Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Pann

Archetype Focus: The Ranger - Official discussion thread

Recommended Posts

 

I believe Blair said somewhere that some archetypes were mixes between two other archetypes, his example being that the Templar was a mix between the Knight and the Confessor (If someone could find where he said this, that'd be great). So they just have to add in the "Base" Archetypes then the rest come easy. But that only goes for powers. I have no idea how hard it is to render and animate, so that could be what takes forever.

 

From my understanding the Templar is its on base Archetype and is labeled as such in the Archetypes section on the website. It is not a mixture of any classes. Which following that mentality means we currently know that for Siege we will only have 5 out of the 13 Archetypes available for testing. Which at this point in a game set to release later this year seems a bit worrisome to me. Especially because the game is so pvp focused balance is a massive ordeal. Now I don't want to come off as just being a downer, I want the game to be the best it can be. I understand taking your time to get it right... but "time is money friend" and if the a 2016 release date still holds true then time is not a resource that can be wasted. I hope that we see more Archetypes announced to be testable for Siege before its testing phase starts in march.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning 'value' of ammo:

I've just had an idea. Recall weapon durability and how important it's supposed to be? Well, what if, due to how the durability system works, bows by themselves lose negligible durability from use? Also, consider the fact that a good archer character is probably not going to be in melee getting hit a lot either so their armor will also probably suffer significantly less durability loss. Thus, perhaps, the intention of ammo is to make durability costs between melee characters and ranged characters more balanced. Mind you, this is all speculation as I have no idea how the actual durability system will end up working.

 

So this begs the question, what about magic characters? They are ranged right? Well, that would, again, depend on the specifics of the durability system. Perhaps from a lore perspective channeling magic through a staff (or other mage weapon) puts more wear and tear on a staff than firing an arrow puts on a bow? Perhaps magic users will have significantly less range than archers? Honestly, I'm not sure concerning magic users but I don't think it rules out my initial idea.

 

Concerning the idea that Ranger will only enter melee combat if out of ammo:

I've seen this idea pop up more than once already, always stated as if it's obviously true. However, it's not obviously true. We don't have enough information to conclude that Ranger will enter melee only because they ran out of ammo and decided they wanted to enter melee. Here is one example of what I'm getting at: what if Ranger has limited mobility compared to melee classes and their bow is far less effective than their melee weapon in close range combat? Seems like a good Ranger would swap to their melee weapon if they were forced to engage in close range combat by a fast moving melee class.

 

In fact, I think it's very important that melee classes move (slightly) faster than ranged characters or have some method by which they can get in melee range of a ranged attacker. If they don't, kiting will be too powerful and make all ranged characters superior to melee characters.

Edited by Aguise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In fact, I think it's very important that melee classes move (slightly) faster than ranged characters or have some method by which they can get in melee range of a ranged attacker. If they don't, kiting will be too powerful and make all ranged characters superior to melee characters.

 

Such a thing isn't important at all... This game isn't going to be balanced around 1v1 and people are going to have to accept that some classes will just win in such a scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

From my understanding the Templar is its on base Archetype and is labeled as such in the Archetypes section on the website. It is not a mixture of any classes. Which following that mentality means we currently know that for Siege we will only have 5 out of the 13 Archetypes available for testing. Which at this point in a game set to release later this year seems a bit worrisome to me. Especially because the game is so pvp focused balance is a massive ordeal. Now I don't want to come off as just being a downer, I want the game to be the best it can be. I understand taking your time to get it right... but "time is money friend" and if the a 2016 release date still holds true then time is not a resource that can be wasted. I hope that we see more Archetypes announced to be testable for Siege before its testing phase starts in march.

 

 

 

This quote about the Templar being a Knight and Confessor mix comes from an interview with MMORPG.com

 

More than likely, it's just talking about borrowing concepts and mechanical pieces from both the Knight and the Confessor for the Templar rather than being a literal cut-and-paste half-n-half kind of deal [hopefully this makes sense].

 

Of course, I trust that Templar will be just as unique as any other archetype.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Concerning 'value' of ammo:

I've just had an idea. Recall weapon durability and how important it's supposed to be guys? Well, what if, due to how the durability system works, bows by themselves lose negligible durability from use? Also, consider the fact that a good archer character is probably not going to be in melee getting hit a lot either so their armor will also probably suffer significantly less durability loss. Thus, perhaps, the intention of ammo is to make durability costs between melee characters and ranged characters more balanced. Mind you, this is all speculation as I have no idea how the actual durability system will end up working.

 

So this begs the question, what about magic characters? They are ranged right? Well, that would, again, depend on the specifics of the durability system. Perhaps from a lore perspective channeling magic through a staff (or other mage weapon) puts more wear and tear on a staff than firing an arrow puts on a bow? Perhaps magic users will have significantly less range than archers? Honestly, I'm not sure concerning magic users but I don't think it rules out my initial idea.

 

Concerning the idea that Ranger will only enter melee combat if out of ammo:

I've seen this idea pop up more than once already, always stated as if it's obviously true. However, it's not obviously true. We don't have enough information to conclude that Ranger will enter melee only because they ran out of ammo and decided they wanted to enter melee. Here is one example of what I'm getting at: what if Ranger has limited mobility compared to melee classes and their bow is far less effective than their melee weapon in close range combat? Seems like a good Ranger would swap to their melee weapon if they were forced to engage in close range combat by a fast moving melee class.

 

In fact, I think it's very important that melee classes move (slightly) faster than ranged characters or have some method by which they can get in melee range of a ranged attacker. If they don't, kiting will be too powerful and make all ranged characters superior to melee characters.

 

I don't feel like mobility is a matter of melee or ranged. The Ranger's bow may just be harder to aim, thus melee adds the ability to abandon range for greater certainty in damage. Kiting should be possible for those capable of run-n-gun'ing with accuracy, I thinks.

 

As for the durability deal, maybe, but I don't see that as much of a problem. Preferably, I'd like to see arrows be more powerful than spells individually with greater range. Magic will be more AoE while projectiles will be stronger single-target. I'm perfectly fine with Magic and Projectiles having unique strengths and weaknesses which are not so easily compared to each other. Magic uses mana as a resource, while Projectile is limited only by preparation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranger_Female_Render.jpg

 

I love the detail in this, from the ware on the armor that seems to be from blades or some kind of weapon to the dirt at the bottom of the cloak. Just cause a few others mentioned it, first thing I said when I saw it was, "Ohh pretty" That was immediately followed by my cubemates judging me.


My name is Toothbrush, Scourge of the local pond, King of this tree stump, and future leader of, "The Irregulars".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So. Much. This.

 

If you're going to impose taxes, make it apply to all, always hated how magic classes were "exempt" from ammunition. Also, are there carrying limits, like weight or how many you can carry ? Because of how resource intensive this game is appearing to be, will the arrows take up inventory space? If so, this ammunition thing is really going to hurt the class a lot, especially compared to magic classes. Unless the ranger does insanely better than casters in dps (who are already looking really scary as it is), then this may be a big issue.

 

It also begs the question: does this inherently confirm that range is better than melee? With range consuming ammo, that means that they'll need to do more damage to make it worth the production cost. And ACE stated that the access to melee is in case of the emergency if they run out of ammo, the inference being "as a last resort." Meaning that range is already inherently preferable to melee, with melee as a cheap, and negligible source of damage.

 

 

So. Much. This.

 

That's another thing...they have stealth, they have traps, they have melee, they have range...seriously, this archetype really does everything. Which is also another big red flag: what can the Stalker do? If ammunition is already a big deal (and it will be, or they wouldn't make this kind of standalone announcement, don't even pretend that it won't an issue until you run out of ammo in a firefight), and they'll need melee, what can the Stalker possibly offer in gameplay to set it apart from the ranger? Frankly there are only so many things you can do with a bow.

 

Also, the Ranger has been touted as the premier pet archetype as well, from all the promotions and reveals on pets, from the artwork, etc...have we forgotten about the wolf on the homepage? Where's the mention?

 

(I mean, I SUPPOSE it is possible that the wolf just happened to wander onto the scene. The it could have been drawn to the sounds of chaos and bloodshed, without any regard to its own well being or safety, unlike most forest animals (that wolf could be in a commercial for the US Marines, lol)

 

Don't get me wrong, I dislike pet mechanics in most games (conceptually, it's a great idea for a class, fulfilling the fantasy of taming and fighting wild beasts as a master of the wild, but in gameplay it has always come off as weak, gimmicky, or overpowered), but was surprised to not see it here, listed along with the rest of the rangers (somewhat excessive) skills and specialties.

 

I'm on the same page you are, it's too easy to gimp this class up, or make it so OP it has to be nerfed into oblivion at launch.

 

It's apparent to me the developers have a melee fetish, they have 4 archetypes right now in pre-alpha and three do melee damage exclusively and the Confessors are racking up huge AOE damage from melee range as well.

 

Now they are gonna make half the rangers powers melee to use those sissy dual ginsu's... Don't even make a Ranger male vessel unless it has a two handed Broad Axe and looks like Conan the destroyer.

 

Dual wielding is for Fae. 

 

And I have a feeling the Stalker is gonna be the sniper class, with anti-stealth, popping rangers from stealth, and head shots from the other side of the map, but of course that's just speculation on my part. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel like mobility is a matter of melee or ranged. The Ranger's bow may just be harder to aim, thus melee adds the ability to abandon range for greater certainty in damage. Kiting should be possible for those capable of run-n-gun'ing with accuracy, I thinks.

 

As for the durability deal, maybe, but I don't see that as much of a problem. Preferably, I'd like to see arrows be more powerful than spells individually with greater range. Magic will be more AoE while projectiles will be stronger single-target. I'm perfectly fine with Magic and Projectiles having unique strengths and weaknesses which are not so easily compared to each other. Magic uses mana as a resource, while Projectile is limited only by preparation.

Yes. We're used to seeing arrows doing small amounts of damage, only able to bring down an opponent by making him a pin cushon.

Historically, one arrow usually took someone out of a fight.

 

I'm not advocating one-shots being common anywhere in the game, just decent damage for arrows.

Edited by chancellor

I think the K-Mart of MMO's already exists!  And it ain't us!   :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, thank god they went with ammunition. Now, the benefits. There's no point in having ammunition if the advantages aren't significant.

 

Forget regents and equivolating everything to ammunition, make archery fundamentally advantageous. Amazing reach, tactical oppression, arrows are the primary cause of death on the ancient battlefield, though not extremely deadly by themselves, the ability to deliver aggression from a distance is just too powerful, especially in large battles where is easy to fill the sky with arrows and randomly hit saturated forces.

 

Between friendly fire and ammunition, the strengths of projectiles needs to be great, so let it rain!

 

As for arrow types, let's get it right, the two primary arrow types for a warrior are Flight Arrows, and Heavy Ammunition. When you want to get those obsurd distances, you use lighter war arrows designed for distance. When your opponent gets close enough, you want armor punching shafts that won't snap from the force of a real war bow (not that trick shooting BS) slamming arrows into armor.

 

Arrow head choices should include Bodkin Point (armor piercing), Broadheads (high damage vs weak armor), Obsidian (special shots that create nasty wounds on low armor targets), and Cheap Shot (crap arrows for low affordability).

 

Stuff like poison and combustion should be skill adjustments that add effects to the arrow used, they don't need to be equipment. And certain firing choices can pick from a small selection of ammo variation to keep things simple. Left click for close range heavy shots, right click for long ranged flight arrows, accessible as ammo allows.

 

With weapon swapping systems it is easy for a class to alternate between multiple weapon configurations, not just melee and projectile, but also between various projectile types as desired.

 

I'm very excited to see how deep the projectile portion of warfare will be for this game. Good luck :)

Edited by bahamutkaiser

a52d4a0d-044f-44ff-8a10-ccc31bfa2d87.jpg          Before you criticize someone, walk a mile in their shoes... Than if they're upset, they'll be a mile away, and barefoot :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a thing isn't important at all... This game isn't going to be balanced around 1v1 and people are going to have to accept that some classes will just win in such a scenario.

I disagree. Suppose we have class X and class Y. What you're saying is that no matter how good a player of class X is at the game, no matter how bad the player of class Y, the bad player will always beat the good player because class Y beats class X. That is just terrible for a competitive PvP game (better believe 1v1 situations can and will happen, possibly often) and does not look good for the skill ceiling.

 

Please don't turn Crowfall into Rock, Paper, Scissors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Suppose we have class X and class Y. What you're saying is that no matter how good a player of class X is at the game, no matter how bad the player of class Y, the bad player will always beat the good player because class Y beats class X. That is just terrible for a competitive PvP game (better believe 1v1 situations can and will happen, possibly often) and does not look good for the skill ceiling.

 

Please don't turn Crowfall into Rock, Paper, Scissors.

Poster might have went a bit too far in saying that but yes the "balance" that CF will have is in fact rock paper scissors type. It won't guarantee a win as a skilled player should be able to adapt and overcome but yes some archetype will just be better against others. Its a group/team based PvP game after all.

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. Suppose we have class X and class Y. What you're saying is that no matter how good a player of class X is at the game, no matter how bad the player of class Y, the bad player will always beat the good player because class Y beats class X. That is just terrible for a competitive PvP game (better believe 1v1 situations can and will happen, possibly often) and does not look good for the skill ceiling.

 

Please don't turn Crowfall into Rock, Paper, Scissors.

 

No, what he's saying is that one archetype may have a significant advantage in a given scenario. There's nothing saying that skill cannot overcome this scenario.

 

For example, a Ranger will be able to win battles which they prepare well for against an equally skilled non-Ranger who prepares equally. This is because the Ranger is an archetype, as it seems, which gains significant advantage from more preparation, such as planting traps on the field and using their superior arrow range. A Champion, however, has more advantage in endurance and long-lasting battles, and a Confessor is better in team fights due to its AoE. 

 

Skill can most definitely overcome these scenarios so long as the gap between the players is wide enough [for instance, a Ranger who hardly hits his target will still get skewered by a Legionnaire/Knight/etc.]. 

Edited by Dondagora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great!! I love the idea of needing Arrows!

 

I am sorry.... but to the complainers who are saying "I don't want to be forced into a certain play style because I ran out of Arrows" DON"T PLAY A RANGER!

 

They already stated that each archetype is going to feel different, and if I am playing an archer with cool mechanics I damn well want to feel like an Archer, and that means I don't have a magical butt hole I pull Arrows out of that never runs out! If you wan't to play a ranged class that doesn't run out of projectiles they already have that ! It's called a mage, and they probably don't have as cool of tricks as the Ranger who comes prepared. 

 

The only concern I do have for the ammo is the idea with the decaying world. Will it still be easy to make arrows come winter time when resources are close to depleted? If its not "easy" to get more arrows come time when resources are starting to become limited, then there would be a problem as too why play an archetype that you can't play to its fullest ability come later down the road (goes with traps too). 

 

I love the mechanic but a ton of thought needs to go into the crafting system and the resources of the world for these things.

I love the idea of arrows too. I still remember when WoW actually required hunters to have arrows (or bullets, depending on the weapon). It may have been a pain in raids, but it sure felt great to go and fletch some arrows before using them. Preparation trumps all. Knowing may be half the battle, but preparing is half the fun. Why games remove or simply don't add that half of the fun is beyond my understanding.

Edited by Hafjoldr

KjUVOZg.png

Hafjoldr - Veteran Member

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well to me the ammo-cap seems more like a counterweight than a limitation if you compare magic and physical ranged dds. 

 

Magic ranged dds traditionally have a casttime attached to their skills while ranged dds pretty burst their skills onto their opponents and kite if the rotation didn't kill the opponent - sometimes. 

 

If for example a ranger features a fast basic attack which could be implemented as

  • Ranger's projectiles have a higher speed than a Confessor's projectile but the share the same frequency
  • Ranger's projectiles are available at a higher frequency than the confessor's projectiles but share the same velocity
  • Ranger's projectiles are faster and are available at a higher frequency

This doesn't take attributes like range and damage into account - just for the info. And with frequency I mean things like skill cooldown, etc. 

 

And kiting is already a thing (I mean why not) but to me if a Ranger has unlimited amount of ammo the kite get's infinite if for example the Ranger's projectiles had a higher frequency. 

 

This also doesn't take the preparation aspect nor stealth into account. But I guess we should see how the skills and powers are designed and matched to the current set of archetypes. 

 

Also to add a point: I know there is more than that - however I'm sleepy so rest well. 

Edited by Thyr

You get the wolves...lots of wolves...and sheep that wear armor and have developed an appetite for blood soaked grass - dubanka

Even insects smell good when roasted - a random confessor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

From my understanding the Templar is its on base Archetype and is labeled as such in the Archetypes section on the website. It is not a mixture of any classes. Which following that mentality means we currently know that for Siege we will only have 5 out of the 13 Archetypes available for testing. Which at this point in a game set to release later this year seems a bit worrisome to me. Especially because the game is so pvp focused balance is a massive ordeal. Now I don't want to come off as just being a downer, I want the game to be the best it can be. I understand taking your time to get it right... but "time is money friend" and if the a 2016 release date still holds true then time is not a resource that can be wasted. I hope that we see more Archetypes announced to be testable for Siege before its testing phase starts in march.

 

Blair did say in the systems chat I video that Templar is a mixture of Confessor and Knight archetypes.


I think the K-Mart of MMO's already exists!  And it ain't us!   :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...