i've been a ranger my whole life ingame and i haven't yet come across a shield for Rangers, just wondering if we are ever going to see some, there are a few of us rangers out there that tend to carry a shield
Ranged Shields..??
#1
Posted 02 July 2013 - 02:26
Crofil - 49 O=(`-`Q)
l0rdka0s - 49 Tank
Ridcully - 49 healer
Liforc - 49 Ranger
Nihilus - 49 Warsin
+ others
#2
Posted 02 July 2013 - 03:46
#4
Posted 02 July 2013 - 22:00
Well, I stoped playing after the first beta (but I still have an eye into Eldevin ), therefore maybe some of the things I'll say aren't acurate with the current game build or even due to I don't recall well.
If I recall well, once a shield is equiped by a char the armor/block values of the shield are added into the char stats since shields are considered as armor items, this way rangers (also mages) can have his/her armor increased all the time; this shouldn't be a problem if the char have an hybrid build (ranger/warrior or mage/warrior) and is performing melee skills; but can bring certain unbalance if the char is performing range skills and still is taking advantage of the armor/block bonuses given by the shield.
Maybe an easy way to balance the game could be:
**1** Add shield into weapons category, instead armor. This way the bonus given by shield only would be active when the Shield is in use.
**2** A system that needs by part of the player the choice of which type of weapon wants to be using in every moment; F1 if you want use long range weapons (bows, crossbows, essences, throwing knives), and F2 if you want to use melee range weapons ( 2 hand axes/swords, staves, dual wielding axe/sword/knife, [[axe/sword/knife +shield]] ).
And maybe would be good a deeper change in the game system, in order to change the necessary requirements to equip an item, this requirements should't be based in the char level but in the char attributes.
In life the things aren't white or black, the certain is that they are composed of a beautiful variety of grey tones.
#5
Posted 03 July 2013 - 02:31
I haven't seen the shield as making the ranger particularly OP in PvE. So I'll assume the problems arise in PvP. And while I haven't tried PvP yet, I can see how the shield might make PvP unbalanced. But I believe it's extremely important for PvE solo. (In PvE group, the ranger is better off with two knives for the stats, as he shouldn't get hit.)
The ranger doesn't have the most effective crowd control. And I've watched mages tear through mobs faster then I can, while templars and warriors survive much better. The shield is that little bit that allows the ranger to survive when fighting multiple mobs in close quarters. We don't want to cripple the PvE ranger in an effort to make PvP more balanced.
The solution is to have different rules for PvP. Perhaps the shield or some talents can be slightly different. A seperate talent/stat spec for PvP, perhaps adding some PvP specific talents to the choices can also offset the shield. I've never seen a game successfully do 'one size fits all' for PvP and PvE, while keeping both balanced and fun.
Meleager, ranger
Tuor, templar (Inactive)
Deimos, mage
Thangbrand, warsin (Mostly on vacation)
Bart, ??? (bene trades)
#6
Posted 03 July 2013 - 03:49
Well, you can't just straight up compare one general character type to another in this game. The details of a particular build are very important. Somebody who can leverage their Talent and Attribute points well is always going to be better off than someone who can't, regardless of character type.
I've talked to a lot of people that have trouble completing quests and such at their level because they've over diversified their Attribute point assignments, or have made Talent choices that don't work well together. Learning how to build your character is a big part of the game if you want to perform well.
#7
Posted 03 July 2013 - 05:20
yes all build user who knows well his character does not have many problems in most areas, and especially healers can kill even certain bosses, but it took some kill
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users