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

Dual Daggers are Silly - Let's get the ranger a more respectable melee weapon

Alternative Ranger Weapons  

165 members have voted

  1. 1. Which alternative melee weapons would you like to see?

    • Sword and Dagger
    • Sword and Buckler
    • Sword and Cape
    • Axe and Buckler
    • I like my dual daggers just fine, thank you very much.
    • Other...(Post alternative in comments)


Recommended Posts

Honestly all/most sound good.
I think dual weapons shouldn't be a thing, but rather individual weapons that archetypes may or may not have use of. Each weapon type can have a unique advantage (base damage, swing time, cooldown increase/decrease, you get the idea). Rapier is already in the game, so why not repurpose it? For example as main hand weapon, and buckler as second hand, or dagger. This opens up varied builds for each archetype. From what I understand this is already in effect for several other archetypes, so it should stand to reason that other ones get this treatment as well. Hell, perhaps even certain skills can be tied to weapon loadouts. So having the offensive/defensive loadout will change a few abilities to be defensive maneuvers. Kinda similar to how Albion Online worked it, perhaps?

 

I'd also like to take a moment to say Rangers need crossbows as an option too. Just sayin'.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This avatar combo...

tumblr_nk2ui3VL4o1sp5mbyo1_500.jpg

seems like JoJo is slowly taking over the forum ;D

 

Back to the topic: 

We have freedom of choice with skills, so why not with weapons? :D All options sound great. Also right now i've seen 3 types of bow available for the ranger. We need more. Greatbows, Crosbows, dual wielded Hand crosbows :D


\[T]/ PRAISE THE SUN! \[T]/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spear . . .

Edited by Bramble

“Letting your customers set your standards is a dangerous game, because the race to the bottom is pretty easy to win. Setting your own standards--and living up to them--is a better way to profit. Not to mention a better way to make your day worth all the effort you put into it." - Seth Godin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's in the skill tree. I expect we will see it as an option at some point.

 

That's reassuring to know. I haven't had the time set aside to really spend time needling through skill trees as much as I'd like. I understand that the current iteration is primarily for testing, but it's still hard to tell what's placeholder and what's staying. So I figure it's best to err on vocalizing support for certain things, particularly what I mentioned earlier - vastly varied weapon loadout possibilities.

 

Spear . . .

 

I was tempted to say the same, but honestly I feel like spears are at odds with what the ranger is supposed to be like. She's, from what I've gathered, much more like a scout, and scouts rely on being fleet on foot and in combat. I feel like spears are at odds with both of those. They're far more cumbersome in both situations. It also feels a bit redundant to have a reach melee weapon as well as ranged weapons. That said, perhaps it'd fit better with one of her promotions? (As I said, I really don't know much about the skill trees yet)

 

This avatar combo...

tumblr_nk2ui3VL4o1sp5mbyo1_500.jpg

seems like JoJo is slowly taking over the forum ;D

 

Back to the topic: 

We have freedom of choice with skills, so why not with weapons? :D All options sound great. Also right now i've seen 3 types of bow available for the ranger. We need more. Greatbows, Crosbows, dual wielded Hand crosbows :D

 

Niceu niceu very niceu Ceasar-chan! :)

 

I fully agree with post above and would love additional types like sabers (esp. dual), greatswords or even claws/wrist blades (though it's much closer assassin's territory)

 

Yesssss jojos everywhere!

 

Also, I feel like dual handcrossbows is, at the risk of sounding like a stick in the mud, too far-fetched to be practical. How are you going to load each when your hands are preoccupied?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesssss jojos everywhere!

JoJo friday is upon us ;D

 

Also, I feel like dual handcrossbows is, at the risk of sounding like a stick in the mud, too far-fetched to be practical. How are you going to load each when your hands are preoccupied?

Self repeating crossbows maybe? :D

Found the image i was thinking of (From good old D&D 3.0 books)

xbowz.jpg

Here you have 4 types of crossbow that could be used in game :) Also who needs logic when duelist reloads flintlock pistol in an instant? (thinking about his ultimate here, unless he uses infinite number of pistols there like overwatch reaper [they just appear or sth?!]){EDIT: i know our line of defense! It's like King Crimson, it just works}

Edited by Sadrax

\[T]/ PRAISE THE SUN! \[T]/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was tempted to say the same, but honestly I feel like spears are at odds with what the ranger is supposed to be like. She's, from what I've gathered, much more like a scout, and scouts rely on being fleet on foot and in combat. I feel like spears are at odds with both of those. They're far more cumbersome in both situations. It also feels a bit redundant to have a reach melee weapon as well as ranged weapons. That said, perhaps it'd fit better with one of her promotions? (As I said, I really don't know much about the skill trees yet)

 

I agree that it'd be cumbersome to carry both a spear and bow. Swapping from one to the other would be awkward, and I really can't think of a way to carry a spear other than holding it in the hands, which would mean dropping it on the ground or resting it against a tree or wall in order to use the bow.

 

I do disagree with it being slow and at odds with the archetype, however.

 

Example of speed: https://youtu.be/O8RWLxlzTiM?t=226

 

Example of rangers using spears from D&D:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/58/31/b8/5831b83c8122df7f2266a2d25321df69.jpg

http://orig00.deviantart.net/b1af/f/2010/151/c/6/human_ranger_by_rhineville.jpg

Edited by Raizex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, I'm more against forcing rangers to use bows than worrying about the melee weapon types.

 

Rangers are those who range.  They get around, roam, patrol, whatever...they have mobility.  It doesn't mean they attack from range.  And I mean, just based on how bad the bow is right now, I'd be totally cool with a situation where the ranger had something like axe/dagger, and switched between stances without actually changing weapons.  I personally don't go into the woods without an axe and a knife, but I can't recall the last time I brought my bow and arrows.

 

I mean, I do think rangers should be completely versatile, so they need some range.  But that doesn't necessarily mean bow and arrow, imo.  Such a lame trope.  Bow also means we have to build more weapons (melee set plus bow), as well as ammo, which is pretty different from the confessor, for example.

 

Why not a stance where axe is melee and dagger is thrown, and another stance where axe is thrown and dagger is melee?

 

Would be a pretty major overhaul, but I mean, ranger right now is pretty bad.  Just some thoughts that I'm relatively certain no one will agree with. :)

Edited by Cejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, I'm more against forcing rangers to use bows than worrying about the melee weapon types.

 

Rangers are those who range.  They get around, roam, patrol, whatever...they have mobility.  It doesn't mean they attack from range.  And I mean, just based on how bad the bow is right now, I'd be totally cool with a situation where the ranger had something like axe/dagger, and switched between stances without actually changing weapons.  I personally don't go into the woods without an axe and a knife, but I can't recall the last time I brought my bow and arrows.

 

I mean, I do think rangers should be completely versatile, so they need some range.  But that doesn't necessarily mean bow and arrow, imo.  Such a lame trope.  Bow also means we have to build more weapons (melee set plus bow), as well as ammo, which is pretty different from the confessor, for example.

 

Why not a stance where axe is melee and dagger is thrown, and another stance where axe is thrown and dagger is melee?

 

Would be a pretty major overhaul, but I mean, ranger right now is pretty bad.  Just some thoughts that I'm relatively certain no one will agree with. :)

 

I like what you said about versatility, but I disagree with the thrown weapon approach. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, I'm more against forcing rangers to use bows than worrying about the melee weapon types.

 

Rangers are those who range.  They get around, roam, patrol, whatever...they have mobility.  It doesn't mean they attack from range.  And I mean, just based on how bad the bow is right now, I'd be totally cool with a situation where the ranger had something like axe/dagger, and switched between stances without actually changing weapons.  I personally don't go into the woods without an axe and a knife, but I can't recall the last time I brought my bow and arrows.

 

I mean, I do think rangers should be completely versatile, so they need some range.  But that doesn't necessarily mean bow and arrow, imo.  Such a lame trope.  Bow also means we have to build more weapons (melee set plus bow), as well as ammo, which is pretty different from the confessor, for example.

 

Why not a stance where axe is melee and dagger is thrown, and another stance where axe is thrown and dagger is melee?

 

Would be a pretty major overhaul, but I mean, ranger right now is pretty bad.  Just some thoughts that I'm relatively certain no one will agree with. :)

The thing about crafting more weapons are false, since onehanded weapons takes each about half the resources a twohanded weapon, so in that regard it evens out, as for ammo yeah im not a fan of crafted ammo myself, though basic arrows are just a single piece of wood and advanced arrows 30 wood and 30 ore only and does give the ranged a HUGE versatility being able to swap between slashing/crushing/piercing dmg(+ what ever extra stats might be on the arrows) at any time, but yeah would prefer not having to craft it in the first place 8and that is even as I dont plan to play ranger myself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, here are the numbers (hopefully without too many math errors; adding is hard):

 

One Handed Book:
Book Binding - 2 plank/1 stitched leather - 6 wood/3 hide
Bound Chapters - 3 chapters - 3 metal bar/3 stitched leather - 27 ore/9 hide
Book Clasp - 1 Metal Bar - 9 ore

Total: 36 ore/12 hide/6 wood (54 total)

Recurve Bow:
2 bow stave limbs - 6 planks - 18 wood
Bow String - 1 stitched leather - 3 hide
Bow Riser - plank/bow sight/bow rest/bow grip - 3 wood
 - bow sight - 1 metal bar - 9 ore
 - Bow rest - 1 metal bar - 9 ore
 - bow grip - 2 stitched leather - 6 hide

Total: 21 wood/18 ore/9 hide (48 total)

Dagger pair:

2 weapon hilts - weapon grip/pommel/crossguard
  - 2 weapon grips - 2 plank or animal - 6 wood or ? animal?
  - 2 pommels - 2 metal bar - 18 ore
  - 2 crossguards - 2 metal bar - 18 ore
2 weapon blades: short - 4 metal bars - 36 ore

Total: 72 Ore/6 wood (78 total)

Leather Boots - 4 Ore /15 Hide (19 total)
Leather Gloves - 4 Ore /15 Hide (19 total)

Arrows:
10 arrowheads - 3 ore
10 arrow shafts - 3 wood

Total resources for ranger: 149
Total resources for confessor: 54

This assumes non-basic weapons/armor, and a mininum gear set to unlock all skills.  Basic armor is basically a no-go due to reduced movement speed, so 30 hide/8 ore is a minimum on the ranger.  Even if you went with basic weapons you're looking at 63 total resources just to unlock ranger skills without penalty:

Basic Bow: 12 wood
Basic Arrows: 1 wood
Basic Daggers: 6 wood/6 stone

But that still gives you crappy weapons.  A confessor "unlocks" their skills for 54, and they do it with a non-basic weapon.  With a basic book, the confessor is fully playable with a mere 12 wood.

 

That's not even addressing the fact that the ranger bow is largely inferior in the first place.

Edited by Cejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that is an issue of the confessor crafting you pointing out actually... try do it with a legionnaire instead and im sure the numbers gonna go way up for his weapons

 

Well, let's see how a lego works by the numbers:

 

Lego: (needs Shield, Helmet, Polearm)

 

Polearm:

Weapon Head: Great Axe - 4 metal bars - 36 ore

Weapon Shaft: Long - Metal Bar - 9 ore

Weapon Hilt: Great - 2 Weapon Grip/2 Pommel/2 Crossguard

  - 2 weapon grips - 2 plank or animal - 6 wood or ? animal?

  - 2 pommels - 2 metal bar - 18 ore

  - 2 crossguards - 2 metal bar - 18 ore

 

Total: 81 ore/6 wood (87 total)

 

Shield:

Shield Covering -  2 metal bars - 18 ore

Shield Base: small - 2 Planks - 6 wood

Enarmes - 2 stitched leather - 6 hide

 

Total: 18 ore/6 wood/6 hide (30 total)

 

Leather Helmet - 4 ore/15 hide

 

Total Resources: 136

 

Also, my math was wrong on the ranger (I was short by 18 ore).  The dagger pair actually looks like this:

 

Dagger pair:

 

2 weapon hilts - weapon grip/pommel/crossguard

  - 2 weapon grips - 2 plank or animal - 6 wood or ? animal?

  - 2 pommels - 2 metal bar - 18 ore

  - 2 crossguards - 2 metal bar - 18 ore

two weapon blades: short - 4 metal bars - 36 ore

 

Total: 72 Ore/6 wood (78 total)

 

Total cost for ranger build goes up to 149.

 

As you can see, the polearm costs only 9 metal more than the daggers.  And the ranger still needs the bow, 2 pieces of armor and arrows.  Overall, ranger build is more "expensive" than the Lego by 13 resources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these custom animations sort of put an upward limit on the amount of character customization which can be done per archetype without it costing the studio. If I had to choose between centaurs and minotaurs on the one hand, and multiple weapons per character (even if those characters were different types of humans/elves/dwarves, I'd choose the latter.


Shadowbane - House Avari/Hy'shen
"Gimp elves get good elves killed." - Belina

Avari Discord - https://discord.gg/Bch24PV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I mean, I'm all for daydreaming, while realizing that I'm not making this game.  I like "what if" threads.

 

But, my main beef (and sorry tangent to your thread Raizex) is that the ranger weapons basically suck. 

 

I mean, I kinda like the daggers, but only for the dash.  And the insanely long cooldown kinda spoils even that.

 

I think we're still at the point where we can suggest that regardless of animations, ranger gameplay needs some re-thinking. That's how I feel, anyway.

 

EDIT:

 

I also think most of the big changes could be made without major alterations to the animation.  If we want to stick with bow + dagger/dagger, the key comes down to skill timing, and some impacts.  I mean, obviously, the LMB charge is not very good.  But I've found the rapid fire suspect, and even ricochet.  Then there's archer stake...which is like an invitation to get killed, it's like putting a bulls-eye up.  Rangers should be about movement.  Not about putting up some lame ass wall.  So I guess that would have to go.  Honestly,. aside from suppression, I pretty much hate the bow right now.

Edited by Cejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Melee Archtype of Rangers should be able to use duel axes and other additional melee weapons that they can unlock via node in that archtype tree. Kinda like how Rangers can unlock Arrow types with the tree, the melee specilisation should be unlocking additional melee weapons


Veeshan Midst of UXA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dual daggers seem fine.

 

The real problem is that the skill tree promotes the selection of Ranged vs Melee.  And we don't know the real cost of obtaining & maintaining two sets of weapons.   

 

If having a second, melee skillbar was a simple perk of the class, then great.   But these "benefits" tend to be balanced out with other deficiencies.  Honestly, I don't quite get the goal here.  Easier to just give every class ranged and melee attacks.  Balance the various options, then let the players decide what to use.

Edited by Dominate

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...