Forums @ Prydwen.net

Elrandhir wrote:I know, but the things said of the ranger in an earlier post is still there even now, most of them, I can't see why you brought up anything but the changes, because as he is right now, the Archer aint hard to kill.

Also the Ranger can't be compared to a mage, thats just plain stupid tbh.

I don't think he will be all that after the changes either, but it might get alittle more interessting to play him.

That's exactly what Mythic is doing in this patch tho, as they themselves have said - abandoning the way archery used to work & changing it to the same systems used by the mage classes. That's why archers will be getting Wild Power & MoC i/o Falcons Eye, & why +Magic Damage will now effect archers.

Check the patch notes.

OohhoO wrote:That's exactly what Mythic is doing in this patch tho, as they themselves have said - abandoning the way archery used to work & changing it to the same systems used by the mage classes. That's why archers will be getting Wild Power & MoC i/o Falcons Eye, & why +Magic Damage will now effect archers.

Check the patch notes.

Even if they make those changes, the Mage and Archer will still be very different, so you can't compare them neways.

How the 2 classes actually work, even if they would get eachothers Realm abilities and such wont make the classes comparable, because they will still be very different.

Alot of classes have similar Abilities, but they cant be compared to eachother neways, because they are so different.

From you'r descripton a Ranger could then do everyting a Mage could better, and that is far from the Truth, because they are good in different areas, and thats why you can't compare them (or maby you think that a Ranger would be able to replace a Mage now?)

They may get afew abilities that are the same, but they are still to different to compare.

I don't need to read any patch notes to understand this.

Xest wrote:Historically mages didn't even exist Gandelf, does that mean they should just be removed from the game?

Historically, they do my dear fellow... or had you forgotten about Merlin?
Whether he cast fireballs, a stun, or a DoT is irrelevant, but he was a Magician.

Trez wrote:Hehe Gandelf, the only thing the longbowmen did in this battle was causing some confusion, they can claim maybe 5 knigts killed by arrows (where you would normally give them credit for 90% of the dead french).

Rest was killed due to mud aka drowning/being pushed under by the ppl behind and the longbowmen when they went into melee.

The reason why the knights drowned ect, is the terrain, it was muddy like hell and was made like a funnel, with the narrow end near the english.

Well, it doesn't have to be Agincourt. The point was that archers work best en-mass, a fact that is backed up by scores of battles BC and AD. In other words, a mass of archers is obviously going to be more effective than one archer.

Elrandhir wrote:(or maby you think that a Ranger would be able to replace a Mage now?)

TBH yes that's the way it looks to me from the current patch.

OK they don't have any CC (apart from scouts shield slam) or so many interrupts (apart from Hunter pets) but they do have much greater defence & melee offence, way more HPS, a greater variety of damage types & stealth. Add to that 2 archers will be able to insta-kill any caster due to them bypassing BT & Brittle Guards on crit-shot & power shot (whatever that is).

So yes they look like they will become a better ranged killer than pretty much any caster & when it comes to close-combat then no contest whatsoever.

I mean, I'm not complaining about these changes. I think they're probably good. Archers have needed some love for some time, & it may stem some of the overpoweredness of casters.

What worries me is that it seems to me that of the three archer classes Scouts benefit the most from these changes due to their having shield spec, & the most annoyingly overpowered mage classes are Sorcs, closely followed by Cabalists & Theurgists, but Mythic are nerfing BDs & Anis. So on the whole - Hibs = Rangers get better but Anis get worse. Mids = Hunters get better but BDs get worse. Albs = Scouts get better.

So the realm which benefits the most from the current set of changes seems to be Albs. Do Albs really need more love? On the whole Mids seems to be suffering the most, & on Dyvet it's anyone BUT Albs which need love.

Gandelf wrote:Historically, they do my dear fellow... or had you forgotten about Merlin?
Whether he cast fireballs, a stun, or a DoT is irrelevant, but he was a Magician.

No, modern day tales depict him as a mage, historically he was likely to have been a druid (in the classic sense of the term, not someone that ran round with a lynx and could root and cast heal spells on people )

However, equally using modern day depictions of ancient legends, archers in DAoC are much more like robin hood than longbowmen.

OohhoO wrote:TBH yes that's the way it looks to me from the current patch.

OK they don't have any CC (apart from scouts shield slam) or so many interrupts (apart from Hunter pets) but they do have much greater defence & melee offence, way more HPS, a greater variety of damage types & stealth. Add to that 2 archers will be able to insta-kill any caster due to them bypassing BT & Brittle Guards on crit-shot & power shot (whatever that is).

So yes they look like they will become a better ranged killer than pretty much any caster & when it comes to close-combat then no contest whatsoever.

I can promise you that you wont see any Rangers in the PvP FG's even after the patch, or in PLing groups for that matter;D

As I said they are good in different areas, thats why you can't compare them like you seem to do.

Yay, Ranger rewamp!!!

Now give us healer pets and insta life tap!

Rangers in a coma, I know, I know, it's serious