Contention:
Rangers are weaker and the lower end class of the 3 classes.
____
Explanation:
Due to the point stat choosing system and it's relationship to practices.
______
Consider the stat system:
360 points.
Str(20) Dex(20) Con(10)
Many combinations can be insued from this setup, allowing for diversity in play style.
______
Consider Practicing:
Ranger prac: All classes gain by the same prac %
Warrior prac: Based on str
Thief prac: Based on dex
_____
The Situation
1.If a ranger were to go abs, he can easily do 19 20(ls) or 20 20(ds) and do just fine practice wise.
2.If a ranger were to go dodge/combo(requirement of shield parry and dodge) with a weapon, the ranger can max out his defense and get some Ranger skills(higher track, notice,search, survival..etc)
3.If a ranger were to go dodge/combo with an additional skill(bash, charge(not working currently)) this would require a much broader reliance on the ranger's str and dex.
4.If a ranger were to go dodge/combo with stab, the pracs are even worse.
____
The Outlook
Thieves 10 point statting system is on Dex.
Warriors 10 point is on Str
Rangers 10 point is on con.
____
The Problem
Ranger's 10 point cost for con does in no way affect any practicing % of any skill.
This is where the imbalance lies.
___
Example:
Ranger wants to go dodge/combo bash. They will have terrible practices(won't get 95%+ in sparry/dodge/bash/weapon) without sacrificing many others.
The result. Ranger must try to get better phys affecting prac % stats.
For every 1 stat point a ranger would like to add to(for instance 1 str to str, making it 17 str instead of 16 str,) this sucks 2 stat points from con.
Now consider the Thief:
They want to go stab(as is the natural and preordained cause), they will and MUST get 20 dex. If they are sane.
They do not have to sacrifice 2 points of dex, to add one more str/con, unless they really choose to.
Thus, they are getting the best prac % possible for their class(sparry is only 1 area out of the vast majority of skills a stabber needs)
Similar with warrior:
The high str allows them to prac very effectively.
Rangers do not have a "stat" that helps with practices, they are burdened with the option of gettin higher hps, or losing 70+ hps for every str/dex they'd like to add to.
_____
The Solution:
Make con affect practices:
1. Affect ranger pracs
2. overall add to a rangers "practices" in thieve/warrior prac. (IE, 18 con, they get 18 "str" and 18 "dex" for practicing at these practices.
Change their stat selecting option:
1.Have str/dex/con all cost 15 points.
2. OR Have str/dex 15 points, with con being 20 points.
I personally, and possibly other players think, that the Ranger is supposedly a versatile class. Now that practices are affected by str/dex, the rangers are behind. I have several warriors, several thieves, several rangers on both sides. And the weakest and crappiest to play of ANY setup, is the ranger.(ls ranger is the worst)
_____
The Question
Do you think that the current system is balanced? Will you please offer any suggestions to the current Ranger system, any comparisons to other classes?
The Ranger-At a Glance
I'm gonna be honest, I didn't read the first post on this thread. However, having just created a human ranger, I beleive that rangers in fact are not as bad as everyone is making them out to be.
If we take a real life approach to this topic, I think that rangers are pretty decent. In real life, they aren't huge bashing warriors with full plate mail, they are dressed in furs and use tracking to find their kills. They have a bow and arrow and a big crocodile dundee hunting knife on their belts. They take a spear and charge you and shove it down your throat.
What I'm trying to get at is that if we were to fix charge, and imp bows, then I think rangers would be perfectly fine. Bash is more for warriors in my opinion anyway, and I statted a perfectly fine 14 19 20 ranger who does a lot of damage with a spear. I don't think we want rangers to be the same as warriors. Warriors SHOULD be abs, I personally think rangers SHOULD be dodge or combo.
That's my 2 cents. I'll go back up and read your post now.
If we take a real life approach to this topic, I think that rangers are pretty decent. In real life, they aren't huge bashing warriors with full plate mail, they are dressed in furs and use tracking to find their kills. They have a bow and arrow and a big crocodile dundee hunting knife on their belts. They take a spear and charge you and shove it down your throat.
What I'm trying to get at is that if we were to fix charge, and imp bows, then I think rangers would be perfectly fine. Bash is more for warriors in my opinion anyway, and I statted a perfectly fine 14 19 20 ranger who does a lot of damage with a spear. I don't think we want rangers to be the same as warriors. Warriors SHOULD be abs, I personally think rangers SHOULD be dodge or combo.
That's my 2 cents. I'll go back up and read your post now.
I think rangers should be a mixture between bash and charge. I don't see why you would want to be a stabber as a ranger, but rangers definetly should bash. They are more the middle man between abs bashers and dodge chargers. Besides, charge isnt even in game.
Anyway, Vurek was focusing more on how rangers get nothing in the way of pracs and their balance with stats.. As is if charge DID work, I would not be able to have charge and still have anymore than 1 level in track and 1 in survival.
Anyway, Vurek was focusing more on how rangers get nothing in the way of pracs and their balance with stats.. As is if charge DID work, I would not be able to have charge and still have anymore than 1 level in track and 1 in survival.
Forgot to add:
Galnor told me that he thought rangers would be more balanced because they have 1 prac for notice.
But if a ranger goes the combo/dodge bash setup, they will have 92% notice and 2 pracs of survival/track.
IF they want any reasonable 94%ish percentages. So, that kind of helps, but warriors get their setups like a breeze, and thieves as well.
If your not going to read my post before you reply, don't reply.
If your content with your ranger, please tell me why.
If you say your ranger is the perfect example of overbalanced, and with no other information, although I know that said person happens to have nearly the best set possible in the game(but do the IMM's know that?), please be quiet.
I never once said that rangers should be stabbers. Never once said rangers should be bashers.
But I did say, in terms of true and enjoyable playability, rangers are the lesser degree.
Please stick to the topic at hand. Again, I believe I wasted my time already.
Galnor told me that he thought rangers would be more balanced because they have 1 prac for notice.
But if a ranger goes the combo/dodge bash setup, they will have 92% notice and 2 pracs of survival/track.
IF they want any reasonable 94%ish percentages. So, that kind of helps, but warriors get their setups like a breeze, and thieves as well.
If your not going to read my post before you reply, don't reply.
If your content with your ranger, please tell me why.
If you say your ranger is the perfect example of overbalanced, and with no other information, although I know that said person happens to have nearly the best set possible in the game(but do the IMM's know that?), please be quiet.
I never once said that rangers should be stabbers. Never once said rangers should be bashers.
But I did say, in terms of true and enjoyable playability, rangers are the lesser degree.
Please stick to the topic at hand. Again, I believe I wasted my time already.
and my abs ranger has 1less str, 1less con and better pracs than my abs warrior... your point is?
some classes have advantages in some areas, that's just the way it is.
rangers are middle men, they shouldn't be as good at bashing as a warrior... they shouldn't be as good at dodging as a rogue... what do you know, THEY AREN'T. Something called balance, play one of the other classes if it annoys you too much.
some classes have advantages in some areas, that's just the way it is.
rangers are middle men, they shouldn't be as good at bashing as a warrior... they shouldn't be as good at dodging as a rogue... what do you know, THEY AREN'T. Something called balance, play one of the other classes if it annoys you too much.
I think I just realized why ranger's pracs suck so bad....
It's because they need to prac warrior and sometimes thief skills which cost 2 pracs per session, and then all of the 1 prac ranger skills they need to practice rise so slowly in percentages it's not even funny.
For all classes, practicing warrior and thief skills, the first prac you get is like 15+%, but for ranger pracs, it's 10-11%. This means you're gonna be spending a lot more sessions on ranger pracs than on anything else. So if we look at it, rangers really are gonna need more pracs for ranger skills along with everyone else, kind of not giving them a 1 prac place to practice.
Ok, might sound confusing. What I'm trying to say is, if ranger prac percentages were upped per prac only for rangers, it might help them be balanced for practices.
It's because they need to prac warrior and sometimes thief skills which cost 2 pracs per session, and then all of the 1 prac ranger skills they need to practice rise so slowly in percentages it's not even funny.
For all classes, practicing warrior and thief skills, the first prac you get is like 15+%, but for ranger pracs, it's 10-11%. This means you're gonna be spending a lot more sessions on ranger pracs than on anything else. So if we look at it, rangers really are gonna need more pracs for ranger skills along with everyone else, kind of not giving them a 1 prac place to practice.
Ok, might sound confusing. What I'm trying to say is, if ranger prac percentages were upped per prac only for rangers, it might help them be balanced for practices.
