Thoughts on Ranger and Ranger Subs..

[DigitalCrack]

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.

Edited November 17, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[jarvs]

Agreed, I am very disappointed with the Stalker subclass and the Ranger talents in general, it would make sense that the stalker would get some form of ability for melee. As of right now the stalker is just a crappy Sharpshooter with more deflection and armor. They could just allow them to use the ranged abilities as melee like in the first game or give stalkers actual talents that give them new slashes/strikes etc. I was really looking forward to this subclass thinking it was like a Aragon/Drizzt style of ranger.

 

As for talents... like you said very lack luster, just basic present upgrades that don`t really show how the ranger evolves over time. I would love to see new types of shots that ranger could use rather just standing there and pew pewing. 

[DigitalCrack]

Agreed, I am very disappointed with the Stalker subclass and the Ranger talents in general, it would make sense that the stalker would get some form of ability for melee. As of right now the stalker is just a crappy Sharpshooter with more deflection and armor. They could just allow them to use the ranged abilities as melee like in the first game or give stalkers actual talents that give them new slashes/strikes etc. I was really looking forward to this subclass thinking it was like a Aragon/Drizzt style of ranger.

 

As for talents... like you said very lack luster, just basic present upgrades that don`t really show how the ranger evolves over time. I would love to see new types of shots that ranger could use rather just standing there and pew pewing.

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. Edited November 17, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[Breckmoney]

FWIW, fighter/stalker is a lot of fun and seems pretty powerful. Rangers obviously needs a few more abilities to be more self-sufficient, but stalker seems like a perfectly viable multiclass taking just the pet buff talents and Mark.

[DigitalCrack]

FWIW, fighter/stalker is a lot of fun and seems pretty powerful. Rangers obviously needs a few more abilities to be more self-sufficient, but stalker seems like a perfectly viable multiclass taking just the pet buff talents and Mark.

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..

[jarvs]

 

FWIW, fighter/stalker is a lot of fun and seems pretty powerful. Rangers obviously needs a few more abilities to be more self-sufficient, but stalker seems like a perfectly viable multiclass taking just the pet buff talents and Mark.

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..

 

This is the issue and it needs to be fixed, Josh even said that wounding shot might be to good and might be nerfed. If wounding shot were to be nerfed what will rangers even have? There needs to be more abilities to add flavor instead of relying on WS.

[draego]

FWIW, fighter/stalker is a lot of fun and seems pretty powerful. Rangers obviously needs a few more abilities to be more self-sufficient, but stalker seems like a perfectly viable multiclass taking just the pet buff talents and Mark.

 

I agree this is what is intended for more melee focused but you have to give up high level abilities to do this. It seem like there should be a 3 types of builds here.

 

1. ranger only that specializing in ranged combat.

2. ranger only that is competent in melee but can reach high level ranger abilities (though at this point they are prob ranged also heh). to compensate for mult getting nice fighter stuff and for players to have lore choice  of being a ranger. This is also important for power level of animal. I assume but havent tested that animal is tied to power level so multi mean weaker animal

3 ranger/? multiclass that access better melee abilities like the fighters. Not sure why number 2 is so bad for POE2. I mean this is the issue with other classes also like wizards and priest.

 

You shouldnt need to give up high level stuff to add some defensive or offensive melee talents to spice up the builds and with rangers you could just allow abilities to work in both ranged and melee to fix some of it but there also need to be general talent pool to help all single classes

 

Also if you do try melee ranger only class get the waraxe. Bleed triggers predator's sense. To bad that is not a general ability you could take and use on any weapon. I wouldnt mind them striping the modal off all weapons and starting a general ability pool with those and then add back other defensive abilities.

Edited November 17, 2017 by draego

[morhilane]

2. ranger only that is competent in melee but can reach high level ranger abilities (though at this point they are prob ranged also heh). to compensate for mult getting nice fighter stuff and for players to have lore choice  of being a ranger. This is also important for power level of animal. I assume but havent tested that animal is tied to power level so multi mean weaker animal

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).

[DigitalCrack]

 

2. ranger only that is competent in melee but can reach high level ranger abilities (though at this point they are prob ranged also heh). to compensate for mult getting nice fighter stuff and for players to have lore choice of being a ranger. This is also important for power level of animal. I assume but havent tested that animal is tied to power level so multi mean weaker animal

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..

[morhilane]

 

 

2. ranger only that is competent in melee but can reach high level ranger abilities (though at this point they are prob ranged also heh). to compensate for mult getting nice fighter stuff and for players to have lore choice of being a ranger. This is also important for power level of animal. I assume but havent tested that animal is tied to power level so multi mean weaker animal

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.

[draego]

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.

 

This is my first build also. Havent extensively explored it yet though.

[DigitalCrack]

 

 

 

2. ranger only that is competent in melee but can reach high level ranger abilities (though at this point they are prob ranged also heh). to compensate for mult getting nice fighter stuff and for players to have lore choice of being a ranger. This is also important for power level of animal. I assume but havent tested that animal is tied to power level so multi mean weaker animal

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.

Edited November 17, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[jones092201@gmail.com]

Stalker is a weird title for that class-

It makes me, at least, think of bg2 kit- light armored melee striker with added stealth and a few spells.

 

Here, it is a beast link tank class??

 

Why not call beastmasrer? Or something that more adequately reflects the function.

 

Agree with previous posters though, nothing too interesting in current subclasses

[jarvs]

Stalker is a weird title for that class-

It makes me, at least, think of bg2 kit- light armored melee striker with added stealth and a few spells.

 

Here, it is a beast link tank class??

 

Why not call beastmasrer? Or something that more adequately reflects the function.

 

Agree with previous posters though, nothing too interesting in current subclasses

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. 

[DigitalCrack]

 

Stalker is a weird title for that class-

It makes me, at least, think of bg2 kit- light armored melee striker with added stealth and a few spells.

 

Here, it is a beast link tank class??

 

Why not call beastmasrer? Or something that more adequately reflects the function.

 

Agree with previous posters though, nothing too interesting in current subclasses

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. Edited November 17, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[jarvs]

exactly what I was thinking, I feel that something is missing from all the sub-classes so they just made a basic template for all of them. Josh said there will be an update soon so here's hoping change will happen. My concern is what to add for Ghost Heart and Stalker, for GH should it just be buffing your pet so its extra tanky or a big damge dealer with abilities? For stalker I`m hoping there`s going to be melee abilities not just a poor mans SS.

[DigitalCrack]

exactly what I was thinking, I feel that something is missing from all the sub-classes so they just made a basic template for all of them. Josh said there will be an update soon so here's hoping change will happen. My concern is what to add for Ghost Heart and Stalker, for GH should it just be buffing your pet so its extra tanky or a big damge dealer with abilities? For stalker I`m hoping there`s going to be melee abilities not just a poor mans SS.

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.

Edited November 17, 2017 by DigitalCrack

[draego]

To be fair i think the Ghost Heart was meant to be the 'pick no animal companion' abilities because there was a segment of players in POE1 that wanted to be ranger without animal. All other versions i think were meant to pick some level of animals abilities and is why ghost hear is my least favorite.

[jarvs]

To be fair i think the Ghost Heart was meant to be the 'pick no animal companion' abilities because there was a segment of players in POE1 that wanted to be ranger without animal. All other versions i think were meant to pick some level of animals abilities and is why ghost hear is my least favorite.

If that were the case people are going to be disappointed because they still need to deal with a pet which has to be summoned or they face the penalty. 

[draego]

 

To be fair i think the Ghost Heart was meant to be the 'pick no animal companion' abilities because there was a segment of players in POE1 that wanted to be ranger without animal. All other versions i think were meant to pick some level of animals abilities and is why ghost hear is my least favorite.

If that were the case people are going to be disappointed because they still need to deal with a pet which has to be summoned or they face the penalty. 

 

 

oops. Didnt realize that hadnt played it yet. But i think people will be disappointed.

[jones092201@gmail.com]

To be fair i think the Ghost Heart was meant to be the 'pick no animal companion' abilities because there was a segment of players in POE1 that wanted to be ranger without animal. All other versions i think were meant to pick some level of animals abilities and is why ghost hear is my least favorite.

I definitely want a ranger class without pet-- always have. Ranger as a class in BG was interesting. Ranger as in Aragorn/Drizzt (yeah, he has the panther), is interesting. just give me a quick moving striker that flow from ranged to melee, and can function as a tank when required (channels the soul of it's dead bear pet, or something).

Let wizards be the pet-master. A great subclass would be a wizard who has reduced spells,  but gets to build and customize an Animat, and empowers it through a fight while casting a limited selection of skills when it can.

Edited November 17, 2017 by jones092201@gmail.com

[jarvs]

 

To be fair i think the Ghost Heart was meant to be the 'pick no animal companion' abilities because there was a segment of players in POE1 that wanted to be ranger without animal. All other versions i think were meant to pick some level of animals abilities and is why ghost hear is my least favorite.

I definitely want a ranger class without pet-- always have. Ranger as a class in BG was interesting. Ranger as in Aragorn/Drizzt (yeah, he has the panther), is interesting. just give me a quick moving striker that flow from ranged to melee, and can function as a tank when required (channels the soul of it's dead bear pet, or something).

Let wizards be the pet-master. A great subclass would be a wizard who has reduced spells,  but gets to build and customize an Animat, and empowers it through a fight while casting a limited selection of skills when it can.

 

That`s were I feel that new talent Evasive Roll would synergize amazing well with the Stalker sub-class. If the Stalker is in trouble just roll out and start shooting things up, I feel the stalker shouldn't have a pet and be a bit more tanky like you said. 

Edited November 17, 2017 by jarvs

[TheC]

There is one thing everyone seems to be forgetting about the Ranger class. You are pigeon-holed into ranged, sure, that is generally what a Ranger is, but the fact is, the class is EXTREMELY powerful because of the pet and overall raw dmg output.

Because of this, Obsidian must be very careful in how they implement the ability to melee effectively without multi-classing. After all, why would you pick a fighter or a barbarian if you can melee effectively with a single class Ranger (utilizing Marked Target and such) AND get a Pet nearly as powerful as another player character that allows you to tank/flank/distract?

 

Basically, I am saying that the class is strong at what it does. Making it as strong in another part of combat would make it OP. You CAN melee with a ranger if you multi-class and therefore suffer the penalties of doing so for the sake balance.

[jones092201@gmail.com]

I think the point is that some people, for RP or technical reasons, wanted a melee focused ranger, one that didn’t require multi-class, and didn’t feature a pet. The subclasses seemed to suggest that the option would be there. In this iteration, it is not quite there.

 

On that subject, why not build a subclass where the pet empowers the ranger rather than vice versa? Some kind of support pet the buffs/debuffs.

[jarvs]

There is one thing everyone seems to be forgetting about the Ranger class. You are pigeon-holed into ranged, sure, that is generally what a Ranger is, but the fact is, the class is EXTREMELY powerful because of the pet and overall raw dmg output.

Because of this, Obsidian must be very careful in how they implement the ability to melee effectively without multi-classing. After all, why would you pick a fighter or a barbarian if you can melee effectively with a single class Ranger (utilizing Marked Target and such) AND get a Pet nearly as powerful as another player character that allows you to tank/flank/distract?

 

Basically, I am saying that the class is strong at what it does. Making it as strong in another part of combat would make it OP. You CAN melee with a ranger if you multi-class and therefore suffer the penalties of doing so for the sake balance.

A good point but what would be the purpose of having the Stalker sub-class in the first place? They could have a meleed focused ranger and nerf ranged damage or something on those lines if not you could make it the sub-class that is more oriented to the pet but most people are looking for a melee ranger with a pet or without the pet.