
edited November 2013
Anyone tried the nature tree? it sorta looks like it'll rely mostly on melee powers unless i misread some tooltips
not looking for it to be top dmg, just wondering if its usefull enough for you and your companion, that low range on the buffs might be tricky though.
If you maximize deflect and use dodge well, couldn't a melee HR achieve the same level of 'tank' as a TR?
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
We wouldnt have this discussion if ppl wouldn't cry for nerfs after they played a class to lvl 10!
Play it to the max lvl and make suggestions after.
When i read posts like i lvled my ranger to 15,20...ect i stop reading asap cuz i'm sorry to say that, those opinions doesnt matter at all!
I got my ranger to 60 in the first few days and even BEFOR the nerfs our dmg was ONLY medicore if u dont look at split the sky and MAYBE split shot!
Also all these posts ranger is intended to be played as hybrid are such a nonsense aslong u mean melee/range.
We have a range(archery tree) and melee (combat tree) specc to pick whatever we wanna play.
Now look at ur meleeskills in general!
70% of our meleeskills are mostly buff or cc spells! Like commanding shot, binding shot, hindering shot ect there are much more.
This and the fact that we can choose a path melee/range/nature shows me that this class IS intended to be played range/melee only or even both!
So u can easily say that our tab skill can also be used just to buff and support either range or melee, which would work perfectly when they buff our dmg by a good amount and give hawkshot its potential back...
I've been playing the HR as it is, and I am having fun with it.
However, having said that, I must say that I fully understand the need for options, and the ability to change things up a bit.
As the HR is in beta, what better time to ask for options? If we don't get them, so be it. But it never hurts to ask.
And as an example, I would probably never have played Neverwinter Online, if I were only allowed to play a Rogue in Perma-Stealth mode. I prefer a Rogue with a shortbow, but tossing daggers is fine. If the TR had no ranged damage, I couldn't play it. If the TR only had feats for melee, and not for stealth it would be less enjoyable. If we only had one kind of enchantment, things would get rough. If we only had one type of companion, 0_0 I hate to think what that would be like. If we could only ride horses, (My TR would simply outrun them ;p ) If there were only one dungeon, how often would it get played? If you could only do quests in parties with a single member of each class? How much fun would anyone have? How many people would simply say, that's the way it is, so live with it. or leave it.
The point being, the more variety, or options, the more fun that we all can have.
And, as the old saying goes, "Variety is the Spice of Life."
Perhaps? A short reminder?
Go for the eyes, Boo!GO FOR THE EYES!!! (Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
Right now my sent gwf burns elites faster down than my ranger.
Just cuz of the fact that their at-will dmg is slightly higher, their encounters do 3x the dmg of the ranger ones and are 10 times as tanky as a ranger.
When i call ranger useless i dont mean it's unplayable, just that every other class is better at everything that ranger offers.
And no one can tell me that it's right that a sent gwf with t1 weapon does more dmg, more burst, more cc and has way more survivability than a ranger.
Everything about the ranger is perfectly designed in my opinion! The feats are amazing and fit perfectly for what u wanna play!
The only problem is that our encounters do 0 dmg!
Those numbers are embarrassing for a lvl60 class with r10s/perfect enchants!
I'm forced to agree.
ATM, yes, it's playable, but it's still to weak. Boss' that my TR could take down in a few seconds takes a HR several minutes to do.
And, personally, I'd love to see it doing the damage of a TR, or very close to it.
Go for the eyes, Boo!GO FOR THE EYES!!! (Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
I'm forced to agree.
ATM, yes, it's playable, but it's still to weak. Boss' that my TR could take down in a few seconds takes a HR several minutes to do.
And, personally, I'd love to see it doing the damage of a TR, or very close to it.
Only issue I worry about is that the damage application at range. CW level damage at range, TR at melee, group buffs instead of the TR's CC immunity.
Honestly, CW's are doing too much damage at range already, for a controlling class.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
Only issue I worry about is that the damage application at range. CW level damage at range, TR at melee, group buffs instead of the TR's CC immunity.
Honestly, CW's are doing too much damage at range already, for a controlling class.
The problem is that rangers are not number 1 class at any point. Not the best single target or aoe damage, not the best survivability or buffs etc. They can do well in some situations aka kiting and dealing damage at the same time (split the sky and thorn ward), but it's too situational. In PvP they seem like clerics - trying to survive while applying weak encounters to their enemies. May be they would do well in premade groups tho.
M6 almost drains your soul given how boring it is. (c) joocycuzzzzzz
Only issue I worry about is that the damage application at range. CW level damage at range, TR at melee, group buffs instead of the TR's CC immunity.
Honestly, CW's are doing too much damage at range already, for a controlling class.
As the HR is a hybrid of ranged and melee stance, I don't see it ever having the damage at range of the CW, or the melee damage of the TR. To do so would make those two classes obsolete, as well as some others, which will not, and should not happen.
On the Hunter-Ranger Feedback page39 I was testing a level 39 HR prior to, and just after the last patch. With that information, combined with the testing of my current level 16 HR, and information gleaned from this, and that thread, I feel that the melee powers need a slight boost to their damage, and the ranged powers need to be on par with their melee ones. Granted, any boost(s) would not be enough to allow the HR to be played fully as a ranged only or melee only ranger, but they would bring it's damage levels up to the point where the class would at least be on par with the other classes.
Go for the eyes, Boo!GO FOR THE EYES!!! (Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
If you maximize deflect and use dodge well, couldn't a melee HR achieve the same level of 'tank' as a TR?
While in theory, under perfect circumstances, the numbers should be close, it does not play like that. I am comparing a melee build for ranged should not have high deflect.
Deflect chance: Rogues get .5% for dex point (above 10) and 1% per cha point. Rangers get just .5% per dex point. That is mostly made up with our 5 point feat deep in the melee tree which adds 10% deflect chance. Both classes have a 3 point 3% feat. Rogue have a natural 75% deflect severity, while we have another 5 point feat in the heroic tree which increases our severity to 75% for five seconds after switching to melee. Note that this is not abusable because it disappears immediately when switching to ranged. It also currently has at least a display bug, because severity increases to 55.6% instead of 75% on the character sheet upon switching to melee stance. The problem here is usability. Five seconds is very short, forcing one to constantly double tap stance change to refresh it. The ranger is already a busy class, and double tapping is problematic at best, as it interacts strangely with other skills. Double tapping waits for whatever animation is ongoing to finish before switching stance, depending on the skill (split strike for example), if you keep the mouse pressed it will automatically start charging or firing the ranged version and forego switching back to melee. Also, if you are interrupted midway you are stuck with 50% deflect when you most need the 75%. Finally, sometimes it does not register the second tap and you start doing a ranged attack instead. You might lose a couple of seconds of the extra 25% severity at times.
The other big difference is a rogue is usually fighting a single opponent, whereas a ranger is usually fighting many given all our aoe melee options. Rangers do alright vs single opponents, and you are right, with well timed shifts we do very well in that situation. The problem lies when facing multiple opponents, when the screen gets messy and red areas are everywhere. To shine we need to be where the gwf is.
Finally, the rogue has stealth to drop all aggro. I use forest ghost constantly, but where a rogue can reposition to hit one opponent and be out of the fray, rangers need to reposition to be in the fray. Basically, because melee rangers use aoe, they attract the attention of a higher number of baddies than the rogue.
I never got to 2k+ defense or even deflect for that matter, so I cannot really say how it plays out once fully geared, but in blues and rank 5s it is very hard to be where we have to be.
A very good start would be to remove the timer on nature's enhancement altogether. Ranged builds cannot really exploit it as they lose at least half damage in melee stance, and melee builds need it. Another good change would be to change aspect of the lone pack so that in melee it works the other way around, providing more mitigation the more enemies are in range.
Edit: forgot to mention I am talking about a dungeon environment.
As the HR is a hybrid of ranged and melee stance, I don't see it ever having the damage at range of the CW, or the melee damage of the TR. To do so would make those two classes obsolete, as well as some others, which will not, and should not happen.
On the Hunter-Ranger Feedback page39 I was testing a level 39 HR prior to, and just after the last patch. With that information, combined with the testing of my current level 16 HR, and information gleaned from this, and that thread, I feel that the melee powers need a slight boost to their damage, and the ranged powers need to be on par with their melee ones. Granted, any boost(s) would not be enough to allow the HR to be played fully as a ranged only or melee only ranger, but they would bring it's damage levels up to the point where the class would at least be on par with the other classes.
Let me start by saying that it is very hard to know this for sure until I can be in a dungeon with a similarly geared cw or tr, so what I am saying is based solely on feeling. I have played all three classes, so this is not completely subjective.
I get the feeling a ranged ranger can do well in damage compared to both a cw and a tr.
Regarding the cw, the ranger's damage will come more from at-wills with aoe fire and forget support. It is hard to say, because the cw damage is amazing, but the ranger at full range and left alone can put out a lot of hurt. Of course that is in the best case scenario. A cw can continue to pour out damage while controlling opponents, if played smart. The ranged ranger, on the other hand, would have to get in close to have the adds peeled off, and then move back again, losing dps in the meantime. The ranger also has no control, so it would never take a cw spot for a run where control is needed.
For single target dps, again we need to have max range and specific skills, so where we can probably change the set-up for a boss fight, we cannot do it on the fly. In short, we either join the group to fulfill the tr single target role or the cw aoe role, but we cannot do both. A tr can also tank a mob, whereas a ranger needs a tank to hold the mob in place if it dreams of putting out damage comparable to a tr. To do so it would need support skills like rain of arrows and thorn ward or constricting shot, and be at max range, so a tank is mandatory. And having tried the whisperknife pp, I have to say rogues single target dps got a nice boost. Perhaps aimed shot should be made like its melee counterpart and be a dot instead of a regular hit. That would increase single target dps considerably.
The melee ranger I am not sure about. For single target there are a few options and a couple of nice bleeds, so it might be possible. Crit chance is lower than at range, according to a graph posted about the ranged crit feats, even with a melee feat adding a flat 10%. It is very hard to say until I can play a ranger on live, which for me won't be until late january due to travel. In fact I think I will go test it right now since my rogue is on the ptr. Just need to find her a blue weapon. It will at least give me an idea.
For melee aoe the competition is much more a gwf than a cw. While the raw numbers are there (though gwf got a nice boost in the preview) I don't think the staying power ever will be. Again, I don't know.
Seems like I wrote a lot about not knowing.
What the class does bring is the possibility of different group set-ups. Whereas a gwf could not really take the spot of a tr in a group, a ranger and a gwf can maybe replace a cw and tr, more damage, less control. It'll be fun to see once live.
The problem is that rangers are not number 1 class at any point. Not the best single target or aoe damage, not the best survivability or buffs etc. They can do well in some situations aka kiting and dealing damage at the same time (split the sky and thorn ward), but it's too situational. In PvP they seem like clerics - trying to survive while applying weak encounters to their enemies. May be they would do well in premade groups tho.
As a GWF player, I'm constantly told that this is why GWF fail. We're not the bonafide best at any one stat (defense, single-target damage, aoe damage, etc).
It takes a good player to put everything a GWF can do on the table, from our tank, to our damage application (single and aoe), to our CC application.
Only class that outright beats me in anything is CW in PvE. And I've done their job of pushing and controlling mobs, however poorly, when they couldn't stay standing anymore.
I have a feeling that, as more classes come out, we won't be seeing any more 'best of the best' like the four primaries of TR, CW, DC and GF. They'll all be hybrids from here. At which point, they will all be useless in the mind of a min-maxer, but for a vast number of players, they'll be perfectly fine.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
As a GWF player, I'm constantly told that this is why GWF fail. We're not the bonafide best at any one stat (defense, single-target damage, aoe damage, etc).
It takes a good player to put everything a GWF can do on the table, from our tank, to our damage application (single and aoe), to our CC application.
Only class that outright beats me in anything is CW in PvE. And I've done their job of pushing and controlling mobs, however poorly, when they couldn't stay standing anymore.
I have a feeling that, as more classes come out, we won't be seeing any more 'best of the best' like the four primaries of TR, CW, DC and GF. They'll all be hybrids from here. At which point, they will all be useless in the mind of a min-maxer, but for a vast number of players, they'll be perfectly fine.
Agreed, combinations will likely be what is coming.
As also a GWF player, I am curious to see if CWs are still ahead in damage once module 2 goes live. Our damage buff was significant if built accordingly.
I did run some single target tests, very rudimentary, so take them with a lot of salt.
I ran "Solo Grind", no dailies, 10600 GS, blue weapons with no weapon enchants. I ran them once to get a good rotation rhythm going, then timed it twice.
TR 8:20
Ranged HR 8:30
Melee HR 9:20
There are many considerations such as powers used, builds, and sheer knowledge with the class. I think any decent TR could have shaved some time off my time, and single target dailies definitely favor the TR. As a very, very rough estimate, I would say the ranged HR is at least 10% behind the TR, with the melee HR another 10% further behind.
I did run some single target tests, very rudimentary, so take them with a lot of salt.
I ran "Solo Grind", no dailies, 10600 GS, blue weapons with no weapon enchants. I ran them once to get a good rotation rhythm going, then timed it twice.
TR 8:20
Ranged HR 8:30
Melee HR 9:20
There are many considerations such as powers used, builds, and sheer knowledge with the class. I think any decent TR could have shaved some time off my time, and single target dailies definitely favor the TR. As a very, very rough estimate, I would say the ranged HR is at least 10% behind the TR, with the melee HR another 10% further behind.
and know try this again with a tr using duelist furry and ull clear it 6 times faster than a HR
I did run some single target tests, very rudimentary, so take them with a lot of salt.
I ran "Solo Grind", no dailies, 10600 GS, blue weapons with no weapon enchants. I ran them once to get a good rotation rhythm going, then timed it twice.
TR 8:20
Ranged HR 8:30
Melee HR 9:20
There are many considerations such as powers used, builds, and sheer knowledge with the class. I think any decent TR could have shaved some time off my time, and single target dailies definitely favor the TR. As a very, very rough estimate, I would say the ranged HR is at least 10% behind the TR, with the melee HR another 10% further behind.
Experience with the class will make a huge difference, no doubt. The good TR's right now have had over six months to maximize their builds and gear choices, to get accustomed to their characters. At the very least, they have learned off of the experiences of others.
Our HR's have only had a few weeks, and massive changes and incomplete gear make it even harder.
With all that said, I think this is a pretty solid test. What it reflects, whether the class needs a buff or not, I leave up to the devs who know what they are intending.
"Every adventurer has two things in common: they don't like dying, and they love getting paid. The rest is just semantics." Brecken, famed mercenary of Baldur's Gate
Comments
It's actually the light at the end of the development tunnel for the HR in my opinion.
You are absolutely right. In that line it is possible to have a constructive discussion. With the absurd allegations that were being made before and, astonishingly, presented as facts, it was hard to even bother answering. This is not aimed at you.
The major problem I see with the HR is the lack of shine of some powers. For a power to be on my bar it has to bring something sizable and do so consistently. That is my personal preference. Many of the HR single target ranged powers come short in that aspect. Many of these powers (hindering, hawk, etc...) do slightly more damage than rapid shot would do in the same amount of time (casting animation), and don't really bring something dependable to the table. The mechanics of the game are so that there is no benefit to one 1500 hit in 3 seconds over three 500 hits in the same amount of time. Quite the opposite, feats like the cd reduction on crit, aspect of the serpent, plaguefire and lightning enchantments, bring much better returns from several smaller hits than fewer stronger ones. I can see how people trying to use these powers with the promise of control or damage might be frustrated. It does not mean the class lacks damage, it means those power lack it, or lack enough utility to make them effective. Because of the nature of the game, we are always fighting multiple opponents. A single target skill needs some serious oomph to take the spot of and aoe skill, and many of the ranged single target powers lack that oomph. The at-wills, on the other hand, are superb. Split shot, even nerfed, has got to be one of the most fun and most powerful at-wills out there, with its very respectable damage, the huge area, and huge range.
One glaring thing I have noticed is the speed. The ranged skills are extremely slow when compared to their melee counterparts.
(Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
I'd have to agree. If not with all of the ranged skills, at the very least, with Rapid Shot.
(Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
The other detail is that split shot can get very wacky in lag, not firing or firing late and making you miss the line-up you had chosen. I never have this lag on live though, so I am hopeful it is just a preview server issue.
That's what I'm expecting to see, personally. Group experiences with the HR look like they will lend heavily to archer style. Let the tanks wade in, and blast from the outside. Much as the CW now does, only more applicable, straight DPS.
Which also begs the question: in a group experience, what does melee style bring to the table?
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
In a roundabout way that's what I was getting at, you already have 3 melee classes and no martial range so a hybrid will see little use of it's melee side for a while even with stellar skills.
(Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
I did play a skirmish as melee spec. The main problem was the lack of mitigation. I ended up spending a lot of time shifting out of red zones and then coming back in. And I even had a gwf which I could shadow and make use of my longer range aoe skills from behind him. Melee has more aoe damage than ranged, but the uptime is much worse due to squishiness and having to be close. Single target I think ranged is way ahead.
So, to answer your question, a melee ranger would do the same job as a cw or gwf, but much worse. At least as things stand now. The damage potential is there, it is just hard to apply it with any consistency. Split the sky and rain of arrows help a lot, albeit not really being melee skills.
not looking for it to be top dmg, just wondering if its usefull enough for you and your companion, that low range on the buffs might be tricky though.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
Play it to the max lvl and make suggestions after.
When i read posts like i lvled my ranger to 15,20...ect i stop reading asap cuz i'm sorry to say that, those opinions doesnt matter at all!
I got my ranger to 60 in the first few days and even BEFOR the nerfs our dmg was ONLY medicore if u dont look at split the sky and MAYBE split shot!
Also all these posts ranger is intended to be played as hybrid are such a nonsense aslong u mean melee/range.
We have a range(archery tree) and melee (combat tree) specc to pick whatever we wanna play.
Now look at ur meleeskills in general!
70% of our meleeskills are mostly buff or cc spells! Like commanding shot, binding shot, hindering shot ect there are much more.
This and the fact that we can choose a path melee/range/nature shows me that this class IS intended to be played range/melee only or even both!
So u can easily say that our tab skill can also be used just to buff and support either range or melee, which would work perfectly when they buff our dmg by a good amount and give hawkshot its potential back...
Perhaps? A short reminder?
(Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
Just cuz of the fact that their at-will dmg is slightly higher, their encounters do 3x the dmg of the ranger ones and are 10 times as tanky as a ranger.
When i call ranger useless i dont mean it's unplayable, just that every other class is better at everything that ranger offers.
And no one can tell me that it's right that a sent gwf with t1 weapon does more dmg, more burst, more cc and has way more survivability than a ranger.
Everything about the ranger is perfectly designed in my opinion! The feats are amazing and fit perfectly for what u wanna play!
The only problem is that our encounters do 0 dmg!
Those numbers are embarrassing for a lvl60 class with r10s/perfect enchants!
ATM, yes, it's playable, but it's still to weak. Boss' that my TR could take down in a few seconds takes a HR several minutes to do.
And, personally, I'd love to see it doing the damage of a TR, or very close to it.
(Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
Only issue I worry about is that the damage application at range. CW level damage at range, TR at melee, group buffs instead of the TR's CC immunity.
Honestly, CW's are doing too much damage at range already, for a controlling class.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
The problem is that rangers are not number 1 class at any point. Not the best single target or aoe damage, not the best survivability or buffs etc. They can do well in some situations aka kiting and dealing damage at the same time (split the sky and thorn ward), but it's too situational. In PvP they seem like clerics - trying to survive while applying weak encounters to their enemies. May be they would do well in premade groups tho.
As the HR is a hybrid of ranged and melee stance, I don't see it ever having the damage at range of the CW, or the melee damage of the TR. To do so would make those two classes obsolete, as well as some others, which will not, and should not happen.
On the Hunter-Ranger Feedback page39 I was testing a level 39 HR prior to, and just after the last patch. With that information, combined with the testing of my current level 16 HR, and information gleaned from this, and that thread, I feel that the melee powers need a slight boost to their damage, and the ranged powers need to be on par with their melee ones. Granted, any boost(s) would not be enough to allow the HR to be played fully as a ranged only or melee only ranger, but they would bring it's damage levels up to the point where the class would at least be on par with the other classes.
(Where's a Miniature Giant Space Hamster when you need one?)
While in theory, under perfect circumstances, the numbers should be close, it does not play like that. I am comparing a melee build for ranged should not have high deflect.
Deflect chance: Rogues get .5% for dex point (above 10) and 1% per cha point. Rangers get just .5% per dex point. That is mostly made up with our 5 point feat deep in the melee tree which adds 10% deflect chance. Both classes have a 3 point 3% feat. Rogue have a natural 75% deflect severity, while we have another 5 point feat in the heroic tree which increases our severity to 75% for five seconds after switching to melee. Note that this is not abusable because it disappears immediately when switching to ranged. It also currently has at least a display bug, because severity increases to 55.6% instead of 75% on the character sheet upon switching to melee stance. The problem here is usability. Five seconds is very short, forcing one to constantly double tap stance change to refresh it. The ranger is already a busy class, and double tapping is problematic at best, as it interacts strangely with other skills. Double tapping waits for whatever animation is ongoing to finish before switching stance, depending on the skill (split strike for example), if you keep the mouse pressed it will automatically start charging or firing the ranged version and forego switching back to melee. Also, if you are interrupted midway you are stuck with 50% deflect when you most need the 75%. Finally, sometimes it does not register the second tap and you start doing a ranged attack instead. You might lose a couple of seconds of the extra 25% severity at times.
The other big difference is a rogue is usually fighting a single opponent, whereas a ranger is usually fighting many given all our aoe melee options. Rangers do alright vs single opponents, and you are right, with well timed shifts we do very well in that situation. The problem lies when facing multiple opponents, when the screen gets messy and red areas are everywhere. To shine we need to be where the gwf is.
Finally, the rogue has stealth to drop all aggro. I use forest ghost constantly, but where a rogue can reposition to hit one opponent and be out of the fray, rangers need to reposition to be in the fray. Basically, because melee rangers use aoe, they attract the attention of a higher number of baddies than the rogue.
I never got to 2k+ defense or even deflect for that matter, so I cannot really say how it plays out once fully geared, but in blues and rank 5s it is very hard to be where we have to be.
A very good start would be to remove the timer on nature's enhancement altogether. Ranged builds cannot really exploit it as they lose at least half damage in melee stance, and melee builds need it. Another good change would be to change aspect of the lone pack so that in melee it works the other way around, providing more mitigation the more enemies are in range.
Edit: forgot to mention I am talking about a dungeon environment.
Let me start by saying that it is very hard to know this for sure until I can be in a dungeon with a similarly geared cw or tr, so what I am saying is based solely on feeling. I have played all three classes, so this is not completely subjective.
I get the feeling a ranged ranger can do well in damage compared to both a cw and a tr.
Regarding the cw, the ranger's damage will come more from at-wills with aoe fire and forget support. It is hard to say, because the cw damage is amazing, but the ranger at full range and left alone can put out a lot of hurt. Of course that is in the best case scenario. A cw can continue to pour out damage while controlling opponents, if played smart. The ranged ranger, on the other hand, would have to get in close to have the adds peeled off, and then move back again, losing dps in the meantime. The ranger also has no control, so it would never take a cw spot for a run where control is needed.
For single target dps, again we need to have max range and specific skills, so where we can probably change the set-up for a boss fight, we cannot do it on the fly. In short, we either join the group to fulfill the tr single target role or the cw aoe role, but we cannot do both. A tr can also tank a mob, whereas a ranger needs a tank to hold the mob in place if it dreams of putting out damage comparable to a tr. To do so it would need support skills like rain of arrows and thorn ward or constricting shot, and be at max range, so a tank is mandatory. And having tried the whisperknife pp, I have to say rogues single target dps got a nice boost. Perhaps aimed shot should be made like its melee counterpart and be a dot instead of a regular hit. That would increase single target dps considerably.
The melee ranger I am not sure about. For single target there are a few options and a couple of nice bleeds, so it might be possible. Crit chance is lower than at range, according to a graph posted about the ranged crit feats, even with a melee feat adding a flat 10%. It is very hard to say until I can play a ranger on live, which for me won't be until late january due to travel. In fact I think I will go test it right now since my rogue is on the ptr. Just need to find her a blue weapon. It will at least give me an idea.
For melee aoe the competition is much more a gwf than a cw. While the raw numbers are there (though gwf got a nice boost in the preview) I don't think the staying power ever will be. Again, I don't know.
Seems like I wrote a lot about not knowing.
What the class does bring is the possibility of different group set-ups. Whereas a gwf could not really take the spot of a tr in a group, a ranger and a gwf can maybe replace a cw and tr, more damage, less control. It'll be fun to see once live.
As a GWF player, I'm constantly told that this is why GWF fail. We're not the bonafide best at any one stat (defense, single-target damage, aoe damage, etc).
It takes a good player to put everything a GWF can do on the table, from our tank, to our damage application (single and aoe), to our CC application.
Only class that outright beats me in anything is CW in PvE. And I've done their job of pushing and controlling mobs, however poorly, when they couldn't stay standing anymore.
I have a feeling that, as more classes come out, we won't be seeing any more 'best of the best' like the four primaries of TR, CW, DC and GF. They'll all be hybrids from here. At which point, they will all be useless in the mind of a min-maxer, but for a vast number of players, they'll be perfectly fine.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters
Agreed, combinations will likely be what is coming.
As also a GWF player, I am curious to see if CWs are still ahead in damage once module 2 goes live. Our damage buff was significant if built accordingly.
I ran "Solo Grind", no dailies, 10600 GS, blue weapons with no weapon enchants. I ran them once to get a good rotation rhythm going, then timed it twice.
TR 8:20
Ranged HR 8:30
Melee HR 9:20
There are many considerations such as powers used, builds, and sheer knowledge with the class. I think any decent TR could have shaved some time off my time, and single target dailies definitely favor the TR. As a very, very rough estimate, I would say the ranged HR is at least 10% behind the TR, with the melee HR another 10% further behind.
and know try this again with a tr using duelist furry and ull clear it 6 times faster than a HR
Experience with the class will make a huge difference, no doubt. The good TR's right now have had over six months to maximize their builds and gear choices, to get accustomed to their characters. At the very least, they have learned off of the experiences of others.
Our HR's have only had a few weeks, and massive changes and incomplete gear make it even harder.
With all that said, I think this is a pretty solid test. What it reflects, whether the class needs a buff or not, I leave up to the devs who know what they are intending.
"D*mn wizards," said Morik the Rogue.
Learn what a GWF and GF really are: The History of Fighters