Why hate rangers?

[Malderon]

I play GW2 since release and was never serious about pve side but lately became and I found out that many MANY people don't like ranger to the point leaving party cuaz I join without even playing with me before... And they mention bear as well. What's their problem?

[Karizee]

Bearbow rangers are notorious for being bad and pulling everything from 3 states away. This build will help you be better so you can make dungeon friends

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/...uide-for-real/

[Malderon]

So, you are telling me, if I want to be a good ranger, I can't use core range weapons?? Maybe they are not core for you, but all RPG I played, ranger or hunter with pet had bow as primary weapon. I guess it's time to change a class... or game

[Deleted]

I'm sure Karizee was only posting a suggestion and not actually insisting you change. If you want to be an archetypal ranger then be so and help change peoples opinions rather than give up.

If you work on your class mechanics and don't become one of "those" rangers then why would anyone have a problem running content with you.

GL in the game and have fun after all, that's why we play isn't it?

[The Kao]

Rather you'll have to rethink your definition of classes. In most games they are bound to a certain play style through core components. This was shifted in GW2 to the extend that most classes can be used in many different ways - you can be melee as Ranger or Elementalist or ranged as Warrior, you can literally do as you please. There is no such thing as a "core weapon" for your class. What you make out of that is very much your own choice, something people still seem to not fully understand about GW2. Yes, there are some builds for each class that evidently perform better than others in many situations. You asked how to perform better and so an answer was given, nothing wrong about that. But you don't have to listen to people telling you "how to play". Just keep in mind that GW2 is a game that leaves many doors open, unlike WoW for example where your best DPS spec and gear was, is and will always be nailed.

[Deleted]

If you meet people that aren't prepared running a dungeon with you before they even talked to you, let alone let you play... why bother? I leave such parties myself :')

Don't worry too much about it. You'll always have naggers, anywhere. Also in other games. Don't let it spoil the good sides =) There's still a ton of nice people out there.

[Arlee]

Pretty much What Silverbleed said. Also if you are finding groups through the Group Finder tool, pay attention to the description about the dungeon runs. In general people who put they want to do a speed run are more often looking for specific classes/builds.

[Deleted]

That, exactly.

It happened to me yesterday as well. I joined a party with my boyfriend. I said 'brb on my mesmer' (I was on my warrior when I joined). Without a word, they kicked me before I was even on my mesmer. No reason why. Apparently they don't want to play with a mesmer. But they didn't say why. No matter how good or bad I am. So my boyfriend left the party too, because we refuse to join such people.

So... we blocked them =) It can help to avoid them again in the future.
I didn't see if they were a guild, but one thing I try to avoid is guilds. They talk behind your back and you have no idea what will happen. If just one isn't satisfied with you, you risk a kick.

It happens to anyone, no matter what class. So really, don't worry about it :')

[Deleted]

Also because (some) people actually think that needing to do max DPS is a thing in GW2, and there's the perception that Rangers don't do as much DPS as other classes.

Some do decent damage, many don't. But... A lot of people can't handle their pet, and with a dead pet they are just standing there autoattacking in their supercool signetbuild, missing out on all the damage their pet would bring.
/L

[Meledelion]

I play GW2 since release and was never serious about pve side but lately became and I found out that many MANY people don't like ranger to the point leaving party cuaz I join without even playing with me before... And they mention bear as well. What's their problem?

Rangers using ranged weapons do no real damage (even after the recent buff to LB) and that's really the only thing that matters in dungeons, anything that isn't related to DPS is (in most cases) trivial.

The bear pet is hated for several reasons, it doesn't do any damage (again) and it doesn't bring anything to the table for the party. You really think 10s of weakness or 2condi removal is worth anything in comparison to high dps pets (felines) who also give 5might or bad dps pets that give Fury or drakes who are god damn tanks and have a blast finisher and bouncing attacks.

You don't need super duper optimized DPS but you sure as hell will notice a difference between a team that uses 5bearbows vs 5DPS rangers.

[Arlee]

If you made a game that was solely about flipping coins, there are people that would be dicks about what denomination of coin you're using, or what color coin you're using, just because someone heard something from someone who told another guy that, "Quarters don't flip as good as nickles."

Well there really is a difference, I mean it's a simple matter of weight ratios.

Some do decent damage, many don't. But... A lot of people can't handle their pet, and with a dead pet they are just standing there autoattacking in their supercool signetbuild, missing out on all the damage their pet would bring.
/L

This is actually a huge point too. Not just not being able to effectively swap pets before they die but also knowing when to recall your pet (like if dps needs to be off the boss or your group wants to pull mobs to a certain location). Many rangers seem to forget everything they can do with their pets.

[Fencers]

I play GW2 since release and was never serious about pve side but lately became and I found out that many MANY people don't like ranger to the point leaving party cuaz I join without even playing with me before... And they mention bear as well. What's their problem?

Not sure. I played a Ranger for a long time and never had a similar experience.

I've never been excluded from a GW2 group that I can recall. People usually don't give a damn what class I show up as. Which was not the case in GW1- what you were mattered to the group. A lot. People got quite militant over it in GW1.

However, I think you could benefit by changing your mind set with regard to the Ranger class in GW2. "Ranger" is just a name, it means jack-all. Rangers don't have to be "range" only- traditional ranger archetypes are melee in fantasy and popular culture! GW2 has their own spin on a "Ranger".

The Ranger class in GW2 is designed to be used in tandem with a pet in melee and range. Insisting on just using one mode of weapon is not in line with the design of the game, to be frank. It's a false limitation one is placing on themselves and can only be harmful to the overall experience of gameplay and developer intention.

Reminds me of two other MMOs, Rift and The Secret World. In those two games it was possible for a player to be "everything". A tank, a healer, a DPS, range or melee. And those games were created with the intention that a player would approach their class with a large degree of flexibility.

We used to tell recruits in Rift for example, that by choosing "cleric" they were not one thing. They were everything that cleric class entitled them to; tank, melee and ranged dps, healing, support. If you just wanted to heal or dps, you chose the wrong game.

Now Rift was a little harsher than GW2. But I hope you are seeing the larger point that GW2 allows your character to suit a variety of play environments and situations-- your bow is a tool. Your sword is a tool. Your pet is a tool. Et cetera.

You are just not one thing. The game isn't designed to be such.

[Svifnymr]

Not sure. I played a Ranger for a long time and never had a similar experience.

I've never been excluded from a GW2 group that I can recall.

I've seen exlusionary groups in LFG, but I certainly wouldn't join one of them in the wrong class/role, if I joined one at all.

However, I think you could benefit by changing your mind set with regard to the Ranger class in GW2. "Ranger" is just a name, it means jack-all. Rangers don't have to be "range" only- traditional ranger archetypes are melee in fantasy and popular culture! GW2 has their own spin on a "Ranger".

I think it's been a few months since we had the big "ranger means X!" argument, so hopefully we don't see any rehash of that. From a dungeons and dragons standpoint, rangers were folks that "ranged" as in ranged far and wide, traveling across the ranges that they protected, nothing to do with distance weapons. The archer-ranger was a thing, because the original ranger wasn't solely archery. If anything, they were about versatility, and sword/hatchet was common. Aragorn as an archetypal ranger/ strider shares that ideal, using sword of bow or sword/torch as needed.

The Ranger class in GW2 is designed to be used in tandem with a pet in melee and range. Insisting on just using one mode of weapon is not in line with the design of the game, to be frank. It's a false limitation one is placing on themselves and can only be harmful to the overall experience of gameplay and developer intention.

If anything, that animal companion is the later addition, not the melee weapons.
As you say, GW2 in general designed for mode swapping, whether kit, element, weapon, whatever.

You are just not one thing. The game isn't designed to be such.

Well said, and encompasses a lot of the problems that the games image has had, I think.

[Fencers]

encompasses a lot of the problems that the games image has had, I think.

Don't think people that play non-MMOs are as tripped up by GW2's mechanics and playstyles as more dedicated MMO players. In my perception, this anecdotal just to be clear, I tend to notice more puzzlement among staunch/long time MMO players toward GW2 than from players of more twitch based games.

I believe this is because GW2 is very close to what is a classical Arcade game more so than a typical MMO of the 1st and 2nd era. I mean the 'stand still and roll dice' method of gameplay of Everquest and its descendants is about as polar an opposite as one can get from fast reaction based shooters, brawlers, platformers and action adventure games of Castlevania, Zelda, God of War and Uncharted of the world.

If players approached games more so for what they are as presented and designed I think the audience of the medium would not only be more informed of gameplay & design but more satisfied in their play experiences.

These are are personal opinions.

[Svifnymr]

Don't think people that play non-MMOs are as tripped up by GW2's mechanics and playstyles as more dedicated MMO players. In my perception, this anecdotal just to be clear, I tend to notice more puzzlement among staunch/long time MMO players toward GW2 than from players of more twitch based games.

Off topic, but the original topic has been answered anyway, but I think most of us could agree that Anet's advertising for GW2 has been sparse and misdirected, if not downright odd. I wonder if they could have done more by advertising it more mainstream or among a different audience, rather than looking at the MMO Market as the audience. If they had distanced themselves from "a B2P MMO" and more as a "living world action rpg" or something.

[Fencers]

Eh, the "you are not one thing" seems pretty contrary to how the game actually works.

I am meaning being tied to one playstyle. You don't have to be, nor is the game designed as such. You can swap weapons freely- such as using a rifle when advantageous even if all your traits are hammer orientated.

And you would be limiting/harming your play by just saying, "No, I only use hammers in melee range!"

There is no doubt about. There are things in the game which are better handled with different weapon sets, if for utility alone. Like getting a speed boost or a block.

You aren't just one thing.

[Deleted]

My issue with rangers (and i have been maining one for pve last few months) is that none of the weapons are particularly good in my opinion.

Longbow requires too much range so you miss buffs and dont really fit in the stack meta of many encounters,
shortbow is only good dps if you can line up mobs with piercing arrows,
Axe mh requires precise positioning, and isnt really that good anyway,
axe OH is situational at best
sword is great dps but my god i hate the animation / dodge problems with it, not to mention jumping off the edge of cliffs if you dare to press once after mob is dead.
dagger offhand seems to be more for pvp
warhorn is just awesome though.

personally i go with shortbow and sword / warhorn, but I am not really happy with any of the weapons myself, and might swap character as my pve char.

[Bugg]

Bearbow rangers are notorious for being bad and pulling everything from 3 states away. This build will help you be better so you can make dungeon friends

http://www.guildwars2guru.com/topic/...uide-for-real/

this feels a bit like power necros. somewhat of a niche / strage build.

[Meledelion]

I personally don't like that build but run something very similar since I don't need the extra vulnerability, but let's not get into min maximing here.

Power necros are something entirely different.

Ranger has good DPS, spotter, spirit of frost, projectile defense (if needed), lots of fury, fire fields (if needed), water field, spirit of water, spirit of nature.

Necros have good DPS (not top end but good) what else do they bring that helps the team? Vulnerability and aside from that sometimes weakness but it got nerfed a lot.

[Venziir]

So, you are telling me, if I want to be a good ranger, I can't use core range weapons?? Maybe they are not core for you, but all RPG I played, ranger or hunter with pet had bow as primary weapon. I guess it's time to change a class... or game

Guess you've never played much D&D then, you know, the RPG which practically BIRTHED the ranger class. A classic RPG ranger chooses between either a bow, or melee weapons.