| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (18)

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 4:26PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Change is not inherently bad.Frequent unending tinkering will kill a game.DAOC is one example that comes to mind.

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 7:21PM Sephirah said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
WoW has frequent changes to classes/abilities/items and it doesn't seem dying to me.
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 4:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I just rolled a ranger alt on the pvp server last week and i'm level 23 now. I've been having much fun despite it's my first char on the pvp server and these changes are going to take my fun away i assume. I mean what a horrible idea for combos or i just didn't understand it a bit... and SALVO???? I WAS JUST CHARGING UP MAH SALVO!!!!

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 5:07PM Jef Reahard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well the changes may not take your fun away, but they probably will add some additional time to learning how to play the class. I'm sitting at 53 on my main and I may park him for a bit to see what happens. There are lots of other interesting classes to play in AoC.
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 5:23PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes, certainly there are! My main is a Bear Shaman and i have hox,dt,sin and this ranger as an alt. I just hope i can keep enjoying my ranger because playing it on a pvp server it was so fun and different from my bs on a pve server.
Reply

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 5:07PM DiscordSK said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can't help but think that the end result of this is going to be a one spec class. Once the "perfect" balance between the two trees is figured out everyone will use that build, and with zero difference between bow and xbow, the only difference between one ranger and another will remain cosmetic.

In theory, sure, people could now create more varied builds... but years of MMO experiance has shown me that players will always flock to the best build on the block.

That said, the other problem that is sure to crop up is balance. Will rangers come out of this OPed or UPed is still in question.. but its safe to say we won't be "fine" for a while to come.

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 5:46PM Deadalon said

  • Half a heart
  • Report
"Balance" is what kills MMO games. Double balance (pve and pvp) leads to double the trouble. Usually it means noone is happy with the changes and turning the class into more of the others (after all that is the perfect balance).

So... AOC is a pve/pvp game. Small game with small budget and very small testing team... Changes will not be "balanced" for both PVP and PVE. Thats just a fact. Happy medium is a funny word in MMOs... Funny until it hits you that sub based MMOs earn most their money by nerfing and buffing things on regulare basis.

Posted: Jun 6th 2010 9:01PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Deadalon never has anything good to say about Conan. Apparently he's still butthurt because DX10 didn't work right at launch so he can't help but pipe in on every Conan article dissing Funcom... hence the time honored refrain -

Deadalon, it's you and your crappy computer.

That said, I don't have a high level ranger myself, but those in my guild who do are hesitantly positive. I guess there were a lot of things about that class that, once you got to 80, became hard to deal with. So, here's crossing our fingers that their tweaking makes sense... lord knows the game has gotten better and better since the 'big turnaround' so I don't see any reason to insult the devs before we see how the changes actually affect gameplay.
Reply

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 12:57AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Deadalon, it's you and your crappy computer."

Definately a catchphrase there...

Actually AoC does seem to attact crazy "haters". Deadalon on Massively and on MMORPG there are a few aswell IceIce and finacticD spring to mind.

Weird how people who dislike a game hang around and continuely post over and post on forums of games they dislike. I don't like STO, but I rarely comment on it, I got better things to do (like play AoC - which my little bunch of haters is a great game!).

Bloo

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 8:44AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
lol - this is a whole other article, but I see what you mean. I'd be lying if I said I hadn't gotten stuck on games just like Deadalon has though. I try not to comment, but sometimes it takes effort. STO was one for me for a while, just because I was so tremendously disappointed in the end product I think. Likewise with Global Agenda.

So, how about a psychological article Massively - what is it about MMOs or MMOers that generate such passionate responses when we feel slighted or dissappointed about a game or by a company? I had high hopes for STO and a lot of ideas about what it could be - why is it so hard to move on when it didn't pan out?
Reply

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 1:24AM DiscordSK said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Having spoken to a few more rangers from my guild the general impression amongst us is wariness. This seems from start to finish a change made to cater to the PVP player, specificlly and without any apperent care for raid viability.

That in itself, not a bad thing except that AOC probably has the most bug ridden, exploit filled PVP this side of a F2P shooter. PVP levels are gained, almost exclusively these days from farming nodes in supposed "PVP zones" that actually contain zero PVP. Guildes avoid fighting each other like the plague, seiges are laggy, crashy, and often completely on sided where multiple high PVP level guilds team up verse a lower end one. Minigames, the only place a solo player can compete without having 23 other people back him up are the exclusive playground of the premade groups. The occasional time you don't end up fighting a premade, you end up with five mouth breathing idiots since anyone with half a brain has long been driven off.

That said, I still enjoy the PVE element of AOC a ton, its a beautiful game and the classes are fairly fun to play, which brings me full circle to my original feeling of wariness.. I really hope they don't screw this up for the rest of us and this really isn't something that pigeonholes us as a pure PVP class.

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 8:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Doh! better PvP rangers? Man, if there are more than one in a mini I get seriously chewed up.

I agree with your comments regarding Bori though. Funcom has some tough decisions to make if they ever want PvP rebalanced again. They can't merely stop the Bori farming without taking back all those PvP levels given away or no one will ever catch up to all those Bori farming PvP 7 and 8s.
Reply

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 11:57AM Jef Reahard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree, it does seem PvP-centric on paper, which is somewhat disappointing. I don't have the numbers, but I'll wager that AoC population percentages are no different than any other AAA MMO: a vocal minority PvP and the majority PvE.

Regardless, I think wariness is an appropriate word. It's too early to jump the gun and get upset, but at the same time, PvE rangers don't need any fixing...
Reply

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 12:27PM Sleven701 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
While the changes seem like an interesting idea of sorts I kind of liked the how after roughly 2 years I could come back to my ranger and easily pick up the game again. I sort of missed the old linebreaker feat for crossbow but it was pretty broken in its implementation.

What I will say is this will most likely force me to shelve my ranger for the time being and play with alts or my main DT.

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 2:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
AoC is my staple game. I don't mind the class changes due the the high availability of playing other classes and still having a lot of fun on them. So, if they bork the ranger, I won't be too upset. Plus, it's nice to have things shaken up from time to time. And let's face it, the Ranger IS the "douchebag" class of AoC. I have pissed so many people off and have thusly been pissed off myself from other Rangers. Fun class!

But one thing that bothered me about the class is the horrible single target grind of the bow. I would have LOVED the opportunity to switch weapons based on the situation. I feel the bow is superior for pvp (single target/great CC) and the xbow for pve (AoE grinding).

/my two cents


Posted: Jun 7th 2010 2:54PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Some of you may remember me. I used to be one of the two Ranger Advocates (players who reported to Funcom on the issues of their class). I quit, over a year ago, both from Advocacy and the game because of long term issues and Craig Morrisson's stated and documented refusal to address them.

Or rather, to allow Ilaliya to address them. I am glad that Ilaliya is finally getting his chance to shine. Further, I'm glad that bows ad crossbows are being normalised because frankly, the endless cycle of balance changes and "bow is better this week - stfu xbow > all" thing gets old and this way, nobody needs to change their whole spec just because one loot-item drops and another won't.

As for "what self-respecting ranger uses melee these days" - well, I did. And I made a point of killing just about every damn class (except for soldiers and demonologists who were basically DA:O Arcane Warriors with all their armour buffs) with just melee weapons as often as I could.

Being able to use melee is the difference between a good ranger and crappy rangers who just hang at the back and go "plink" - letting others take all the risks is no way to enjoy a game.

I hope Ilaliya makes a success of this. I may even re-up for a month and see for myself.

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 5:23PM Jef Reahard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Actually the way to enjoy a game is whatever way you want, and frankly there's zero risk in AoC PvP, nor has there ever been any.

Some PvPers seem to think their way is the one true path (goes with their type-A arrogance/aggressiveness I guess), when in reality it's a niche play style.

That said, I'm always glad to see people coming back to check things out.

/salute
Reply

Posted: Jun 7th 2010 11:08PM DiscordSK said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
While I have no problem with, and even encourage, diversity in both gameplay and builds I can't shake the feeling that this is going to have the exact opposite effect. By breaking away from having a actual choice between weapon types and having one specificlly good for one role while the other covers a second, you end up having a class where the only difference between one ranger and the other is the icon that represents its attacks. Sooner or later an optimal build will be discovered and everyone will just stick with that. Thats just lazy, copy and paste, gameplay.

Specifically I think the problem that exists right now may be the current crop of ranger advocates and while this may possibly be imagined the impression my fellow guildies and I are getting is that neither seems particularly interested in the PVE aspect of the class. This may partially be due to WoW though, coming from that game I am used to having discussions about my prefered class that included hard numbers, (self appointed) advocates who knew what the hit/crit/dex caps and being able to crunch hard numbers to get that last sliver of DPS out of the class.. I just find the ranger discussions rather... weak? The advocates talk in generalities, nobody number crunches and there is little to no theorycrafting about how to improve us in raids.

I'm adopting a wait and see approach to this patch, AOC pulled it off once with a late life gameplay change so who knows.. but generally speaking, people really end up hating having a class dramatically shift so late in a games life.
Reply

Featured Stories

Global Chat: Blaugust triumphant

Posted on Sep 16th 2014 8:00PM

Massively Speaking Episode 313: ArcheRivals

Posted on Sep 16th 2014 6:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW