What are Anet's Actual Intentions with Soulbeast?

[psizone.8437]

> @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

 

> This is the reason ANet hardly responds to forum questions, people do not like to be attacked and that is pretty much what they get when they do respond. Framing the thread as an attack to begin with is counter-productive.

 

They really need a community liaison agent that can talk to players directly about this, soak up the hate and format it in a productive manner before passing it on to the devs. This would make balancing the game and receiving feedback a lot easier for the devs.

 

A lot of the hate is coming from the lack of communication, but the devs getting it directly isn't productive.

 

 

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

> @ArmageddonAsh.6430 said:

> > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > You are exactly right.

> >

> > This is the reason ANet hardly responds to forum questions, people do not like to be attacked and that is pretty much what they get when they do respond. Framing the thread as an attack to begin with is counter-productive.

>

> Well, if they weren't making such basic mistakes. Then maybe people wouldnt be calling them out on it. Soul Beast feels like it wasnt finished. It feels like it is in BETA test mode. Riddled with issues. They constantly release updates that add bugs and issues - this new visual effect bug that has been happening is only another example in a LONG list of issues that Anet themselves have allowed to get into the game with their "testing" of updates before just rushing them out. What is worse, the bugs and issues they release take them an age to fix.

>

> It gets to the point, where when the big "balance" update comes - You play a game of "Is this intended or a bug" with pretty much everything that they add, because they constantly add bugs and issues, then add changes that they dont list either.

>

 

Basic mistakes are par for the course in any MMO, the other games I've played just close the servers to update and you can't even play for days at a time, GW has only been down for minutes in it's lifetime.

 

Making threads like this (with titles like this) are completely counter-productive and the main reason why ANet does not communicate through the forum. So it's like a self fulfilling prophesy or vicious circle.

[Dragonzhunter.8506]

> @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> Making threads like this (with titles like this) are completely counter-productive and the main reason why ANet does not communicate through the forum. So it's like a self fulfilling prophesy or vicious circle.

 

Heimskarl , you must admit that are all kind of threads some not like this (even this one looks fine by me) and still ANET did nothing about all useless utilities, elite and half or more of traits from Soulbeast traits line.

ArmageddonAsh has right, it is unbelievable how they make a Specialization with useless, broken, bad utilities. Look on other classes, I think everyone use the new utilities and elite. Not all utilities but at least half of them.

 

Like I said before, I enjoy Soulbeast and I am more than ok with it, I can handle in 1 vs 1 , and 1 vs 2 for long time, I have burst etc , but this only using old utilities, healing skill and elite. Otherwise ... I'll die in seconds.

 

 

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

> @Dragonzhunter.8506 said:

> > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > Making threads like this (with titles like this) are completely counter-productive and the main reason why ANet does not communicate through the forum. So it's like a self fulfilling prophesy or vicious circle.

>

> Heimskarl , you must admit that are all kind of threads some not like this (even this one looks fine by me) and still ANET did nothing about all useless utilities, elite and half or more of traits from Soulbeast traits line...

 

That's my point though mate, there are so many threads that just attack them or are so utterly negative that they never come here anymore and they never read the feedback or suggestions that we make. It's too hostile an environment for anyone to try and work with. As for the useless skills/traits, well, there are other reasons for that and attacking people through forum posts should not be a valid way of making them perform their work better. I don't think your post is particularly attacking anyone, but the all caps and phrasing is not going to get any good attention.

[Fluffball.8307]

My intentions are to take soulbeast out for a nice steak dinner, and then NEVER PLAY IT AGAIN.

[ArmageddonAsh.6430]

> @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > @Dragonzhunter.8506 said:

> > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > > Making threads like this (with titles like this) are completely counter-productive and the main reason why ANet does not communicate through the forum. So it's like a self fulfilling prophesy or vicious circle.

> >

> > Heimskarl , you must admit that are all kind of threads some not like this (even this one looks fine by me) and still ANET did nothing about all useless utilities, elite and half or more of traits from Soulbeast traits line...

>

> That's my point though mate, there are so many threads that just attack them or are so utterly negative that they never come here anymore and they never read the feedback or suggestions that we make. It's too hostile an environment for anyone to try and work with. As for the useless skills/traits, well, there are other reasons for that and attacking people through forum posts should not be a valid way of making them perform their work better. I don't think your post is particularly attacking anyone, but the all caps and phrasing is not going to get any good attention.

 

Well, the problem lies with Anet. These arent new mistakes. These arent something that they have only recently started doing. Even during the BETA they barely were visible on the forums. When you have played the game since pre-release, seeing the countless times they have introduced bugs and issues and taken MONTHS (if they actually ever do...) to fix them isnt good. Adding new specializations are cool and everything but how much did they actually test this mess of a class before release? Riddled with bugs and issues throughout the spec. How did they not see them? and if they did, why was nothing done to fix them? These are the questions that need answering.

 

The days of "balance" updates are more "yay lets look for all the new bugs they have added" they have ALWAYS been bad with this, its hard to think of balance updates, some normal updates have even added huge issues. They have NEVER been really that talkative to the player base, its only gotten worse and i agree that the negativity doesnt help but when they are CONSTANTLY releasing updates and patches that include such EASY to spot issues that they somehow missed during their "testing" it annoys the player base. As it should, it just makes it look like they arent even bothering to try and test them. We basically beta test every single update because their is ALWAYS that risk that have introduced silly bugs and issues.

[Caccis.9087]

> @Dragonzhunter.8506 said:

> > @Sojourner.4621 said:

> > In the "Fantasy Game Archetype".... which fantasy game? GW1 sure... but a lot of fantasy games have melee rangers... including tabletops. In fact the TRADITIONAL fantasy ranger in a large majority of games, including other MMOs, is a hybrid... able to use melee AND bows proficiently with limited drawbacks. Arguing that Ranger should have stronger bow abilities because it would better fit YOUR vision of what the ranger should be is conceited and much more "pretentious" than anything that I said.

>

> You are joking right ? Tell me you are joking, please!

> In most RPG and MMORPG games Ranger = Hunter and Hunter = Ranger. What is a hunter in culture of every population in real life also in games, fairy tales, legends ?

> Someone who hunt with RANGE weapon, this means their MAIN weapon and powerful one is a Range Weapon. Most of hunters in the past used Bow like range weapon due to the fact is the weapon with highest range, but also spear, crossbow (another kind of Bow) or boomerang. Ofc are many range weapons but most knew is Bow. Hunters/Rangers use knife for final shot, when the prey is down but not dead or for skinning. I don't know from where did you get that knife is the hunter/ranger main weapon ....

> I don't understand why did you say about Aragorn when the best character who can be compared with Rangers/Hunters from games (RPG, MMORPG) is Legolas, he is the real Hunter, the one who merge with the nature, the forest ... and his main weapon (even in game Lord of the Rings) is Bow!

 

 

Guild Wars(and MMOs in general) Ranger has normaly this "ranger is ranged" vibe and I am fine with it. But Legolas is more like bow Warrior/Fighter from normal rpgs. Ranger is commonly(but not always) just a dude who excels tracking in wilderness and using nature at his advantage.(Like Aragorn.) f.e:

D&D Ranger is nature magic fighter who works either way melee or ranged

Dragon Age Ranger is a pet class(rogue) who is more beefy than normal rogue.

 

Both ways are right and you could argue that Legolas is a tracker also. But I think it is wrong to assume that ranger means only range or that range should be stronger. Feels limiting to me.

 

[Lazze.9870]

> @Dragonzhunter.8506 said:

> > @Sojourner.4621 said:

> > In the "Fantasy Game Archetype".... which fantasy game? GW1 sure... but a lot of fantasy games have melee rangers... including tabletops. In fact the TRADITIONAL fantasy ranger in a large majority of games, including other MMOs, is a hybrid... able to use melee AND bows proficiently with limited drawbacks. Arguing that Ranger should have stronger bow abilities because it would better fit YOUR vision of what the ranger should be is conceited and much more "pretentious" than anything that I said.

>

> You are joking right ? Tell me you are joking, please!

> In most RPG and MMORPG games Ranger = Hunter and Hunter = Ranger.

 

Not really. Some games use one or the other for the "general same archetype class", but they literally doesn't mean the same thing. Sometimes they throw in "rouge" in there aswell. It gets pretty expansive at that point... In that sense it makes perfect sense for the profession in GW2 game to be named ranger because it's not just a simple archer. But why do I bother. Go play something else if your not happy with GW2 and you wanna play an archer.

 

As for the intentions with soulbeast? Isn't that obvious? It's our version of warrior's berserker. I've repeated the flaws and problems with soulbeast over and over again, but its actual intention is pretty obvious to me. And what was the intention with the berserker? Just a general damage oriented spec.

[Dragonzhunter.8506]

> @Lazze.9870 said:

> Not really. Some games use one or the other for the "general same archetype class", but they literally doesn't mean the same thing. Sometimes they throw in "rouge" in there aswell. It gets pretty expansive at that point... In that sense it makes perfect sense for the profession in GW2 game to be named ranger because it's not just a simple archer. But why do I bother. Go play something else if your not happy with GW2 and you wanna play an archer.

> @Caccis.9087 said:

> Guild Wars(and MMOs in general) Ranger has normaly this "ranger is ranged" vibe and I am fine with it. But Legolas is more like bow Warrior/Fighter from normal rpgs. Ranger is commonly(but not always) just a dude who excels tracking in wilderness and using nature at his advantage.(Like Aragorn.) f.e:

> D&D Ranger is nature magic fighter who works either way melee or ranged

> Dragon Age Ranger is a pet class(rogue) who is more beefy than normal rogue.

>

> Both ways are right and you could argue that Legolas is a tracker also. But I think it is wrong to assume that ranger means only range or that range should be stronger. Feels limiting to me.

 

This is my last post regarding what is or not a Ranger. On this post we talk about Ranger and his specialization Soulbeast. I don't want to argue more what Ranger means in MOST of very well known MMORP and RPG. For last time, look on every Poster, pictures who shows Ranger in every MMORP and RPG well known games and you will see Ranger or the classes who have almost the same specialization but different name, has a BOW. And if you ask people from those games I written about Rangeryou will see that most of them will thinking about a range class with Bow and ofc another second weapon/weapons.

 

Lazze, every player I know since Beta, when they choose class Ranger in GW2 and also in other MMORPG they choosed for BOW and Range fight! OK?! Even you did this if you are a real ranger player. None of us (the real ranger player who love to play ranger) didn't choose Ranger because we thought in the future our main build will be like warrior, thief etc. So I played GW1 and GW2 since beta, I spent a lot of money on this game , time and emotions ... so is my right to say what I learn from my experience in this game and other games. You can go and play something else if you want Ranger to be Guardian, Warrior or whatever you want.

 

Caccis, this post is not about what Legolas or Aragorn truly are ... and my discussion start based on the fact in normal way Ranger should have Bow. Ofc this dosen't means he can wear only Bow. Even in vanila we were good with build Bow+GS ... again even I like GS (I have legendary one) I think the main build should be Longbow+Sword(Dagger) + Warhorn (Torch). Greatsword normally is for Warrior, Guardian. I don't want to talk about Necro, Mesmer wearing GS .... they just wanted (ANET I mean) to change all known mechanics of old classes, and it's ok.

 

So stop to argue with me about fact Ranger dosen't mean someone who should have Bow!

Guild Wars 1 and 2 (vanila), World of Warcraft , BDO, DOTA, AION, Lineage - Archer, TERA Online , RIFT ,Age of Conan, Diablo (these are the best MMORPG and RPG ever) in all these, Ranger representative weapon is a BOW!

 

Now let's talk about real issues ... the useless traits, utilities, elite from new specialization Soulbeast. About all bugs, pet damage etc

 

 

[Kilrik.6320]

I know this is only fueling the off-topic ranger argument but there is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger (under Fiction and games- character, class) and this http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Ranger from the original Guild Wars to back up Dragonhunterz point. Also they did in fact change the description (probably because of these semantic arguments) for the Guild Wars 2 description of ranger which did also indicate a mastery of ranged weaponry either including or insinuating the bow. I do NOT think the class has to be ranged. I entered into the class with ranged weaponry in mind, am currently using a ranged build, but I've used many melee builds as well. That being said, the general consensus is that ranger is a ranged class for the most part.

[Lazze.9870]

> @Dragonzhunter.8506 said:

> > @Lazze.9870 said:

> > Not really. Some games use one or the other for the "general same archetype class", but they literally doesn't mean the same thing. Sometimes they throw in "rouge" in there aswell. It gets pretty expansive at that point... In that sense it makes perfect sense for the profession in GW2 game to be named ranger because it's not just a simple archer. But why do I bother. Go play something else if your not happy with GW2 and you wanna play an archer.

> > @Caccis.9087 said:

> > Guild Wars(and MMOs in general) Ranger has normaly this "ranger is ranged" vibe and I am fine with it. But Legolas is more like bow Warrior/Fighter from normal rpgs. Ranger is commonly(but not always) just a dude who excels tracking in wilderness and using nature at his advantage.(Like Aragorn.) f.e:

> > D&D Ranger is nature magic fighter who works either way melee or ranged

> > Dragon Age Ranger is a pet class(rogue) who is more beefy than normal rogue.

> >

> > Both ways are right and you could argue that Legolas is a tracker also. But I think it is wrong to assume that ranger means only range or that range should be stronger. Feels limiting to me.

>

> This is my last post regarding what is or not a Ranger. On this post we talk about Ranger and his specialization Soulbeast. I don't want to argue more what Ranger means in MOST of very well known MMORP and RPG. For last time, look on every Poster, pictures who shows Ranger in every MMORP and RPG well known games and you will see Ranger or the classes who have almost the same specialization but different name, has a BOW. And if you ask people from those games I written about Rangeryou will see that most of them will thinking about a range class with Bow and ofc another second weapon/weapons.

>

> Lazze, every player I know since Beta, when they choose class Ranger in GW2 and also in other MMORPG they choosed for BOW and Range fight! OK?! Even you did this if you are a real ranger player. None of us (the real ranger player who love to play ranger) didn't choose Ranger because we thought in the future our main build will be like warrior, thief etc. So I played GW1 and GW2 since beta, I spent a lot of money on this game , time and emotions ... so is my right to say what I learn from my experience in this game and other games. You can go and play something else if you want Ranger to be Guardian, Warrior or whatever you want.

>

> Caccis, this post is not about what Legolas or Aragorn truly are ... and my discussion start based on the fact in normal way Ranger should have Bow. Ofc this dosen't means he can wear only Bow. Even in vanila we were good with build Bow+GS ... again even I like GS (I have legendary one) I think the main build should be Longbow+Sword(Dagger) + Warhorn (Torch). Greatsword normally is for Warrior, Guardian. I don't want to talk about Necro, Mesmer wearing GS .... they just wanted (ANET I mean) to change all known mechanics of old classes, and it's ok.

>

> So stop to argue with me about fact Ranger dosen't mean someone who should have Bow!

> Guild Wars 1 and 2 (vanila), World of Warcraft , BDO, DOTA, AION, Lineage - Archer, TERA Online , RIFT ,Age of Conan, Diablo (these are the best MMORPG and RPG ever) in all these, Ranger representative weapon is a BOW!

>

> Now let's talk about real issues ... the useless traits, utilities, elite from new specialization Soulbeast. About all bugs, pet damage etc

>

>

 

> @Dragonzhunter.8506 said:

> > @Lazze.9870 said:

> > Not really. Some games use one or the other for the "general same archetype class", but they literally doesn't mean the same thing. Sometimes they throw in "rouge" in there aswell. It gets pretty expansive at that point... In that sense it makes perfect sense for the profession in GW2 game to be named ranger because it's not just a simple archer. But why do I bother. Go play something else if your not happy with GW2 and you wanna play an archer.

> > @Caccis.9087 said:

> > Guild Wars(and MMOs in general) Ranger has normaly this "ranger is ranged" vibe and I am fine with it. But Legolas is more like bow Warrior/Fighter from normal rpgs. Ranger is commonly(but not always) just a dude who excels tracking in wilderness and using nature at his advantage.(Like Aragorn.) f.e:

> > D&D Ranger is nature magic fighter who works either way melee or ranged

> > Dragon Age Ranger is a pet class(rogue) who is more beefy than normal rogue.

> >

> > Both ways are right and you could argue that Legolas is a tracker also. But I think it is wrong to assume that ranger means only range or that range should be stronger. Feels limiting to me.

>

> This is my last post regarding what is or not a Ranger. On this post we talk about Ranger and his specialization Soulbeast. I don't want to argue more what Ranger means in MOST of very well known MMORP and RPG. For last time, look on every Poster, pictures who shows Ranger in every MMORP and RPG well known games and you will see Ranger or the classes who have almost the same specialization but different name, has a BOW. And if you ask people from those games I written about Rangeryou will see that most of them will thinking about a range class with Bow and ofc another second weapon/weapons.

>

> Lazze, every player I know since Beta, when they choose class Ranger in GW2 and also in other MMORPG they choosed for BOW and Range fight! OK?! Even you did this if you are a real ranger player. None of us (the real ranger player who love to play ranger) didn't choose Ranger because we thought in the future our main build will be like warrior, thief etc. So I played GW1 and GW2 since beta, I spent a lot of money on this game , time and emotions ... so is my right to say what I learn from my experience in this game and other games. You can go and play something else if you want Ranger to be Guardian, Warrior or whatever you want.

>

> Caccis, this post is not about what Legolas or Aragorn truly are ... and my discussion start based on the fact in normal way Ranger should have Bow. Ofc this dosen't means he can wear only Bow. Even in vanila we were good with build Bow+GS ... again even I like GS (I have legendary one) I think the main build should be Longbow+Sword(Dagger) + Warhorn (Torch). Greatsword normally is for Warrior, Guardian. I don't want to talk about Necro, Mesmer wearing GS .... they just wanted (ANET I mean) to change all known mechanics of old classes, and it's ok.

>

> So stop to argue with me about fact Ranger dosen't mean someone who should have Bow!

> Guild Wars 1 and 2 (vanila), World of Warcraft , BDO, DOTA, AION, Lineage - Archer, TERA Online , RIFT ,Age of Conan, Diablo (these are the best MMORPG and RPG ever) in all these, Ranger representative weapon is a BOW!

>

> Now let's talk about real issues ... the useless traits, utilities, elite from new specialization Soulbeast. About all bugs, pet damage etc

>

>

 

Lol, ”real ranger“. Okay, if we’re gonna play that game: I played two professions in gw1. Ranger and dervish, so ranger become the obvious choice in GW2. You know why I liked ranger in gw1? Because of all the build choices, INCLUDING dagger, hammer and scythe builds that took adventage of the expertise attribute. Expertise was the main attribute for ranger in gw1, you were by no means tied to a bow. The design of the game however made it natural to tie marksmanship attribute to the ranger profession. Any other profession could pick ranger as a secondary profession and run bows.

 

So get over yourself. And no I, while I like bows, I didn’t pick ranger just to play bow builds. And you’re extremely out of touch with this game if you think an all out ranged profession would even work.

 

Not wasting any more time on this nonsense. Ranger isn’t THE bow profession in this game, it’s a profession with bows. Learn the difference.

[InsaneQR.7412]

> @ZyniX.3589 said:

> > @extremexhero.9178 said:

> > why does everyone want power builds? I love condition builds

>

> Enjoy your condition builds then. I want build diversity.

 

I have to agree to the later. I really like condi builds and want to play Sbeast hybrid style, but build diversity and give Power better viability would only benefit the profession.

[ArmageddonAsh.6430]

I love how i started this to at least try to get Anets attention about all the issues and everything the spec has, its in a worse state than Scourge and yet they seem to only care about talking to necro players because most of them are upset that they FINALLY got a little bit more balanced when it comes to 2/3 of the game modes. But here, got people debating what a ranger is lol

[Ghotistyx.6942]

> @"Substance E.4852" said:

> Don't be pretentious. You know full well that the fantasy game archetype "Ranger" is a bow user. Even the GW1 ranger used *5* (ftfy) types of bows as it's weapons. We're also the only class that has access to both bow types as well as having an entire line named "Marksmanship" while not using firearms.

 

What, you mean the GW1 rangers that had builds like Bunny Thumper, Touch Ranger, Spear Pressure, and Dagger Spammer?

Or Lord of the Rings where Aragon often featured a Sword and Torch? (The reason GW2 rangers have torch)

Or Dungeons and Dragons where Rangers have had melee fighting styles since at least 2nd Edition? (1989)

 

Ranger is more than just a bow.

[ArmageddonAsh.6430]

> @InsaneQR.7412 said:

> For the soulbeast itself it seems like a hybrid dmg melee oriented E-spec. It needs improvements in traits, skills and mechanics.

> But it seems to have 3 distinctive roles. 1 Boon heavy, condi/dmg heavy, utility/defensive heavy.

> Anet needs to improve on them and streamline them to make this E-Spec shine.

 

The problem here is clear, of what it can do , other classes and even Base/Druid Ranger can do just as well. If not better. Ignoring all the broken abilities, traits and such. The Dagger just is NOWHERE near strong enough, it does poor direct damage, poor condi damage and just overall is meh. Soulbeast needs a LOT of work, it needs its OWN role, something that Ranger or Druid cant do.

 

An idea could be to change Predators Cunning to also remove/corrupt a boon when applying Poison. Maybe make the bottom line of Soul Beast traits based around Poison application. It would be an issue with Unstoppable Union as quite a few use that but Oppressive Superiority kinda, really sucks! so it wouldnt be too bad if they changed that to something Condi/Poison related

 

 

[Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582]

> @Ghotistyx.6942 said:

> > @"Substance E.4852" said:

> > Don't be pretentious. You know full well that the fantasy game archetype "Ranger" is a bow user. Even the GW1 ranger used *5* (ftfy) types of bows as it's weapons. We're also the only class that has access to both bow types as well as having an entire line named "Marksmanship" while not using firearms.

>

> What, you mean the GW1 rangers that had builds like Bunny Thumper, Touch Ranger, Spear Pressure, and Dagger Spammer?

> Or Lord of the Rings where Aragon often featured a Sword and Torch? (The reason GW2 rangers have torch)

> Or Dungeons and Dragons where Rangers have had melee fighting styles since at least 2nd Edition? (1989)

>

> Ranger is more than just a bow.

 

Don't forget Scythe Ranger which was pretty epic, or Spear/Shield SF farmer, Staff trapper, 40/40 Spirit Ranger etc etc.

[Dragonzhunter.8506]

Guys, don't talk anymore about Ranger and Bow, because you are far away of what I said. In every games representative weapon for Ranger was Bow, if developers later in every patch, or second version of the game they add another weapon and build, this is something else!!! Next expansion maybe Anet will make Ranger to wear guns and maybe this will be the most powerful build for Ranger, but this doesn't mean guns are representative weapons for Ranger. You have completely deviated from the subject. It's not about a weapon or a build is not better than bow or beastmastery build ... Developers can do whatever they want, if they want can make hairpin to be best weapon for Ranger .... but I talk about what is representative weapon , and in any games, fairy tail, legends each class have his representative weapon. Thats all.

For example before Dragonhunter if anyone of you want to play a class with Bow, a class who can wear Longbow and can be competitive with this weapon, which was that class?! Well this dosen't mean something ? Why the best class who had Longbow for more than 2 years was Ranger? I think this is the right answer.

 

Now a question for Rangers only ... in your opinion what is the best build to kill a good Mirage, because atm I can beat all classes or at least I can handle , only Mirage (when a good player is playing) beat me, and I tried every kind of builds, weapons .... I didn't tried yet condi builds because of short range and in W3 from my pov power build is much better.

It is any way to kill a good Mirage, or is one of OP class atm, in my opinion is.

[draxynnic.3719]

Here's the thing:

 

Bows, and ranged weapons in general, are a pretty significant factor in the image of a ranger: which makes sense when you consider their role. For hunting, scouting, patrolling an area for poachers, and a variety of other tasks you could typically see a ranger doing... having a ranged weapon is pretty useful, and bows are pretty good ranged weapons.

 

However, rangers aren't obligated to use bows. Some specialise in them, some regard them as a situational weapon while preferring something else, others rely on something else for ranged capability, including thrown weapons or firearms (referring to general fantasy here, not GW2-specific).

 

Furthermore, game balance considerations pretty much require that range has a tradeoff. If you had a 1500 range weapon that was in all other respects identical to a 130 range weapon, then obviously everyone would use the 1500 range weapon. Generally speaking, the tradeoff is that the long-range weapons offer less damage output, less active defences, or both compared to melee equivalents.

 

Ranger is _already_ in a position where going melee doesn't offer much additional DPS to bows. For greatsword and to a lesser extent sword/X, drawing your melee weapon is not something you do in order to do more damage, it's something that you do in order to receive the defensive and mobility benefits of those sets. Because of this, the state of affairs that you appear to be asking for _already exists_ - nearly all DPS-oriented ranger specs have a bow as one of their swaps, whether longbow for power or shortbow for conditions. Arguably, I would say that this is a _problem_ for rangers: when longbow is one of their best DPS options, this is essentially saying that their best DPS options are on par with something that is balanced against having one of the longest ranges in the game. Which generally means that their DPS is going to be lower than professions that are intended to do their best DPS in melee.

[extremexhero.9178]

Going back on topic, I mean there were a lot of additional pet skills that were added, new pets, and the whole merge ability. After every new game addition there will always be balances and bug fixes. I rather have had PoF come out than them working on soul beast longer....

[vicious.5683]

> @ArmageddonAsh.6430 said:

> > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > You are exactly right.

> >

> > This is the reason ANet hardly responds to forum questions, people do not like to be attacked and that is pretty much what they get when they do respond. Framing the thread as an attack to begin with is counter-productive.

>

> Well, if they weren't making such basic mistakes. Then maybe people wouldnt be calling them out on it. Soul Beast feels like it wasnt finished. It feels like it is in BETA test mode. Riddled with issues. They constantly release updates that add bugs and issues - this new visual effect bug that has been happening is only another example in a LONG list of issues that Anet themselves have allowed to get into the game with their "testing" of updates before just rushing them out. What is worse, the bugs and issues they release take them an age to fix.

>

> It gets to the point, where when the big "balance" update comes - You play a game of "Is this intended or a bug" with pretty much everything that they add, because they constantly add bugs and issues, then add changes that they dont list either.

>

 

You should stop crying like a baby. Start posting some constructive criticism.

If you talk about bugs, report them, explain what's wrong and how it should work.

Is your spec not performing as you wish it would? well, wait in line.

 

Also you should spend less time in other profession forums, complaining about the same thing you complain here. It's annoying af.

[Wondrouswall.7169]

At the end of the day, does it really matter? They don't have really have to explain since Soulbeast is the result of suggestions made over the years.

 

The entire melding with pets and gaining extra stats: a suggestion on the first Ranger CDI more than 5 years ago. A main hand dagger as melee condition weapon with a gap closer. Check. Stances. Check. People asked for it - they gave it. May not be exactly what people asked for, but as with all things, be careful what you wish for.

 

At this point, just let the bug fixes roll out. Not justifying some of the lackluster aspects either, mind you. Thank goodness there are options.

[Fluffball.8307]

> @Wondrouswall.7169 said:

> At the end of the day, does it really matter? They don't have really have to explain since Soulbeast is the result of suggestions made over the years.

>

> The entire melding with pets and gaining extra stats: a suggestion on the first Ranger CDI more than 5 years ago. A main hand dagger as melee condition weapon with a gap closer. Check. Stances. Check. People asked for it - they gave it. May not be exactly what people asked for, but as with all things, be careful what you wish for.

>

> At this point, just let the bug fixes roll out. Not justifying some of the lackluster aspects either, mind you. Thank goodness there are options.

 

Ya I honestly feel bad for the devs. They gave the community EXACTLY what they wanted. Only problem was the community had no fucking shit idea what they were talking about and also most of them didn't even play ranger.

[Zenith.7301]

> @Fluffball.8307 said:

> > @Wondrouswall.7169 said:

> > At the end of the day, does it really matter? They don't have really have to explain since Soulbeast is the result of suggestions made over the years.

> >

> > The entire melding with pets and gaining extra stats: a suggestion on the first Ranger CDI more than 5 years ago. A main hand dagger as melee condition weapon with a gap closer. Check. Stances. Check. People asked for it - they gave it. May not be exactly what people asked for, but as with all things, be careful what you wish for.

> >

> > At this point, just let the bug fixes roll out. Not justifying some of the lackluster aspects either, mind you. Thank goodness there are options.

>

> Ya I honestly feel bad for the devs. They gave the community EXACTLY what they wanted. Only problem was the community had no kitten kitten idea what they were talking about and also most of them didn't even play ranger.

 

No, they didn't give what was wanted.

 

They gave a whole traitline full of garbage traits outside Oppressive Superiority. Nobody asked for that. They asked for stances, but not pathetically weak stances that are a way worse version of warrior stances.

 

And when they asked for pet merging, they didn't ask for a feline bite that does even less damage than the pet version.

 

Or that Worldly impact be an animation locked stomp that has an even lesser chance to hit a moving target than the very own Hitl Bash, former king of all failed skills.

 

Nor did they ask to be hassled with having to re-merge every time you're downed, dismounted, or touch water, and that doing any of those will put the merging on cooldown.

 

Nor did they ask for incredibly bland animations. Bite is virtually the daredevil's palm strike copy pasted. They could have done a spirit bite animation. They could have given mainhand dagger half the animation attention spellbreaker dagger got.

 

All soulbeast gained visually was a green swirl. The rest of the spec is half baked.

 

Hell, the reason condi soulbeast is strong is purely because of a numbers buff to dagger and oppressive superiority making up for previous nerfs to condi ranger.

 

And even then, our new elite spec boils down to the exact same playstyle of old core condi ranger, but with a dagger instead of axe.

 

Same boring utilities, same old quickdraw playstyle.

 

It's even kind of bewildering that a spec like soul beast was made a condition spec when ranger has had nothing but dominant condition specs, while it was power specs and greatsword particularly that have needed significant boosts and fleshing out.

[ArmageddonAsh.6430]

> @Fluffball.8307 said:

> > @Wondrouswall.7169 said:

> > At the end of the day, does it really matter? They don't have really have to explain since Soulbeast is the result of suggestions made over the years.

> >

> > The entire melding with pets and gaining extra stats: a suggestion on the first Ranger CDI more than 5 years ago. A main hand dagger as melee condition weapon with a gap closer. Check. Stances. Check. People asked for it - they gave it. May not be exactly what people asked for, but as with all things, be careful what you wish for.

> >

> > At this point, just let the bug fixes roll out. Not justifying some of the lackluster aspects either, mind you. Thank goodness there are options.

>

> Ya I honestly feel bad for the devs. They gave the community EXACTLY what they wanted. Only problem was the community had no kitten kitten idea what they were talking about and also most of them didn't even play ranger.

 

When did the player base ask for a spec riddled with issues and bugs? I must have missed that. Again, i have no problem with the spec, i like it. Its the bugs and issues that SHOULD Have been fixed before the game came out that annoys me. How many bugs and issues does this spec have? quite a lot. I could understand the odd bug getting through testing (assuming they do actually test anything...) but this much? Nah. Not at all.

 

Balancing aside (its Anet. I never expect balance...) The spec can be fun to play, but having to play around bugs and issues, having to use certain skills and such because others either have limited or no function at all, having to avoid water like the plague and everything else should not have made it through into release.

[ArmageddonAsh.6430]

> @vicious.5683 said:

> > @ArmageddonAsh.6430 said:

> > > @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > > You are exactly right.

> > >

> > > This is the reason ANet hardly responds to forum questions, people do not like to be attacked and that is pretty much what they get when they do respond. Framing the thread as an attack to begin with is counter-productive.

> >

> > Well, if they weren't making such basic mistakes. Then maybe people wouldnt be calling them out on it. Soul Beast feels like it wasnt finished. It feels like it is in BETA test mode. Riddled with issues. They constantly release updates that add bugs and issues - this new visual effect bug that has been happening is only another example in a LONG list of issues that Anet themselves have allowed to get into the game with their "testing" of updates before just rushing them out. What is worse, the bugs and issues they release take them an age to fix.

> >

> > It gets to the point, where when the big "balance" update comes - You play a game of "Is this intended or a bug" with pretty much everything that they add, because they constantly add bugs and issues, then add changes that they dont list either.

> >

>

> You should stop crying like a baby. Start posting some constructive criticism.

> If you talk about bugs, report them, explain what's wrong and how it should work.

> Is your spec not performing as you wish it would? well, wait in line.

>

> Also you should spend less time in other profession forums, complaining about the same thing you complain here. It's annoying af.

 

Why? When was the last time they came into these forums? I posted a list of the bugs in a quote to one of them in another thread, it got removed and i got warned about it. There are MANY threads pointing out all the issues. I have posted quite a few ideas on how to improve the spec myself though balance should be done AFTER the bugs and issues have been fixed. Just like what they are doing with Necro and their game breaking bug. That i give them credit for, always fix bugs before you buff/nerf anything but MANY of the bus and issues Soul Beast have shouldnt have even made it into the game and you just have to question maybe its time they sorted out their pre-release checks and tests as they do this ALL the time be it with game updates or expansion releases, some bugs are expected - Anet level of bugs is insane.

 

I love Soul Beast, its been pretty much all i have played since PoF came out, its not that its a bad spec. Its all the bugs and issues that annoy me. yes their are balance changes that i would love to see happen and i have posted in many threads on here about how Dagger and the stances could be improved.