test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Official M16: Ranger

11012141516

Comments

  • minotaur2857minotaur2857 Posts: 1,138Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    edited March 28
    "By the way, to the ones that says, ok shut up so they can develop something good, we did shut up and this is what they gave us. I am 100% sure that no good/old HR will play this boring class if this hits live. I am not saying effective or strong, I am saying boring and meaningless. I myself started thinking about a TR or SW or completely leaving, already. So, my whining is only to be able to play the class I loved before all this mod 16 chaos. "

    Unfortunately I'm finding the same with all the other classes I liked ...
  • masterclown61masterclown61 Posts: 101Member Arc User
    > @minotaur2857 said:
    > "By the way, to the ones that says, ok shut up so they can develop something good, we did shut up and this is what they gave us. I am 100% sure that no good/old HR will play this boring class if this hits live. I am not saying effective or strong, I am saying boring and meaningless. I myself started thinking about a TR or SW or completely leaving, already. So, my whining is only to be able to play the class I loved before all this mod 16 chaos. "
    >
    > Unfortunately I'm finding the same with all the other classes I liked ...

    I liked TR, try that on preview, looks a lot like combat HR and has better movement. It is fun man, try it out on preview :)
  • minotaur2857minotaur2857 Posts: 1,138Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User

    > @minotaur2857 said:

    > "By the way, to the ones that says, ok shut up so they can develop something good, we did shut up and this is what they gave us. I am 100% sure that no good/old HR will play this boring class if this hits live. I am not saying effective or strong, I am saying boring and meaningless. I myself started thinking about a TR or SW or completely leaving, already. So, my whining is only to be able to play the class I loved before all this mod 16 chaos. "

    >

    > Unfortunately I'm finding the same with all the other classes I liked ...



    I liked TR, try that on preview, looks a lot like combat HR and has better movement. It is fun man, try it out on preview :)

    TR is not one I play that much as it's the worst of my 15K DPSs, CW, GWF, DPS GF I've found to be boring as hell,
  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    kangkeok said:

    userutf8 said:

    Constricting is single target (shame on me :-))

    The same goes for Binding arrow. Without thorn root feat, they are all single target damage power with aoe CC function. That is why your suggestion on swapping RoA for Binding isn't fair for anyone that spec into non root based hunter. Its basically swapping away an aoe power for a single target. If its an improvement as suggested by kythelion, it should benefit all build and not by gimping one build while pushing the benefit to all other build. There are a lot of things to consider other than numerical value and personal taste during a swap. I believe the developer arrange all those power as it is now for a good reason.

    If people are not satisfied or feel out of place regarding having Binding arrow in warden path because of its root mechanic, it can be solved without even messing with the power arrangement initially setup by the developer by just changing Binding arrow into something similar with CC function. In my opinion, its way better and simpler compare to power swapping. To nip a bud we doesn't have to cut down the whole tree.
    Did I mention somewhere that Binding Arrow is NOT a single target?
    I made my suggestion with respect to the fact that it's single target.

    Well, let me guess: maybe I should have mentioned that Hunter has access to 5 ranged AoE encounters whereas warden has access to 3 ranged AoE encounters and that would convince somebody like you? - That would probably have broken your previous argumentation about removal of valuable ranged AoE from Hunter, right? xD Isn't that "unfair" that Hunter has more ranged AoE? Isn't that unbalanced (from point of "fairness")? Problem is that I do not base my suggestions on what is fair or unfair, poor me.
    (In case you didn't understand, that's a sarcasm above :-))

    Again, your opinion on what "is fair" and what is "not fair", is only your incompetent opinion. (NOT going to debate about your incompetence, everyone can check your "suggestions" starting from initial page of this thread and make their decision).
    Again: your incompetence and inability to make valuable suggestions doesn't mean that nobody else can make valueable suggestions. Your inability to estimate the impact of the proposed change doesn't mean that nobody else can estimate that.
    I know it's hard, but try to understand that.
    Regards :-)
    ABSOLUTE
  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    hastur905 said:

    @noworries @astradahl

    I am not going to comment on the changes to at-wills, encounters, dailies or any of the other stat changes you made today. My only concern with today is the announcement of MoD 16 going live.

    It's going live on April, 23, isn't it?
    They have almost a month...
    Don't underestimate the power of deadline, when it's applied to a software developer :-)
    ABSOLUTE
  • arazith07arazith07 Posts: 401Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    We still need to see the promised changes coming for HRs tomorrow, hopefully Rangers will be in a lot better position than they are now.
  • artifleurartifleur Posts: 642Member Arc User
    Where did you this anouncement?

    There's nothing in the news tab.

    April 23 sounds too early to me.
  • rafaeldarafaelda Posts: 619Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    artifleur said:

    Where did you this anouncement?



    There's nothing in the news tab.



    April 23 sounds too early to me.

    I hevent seen the annoucement , (twiter i think) but i was already expecting somthiing near it, new mod always come after a 2xXP event and there one set to end near that date...

    to be hoinest is was thinking they would dropit ione week later 30April or 01 Mai but not much earlier than i was expecting...
  • wizardlvl80#5963 wizardlvl80 Posts: 519Member Arc User
    userutf8 said:

    hastur905 said:

    @noworries @astradahl

    I am not going to comment on the changes to at-wills, encounters, dailies or any of the other stat changes you made today. My only concern with today is the announcement of MoD 16 going live.

    It's going live on April, 23, isn't it?
    They have almost a month...
    Don't underestimate the power of deadline, when it's applied to a software developer :-)

  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    artifleur said:

    Where did you this anouncement?



    There's nothing in the news tab.



    April 23 sounds too early to me.

    https://youtube.com/watch?time_continue=102&v=e_7N49AgluM

    ABSOLUTE
  • kythelion#3210 kythelion Posts: 252Member Arc User
    edited March 28
    It isn't going to be ready, but they honestly couldn't have pushed it more than another week or so. They have other mods to get out this year.
  • artifleurartifleur Posts: 642Member Arc User
    > @userutf8 said:
    > Where did you this anouncement?
    >
    >
    >
    > There's nothing in the news tab.
    >
    >
    >
    > April 23 sounds too early to me.
    >
    > https://youtube.com/watch?time_continue=102&v=e_7N49AgluM

    Thanks.

    That only leave 3 weeks of testing.

    They had better bring some serious changes for ranger this week.
  • kangkeokkangkeok Posts: 1,117Member Arc User
    edited March 28
    userutf8 said:

    kangkeok said:

    userutf8 said:

    Constricting is single target (shame on me :-))

    The same goes for Binding arrow. Without thorn root feat, they are all single target damage power with aoe CC function. That is why your suggestion on swapping RoA for Binding isn't fair for anyone that spec into non root based hunter. Its basically swapping away an aoe power for a single target. If its an improvement as suggested by kythelion, it should benefit all build and not by gimping one build while pushing the benefit to all other build. There are a lot of things to consider other than numerical value and personal taste during a swap. I believe the developer arrange all those power as it is now for a good reason.

    If people are not satisfied or feel out of place regarding having Binding arrow in warden path because of its root mechanic, it can be solved without even messing with the power arrangement initially setup by the developer by just changing Binding arrow into something similar with CC function. In my opinion, its way better and simpler compare to power swapping. To nip a bud we doesn't have to cut down the whole tree.
    Did I mention somewhere that Binding Arrow is NOT a single target?
    I made my suggestion with respect to the fact that it's single target.

    Well, let me guess: maybe I should have mentioned that Hunter has access to 5 ranged AoE encounters whereas warden has access to 3 ranged AoE encounters and that would convince somebody like you? - That would probably have broken your previous argumentation about removal of valuable ranged AoE from Hunter, right? xD Isn't that "unfair" that Hunter has more ranged AoE? Isn't that unbalanced (from point of "fairness")? Problem is that I do not base my suggestions on what is fair or unfair, poor me.
    (In case you didn't understand, that's a sarcasm above :-))

    Again, your opinion on what "is fair" and what is "not fair", is only your incompetent opinion. (NOT going to debate about your incompetence, everyone can check your "suggestions" starting from initial page of this thread and make their decision).
    Again: your incompetence and inability to make valuable suggestions doesn't mean that nobody else can make valueable suggestions. Your inability to estimate the impact of the proposed change doesn't mean that nobody else can estimate that.
    I know it's hard, but try to understand that.
    Regards :-)
    No, It doesn't broke my previous argument but it does say something on what u overlooked. Warden has 2 range aoe at-will while hunter only have single target at-will. U are only comparing encounter while u should compare powers as whole. I'm not even mentioning dailies yet. I trust the developer has already worked on balancing the power accessibility thoroughly. As for suggestion that is competence or not, guess its your turn to answer now does it?

    It really depends on one perspective to see the fairness of your suggestion. Not opinion. If u look from a warden perspective, its doesn't matter because nothing has changed. All powers are still accessible. From root based hunter ( or trapper), its great. They gain an encounter option where root damage could apply while it retain its aoe function. However, from the perspective non root based hunter (archer), that's unfair. We lost an aoe encounter for a single target one. If u can't accept the point of view from an archer by sending him off with insult, then what's the point of the forum anyway?

    Anyway, there is no point insulting each other. Its a forum and it changes all the time. Today u might be of different opinion with someone but tomorrow u might be on the same page. Vice versa.
  • arazith07arazith07 Posts: 401Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    Hunters do have a ranged aoe at will, one that does about the same damage as rain of arrows, more if there are 5 or less targets. If you really are concerned about archer aoe, I highly suggest trying out the warden. Hunters are more geared to single target, especially if you don't go with roots.
  • kangkeokkangkeok Posts: 1,117Member Arc User
    edited March 28
    arazith07 said:

    Hunters do have a ranged aoe at will, one that does about the same damage as rain of arrows, more if there are 5 or less targets. If you really are concerned about archer aoe, I highly suggest trying out the warden. Hunters are more geared to single target, especially if you don't go with roots.

    U mean split shot? That's on common path. Warden has it too if u wanna put it this way. In fact every build is accessible to it. I have tried warden as an archer. They do not lacks of aoe powers but they do lack of dps (however I haven't played it with the latest update). Because Hunter path are more geared to single target without speccing root, they cant afford to lose RoA. I believe the developer put it there for a reason.
  • arazith07arazith07 Posts: 401Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    With no developers providing insights, acknowledgement of feedback given, and no changes on patch notes, any discussions are bound to degenerate into bickering and name calling. We are partly to blame, however a large part of the blame is on the developers. Tomorrow we were promised some changes, hopefully for the better. But yes, ranger dps sucks right now. Hopefully the changes tomorrow is fix our position and we can go back to providing feedback instead of squabbling with ourselves.
  • kangkeokkangkeok Posts: 1,117Member Arc User
    Frankly, there is nothing we can do about it if the developer doesn't want to involve in discussing ideas with us. We don't know the scene behind the curtain, we cant comment much. What we can do is keep testing and posting on which power is still underpowered. However, I suggest that we avoid controversial suggestion that involve changing each other build like power swapping because someone is bound to defend their build.
  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    kangkeok said:

    userutf8 said:

    kangkeok said:

    userutf8 said:

    Constricting is single target (shame on me :-))

    The same goes for Binding arrow. Without thorn root feat, they are all single target damage power with aoe CC function. That is why your suggestion on swapping RoA for Binding isn't fair for anyone that spec into non root based hunter. Its basically swapping away an aoe power for a single target. If its an improvement as suggested by kythelion, it should benefit all build and not by gimping one build while pushing the benefit to all other build. There are a lot of things to consider other than numerical value and personal taste during a swap. I believe the developer arrange all those power as it is now for a good reason.

    If people are not satisfied or feel out of place regarding having Binding arrow in warden path because of its root mechanic, it can be solved without even messing with the power arrangement initially setup by the developer by just changing Binding arrow into something similar with CC function. In my opinion, its way better and simpler compare to power swapping. To nip a bud we doesn't have to cut down the whole tree.
    Did I mention somewhere that Binding Arrow is NOT a single target?
    I made my suggestion with respect to the fact that it's single target.

    Well, let me guess: maybe I should have mentioned that Hunter has access to 5 ranged AoE encounters whereas warden has access to 3 ranged AoE encounters and that would convince somebody like you? - That would probably have broken your previous argumentation about removal of valuable ranged AoE from Hunter, right? xD Isn't that "unfair" that Hunter has more ranged AoE? Isn't that unbalanced (from point of "fairness")? Problem is that I do not base my suggestions on what is fair or unfair, poor me.
    (In case you didn't understand, that's a sarcasm above :-))

    Again, your opinion on what "is fair" and what is "not fair", is only your incompetent opinion. (NOT going to debate about your incompetence, everyone can check your "suggestions" starting from initial page of this thread and make their decision).
    Again: your incompetence and inability to make valuable suggestions doesn't mean that nobody else can make valueable suggestions. Your inability to estimate the impact of the proposed change doesn't mean that nobody else can estimate that.
    I know it's hard, but try to understand that.
    Regards :-)
    No, It doesn't broke my previous argument but it does say something on what u overlooked. Warden has 2 range aoe at-will while hunter only have single target at-will. U are only comparing encounter while u should compare powers as whole. I'm not even mentioning dailies yet. I trust the developer has already worked on balancing the power accessibility thoroughly. As for suggestion that is competence or not, guess its your turn to answer now does it?

    It really depends on one perspective to see the fairness of your suggestion. Not opinion. If u look from a warden perspective, its doesn't matter because nothing has changed. All powers are still accessible. From root based hunter ( or trapper), its great. They gain an encounter option where root damage could apply while it retain its aoe function. However, from the perspective non root based hunter (archer), that's unfair. We lost an aoe encounter for a single target one. If u can't accept the point of view from an archer by sending him off with insult, then what's the point of the forum anyway?

    Anyway, there is no point insulting each other. Its a forum and it changes all the time. Today u might be of different opinion with someone but tomorrow u might be on the same page. Vice versa.
    Right :-) Sorry, but you missed one thing again: highlighted sarcasm for you. I think now it becomes more clear when it starts, right?

    Sorry, if I somehow insulted you. I definitely didn't mean to insult you. I just pointed that you are incompetent.
    Why would you interpret it as insult? There are many people who are incompetent. On forum, in game, IRL. It's ok to be incompetent in something. It's ok to be wrong. But when incompetent person is arguing with everybody, it irritates, isn't it?
    kangkeok said:

    Frankly, there is nothing we can do about it if the developer doesn't want to involve in discussing ideas with us. We don't know the scene behind the curtain, we cant comment much. What we can do is keep testing and posting on which power is still underpowered. However, I suggest that we avoid controversial suggestion that involve changing each other build like power swapping because someone is bound to defend their build.

    1. "keep up testing and posting on which power is underpowered." +1 seems like a cool idea. Btw, I do not see much testing and reporting by you.
    2. suggestion rejected, sorry :-) I will suggest everything that I consider to be viable, regardless of somebody's particular build.
    Regards
    ABSOLUTE
  • lordaeoloslordaeolos Posts: 119Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User


    Hunter "Trapper":
    1. Thorned roots does zero damage when applied by hindering strike
    -recreate by striking target with Hindering Strike from melee stance, thorned roots procs 9 times, always for 0 damage

    3. Thorned roots when applied from range ends after changing to melee stance and attacking
    -recreate by striking target from ranged stance with constricting arrow, immediately switch stances to melee and attach with any power, thorned roots clears and no longer does damage





    "Lord Willow"
    Guild Leader: Mistaken Identity (formerly Midnight Express)

    My Twitch Stream

    See my Youtube Channel for guides and more


    "Don't ever become a pessimist... a pessimist is correct oftener than an optimist, but an optimist has more fun, and neither can stop the march of events."
  • kaudilhokaudilho Posts: 68Member Arc User
    edited March 30
    Patch note didn't come out yet but seems like hr was ignored once again , changing to melee weapons dmg is nice, but range powers still are bugged when switching stances and i supose the rest of the bugs are not touched too....
    Harding Grim
    Guild:
    Dragon Server-Essence of Aggression
    Drider Server- TheWolves
    youtube channel
  • hustin1hustin1 Posts: 2,997Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    ROA doing zero damage

    I'm getting this a lot:

    [Combat (Self)] Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Dread Hound.
    [Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Dread Hound.
    [Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Guard.
    [Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Dread Hound.
    Harper Chronicles: Cap Snatchers (RELEASED) - NW-DPUTABC6X
    Blood Magic (RELEASED) - NW-DUU2P7HCO
    Children of the Fey (RELEASED) - NW-DKSSAPFPF
    Buried Under Blacklake (WIP) - NW-DEDV2PAEP
    The Redcap Rebels (WIP) - NW-DO23AFHFH
  • kaudilhokaudilho Posts: 68Member Arc User
    edited March 30
    hustin1 said:

    ROA doing zero damage

    I'm getting this a lot:

    [Combat (Self)] Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Dread Hound.
    [Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Dread Hound.
    [Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Guard.
    [Combat (Self)] Critical Hit! Your Rain of Arrows gives 0 Physical Damage to Dread Hound.

    Yeh that's the old one, pretty much every ranged power that has timer roa, thorned roots feat(it's count as a range power even if applied by melee encounter), same for split the sky etc when you switch stance deals 0 dmg.
    Harding Grim
    Guild:
    Dragon Server-Essence of Aggression
    Drider Server- TheWolves
    youtube channel
  • artifleurartifleur Posts: 642Member Arc User
    None of the bugs we've previously reported have been fix.

    Some new ones appeared such as blade hurricane not working at all with melee encounters.

    Magnitudes still make no sense. Hindering Strike 400, Steel Breeze 150, go figure. >.<

    This is getting ridiculous.
  • masterclown61masterclown61 Posts: 101Member Arc User
    artifleur said:

    None of the bugs we've previously reported have been fix.

    Some new ones appeared such as blade hurricane not working at all with melee encounters.

    Magnitudes still make no sense. Hindering Strike 400, Steel Breeze 150, go figure. >.<

    This is getting ridiculous.

    To be honest, all of the classes have gotten their powers reduced as in magnitude.

    I found melee weapon damage change as a nice update, yet it would be better if our offhand weapon acted like the other classes, or Rogues, instead of a seperate calculation reason.

    There are too many bugs in this patch, so I can't really say anything. The only thing I discovered is, now I feel like I am the companion of my companion.

    At-wills got some love, though they still are not providing anything but simple damage. I'd love to see a good side effect on some of them to be effective.

    I tried solo Esot, took me 20 minutes dungeon time to bring boss health to 15% then I got bored and let it kill me.

    Also, I don't know what they have changed but seems like Armor Penetration and Accuracy limits have been changed. I see lots of not fully pierced or deflected shots.
  • artifleurartifleur Posts: 642Member Arc User

    Also, I don't know what they have changed but seems like Armor Penetration and Accuracy limits have been changed. I see lots of not fully pierced or deflected shots.

    This is why :

    Now that preview has been going for several weeks now and there has been an immense level of feedback for us to review, we have made some core changes to further improve the balance. These will likely go to preview later this week, barring any complications.

    • Ratings now convert at 1000 rating points to 1%
    • Defense now caps at 50% damage ignored. Certain temporary buffs can bypass this cap up to a maximum of 80% damage ignored.
    • Critter ratings have been adjusted to have two values. Defense/Deflect/Combat Advantage/and Crit will be a higher value than the other four ratings. Critter ratings have been adjusted as well. Ex: level 70 critters will have 7,000 rating for Critical Resist, Accuracy, Awareness, and Armor Pen. They will have 57,000 ratings for Defense, Deflect, Combat Advantage, and Critical Strike. At endgame, the higher ratings are always 50,000 more than the lower ratings.
    • Encounter and Daily magnitudes have been brought down, making At-Will powers more effective in relation.
    • Critter Health has been reduced by 30% across the board
    • Multi-target At-Wills have had their damage increased

    So why were these particular changes made?

    With the values ratings currently have, players routinely either have below the threshold for a given rating which means it has zero effectiveness, or they have wasted stats because the cap for effectiveness has been exceeded.

    By changing the conversion from 500 to 1% to 1000 to 1% it gives a wider variance in values. This in turn allowed us to lower the critter ratings so that players who have even minimal viable gear should find it easy to see some effectiveness from their ratings. In addition, separating the critter ratings into two categories allows for all ratings to have similar investments put into them for effectiveness. The way it is on preview now, players need over twice as much for half their ratings which is an odd balancing act.

    There has been no shortage of talk about At-Wills not feeling meaningful enough to want to use. While mathematically over the course of a fight, or dungeon run, they added up to a significant amount of damage, it didn't feel that way due to the size of individual hits. To bring At-Wills closer to other powers, we reduced the magnitudes of Encounter and Dailies and reduced overall critter health to adjust for the lower overall damage.

    As with all aspects, further changes could happen before this goes live.
  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    edited April 1
    Re-tested at-wills' magnitudes (spreadsheet will be updated later today or tomorrow).

    Changes:
    1. Rapid Shot, Rapid Strike, Electric Shot and Electric Strike are no longer combos: now they have fixed magnitude for each hit. (animation is still the same)
    That's a good change, imo. Thanks, devs
    2. Storm Strike combo is simplified to 3 fixed hits and one lightning hit that deals 1/2 damage.

    Mistakenly reported Storm Strike and Electric Shot magnitudes as buggy, however they are correct and respect bonus damage from INT,
    thanks @masterclown61 who pointed that they are elemental, so not necessarily should depend on STR bonus.

    Re-tested encounter magnitudes (spreadsheet will be updated later today or tomorrow)
    here's the list of actual bugs:
    Marauder's Escape, Plant Growth and Throw Caution still do not respect neither STR nor INT damage bonus

    Not only Thorn Ward returns 0 damage when you switch to melee, but also melee damage/weapon is included into its damage calculation (there's some dependency on melee weapon): you can check that if you equip 1000 dmg ranged and 100 damage melee weapon than damage is less than if you had both weapons with damage 1000 (warning: it's hard to repro, see discussion below)
    Post edited by userutf8 on
    ABSOLUTE
  • kythelion#3210 kythelion Posts: 252Member Arc User
    Is it using melee instead or additively?
  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User

    Is it using melee instead or additively?

    Basically it looks like it's damage debuff 10% is somehow tied to melee weapon.

    It doesn't repro consistently.
    What I have to do is to:
    1. unequip ranged weapon, so only dmg 100 axes remain
    2. proc thorn ward (it does 0 damage)
    3. equip 1000 bow
    4. proc thorn ward again - it does 351 damage (335 base + 5% bonus from STR20 but it doesn't apply that 10% debuff).
    5. proc thorn ward again - it correctly does 386 (335 base + 5% bonus from STR20, + 10% debuff on top).

    If you equip dmg 1000 melee on step 1, then step 4 doesn't reproduce.

    Mess...
    ABSOLUTE
  • kythelion#3210 kythelion Posts: 252Member Arc User
    Huh. I'll try it out later. See if I can repro it.
  • userutf8userutf8 Posts: 270Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    Verified cast times on at-wills and updated spreadsheet:
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r0LLxAKif3AUwYKyTaoIfB1clrP7u8fQpoCYMYuct6M/edit?usp=sharing

    Here's the bad problem that I already reported and it's not yet adressed:
    Cast times on Rapid Shot, Rapid Strike, Electric Shot and Clear the Ground BADLY mismatch the tooltip, which means that either:
    1. these powers require increase of magnitude to be balanced with other at-wills
    2. cast times (animations) must be adjusted to fit the tooltip values
    Currently on paper (tooltips) these powers look ok, but they BADLY underperform in fact, which is one of the reasons that causes people to complain about underpowered HR at-wills.

    Rapid Shot: tooltip says that cast time is 0.4, but real average cast time is 0,63.
    It's 1,575 longer than intended and as a result mps of Rapid Shot is 80, whereas on paper it's 125 (>1,5x difference).
    Rapid Strike tooltip says that cast time is 0.2, but real average cast time is 0.43, which is more than twice longer!!!
    As a result we get half of intended dps.
    Same applies to Clear the Ground 0.6 real vs 0.3 in tooltip!

    Electric Shot 0.92 vs 0.7 - not as bad as these three, but still bad!

    Split Strike, Penetrating Arrow and Hunter's Teamwork have longer cast times as well!

    Can we hope that it will be adressed?

    Attaching screens with filtered logs:

    Rapid Shot


    Rapid Strike


    Clear the Ground
    https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/134000401702846464/561668642576662528/Clear_the_Ground_sample.jpg?width=884&height=446

    Electric Shot


    Hunter's Teamwork


    Penetrating Arrow


    Split Strike



    Split Shot charged mps is less then non-charged mps. What's the big idea behind that? Why tooltip of Split Shot specifies that magnitude is 40-80, whereas in fact it's 50-80
    ABSOLUTE
Sign In or Register to comment.