DigitalCrack

https://forums.obsidian.net/topic/94494-thoughts-on-ranger-and-ranger-subs/page-4?do=findComment&comment=1953254 Thread for Ranger

Giving fighters some unique cool abilities and just getting rid of two-weapon/two-handed/one-handed/sword and shield specialization from the game altogether would be great.Almost. I would simply make weapons styles general proficiencies and then give the fighter cool new abilities to replace the loss of boring buffs. Edit: The stances were such a neat idea for fighters that they could simply add an upgrade talent for each stance or maybe an active for each stance that can only be used while using a specific stance. But wouldn't it be even more fun if you just got rid of generic +number abilities and gave everyone new abilities that were thematic to their class? Like I understand it's a lot of work and if Obsidian decides to just make a generic talent bucket that's fine with me too, but I'd prefer if they were more tailored to individual classes.If they would no doubt i would rather have your suggestion. But I don't see it as a likely option given the time it would take.

Giving fighters some unique cool abilities and just getting rid of two-weapon/two-handed/one-handed/sword and shield specialization from the game altogether would be great.Almost. I would simply make weapons styles general proficiencies and then give the fighter cool new abilities to replace the loss of boring buffs. Edit: The stances were such a neat idea for fighters that they could simply add an upgrade talent for each stance or maybe an active for each stance that can only be used while using a specific stance.

You simply dont give fighters a weapon style buff talent to replace losing weapon style talents. They already have stances which are essentially specialized styles. You actually give them 3 new talents unrelated to weapon styles but still fighter appropriate and hopefully more interesting then a weapon style buff.

Absolutely ZERO reason for fighters to be the only ones who can take weapon styles as they already have stances that are essentially specialized weapon style modals that they can switch between on command. Having the passives just comes off as filler talents for the fighter instead of a unique enhancement to the class (like the style modals are).

weapon styles really should just be generic proficiencies (which has been brought up before) you get enough of them that its not gonna dip into your weapon choices if you decide to invest in a style and then you can focus on new abilities for classes instead of wasting talent space on weapon styles.

Some people are arguing that the ranged Ranger doesn't have enough offensive abilities, or enough interesting offensive abilities. I think everyone agrees that the Stalker subclass is currently lackluster. It's really conspicuous, especially since a lot of the other subclasses have a lot of polish (except the wizard subs, & a couple of the priests). No, ranger has plenty of ranged abilities and thats the issue. Stalker sub has nothing to utilize for being the melee ranger outside of a passive pet build.

Using your criteria, the ranger has only a single offensive ability: Wounded shot. Melee not having any shouldn't have people act as if ranged weapons had 10 and them 0. This is the exact reason rangers need more abilities for themselves. Pet has enough of them yet the ranger only has one direct offensive ability ( also marked prey technically but its more of a debuff imo) in 5 power levels and its ranged only? I don't think he needs a bunch but 2-3 to pick from by power level 5 isn't ridiculous. Plenty of classes that already have that many by power level 3. I dunno Obsidian will do what they do but the ranger is not in a good place..

Yeah PoE1 you could build a pretty good melee ranger. One of my play throughs is a dual wielding ranger and it was really fun.

GH you could really just run with the phantom aspect. Give hime some phantom like talents or change some of the pet skills to be more phantom-y (like cold and stun on attack) or change the subs speccial a little where when your pet isnt summoned you gain some passive phantom bonuses/abilities but lose them if you summon the pet. But yeah stalker is a bit easier to think up abilities for. Edit: Or instead of Takedown the GH gets possess which allows the spirit pet to possess targets causing various effects.

When I saw Stalker as a sub class that what I was thinking but with a pet. I got so excited when I saw it but based on what i`ve seen in the beta it has to relation unless they patch abilities in. Yeah perception meeting reality with these ranger subs was brutal haha. Even Ghost heart I was thinking would see some paladin like talent alterations or even a few exclusive talents but alas it was the same talent tree just copy pasted across all ranger class offerings.

Nothing currently stop you from putting a melee weapon or two on you ranger in the beta. They can't use the ranged abilities, but the pets ones should still work. Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if that was how the class was balanced: melee Ranger is low maintenance but buff the pets more because you take more passives (which are mostly pet oriented). Which seems silly that if your ranged you get a better variety of abilities to chose and if melee.. well here is your sub-optimal one route for playing melee ranger..You can make a low maintenant ranger that focus on improving his/her pets that use melee weapons. There is nothing sub-optimal about that, it's just low maintenance. Hell, I try another ranger tonight with that passive focus and see how it goes. I wouldn't be surprised if the pet hits harder than the bonus any of the other weapon class gets though. sub-optimal was poor choice and placement. the level of choice for melee build is sub-optimal. I do agree that you can build a decent animal based melee ranger buts thats it. where a ranged ranger has much more variance on how his build looks (e.g more pet based or more weapon based). None of this is aided by the fact that their talent tree is sparse as well. Edit: This is all related only to single class ranger just fyi for people who may come through and read this ha.

Nothing currently stop you from putting a melee weapon or two on you ranger in the beta. They can't use the ranged abilities, but the pets ones should still work. Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if that was how the class was balanced: melee Ranger is low maintenance but buff the pets more because you take more passives (which are mostly pet oriented). Which seems silly that if your ranged you get a better variety of abilities to chose and if melee.. well here is your sub-optimal one route for playing melee ranger..

I am not saying I want generic stat boosters for every class. I would rather see Melee talents specialized for a ranger for example or even their ranged only active and passives allow for melee. The real thing people are looking for is at least a little flexibility within a single class which just simply doesnt exist. Your choices for diversity are either in even split with multiclassing (which sacrifices your top tier class abilities) or single class with no flexibility at all outside of 4 classes. I think its a valid criticism that why should a player have to suffer the sacrifice of multiclassing to quite literally have access to a single Talent that logically should be generic? Like sword and shield styleor two handed style, why arent these just general proficiencies (which makes more sense) instead of class specific talents?I haven't seen anyone arguing that classes shouldn't be fleshed out further. Some more than others, but everyone could use more options. I just think that giving everyone some generic number-increasing talents is pretty uninteresting. They make sense on a fighter - he's a very uninteresting guy. Almost everything on the class is about making his back and forth trading power in combat virtually unmatched. It's his thing. I just want Paladins to have a different thing that works towards the same ideal. Two-handed Style doesn't do anything unique that the Paladin would be losing, it just makes the numbers go up. So why not have a more thematic way of making numbers go up? I realize this is a lot to ask of game designers and if they put in a pool of generic abilities I'd be perfectly fine with that. I'd just rather it be this way instead. I am more or less in agreement with you and I am not terribly interested in how its done but individual classes just are not fleshed out as they should be and they need to allow some flexibility role wise without going full-on multiclass just to deviate slightly role wise.

The issue with stalker is exactly that it is only useful if multiclassed at the moment. Most all the issues with Ranger is if you play it single classed your basically a sharpshooter no matter which sub you pick or if generic..

I am not saying I want generic stat boosters for every class. I would rather see Melee talents specialized for a ranger for example or even their ranged only active and passives allow for melee. The real thing people are looking for is at least a little flexibility within a single class which just simply doesnt exist. Your choices for diversity are either in even split with multiclassing (which sacrifices your top tier class abilities) or single class with no flexibility at all outside of 4 classes. I think its a valid criticism that why should a player have to suffer the sacrifice of multiclassing to quite literally have access to a single Talent that logically should be generic? Like sword and shield styleor two handed style, why arent these just general proficiencies (which makes more sense) instead of class specific talents?

It worries me even more that Josh actually said that he played a ghost heart and liked where it was and that it felt good. 3 actives (the damaging one being ranged only) and the like 3-4 passives that affect the ranger himself (ranged only again) is not what I define as "feels good" unless I was going to play ranged and even then the same setup is way better utilizing the sharpshooter sub. the ranger class is the definition of being railroaded as all subs and generic force you to be ranged.

@doppelschwert lack of options for single classes isnt "ridiculous" to say as really there are about 4 classes that are at least acceptable (to me anyway) however that isnt the norm. If you look at the priest, wizard, and ranger (best examples) tell me how to build them even slightly different without multiclassing? they are simply too heavily focused and limited to a single role. If you play a ranger you are ranged thats its even if you pick their "melee" subclass it doesnt change anything at all you are still stuck being exclusively ranged..

Yes it does. I have been playing a mage slayer/soul blade and never lack for focus haha. Soul anhilation is epic in that combo as a side note.

Ranger classes need a lot of work and I wanted a thread for suggestions specific to improving them. 1. Melee options... Right now the ranger talent tree is essentially a sharpshooter tree just copy and pasted 4 times absolutely no options for melee and even abilities that worked both ways in PoE1 are now ranged only. 2. No variance in talent trees between subclasses. Would be nice to see some reflection of the stalker and Ghost Hearts changes in some talents or as additional talents. Stalker would be taken care of simply by taking away the "ranged only" on the rangers talents. Ghost heart would be nice to see either a hand full of spectral spells or change the pet talents to emphasize that your pet is a ghost. An example would be having a pet talent that lets your ghost pet do cold damage and stun on hit if chosen. 3. More talents in general. A lot of what used to be low level ranger talents are now weapon proficiency modals and its left the rangers talent pool looking sparse and actually feels unfinished as a result. especially when you look at just about every other classes talent trees (except maybe priests). Really think something needs to be done with this class currently as the whole thing feels like an afterthought despite having some conceptually cool subclasses.

I think this might work, and the classes that currently have these things as talents could get something to further specialize them in these styles. For instance, a Fighter could gain bonus accuracy or damage as a Weapon Mastery type of Talent. A Ranger get a further bonus to Marksman or gunner, as well. I would move them a little further down the class tree to require some investment in the class before obtaining them. Heck, they might get those now after level 5 for all we know. I don't know. The Ranger needs so many other things besides more ranged options.. That class dissapointed me the most with its current state considering Josh came out and said that Rangers have melee as an option (by design) this time around and that's absolutely false. Even the "melee" ranger subclass has ZERO melee abilities haha. Literally all Ranger subs play exactly the same way and sharpshooter sub is the only one thats even worth taking since most all ranger abilities are ranged only he gets a decent boost.

I agree with the Mazisky. penetration and wound system is less with how it works and more that its poorly translated in game to the player. which is much different than the design issues surrounding classes, like the fact that single class-ing is broken and we even have some classes that are unplayable as a single class (looking at you stalker).

Thought the same thing cause you get so many proficiencies that it would actually work out well.

This is exactly the issue with single clasz and why the argument "just multiclass" falls apart. If I have a wizard and I only really want 1 or 2 weapon style talents and nothing else I should not have to multiclass with a fighter (sacrificing all high tier spells) just to get a single talent.. Single class choices should at minimum be able accomodate that level of flexibility. Anr really to do this you dont even have to create a whole new general talent system. you just copy some general talents across most classes. Personally I would turn styles into proficiencies. Anyway some classes already have shared talents so from a multi class perspective it just gets treated the same way it already does.

A lot of it just feels overly simplified. Like take the ranger all it woukd take to make it considerably more interesting is to take all its ranged only talents and make them apply to both ranged and melee. This would also make the subs more pertanent for single builds as the sharpshooter incentivises the using those talents at range but then the stalker could actually take advantage of the sam skills but in melee.