Melee Readjustments - Discuss
- Thread starter Wiz
- Start date
- Status
diolas
Dalayan Beginner
Wiz said:
I'm not fully knowledgeable on Ranger AA's. Could someone let me know which of the Following monk DPS AA's a ranger does not get(besides the ones tagged monk only):
Combat Fury
Combat Ferocity
Melee Mastery
Ambidexterity
Melee Mastery
Fury of the ages
Unerring Precision
Crippling Strike (mob level capped at 61)
Monk Only:
Return Kick (only useful when tanking)
Discipline of the Body
Wiz
NOT DONATING *EVER*
Discipline of the Body primarily (absolutely nothing to scoff at, a maxed flying kick is something like 20 DPS)
RK as well, though that's not much of a DPS AA.
Also, rangers' only damage style, Whirling Strikes, gets worse and worse the more AAs you buy, while Flurry of Blows/Cryo/Kinetic/Crushing Blow remain consistent.
RK as well, though that's not much of a DPS AA.
Also, rangers' only damage style, Whirling Strikes, gets worse and worse the more AAs you buy, while Flurry of Blows/Cryo/Kinetic/Crushing Blow remain consistent.
I just don't understand how short-sighted most people can be here.
Look -
Monk class = DPS, Tanking, FD, mend, brilliant styles with PROCS, and a whole host of extra dmg abilities all with their own PROCS too. The monks domain extends far beyond that of most other classes, and if that isnt enough, all of these are augmented by your Alternate advancements.
In other words, your tanking, your mitigation, your damage, your procs, your heals and your FD all become better.
Now lets look at this from another point of view,
The ranger is a hybrid between a warrior and a druid. What does that mean? For starters, It poses a paradox whereby a chain wearing 'half warrior' cant tank anywhere close to a leather wearing monk.
Putting this aside, it means the ranger has access to some of the lesser spells of the druid, while gaining the lesser abilities of the warrior.
The ranger has not the damage of a rogue, nor the utility of a monk, nor the abilities of the warrior, nor the useful spells of the druid, nor the styles of the war/monk/rogue which maintain their usefulness through alternate advancement.
Like monks, rogues too are improved in their entirety through alternate advancement - thats DPS, backstab, evade, hide, and escape.
As for rangers? spend 60 AA points to bring themselves *UP TO* a monks level of dps. Not to mention the unbelievable tediousness of using bows to do dmg...
simply put, high level the ranger has nothing to offer except dps - which is comparable to monks and lower than rogues. They can solo better than either yes, but have you ever tried soloing as a ranger with bows? I can guarantee you, it is so poor/dull you will not want to continue beyond half of the first kill. The only meaningful xp method to look forward to is grouping and at that they have neither the dps of the rogue nor the utility of the monk to offer.
So for gods sake, quit whining because you have nothing to whine about, especially a tiny addition such as tripple attack which is inherentl a benefit for lower level rangers and not higher level ones.
Look -
Monk class = DPS, Tanking, FD, mend, brilliant styles with PROCS, and a whole host of extra dmg abilities all with their own PROCS too. The monks domain extends far beyond that of most other classes, and if that isnt enough, all of these are augmented by your Alternate advancements.
In other words, your tanking, your mitigation, your damage, your procs, your heals and your FD all become better.
Now lets look at this from another point of view,
The ranger is a hybrid between a warrior and a druid. What does that mean? For starters, It poses a paradox whereby a chain wearing 'half warrior' cant tank anywhere close to a leather wearing monk.
Putting this aside, it means the ranger has access to some of the lesser spells of the druid, while gaining the lesser abilities of the warrior.
The ranger has not the damage of a rogue, nor the utility of a monk, nor the abilities of the warrior, nor the useful spells of the druid, nor the styles of the war/monk/rogue which maintain their usefulness through alternate advancement.
Like monks, rogues too are improved in their entirety through alternate advancement - thats DPS, backstab, evade, hide, and escape.
As for rangers? spend 60 AA points to bring themselves *UP TO* a monks level of dps. Not to mention the unbelievable tediousness of using bows to do dmg...
simply put, high level the ranger has nothing to offer except dps - which is comparable to monks and lower than rogues. They can solo better than either yes, but have you ever tried soloing as a ranger with bows? I can guarantee you, it is so poor/dull you will not want to continue beyond half of the first kill. The only meaningful xp method to look forward to is grouping and at that they have neither the dps of the rogue nor the utility of the monk to offer.
So for gods sake, quit whining because you have nothing to whine about, especially a tiny addition such as tripple attack which is inherentl a benefit for lower level rangers and not higher level ones.
Ranger solo isnt unbearable, I actually do it quite often and effectively if I am close (50%ish) to a ping and there arent any groups up. I dont think that Rangers are as useless as you all say, and I wouldnt mind one bit if nothing was changed about our class. However, this isnt about me and I know for sure before lvl 65, a crazy bow and mucho AA's I melee'd like crap in groups. Why not use the bow in groups? because its tedious to buy/fletch/summon a TON of arrows every fight, and even then pre-archery mastery even our melee is better than our bows. Most of the people debating on this thread wont be affected at all by this change, since no high end ranger will melee if he had the chance to use his bow. This is to encourage lower levels to play/group with a ranger, and give them a little boost to keep up with other classes pre-end game. In my opinion no one here (especially monks) have nothing to worry about because it wont really have any effect on you.
ps. A higher chance to dual weild/double attack is negated by the fact that we have a style that automatically succeeds every dual weild + double attack
ps. A higher chance to dual weild/double attack is negated by the fact that we have a style that automatically succeeds every dual weild + double attack
A similar situation arose during GoD on live. With the insane spikiness of the damage output of GoD mobs, knights could no longer reliably tank even trash mobs. Warriors didnt have a problem with their mitigation and riposte/parry discs.
Knights needed a way to tank trash mobs more reliably, but warrios went nuts because now that they had reasonable snap aggro and superior long term aggro (which knights fully backed them getting in petitions to sony), they were the ONLY tank to have, and knigths could not get a group.
Warriors threw a tantrum, denying knights soem form of mitigation disc of any form to deal with the low db high di mobs of GoD.
They couldnt handle any other class being able to do what they wanted to do : tank nameds and tank trash.
Same issue is happening here with monks VS rangers.
again, there are only 4 classes.
Tank
DPS
Healer
Crowd Control
These all have to be more or less equal, no matter what fancy name we give the different varieties.
Knights needed a way to tank trash mobs more reliably, but warrios went nuts because now that they had reasonable snap aggro and superior long term aggro (which knights fully backed them getting in petitions to sony), they were the ONLY tank to have, and knigths could not get a group.
Warriors threw a tantrum, denying knights soem form of mitigation disc of any form to deal with the low db high di mobs of GoD.
They couldnt handle any other class being able to do what they wanted to do : tank nameds and tank trash.
Same issue is happening here with monks VS rangers.
again, there are only 4 classes.
Tank
DPS
Healer
Crowd Control
These all have to be more or less equal, no matter what fancy name we give the different varieties.
diolas
Dalayan Beginner
daimyo said:
Ahem
Wiz said:
I believe this thread has now been thoroughly Hijacked.
An attempt to get back on Topic
How about a style that gives them triple attack or something to that effect? Or you could give them a cool self proc buff with high damage that only works in melee.
We have proc spells:
Call of the Mound - lvl 64
+15 AC, Weapon Proc (Melee Only) for 82 dmg, and a stun.
In addition to several bow procs in the form of the 'quiver' line of spells:
Quiver of Flame - lvl 61
130 AoE DD (Bow Only)
Quiver of Cold - lvl 63
160 Single DD (Bow Only)
Quiver of the Sun - lvl 65
Blind (bow only) <-- never used except in pvp :?
The problem with some of the melee procs is that it is huge aggro, and then coupled with weapons with an innate proc (Ytraz anyone?) poses a problem to us papertanks. Today in Akheva I engaged an undead mob at around 80% without casting or hitting before and stole aggro on the first hit (with a proc) from Aratar. Yes we get spells like Cyro Jolt which almost instantaneously lose us aggro (1.5 sec cast), but against any formidable mob that is enough to get us killed, not to mention resists.
Now, a style that gives us triple attack... since the point of this is to help out lower-mid level rangers, that would mean they would have to choose between this style and whirling strikes (which is an automatic succeed on every dual weild + double attack). I would think the two styles would be similar in effect, or that whirling strikes would even be better (since the ranger may not have his/her weapon/offensive skills maxed yet. Although this style would be nice to high end rangers (who already have melee AA's which cancels the need to use whirling strikes) in those special cases where we *have* to melee, we dont really need it and "The high end AAed game isn't an issue."[/i][/u]
Call of the Mound - lvl 64
+15 AC, Weapon Proc (Melee Only) for 82 dmg, and a stun.
In addition to several bow procs in the form of the 'quiver' line of spells:
Quiver of Flame - lvl 61
130 AoE DD (Bow Only)
Quiver of Cold - lvl 63
160 Single DD (Bow Only)
Quiver of the Sun - lvl 65
Blind (bow only) <-- never used except in pvp :?
The problem with some of the melee procs is that it is huge aggro, and then coupled with weapons with an innate proc (Ytraz anyone?) poses a problem to us papertanks. Today in Akheva I engaged an undead mob at around 80% without casting or hitting before and stole aggro on the first hit (with a proc) from Aratar. Yes we get spells like Cyro Jolt which almost instantaneously lose us aggro (1.5 sec cast), but against any formidable mob that is enough to get us killed, not to mention resists.
Now, a style that gives us triple attack... since the point of this is to help out lower-mid level rangers, that would mean they would have to choose between this style and whirling strikes (which is an automatic succeed on every dual weild + double attack). I would think the two styles would be similar in effect, or that whirling strikes would even be better (since the ranger may not have his/her weapon/offensive skills maxed yet. Although this style would be nice to high end rangers (who already have melee AA's which cancels the need to use whirling strikes) in those special cases where we *have* to melee, we dont really need it and "The high end AAed game isn't an issue."[/i][/u]
Yes, our -aggro spells work pre engaging, or at least they used to. There was even a bug once where rangers could cast jolt a few times before engaging and the mob would just stand there and not attack because we were still under zero aggro, but we quickly fixed that bit
I guess the problem is that even casting after jolting a mob, if I happen to get a string of procs (which can happen quite frequently) I will still steal aggro, that coupled with me being lazy and not wanting to cast jolt 10 times a fight
I guess the main point is that, if a high end ranger can use his bow (not close quarters and a ton of adds wandering) then he will, over melee, always.
I guess the problem is that even casting after jolting a mob, if I happen to get a string of procs (which can happen quite frequently) I will still steal aggro, that coupled with me being lazy and not wanting to cast jolt 10 times a fight
I guess the main point is that, if a high end ranger can use his bow (not close quarters and a ton of adds wandering) then he will, over melee, always.
Usually (im not sure for wr) melee aggro is less than proc aggro.
But, lets assume for a sec that rangers should be upped a bit in melee damage output to keep them in line with their DPS classification.
You say rangers need to learn to deal with the added aggro. Basically you're telling them to cope, while monks have FD and rogues have evade to 'cope' with aggro.
So, since monks and rogues don't have to cope with it without tools available to them for that specific problem, why should another melee DPS class have to?
Just wondering what logic you have behind rangers having to deal with doing less damage and less effective aggro-losing tools than the other 2 melee dps classes? On top of which, apparently they cant tank as well as a monk who can lose the aggro by simply FDing anyway.
But, lets assume for a sec that rangers should be upped a bit in melee damage output to keep them in line with their DPS classification.
You say rangers need to learn to deal with the added aggro. Basically you're telling them to cope, while monks have FD and rogues have evade to 'cope' with aggro.
So, since monks and rogues don't have to cope with it without tools available to them for that specific problem, why should another melee DPS class have to?
Just wondering what logic you have behind rangers having to deal with doing less damage and less effective aggro-losing tools than the other 2 melee dps classes? On top of which, apparently they cant tank as well as a monk who can lose the aggro by simply FDing anyway.
diolas
Dalayan Beginner
Right now, rangers deal about the same damage as warriors in melee. If you up their melee damage they will consistently steal more agro. This isn't an issue in the higher levels as warriors usually have more agro from the tools they carry, but we're talking about the lower levels). Assuming that the ranger isn't tanking, this leaves either a knight, war, or monk to tank. You'll be doing more damage with the suggested changes than all of those (possibly not the monk, but it's hard to judge front dps vs. back dps). More damage = more agro. Simple really. Yes, monks and rogues can lose their agro but that's because they're melee dps classes. Rangers are currently a ranged dps class with the option of doing decent melee dps.
In order to cope with the added agro, they'll need to rely more on their agro reduction line of spells. Unfortunately, rangers don't get their first one until level 51. According to Camongrel, there are actually 3 of them from 51 - 62. It doesn't take much imagination to extend the line to the lower levels.
In order to cope with the added agro, they'll need to rely more on their agro reduction line of spells. Unfortunately, rangers don't get their first one until level 51. According to Camongrel, there are actually 3 of them from 51 - 62. It doesn't take much imagination to extend the line to the lower levels.
Wiz said:
Long experience grind in Everchill tonight showed that a Ranger using a 2h weapon and Melee Mastery 1 will triple about 1% of the time. A monk using a 2h weapon and having no melee enhancing AAs other than Combat Fury 3 will triple about 40% of the time. Neither character was primary tank. Rate of single attack for both characters was roughly equal at about 14%.
- Status