Ranger Status - Pre Launch

[mutonizer]

The OP got his answer by now I think.

 

Let's agree to disagree on the rest and make out our own party compositions after release

Edited March 21, 2015 by mutonizer

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, I mean, as long as you don't make a party of 6 Rangers, you should be fine in terms of class deficiencies, I suppose.

I actually kinda suspect that 6 rangers could work out better than some other underpowered builds combos given everyone would at least be on the same page. Arquebus Rangers are all burst and no sustained, but the Vicious Aim and Wounding Shot combo is hefty enough that many things won't be surviving the subsequent dot, so rangers are OK at gibbing things to open combat and then scraping out a win from there. What really hurts gun/arbalest rangers in mixed parties is that they still don't burst as hard as rogues nor do they provide enough debuffs that non-rogue melee characters sit up and notice, which makes it awful tough to recommend them over other classes.

Edited March 21, 2015 by Whipstitch

[wolfstriked]

 

My oh my fighter just doesn't sound right for a character that is just a tank and not good at dealing damage.Lineman sounds better to me and that took 5 seconds.Guards,shields etc,something better than fighter can give a better feel to what they actually do.

 

Fighters can be DPS as well, not a problem and afaik they are the only ones who can get weapon masteries.

 

 

 

 

Sounds interesting,thanks.

[Voss]

 

Now there's something I can agree with, although I still don't consider pets high maintenance. Rogues and casters are high maintenance.

 

I've gone through my screenshots, fortunately I made a lot. The combat log pretty much speaks for itself.

 

Gear:

Ranger has one of the best bows: The Rain of Godagh Field (superb with +20% speed). This ranger build uses Swift Aim (I wanted to try that out because I usually go with VA when I test). No armor, therefore no recovery penalty.

Fighter has superb sabres with +0.5 crit damage. Leather armor with -30+16=-14% recovery penalty.

Both have +damage gloves

 

Stats: both have 19 might and 19 dex

 

Talents: both are specced for offense. The ranger has no Predator's Sense nor Merciless Companion, and no Vicious Companion either, so the pet could do slightly more damage, but then the ranger would do less.

 

And here's the combat log... it shows roughly the same interval. The ranger's is a bit longer because of stunning shots and the bear adding to the amount of lines. Note, that you see lines starting with "Bear" only twice and even then damage is very low.

  

Fighter's overall damage: 447

Ranger+pet's overall damage: 161

I'd need a much much longer combat log for statistics. The fighter probably got better rolls, but lets say a 2:1 damage ratio would be somewhat accurate.

 

I made so many suggestions to improve the ranger, but they were all ignored. I suggested something like 2 item slots for pets to customize them. So many have asked for better stats on pets. I've suggested shared stats i.e. the pet would benefit from the ranger's stats/gear; even half of it would be great. Josh just doesn't seem to care.

 

Edit: fixed typo

 

 

Sorry but you are comparing dual wielded sabers to a bow. That is a complete oranges to apples comparison, since you are much more comparing the weapon groups than the classes itself.

If we just wanna compare whatever loadout, then here I'll go with lvl 8 offensive dual saber specced fighter against a blunderbuss ranger, both solo: 

 

You just did the same thing.  If you really want to compare classes rather than weapons, give them the same weapons.

[dukefx]

@Odd Hermit
Yes, bows do suck, but shouldn't the ranger be the ranged class who doesn't suck with a bow? Afaik the heavier weapons aren't that much better in the latest build either. I recall Sensuki mentioning they toned down Arbalests and co. As for Swift Aim vs Vicious Aim... neither is better. I went with VA almost always. The screenshots I dug up happened to have SA. Even the Ranger's name is New Swift Aim.

@GreyZ
I'll just print that out and stick it to the fridge door. Have a cookie!

@morhilane
They do... very little tho. That amount is clearly not enough.

@Voss
I gave them weapons that fall into the same category that they are supposed to be good with and built both classes as best I could (unlike GreyZ who deliberately made a horrible fighter... I didn't have enough skill points at level 12 to take utility skills like Clear Out, not to mention at level 8 LMAO). As for your idea of comparison... I never tried a ranged fighter, nor a melee ranger, but I imagine they'd be both weaker, as they are clearly the ranged class and the melee class.

Edited March 21, 2015 by dukefx

[morhilane]

@Odd Hermit

Yes, bows do suck, but shouldn't the ranger be the ranged class who doesn't suck with a bow? Afaik the heavier weapons aren't that much better in the latest build either. I recall Sensuki mentioning they toned down Arbalests and co. As for Swift Aim vs Vicious Aim... neither is better. I went with VA almost always. The screenshots I dug up happened to have SA. Even the Ranger's name is New Swift Aim.

 

In your screenshot, the warbow damage makes no sense. You claim it was a superb warbow, well that's not what is shown in your screenshot. The warbow has about the same damage range as the saber, so it should output about the same damage per hits when the same damage multipliers are applied on it, not less than half of what the saber does like in your screenshot. To have the values showing up in your screenshots it would require the enemies to have about 30 DR against piercing (which they don't have). Looks like you stumbled upon a bug to me.

[Shevek]

Rangers should NOT be a predominantly ranged class. Rangers are folks that walk around across far "ranges." Every famous fantasy ranger worth a damn is a melee fighter.

[View619]

Rangers should NOT be a predominantly ranged class. Rangers are folks that walk around across far "ranges." Every famous fantasy ranger worth a damn is a melee fighter.

 

Yeah, it looks like people are forgetting that Rangers were never restricted to being archers before. Not sure why that would be true now.

[Voss]

@Voss

I gave them weapons that fall into the same category that they are supposed to be good with and built both classes as best I could (unlike GreyZ who deliberately made a horrible fighter... I didn't have enough skill points at level 12 to take utility skills like Clear Out, not to mention at level 8 LMAO). As for your idea of comparison... I never tried a ranged fighter, nor a melee ranger, but I imagine they'd be both weaker, as they are clearly the ranged class and the melee class.

You can build a totally non-melee fighter, at least at level 5.  (Disciplined Barrage, Offensive Talent, Confident Aim, Offensive Talent, Weapon Specialization)

Just because sabers and blunderbusses are in the Ruffian category doesn't mean they're comparable weapons.  The way to accurately compare is to set as many controls up as possible, not include extra variables that make the comparison more difficult.  Anything that is not derived from class should be exactly the same so you know where the differences are coming from. That you are imagining the results is exactly the point of testing. Test correctly and you won't have to guess.  You'll know. 

[Sock]

I just ran through the beta on PotD with a tank ranger (Weapon and Shield, Hold the Line, Cautious Attack, and Bloody Slaughter, with Stalker's Link, Marked Prey, Swift Aim, the +AoE defense ranger ability)  and a 2H fighter in plate with mixed tank/dps talents: defender, wary defender, confident aim, weapon spec soldier, weapon focus soldier, weapon mastery soldier, bloody slaughter. 

 

The ranger was miles ahead of the fighter at first. In the Meredith fight, the ranger did 600 damage while the highest anyone else did was 150. The gap narrowed quickly afterwards, though, and the ranger began to balance out with everyone. The fighter, however, was starting to rise ahead towards the end. With the damage boosting abilities and relying on the DR from the plate + regen from constant recovery, the fighter was very heroic in action, although almost entirely passive. Managing the pet with the ranger was more enjoyable than watching the fighter fight. 

 

My ranger ended with around 110 deflection. while the fighter had 60. There were some cases where the fighter was worthless (wurms, who target reflexes and not deflection), but for most fights the fighter was a perfectly adequate tank for PotD, and the ranger and wolf were always there, ready to take **** out as a duo or split to provide coverage if the fighter went down. The ranger also served as a better tank in situations where the fighter didn't, such as the wurms.

 

I have also ran a build with a boreal dwarf  ranger with a rifle and a bear. I partnered her with a chanter, but her crit rate was obscene with stalker's link and the reload speed was respectable enough that I could just let her be passively. Very effective as a ranged nuker, but you needed to direct her based on what the pet was targeting. If the pet can't get to the juicy target you want to kill, then too bad. This is a downside for most traditional ranged characters who tend to benefit from free target choice. Still, the pet is an "okay" tank 1v1, but worthless in 1v2+. If the pet goes down, your DPS vanishes.

 

Interesting note: If your pet dies, and you have a paladin use reviving exhortation, you will still have the bonded grief penalty applied. -20 accuracy is a huge penalty to damage, but if you're using stalker's link then you're really down -40. That's why you CANNOT risk your pet, you have to play it safe. Unlike a tank ranger, a ranged ranger is entirely reliant on their accuracy to function in the group. A tank ranger can still tank even with crap accuracy. A ranged ranger can do nothing with crap accuracy. 

 

Rangers are capable members of the party, they just have to be babied like the rogue, just in a very different way.

[dunehunter]

I just ran through the beta on PotD with a tank ranger (Weapon and Shield, Hold the Line, Cautious Attack, and Bloody Slaughter, with Stalker's Link, Marked Prey, Swift Aim, the +AoE defense ranger ability)  and a 2H fighter in plate with mixed tank/dps talents: defender, wary defender, confident aim, weapon spec soldier, weapon focus soldier, weapon mastery soldier, bloody slaughter. 

 

The ranger was miles ahead of the fighter at first. In the Meredith fight, the ranger did 600 damage while the highest anyone else did was 150. The gap narrowed quickly afterwards, though, and the ranger began to balance out with everyone. The fighter, however, was starting to rise ahead towards the end. With the damage boosting abilities and relying on the DR from the plate + regen from constant recovery, the fighter was very heroic in action, although almost entirely passive. Managing the pet with the ranger was more enjoyable than watching the fighter fight. 

 

My ranger ended with around 110 deflection. while the fighter had 60. There were some cases where the fighter was worthless (wurms, who target reflexes and not deflection), but for most fights the fighter was a perfectly adequate tank for PotD, and the ranger and wolf were always there, ready to take **** out as a duo or split to provide coverage if the fighter went down. The ranger also served as a better tank in situations where the fighter didn't, such as the wurms.

 

I have also ran a build with a boreal dwarf  ranger with a rifle and a bear. I partnered her with a chanter, but her crit rate was obscene with stalker's link and the reload speed was respectable enough that I could just let her be passively. Very effective as a ranged nuker, but you needed to direct her based on what the pet was targeting. If the pet can't get to the juicy target you want to kill, then too bad. This is a downside for most traditional ranged characters who tend to benefit from free target choice. Still, the pet is an "okay" tank 1v1, but worthless in 1v2+. If the pet goes down, your DPS vanishes.

 

Interesting note: If your pet dies, and you have a paladin use reviving exhortation, you will still have the bonded grief penalty applied. -20 accuracy is a huge penalty to damage, but if you're using stalker's link then you're really down -40. That's why you CANNOT risk your pet, you have to play it safe. Unlike a tank ranger, a ranged ranger is entirely reliant on their accuracy to function in the group. A tank ranger can still tank even with crap accuracy. A ranged ranger can do nothing with crap accuracy. 

 

Rangers are capable members of the party, they just have to be babied like the rogue, just in a very different way.

 

Stalker's link is a reaaally good skill to pick, even a bit OP to me, +20 accuracy for a circumstance that is not hard to meet is a bit too good.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Hands off! Nobody touches that stalker pet ability on my watch!

[Sock]

It's countered by just how easy it is for your pet to die.

 

Seriously. They are very fragile.

[Gromnir]

 

 

Rangers are capable members of the party, they just have to be babied like the rogue, just in a very different way.

hard mode is particular hard on the ranger's animal companions.  hard mode increases the size o' mobs, and it is difficult to protect the animal companion from the flood o' beetles or spiders or whatever the developers throw at us right before we get hit with the kitchen sink.  frequent enough, protecting the animal companion is converse either impossible or simple not worth the effort as keeping the critter safe also negates the animal companion's usefulness to the ranger.  

 

am admitting we haven't played more than about 2 hours o' ranger since 480 were released.  we will play a bit more and see if it has genuine changed enough to warrant a reappraisal.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sock]

I tend to roll with 3 melee/3 ranged.

 

Theoretical party: Ranger/Fighter/Paladin/Chanter/Priest/Wizard

 

If my ranger is melee, then my chanter is using a gun or bow. If my ranger is ranged, then my chanter is using a sword and shield and has hold the line.

 

I don't count my pet has a tank or off-tank when it's by itself. It can withstand 1v1, but that's it. Without devoting talents to it's tanking ability, it will never be able to tough it out on the front lines. When I have a melee ranger, I have to baby the pet less, since the ranger will grab up one or two, and then I can micromanage the pet and ranger to coordinate attacks.

[roguelike]

Is there any chance you can reproduce the combat log where a level 4 weapon and shield ranger deals 600 damage to medreth's group?  That sounds like a really good build.

[GordonHalfman]

I tried a bog standard ranged DPS build and it seemed pretty good tbh. Kind of one dimensional but it did a lot of damage. I feel like this is what you're supposed to do with a ranger, I don't really follow the arguments for doing other stuff. I went for an arbalest build with Swift Aim, Weapon Focus, Gunner and stuff like that. 

 

One thing I noticed about Stalkers Link was that it wasn't strictly necessary for the bear to be attacking the target, just for it to be the intended target. So if you wanted to keep your bear safe you could tell it to attack someone and then cast a stuck effect on it to keep it in place and still get the bonus.

[Baleros]

Would making the pet immune to disengagement attacks be the best way to solve the pet weakness problem?

[Luckmann]

Would making the pet immune to disengagement attacks be the best way to solve the pet weakness problem?

 

I would say no, but it certainly couldn't hurt. My issue with that would be that it wouldn't make sense, though; why would specifically ranger pets be immune to a mechanic that affects each and everyone else?

[Baleros]

 

Would making the pet immune to disengagement attacks be the best way to solve the pet weakness problem?

 

I would say no, but it certainly couldn't hurt. My issue with that would be that it wouldn't make sense, though; why would specifically ranger pets be immune to a mechanic that affects each and everyone else?

 

 

I'd say if you needed a "real life" reason, it'd be because animals are faster than men.  Or, if that wasn't sufficient (maybe because you're thinking: hey what about enemy bears?), you could say it is the result of the speed of the animal AND the spirit bond of the ranger, which allows for them to guide each other in combat.

[View619]

I just ran through the beta on PotD with a tank ranger (Weapon and Shield, Hold the Line, Cautious Attack, and Bloody Slaughter, with Stalker's Link, Marked Prey, Swift Aim, the +AoE defense ranger ability)  and a 2H fighter in plate with mixed tank/dps talents: defender, wary defender, confident aim, weapon spec soldier, weapon focus soldier, weapon mastery soldier, bloody slaughter. 

 

The ranger was miles ahead of the fighter at first. In the Meredith fight, the ranger did 600 damage while the highest anyone else did was 150. The gap narrowed quickly afterwards, though, and the ranger began to balance out with everyone. The fighter, however, was starting to rise ahead towards the end. With the damage boosting abilities and relying on the DR from the plate + regen from constant recovery, the fighter was very heroic in action, although almost entirely passive. Managing the pet with the ranger was more enjoyable than watching the fighter fight. 

 

My ranger ended with around 110 deflection. while the fighter had 60. There were some cases where the fighter was worthless (wurms, who target reflexes and not deflection), but for most fights the fighter was a perfectly adequate tank for PotD, and the ranger and wolf were always there, ready to take **** out as a duo or split to provide coverage if the fighter went down. The ranger also served as a better tank in situations where the fighter didn't, such as the wurms.

 

I have also ran a build with a boreal dwarf  ranger with a rifle and a bear. I partnered her with a chanter, but her crit rate was obscene with stalker's link and the reload speed was respectable enough that I could just let her be passively. Very effective as a ranged nuker, but you needed to direct her based on what the pet was targeting. If the pet can't get to the juicy target you want to kill, then too bad. This is a downside for most traditional ranged characters who tend to benefit from free target choice. Still, the pet is an "okay" tank 1v1, but worthless in 1v2+. If the pet goes down, your DPS vanishes.

 

Interesting note: If your pet dies, and you have a paladin use reviving exhortation, you will still have the bonded grief penalty applied. -20 accuracy is a huge penalty to damage, but if you're using stalker's link then you're really down -40. That's why you CANNOT risk your pet, you have to play it safe. Unlike a tank ranger, a ranged ranger is entirely reliant on their accuracy to function in the group. A tank ranger can still tank even with crap accuracy. A ranged ranger can do nothing with crap accuracy. 

 

Rangers are capable members of the party, they just have to be babied like the rogue, just in a very different way.

 

Sounds like a bug, maybe you should report it for post-release resolution?

[Luckmann]

 

 

Would making the pet immune to disengagement attacks be the best way to solve the pet weakness problem?

 

I would say no, but it certainly couldn't hurt. My issue with that would be that it wouldn't make sense, though; why would specifically ranger pets be immune to a mechanic that affects each and everyone else?

 

 

I'd say if you needed a "real life" reason, it'd be because animals are faster than men.  Or, if that wasn't sufficient (maybe because you're thinking: hey what about enemy bears?), you could say it is the result of the speed of the animal AND the spirit bond of the ranger, which allows for them to guide each other in combat.

 

Way back, I argued a bit about that, that animals shouldn't be subject to Engagement rules, and to a degree I still think that today, but I find it quite hard to excuse specifically ranger animal companions. I'd rather see animal companions get legit ways to avoid Engagement, whether it's Escape or Invisibility or whatever, at that point.

[Sock]

I can't post the log, and it was technically a level 5 ranger, had just gotten stalker's link. Did the whole cat and mouse quest for the level up.

 

Fine sword, plain medium shield, fine chainmail. 16 str, 8 con, 10 dex, 15 per, 15 res, 14 int. Marked Prey, Swift Aim, Stalker's Link, Sword and Shield, Hold the Line. Wolf pet. 

 

I feel like each pet should have two characteristics that define them. Bear is tanky, wolf is fast, etc. Well, what if the bear could also cause a bleed over time DoT, wolves gave additional coordination bonuses, antelope gets an escape type function, boar gets a charge, etc. The idea being that choice of pet would impact how your ranger plays.

[Gromnir]

after another +8 hours o' ranger play...  meh.  it isn't a hopeless class as it were in previous builds, but there is no way we would play a ranger our first time through poe on hard mode.  the animal companion continues to require constant attention and care during the beta combats we have now completed literal dozens (hundreds?) of times.  for Gromnir, meta-knowledge o' battles is almost a prerequisite for keeping the critter alive.  also, the class still don't work particularly well as designed-- it is not a ranged-heavy hitter on par with the rogue.  the class is not exactly great, but it ain't guaranteed to frustrate neither, save for our previous observation that we cannot possibly recommend playing a ranger for a first run o' poe on hard mode.  

 

as complete impossible as the suggestion is to be accepted by obsidian or boardies, we once again will put forth the notion that the single best way to improve the ranger is to comple discard the animal companion.  the synergy between ranger and companion still needs tuning, the companions themselves are more nuisance than anything else, and we suspect that obsidian has more than a little difficulty balancing what amounts to a 7th party member.   get rid o' the ranger's parasite and rebuild without all the attendant headaches and hurdles.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited March 22, 2015 by Gromnir

[Sock]

after another +8 hours o' ranger play...  meh.  it isn't a hopeless class as it were in previous builds, but there is no way we would play a ranger our first time through poe on hard mode.  the animal companion continues to require constant attention and care during the beta combats we have now completed literal dozens (hundreds?) of times.  for Gromnir, meta-knowledge o' battles is almost a prerequisite for keeping the critter alive.  also, the class still don't work particularly well as designed-- it is not a ranged-heavy hitter on par with the rogue.  the class is not exactly great, but it ain't guaranteed to frustrate neither, save for our previous observation that we cannot possibly recommend playing a ranger for a first run o' poe on hard mode.  

 

as complete impossible as the suggestion is to be accepted by obsidian or boardies, we once again will put forth the notion that the single best way to improve the ranger is to comple discard the animal companion.  the synergy between ranger and companion still needs tuning, the companions themselves are more nuisance than anything else, and we suspect that obsidian has more than a little difficulty balancing what amounts to a 7th party member.   get rid o' the ranger's parasite and rebuild without all the attendant headaches and hurdles.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Honestly from the sound of it, you're still using the pet incorrectly. You talk about how much micro-managing it needs, but if you have a ranged ranger then it would probably need LESS management than it would for a melee ranger. You also refer to it as a seventh party member.

 

To me, it sounds like you have the pet on the front lines with your tanks. That's not where the pet belongs, even if it's a bear or antelope. The pet should never be initially targeted by anything for engagement, it should single out a roamer or something presently engaged, and then the ranger follows the target of the pet. Pets tank just like rogues do, which is to say that they are not suited for it at all. 

 

Hang back with the pet, wait until the field is settled. If you find yourself missing a tank because the pet isn't grabbing aggro, then your party is imbalanced. The only time the pet can rush in is when the ranger is also melee. The ranger has higher defenses, access to higher DR, and has more endurance than the pet. The ranger will tank while the pet deals damage. 

 

The pet is not a meat shield, it is the method by which rangers deal damage.