Bow Rate of Fire vs. Melee attack rate

[EightyFour]

Well I just got my 25 black scales, and got some Blackhide armor for my Ranger, he's a bow user and I'm trying every thing to make him better than he is now. I would like him to be a good range attacker and it seems that I'm dreaming here that it could happen, minus finding a Heavy Repeating WoP crossbow or WoP Long/short bow maybe, repeater would be better though.

So this is what I started to look at, Rate of Fire vs. Melee attack rate, so I ren the numbers,
47 shots / minute (Basic RoF with bow, level 16, BAB +15).
53 shots / minute (Ranger with Rapid shot, Level 16, BAB +15) 12.76% increase.
56 shots / minute ((Same Ranger)Ranger with Rapid shot + Black Hide Dragon Armor) 5.66% increase if Rapid shot stacks/19.14% if it dose not.
59 shots / minute ((Same Ranger)Ranger with Rapid shot + Haste(No Dragon Armor)11.32% increase if Rapid shot stacks/ 25.53% if not.
61 shots / minute (Rapid shot + Black Dragon Armor + Haste) 29.78% increase if it doesn't stack with rapid shot, 15.09% if it dose. (I was a little shocked by this one, my mind still dose not want to except it yet I'm so used to the rules of stacking being Items + Feats + Enhancements)

Now the armor says 10% increase to range attacks, if a feat stacks with an item, which it normally does, than I should be showing
58 to 59 shot's per minute with the 10% increase, with haste I should be showing 66 to 67 shots per minute.

Also even with fixing these rates to what they should be, a hasted bow user is still going to dps more slowly than a tank without haste.

88 Swings / minute for a basic attack rate, Level 16, BAB +15, one handed weapon and shield.
98 Swings / minute when he is wearing Jorjundal's Collar, which is like the Black Hide Armor (10% increase in rate of swing) 11.36% increase.Much closer to the target.
115 Swings / minute when Hasted, this is a 30.68% increase. Also closer to the target.

I know this can't be an animation problem, you got 30 frames in a second to mess around with, more if you want to set them also.
So I'm guessing this is a programming problem?
1.) The reason I bring this up is I want my ranged ranger to do more damage, that's the first reason.
2.) I bring this up because not once have I seen this explained, maybe I missed it and someone can point this out to me where this question was answered, I looked but I found nothing, going to take someone with more patience then myself for looking through the forums. (I must admit I just did a search of Rate of Fire looking under posts and Threads, didn't turn up on the first page, it's prob. a lot further back, but also I'm pretty active in that Dev Tracker so I'm thinking I would have saw it at one point.)
3.) Huge difference between ranged and melee damage as a result of this.

Even if you gave the ranger manyshot for 20 seconds and it had a 40 second cool down, the melee is still getting more swings in, and getting more critical hit's, and doing more damage over time.

So I would suggest that you could either have double damage for every arrow, have two arrows fire every shot, or even make every other shot shoot two arrows. That would be my I don't know how the program works suggestions.

What I ask is if someone could take some time here and there and explain to me what is going on? Is this a balance issue? Maybe the overall feel is that ranged attacks could be to powerful if the rate of fire is increased? That everyone well pick up bows and kill everything from range? That ranger well become the most popular class? Just couldn't get the program to work right and it keeps getting bumped for the past two years down to the bottom of the list? Some information would go a long way in my book.

If anyone can show me a Dev post or something that show's why this has been a problem in DDO for so long and has not been put up for a revamp or fix, I thank you in advance for your time, I well check in on this post from time to time, so if you find anything out or find a sample of information on this, it would be very helpful in understanding what is going on.

Light Crossbow
Basic = 42 shots / minute
Rapid Reload = 52 shots / minute
Rapid Reload + Black Dragon Armor = 53 attacks / minute

Heavy Crossbow
Basic = 42 shots / minute
Rapid Reload = 52 shots / minute
Rapid Reload + Black Dragon Armor = 53 attacks / minute

Great Crossbow
Rapid Reload = 51 shots / minute
Rapid Reload + Black Dragon Armor = 53 attacks / minute

Heavy Repeater
Rapid Reload = 117 attacks / minute
Rapid Reload + Black Dragon Armor = 120 attacks / minute

These are rough numbers, they could be a shot off. So the great crossbow could be 52 shots / minute or 50 shots per minute, used the in game timers for these tests. It's likely that the Black Dragon armor does not work at all on crossbows.

[issiana]

i'm a bit rusty as to where i got this from, but i was always lead to believe it was a balancing issue.
Lets face it, you stand back and shoot things to death for next to no risk, where as the melee has massive risks in there attempt to kill things. So melee is balanced to do more damage vs ranged.

Is it right to be this way? i dont think so but i can see the balancing reasons to a certain extent if it was a pvp game.. but its not.

[MageLL]

With Improved Precise shot you can hit multiple targets for full damage. Compared to melee's grazing bonuses IPS is much better.

Ranging gives you the ability to avoid close combat damage. Dodging spells and arrows is fairly easy, while melees can do this from a distance, they do their most damage up close.

Arrows give bows the ability to deal multipe types of damage. An acid bow with fire arrows deal both acid and fire damage.

With that said, I still agree with you that the ROF should be turned up some.

[GlassCannon]

Devs hate Ranged combat(except Codog, who still has to answer to the head cheese, and has to say 'ok' despite not liking how gimped Ranged Combat is for PC's, and how uber it is for NPC's).

Simple as that.


They also hate tanks that try to chase feared or non-melee targets. That much is clear and self-evident(they expanded the hit box for running PC's, only to have the hitbox of the monster move around like a caffeinated OCD squirrel with severe multiple personality disorder, extreme schizophrenia, psychosis, and a wicked Crystal Meth habit, on cocaine and LSD). To further illustrate this point, observe the Bearded Devil.

I think they want everyone in DDO to simply cancel their subscriptions and move to a more 'lucrative' game, like LOTRO.



Yes, I own 3 Rangers and have retired 1 more. They are all capped, and the reroll was capped as well.

[iruka41]

Devs hate Ranged combat(except Codog, who still has to answer to the head cheese, and has to say 'ok' despite not liking how gimped Ranged Combat is for PC's, and how uber it is for NPC's).

Simple as that.


They also hate tanks that try to chase feared or non-melee targets. That much is clear and self-evident(they expanded the hit box for running PC's, only to have the hitbox of the monster move around like a caffeinated OCD squirrel with severe multiple personality disorder, extreme schizophrenia, psychosis, and a wicked Crystal Meth habit, on cocaine and LSD). To further illustrate this point, observe the Bearded Devil.

I think they want everyone in DDO to simply cancel their subscriptions and move to a more 'lucrative' game, like LOTRO.

In LotRO, Hunters are proudly decribed as a Nuker, and they really Nuke :)

Hmm, well, but I prefer Rangers in DDO over Humters in LotRO.

BTW, ranged combat has significantly improved compared to 2 years ago.

You used to have to stand still to reload unless you have SotR feat,
and much much low RoF, no BAB progression,
never get hasted by haste spell,
didn't even had precise shot lines.

So I have to admit that Devs' had worked hard enough to improve it.

IMO ranged combat is now pretty balanced.
If it gets any better, my repeater-specced bard will just be more stronger up to level of game breaking ;)
(I'm already confident to solo 4 of 5 Meridia quests when this toon gets capped, that makes me saying the ranged combat is already balanced enough.)

If someone wants to argue with the ranged combat, they should specify it as a non-repeater-ranged-combat.
Just my thought. Maybe they can improve those 2 ranger specialties, Arcane Archer and Deepwood Sniper.
But rate of fire, I have no problem with that.

[Raithe]

Well I just got my 25 black scales, and got some Blackhide armor for my Ranger, he's a bow user and I'm trying every thing to make him better than he is now. I would like him to be a good range attacker and it seems that I'm dreaming here that it could happen, minus finding a Heavy Repeating WoP crossbow or WoP Long/short bow maybe, repeater would be better though.

So this is what I started to look at, Rate of Fire vs. Melee attack rate, so I ren the numbers,
47 shots / minute (Basic RoF with bow, level 16, BAB +15).
53 shots / minute (Ranger with Rapid shot, Level 16, BAB +15) 2.82% increase.
56 shots / minute ((Same Ranger)Ranger with Rapid shot + Black Hide Dragon Armor) 1.59% increase if Rapid shot stacks/4.23% if it dose not.
59 shots / minute ((Same Ranger)Ranger with Rapid shot + Haste(No Dragon Armor)3.18% increase if Rapid shot stacks/ 5.64% if not.


Your math is a bit off. Going from 47 shots per minute to 59 shots per minute is a 25.5% increase, which seems to suggest that Rapid Shot does not stack with haste [and I did not know that].

My calculations for my 14/2 ranger/fighter were 54 shots per minute, unhasted. With manyshot that goes up to 216 arrows per minute for 20 seconds, and balances out to 81 arrows per minute overall. It's actually very comparable to 1-handed fighting, only has the burst potential that is easily utilized to advantage.

Rangers are currently extremely overpowered in relation to the rest of the melee classes. Worrying about rate of fire for them seems a bit frivolous.

[Vagabond]

Rangers are currently extremely overpowered in relation to the rest of the melee classes. Worrying about rate of fire for them seems a bit frivolous.

But if you're specced for ranged combat you aren't specced for meleeing. Not everyone wants to be a melee fighter, The more builds/specs that are viable, the more variety you will see.

It seems wrong that the items/feats aren't stacking with haste here. It should be looked into.

[Raithe]

But if you're specced for ranged combat you aren't specced for meleeing. Not everyone wants to be a melee fighter.


In historic D&D, everyone was both ranged and melee (and some were magical), even within a single encounter. It is based off from a guerilla-style combat system and high degrees of specialization as you would see within a large infantry were not the norm.

The problem with DDO is that it has lost that realistic system to an unrealistic system of ego-boosting hero play.

1) Fighters: should be good with a bow and crossbow, but better with melee weapons
2) Clerics: should be fair with simple missile weapons, good with melee weapons, best with magic
3) Rogues: should be equally good with missile and melee weapons
4) Magic-users: should be fair with missile weapons, poor with melee, awesome with magic
5) Rangers: should be good with melee weapons, but better with bows (or visa versa, depending on the ranger type)
6) etc., etc.

Missile attack, however, was generally limited to the opening salvos of an encounter (except in the case of magic-users) and was generally lower-powered than getting up close and personal.

So what I am saying:

1) Having an entirely ranged-based build is not traditional D&D guerilla-style gaming.
2) If you want to complain about something, complain about the loss of the realistic combat statistics system and the inflation of monsters to beyond absurdity. Then characters not entirely specced for range could still use it.

[redoubt]

In LotRO, Hunters are proudly decribed as a Nuker, and they really Nuke :)

Hmm, well, but I prefer Rangers in DDO over Humters in LotRO.

BTW, ranged combat has significantly improved compared to 2 years ago.

You used to have to stand still to reload unless you have SotR feat,
and much much low RoF, no BAB progression,
never get hasted by haste spell,
didn't even had precise shot lines.

So I have to admit that Devs' had worked hard enough to improve it.

IMO ranged combat is now pretty balanced.
If it gets any better, my repeater-specced bard will just be more stronger up to level of game breaking ;)
(I'm already confident to solo 4 of 5 Meridia quests when this toon gets capped, that makes me saying the ranged combat is already balanced enough.)

If someone wants to argue with the ranged combat, they should specify it as a non-repeater-ranged-combat.
Just my thought. Maybe they can improve those 2 ranger specialties, Arcane Archer and Deepwood Sniper.
But rate of fire, I have no problem with that.

The OP did specify bow rate of fire.

[redoubt]

Your math is a bit off. Going from 47 shots per minute to 59 shots per minute is a 25.5% increase, which seems to suggest that Rapid Shot does not stack with haste [and I did not know that].

My calculations for my 14/2 ranger/fighter were 54 shots per minute, unhasted. With manyshot that goes up to 216 arrows per minute for 20 seconds, and balances out to 81 arrows per minute overall. It's actually very comparable to 1-handed fighting, only has the burst potential that is easily utilized to advantage.

Rangers are currently extremely overpowered in relation to the rest of the melee classes. Worrying about rate of fire for them seems a bit frivolous.

The question and problem is about bow rate of fire. It has nothing to do with rangers. Rangers are a class. Bows are a weapon.

[Raithe]

The question and problem is about bow rate of fire. It has nothing to do with rangers. Rangers are a class. Bows are a weapon.

Bows are a manually loaded weapon and the entire loading and firing sequence is performed by a person.

Therefore, bows do not have a rate of fire. People with bows do.

[GlassCannon]

It's a shame our Bow skill doesn't increase as we fire hundreds of thousands of arrows....

I really would like Bow speed to be directly affected by how many arrows a person has used in their character lifetime...

Then again it would give Powergamers and Cheaters too much of an edge.

[GlassCannon]

In historic D&D, everyone was both ranged and melee (and some were magical), even within a single encounter. It is based off from a guerilla-style combat system and high degrees of specialization as you would see within a large infantry were not the norm.

The problem with DDO is that it has lost that realistic system to an unrealistic system of ego-boosting hero play.

1) Fighters: should be semi-good with a bow and crossbow, but better with melee weapons
2) Clerics: should be fair with simple missile weapons, poor with melee weapons, best with magic
3) Rogues: should be equally good with missile and melee weapons
4) Magic-users: should be fair with missile weapons, utter failure with melee, best with magic
5) Rangers: should be good with melee weapons, but better with bows (or visa versa, depending on the ranger type)
6) etc., etc.

Missile attack, however, was generally limited to the opening salvos of an encounter (except in the case of magic-users) and was generally lower-powered than getting up close and personal.

So what I am saying:

1) Having an entirely ranged-based build is not traditional D&D guerilla-style gaming.
2) If you want to complain about something, complain about the loss of the realistic combat statistics system and the inflation of monsters to beyond absurdity. Then characters not entirely specced for range could still use it.

1) It is effective.
2) I will complain until the world is perfect. You might as well get used to it :p

As for being limited to opening salvos, this is NOT British Regular fighting... we do not line up, shoot at one another, then rush in for melee.


Further, as noted by British Longbowman(In the medieval times), Ranged combat is MORE DEADLY than Melee in most occasions. Therefore our Rangers, comparative to current melee damage average of 25, should be hitting for 90-280 with an arrow(Base damage, 280 is a crit). Additionally, as noted by armor DR and Class, an Archer would not be capable of Melee, due to being as squishy as a Sorc, if not squishier. Let's toss logic and old failed tactics out the window at the same time. Sense and senselessness ought simply be discarded.

[Raithe]

As for being limited to opening salvos, this is NOT British Regular fighting... we do not line up, shoot at one another, then rush in for melee.

Further, as noted by British Longbowman(In the medieval times), Ranged combat is MORE DEADLY than Melee in most occasions. Therefore our Rangers, comparative to current melee damage average of 25, should be hitting for 90-280 with an arrow(Base damage, 280 is a crit). Additionally, as noted by armor DR and Class, an Archer would not be capable of Melee, due to being as squishy as a Sorc, if not squishier. Let's toss logic and old failed tactics out the window at the same time. Sense and senselessness ought simply be discarded.

You are talking about infantry (conventional) warfare. Arrows are not as effective as highly precise, professional melee strikes against full-plate armored special forces. Rangers are not archers, they are skilled hunter-type soldiers and survivalists. With a high dexterity, it makes sense that they can achieve higher ACs in the game than most other soldier-types. What doesn't make sense is that they do as much melee damage as a raged barbarian, do even more when fighting their favored enemies, and blow them out of the water when sniping against favored enemies with 4 arrow manyshot.

If you want to build an "archer" in D&D, you probably should use some sort of elven wizard configuration.

Most importantly, you don't disregard sense and senselessness in a regular game, let alone a roleplaying game. Games without logic or something applicable to reality are not worth playing, as they dull mental faculties rather than hone them, and most people consider them to be entirely lacking in fun.

[EightyFour]

I'm not willing to accept that precise shot or manyshot or combat from range has anything to do with this.

I mean, when's the last time your group let you conga line the mob's, sure when you solo, you can do whatever you want, you can also kit as long as you want, you could spend 8 hours kitting one mob tell it die's. But most of the time you are not going to get mob's in a conga line, the best you can get is like 3 to 4 mob's in a row because they are all piles around the group.

Manyshot while nice, I don't think it should be used as a "Catch up to melee damage" ability, I think sense it's a ranger ability, it should be used as something to help enhance the ranger, it should be a special ability the ranger can use, almost like something that would enhance your character rather then help them catch up to everyone else.

Combat from range, even in PvP games I have seen some wicked damage from range combat, a lot better than in this game.

Currently the way things work, ranged combat in general is not fun to play, well it's fun tell you remember that you can't do any damage tell your manyshot comes up.

Also I do use repeaters on a ranger, mostly stat damage, if someone what's to give me a WoP Heavy repeater and enough ingredants to craft all three tiers on my greensteel bow, than I'll stop talking about this, I'll still be upset about bow damage and RoF, but the WoP repeater would take care of enough of the game content to make it good enough that I wouldn't need to complain.

And your right, my math is off a bit, it's off on the melee's as well a bit, it should be about 11% with the collar and 30% with haste.

[EightyFour]

Also just wanted to add, I understand that this is a ranged problem, or bow problem, or bow RoF problem. But I play a ranger, so I make a lot of references to the ranger class, I'm not saying that anyone that want's to build anything else should be shoved to the side, this is a problem for all ranged combatant's.

I would also like to see throwing dagger, axe or whatever be able to use a thrown weapon in each hand and be able to damage as well, but I didn't build one so I'm not as passionate about that.

As I understand things in my world is the most important part of a game is to have FUN, and under the current ranged combat system it is NOT FUN at all, I'm sorry to say it, but when I see a ranged character in the group, I already know they are not going to be doing much damage, at least bow users, if they have a repeater the first thing I think to myself is "I hope they are using stat damage." So let's just throw WoP ranged out the window for the purpose of this discussion, as we all know WoP repeaters are awesome and the WoP bows are real good also, but when you run across a red named mob, what type of damage are you going to be doing, a lot less than the melee's, and who dose that hurt, it does not hurt the ranged combatant doing it, it hurts the over all damage of the party, the party as a whole is now less effective because someone had this crazy idea in there head that they put bows in the game because they wanted people to use them, I mean what the heck, why put a weapon in the game and than go out of your way to make sure it's buggy and not fun to play with.

I guess everyone gets a chance to be the star, and that's the role of the ranged combatant, to be saved when they get agro, so someone else can be the star right. Do I want to be the star of show, no, it's nice when it happens, but I don't go looking for it, do I feel a little bad for the party I join when I play my ranger, yeah I do, because I know I can log a tank and do 5 to 10 times the damage, but hey, I would like to be an effective damage dealer, is that too much to ask?

[Turial]

Eightyfour Give this thread a read: http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=139451

If I remember correctly bow based ranged combat gets about 51-53 attacks per in with rapid shot at level 16. Manyshot will increase this to ~153 attacks per 2 minutes vs melees ~193 over the same 2 minutes. Rapid shot will stack with ranged alacrity from the black dragon leathers and the abbot quiver. Haste, however, is the spell that alacrity effects are based off of and will not stack with the ranged alacrity. I have a set of black dragon leathers and they currently sit in my bank because when I am in groups I can typically expect to be hasted which allows me to wear something else in the armor slot.

I feel your pain and anguish on the state of bow based ranged combat. iruka41 is correct in that ranged combat is a bit better then it was at launch....curses beta nerf bat. Codog is the patron saint for many of the ranged combat users due to his dog house thread where he listened to us and gave us feedback on why some things are the way they are and how he would like to change things. The issue is that beta testing results showed that ranged combat was too powerful when compared to melee. The things iruka41 touched on were some of the "balance" that was introduced. Balance that was well beyond what needed to happen. Since then ranged combat users have gotten some powers back but the two things we would really like to see are unlikely to ever happen. 1) increased ranged combat ROA to that of melee 2) manyshot as a stance with penalties to-hit. Personally I just want item 1 right now. As I said read though the thread I posted to see some of the ranged combat communities ideas on fixes and mechanics. Also it tends to be free of people who simply say melee and ranged can't be equal in speed because of risk.

[EightyFour]

Well I looked at almost all of Codog's posts, got tired on page 4 of 5 when I selected the back button on my browser and it gave me some vBulletin error that I didn't read as I'm a little tired.

These are the posts I saw about ranged combat:


http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1789270#post1789270

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1787474#post1787474

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1544471#post1544471
This one has a post about RoF in it

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pid4TO8jdInZyyID3g553Mg
Item number 57 has not been addressed yet on this spreadsheet, but I see now that it is being looked at.

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1467220#post1467220
Attack progression

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=122142&page=32
Bottom of the page, attack progression

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1435770#post1435770
Aesthetics of ranged combat

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1428958#post1428958
Best post so far, takes about in the begining the fear of too many arrows in world would cause major lag, and manyshot was something that got rushed into game, one of those got to get it done, but we dont have the time to do it things.

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1411047#post1411047
Ranged Combat, "Having more teeth", meaning that's it's in progress

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1408478#post1408478
+500xp post for ranged combat ideas

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1404397#post1404397
Posting about ranged combat suggestions

So I guess when I get another chance I'll go through the rest and see if there is anything else. But it seems that from what I can tell is that the issue is being kicked around a little, but it's seems the desire is to A.) Get it right and B.) progression well be slow as there are many other things that have to be done and C.) Codog cares very much and is trying his best to make this game even better that it already is and hopefully well get a chance to take a vacation some time and get some sleep.

I figure I well reread these later when I get a chance, maybe make some comments to make these clearer for someone just seeing the web address and maybe make them into links and such. (Ahh...they made themselves into links, that's helpful.)

So I guess what I'm going to do is find some of the things I liked in the game's that I have played before and try and figure out what made ranged combat so fun in those games. Hopefully I can help Codog run his marathon.

[Missing_Minds]

You are talking about infantry (conventional) warfare. Arrows are not as effective as highly precise, professional melee strikes against full-plate armored special forces.

Full plate special forces? I think you are confusing terms now.

How well do you know your history when it comes to warfare? I know that I do not know a whole lot, but even I know the French knights hated and feared English long bows. Wonder why that was.

[Griphon]

Full plate special forces? I think you are confusing terms now.

How well do you know your history when it comes to warfare? I know that I do not know a whole lot, but even I know the French knights hated and feared English long bows. Wonder why that was.

It's was because the pressure pound per inch of a Longbow easily allowed the arrowhead to puncture thickly plated 'Turtle' Knights.
That is compared to other weapons who 'pressure pound' 'per inch of weapon' was much greater and failed to properly make it through the plating....

The Longbow less training to be effective and deadly. This displaced the value of 'knights' dramatically and caused a socio-economic shift away from them.... Enough history Geek talk..

Increase the Bow speed, already. :)

[ice33b]

Full plate special forces? I think you are confusing terms now.

How well do you know your history when it comes to warfare? I know that I do not know a whole lot, but even I know the French knights hated and feared English long bows. Wonder why that was.

Because the English like to fight and the French like to surrender? :cool:

[Angelus_dead]

The Longbow less training to be effective and deadly. This displaced the value of 'knights' dramatically and caused a socio-economic shift away from them....
The training time to be a top English Longbowman was similar to that of a knight, although the material investment was lower. Both were a full-time job to build and maintain the skills. But the real reason they displaced some knights is because they could safely kill them in open battle.

[Aesop]

Ranged Combat Rebalancing: Ranged Combat feels like an after thought that is the bastard stepchild of an abusive alcoholic schizophrenic. It still needs a little love but it doesn't seem to get any at home. So put the stepparent on prozac and lets get by this.

a. RoF: I've posted this a number of times but here it goes again. The RoF of Ranged attacks is far too low relative to Melee. I understand that Mele actually has to be up close and personal with the baduns so risk taking more damage vrs ranged who is well... ranging. However that is a benefit of Ranged combat. The benefits of Melee varies a little. Sword and Shield has Blocking DR and make great Intimitank style of play. Two Handed Fighters do Strength and 1 Half Damage and get glancing blows for a bunch more damage. Two Weapon Fighters are the Quisinarts of the DDO world and attack a huge number of times (though possibly not as many as they should). That said the following should be considered.

1.Change the base RoF of Ranged attacks to 60% that of Sword and Shield Melee(hence forth with regard to Ranged RoF refered to as Melee). (if melee swings 100 times in a minute then Archers and thrown weapons should fire off 60 shots without any modifiers)

2.Rapid Shot should increase the RoF to 75% that of Melee

3.The Feat Improved Rapid Shot should be implemented to give an additional 10% bringing Ranged to 85% the RoF of Melee

4.Manyshot should be changed to a Stance with the following conditios and modifiers.
4a. Many Shot cannot be used in conjunction with Rapid Shot or Improved Rapid Shot thus reducing the RoF back down to 60% Melee.
4b. Numbers of Arrows used should be selectable with limitations by BAB. 2 at BAB 6, 3 at BAB 11, and 4 at BAB 16.
4c. Each arrow should give a cumulative penalty. I suggest -2 to hit for the first additional arrow and -1 for each beyond that and a RoF penalty of -5% per additional arrow thus reducing the RoF of a Many Shot to 45% at BAB 16 with 4 Arrows flying and a -4 to hit penalty. (note: In PnP Many Shot is a Standard Action which means it can only be fired once per round and comes with a penalty of -8 for firing 4 arrows at the same time. While this (sorta) works in PnP in a Real Time MMO the penalty would be slightly out of balance with the rest of combat to have the RoF reduced to 20% melee)
4d. It may already be there but as Melee has a reduce RoF while moving so too should Ranged. As Many Shot would already encompass a RoF Penalty that is to emulate the Standard Action the movement penalty shouldn't stack to further reduce the Many Shot.

b. Ammunition: Ranged needs a better selection of Ammunition.
1. Basic Elemental types Should be made available to purchase. Flaming, Frost, Acid and Shock. Favor Rewards should be implemented to make available other ammunition types (Holy, Axiomatic, Burst effect, Cursespewing etc... almost any weapon effect can be placed on ammunition)
2. From the SRD
Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), or sling bullets (for slings). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action; crossbows and slings require an action for reloading. Generally speaking, ammunition that hits its target is destroyed or rendered useless, while normal ammunition that misses has a 50% chance of being destroyed or lost. I would like this translated into all normal ammo being 10% returning and Masterwork and magic being 15%(or more) returning.

Range: Range and distance seem a bit off right now.
1. Please increase the Range increments. As it stands now, Point Blank Shot only kicks in at a range almost being able to swing a sword at the critter I'm attacking. 30 ft seems much closer to 10.
2. Also add in Range Increments. even if it is only 5 of them with the ranges being touch, short, medium, long and extreme. throwing a hammer from accross the valley shouldn't hit as effectively as an Arrow from 10 ft. which brings me to the next part
3. Penalties. have penalties kick in beyond medium range. -2 for long range and -4 for extreme. let Point Blank range be within the Short Range category.
4. Implement Far Shot as a Feat. Have Far Shot increase the effective range of Point Blank Shot to Medium and decrease penalties by 2. (note let this also affect Sneak Attack range)
5. Implement Guided Shot (Ranger/Wiz Spell level 1 that negates Ranged Penalties for 1 round ... of just a short time here), Sniper Shot (level 1 ranger/wiz spell lvl 1 which removes the range limitation on Sneak Attack for 1 shot...or just a short time here), and Arrow Mind (ranger/wiz spell level 1 which makes it so ranged attacks don't cause Attacks of Opportunity... here it would negate the AC penalty)

Bow Strength: I understand that when first starting it appeared that rangers needed a little love... and they might have. I also understand that in an environment where crafting was not existant that requiring Composite bows that match your characters strengh could get problematic. However making Archery a Ranger only ability is a bad bad thing. If you needed to, just add Bow Strength to Point Blank Shot and give the Bow Strength to rangers anyway (since they bypass PBS and go straight on to Rapid Shot). Fighters and other range Centric characters shouldn't need to splash Ranger to make an archer.

[Raithe]

Full plate special forces? I think you are confusing terms now.

How well do you know your history when it comes to warfare? I know that I do not know a whole lot, but even I know the French knights hated and feared English long bows. Wonder why that was.

We talking one knight, possibly on a horse, being afraid of a couple of archers he is a few hundred feet from? A knight that has been extensively trained through actual experience in battle?

Whether or not melee in the game of D&D are actually wearing full plate armor, most of them have armor/dex values that equal or exceed that benchmark. Some monks have the ability to swat arrows right out of the air.

I'd be entirely for making arrows hit harder when they do penetrate for a crit, but...

No, they shouldn't be made more effective overall than they already are.

[Kromize]

i'm a bit rusty as to where i got this from, but i was always lead to believe it was a balancing issue.
Lets face it, you stand back and shoot things to death for next to no risk, where as the melee has massive risks in there attempt to kill things. So melee is balanced to do more damage vs ranged.

Is it right to be this way? i dont think so but i can see the balancing reasons to a certain extent if it was a pvp game.. but its not.

Rangers still need to be able to shoot as fast as the mobs do in game...naturally....

[Noctus]

We talking one knight, possibly on a horse, being afraid of a couple of archers he is a few hundred feet from? A knight that has been extensively trained through actual experience in battle?

Depends on if the archers are either

A: some peasants who use their self-build shortbows usually for rabbit hunting and were pressed into army service

B: a retinue of english longbow-archers. trained for their profession since they first sprouted hair in their faces, su much in fact that the training even deformed their skeletons. equiped with a weapon which not only could injure your horse, but also penetrate your full plate if you closed in for the charge.


A is more ikea Humvee and B compares more closely to a M1 Abrams.

[Raithe]

a retinue of english longbow-archers...

No, not a retinue. That is the point I was trying to make, even originally. D&D isn't a large-scale conventional warfare simulator. We aren't talking about knights in formation making a charge against hundreds or thousands of archers. We are talking about a highly trained (at least past level 2 or so) combatant slinking through less-than-well-lit sewers, dungeons, or foliage. My analogy was that the typical D&D adventurer is akin to a Green Beret or Navy Seal special forces soldier executing guerilla tactics to achieve an objective.

It makes sense that ranged attack would be limited in use for close-quarters, often stealth-based encounters.

[EightyFour]

ok, here's another idea, just kinda throwing thos one out in the dark and maybe I can improve on it once I get more time. I'm thinking ranged debuff's here, either an enchancement line that is open to everyone or maybe feats? Not totally sure, this should be open to everyone with a bow, in one of the game's I played you trained your bow up to a certain level, and once you reached 35% bow or 110% bow you would unlock debuff's, one of those debuff's was a damage debuff, how about increaseing the damage. Like manyshot ups the damage, but it also puts more arrows into the world which creates more lag, too many arrows, to much lag. And that's what we are trying to get rid of right? Lag is bad, so instead of more arrows we have them hit harder, do twice as much damage, and I'm not talking just change the damage, base it on a timer and call it a debuff, exposing arrow or something like that, 10 sec debuff on 10 sec timer, or whatever the best balance is, it allows precise shot to do it's thing, but the one mob you are focused on takes 50% to 100% more damage depending on how far up you trained your enhancement. I guess the QA guys would have to test out the balance of it, which would require many hours, but it might be worth it, just throwing another idea out there.

The nice thing is you can up the damage, keep the lag down, and give ranged users a way to be more active on what they target. Also this would have to work on red names as well, or it would only be half a fix, as the red names are the one's with the most health requiring you to have more damage.

Also here is where I'm getting the idea, this is off a PvP game called Shadowbane. Here is an older screenshot.
http://img357.imageshack.us/img357/6875/keymasteryq2.jpg

This is a screenshot of a "Chainsaw" Barbarian, there damage isn't as high as other weapons but they throw at such a fast rate having one throwing weapons in each hand, that they make up the damage from the extra attacks they get. If you look to the right of the screenshot you well see round icons, some of the icons have some red covering up the icon, this is a display timer on when you can use the power again. These icons allow special abilitys, like stun at range, debuff to slashing damage, there were some that would slow down the attack rate of an attacker. The point being, this made ranged attacking more fun as you felt like you were doing stunning blows, or hamstrings, or trips in the case of DDO with a bow.

If you could do Stuning Blow with a bow, that would be awesome.
Or if you could debuff a mob to -100% piercing, everyone with a piercing weapon would be happy, but your damage would go up to twice what it is, and if you could use it on red named mobs, everyone using a piercing weapon benifets, their dps go's up as well. Anyway, I thought that it was fun.

[Galapas]

The training time to be a top English Longbowman was similar to that of a knight, although the material investment was lower. Both were a full-time job to build and maintain the skills. But the real reason they displaced some knights is because they could safely kill them in open battle.

Actually, it was almost impossible for a longbowman to kill an armored knight, with arrows anyway. In the best of circumstances, with a bodkin arrowhead fired at normal incidence a longbowman could partially penetrate the thinner arm or leg plates.

Their value in the Hundred Years War was in forcing French knights off their horses. Horses could not effectively carry enough armor to make them invulnerable to longbows. The sawtooth array that the English used was to allow them to shoot the horses flanks, which were poorly armored. At Crecy and Poitiers, they decimated French cavalry charges this way. By Agincourt, the French had learned their lesson. They dismounted and attacked on foot. Unfortunately for them, they attacked through mud 1/2 to 2 feet deep. There were few deaths or injuries from arrows. Most French deaths were from suffocation or getting their throat cut while helpless.

After Agincourt, the French maintained their practice of advancing on foot with knights. After 1422 they generally slaughtered the English longbowmen and reconquered their Kingdom very quickly. The French were particularly overwhelming in the battles in the wars in northern Spain. Picked English mercenary longbowmen were essentially useless against the French. We just never hear stories about it because we speak English, not French.

[Turial]

.... Like manyshot ups the damage, but it also puts more arrows into the world which creates more lag, too many arrows, to much lag. And that's what we are trying to get rid of right? Lag is bad, so instead of more arrows we have them hit harder, do twice as much damage,....

With the lag introduced in instances with large numbers of teleporting mobs and places where players are likely to spam spells like dancing balls and firewall we can write off lag as being a main reason for holding ranged combat back, it maybe a secondary reason but not a good one.

My logic for this would be if multiple arrows following trajectory paths cause high amounts of crippling lag then large numbers of teleporting mobs (which have a greater animation and effect load that they place on the servers) would cause either the same amount or more lag. Seeings as they did are preventing one thing but not the other it would seem that lag is not the main factor in limiting the number of ranged attacks that can occur.

[Missing_Minds]

Like manyshot ups the damage, but it also puts more arrows into the world which creates more lag, too many arrows, to much lag. And that's what we are trying to get rid of right?

Codog changed manyshot to be only one arrow, not many. Which in turn means that if you kill a mob with that barrage, it doesn't continue on and X number of arrows are wasted. Turn about, less lag. Meh.. give and take there.

[Angelus_dead]

Actually, it was almost impossible for a longbowman to kill an armored knight, with arrows anyway. In the best of circumstances, with a bodkin arrowhead fired at normal incidence a longbowman could partially penetrate the thinner arm or leg plates.
That is completely and totally untrue. English longbowmen used powerful bows that only a minority of modern humans can bend. If the target survives the first shot, he's still tactically dead because there are 11 more arrows coming within a minute.

Furthermore, even if the armor could survive the arrow, the wearer would be pushed back and down and be unable to progress towards the archer before the next shot hit him.

[Coldin]

Codog changed manyshot to be only one arrow, not many. Which in turn means that if you kill a mob with that barrage, it doesn't continue on and X number of arrows are wasted. Turn about, less lag. Meh.. give and take there.

Actually I'm always a bit confused on this topic. Since Codog's manyshot change, Manyshot actually visually shows multiple arrows for each arrows fired. Wasn't Codog's change supposed to stop things like that to conserve resources? I suppose it's possible it was a more back-end problem, with multiple arrows clogging up the combat system.

[iruka41]

The OP did specify bow rate of fire.

Yup, but in other posts (even on replies here) contains comments something like "Devs hate ranged" "They don't improve it".
So I said 'someone' instead of 'OP' :)

[Coldin]

Ranged Combat Rebalancing: Ranged Combat feels like an after thought that is the bastard stepchild of an abusive alcoholic schizophrenic. It still needs a little love but it doesn't seem to get any at home. So put the stepparent on prozac and lets get by this.

a. RoF: I've posted this a number of times but here it goes again. The RoF of Ranged attacks is far too low relative to Melee. I understand that Mele actually has to be up close and personal with the baduns so risk taking more damage vrs ranged who is well... ranging. However that is a benefit of Ranged combat. The benefits of Melee varies a little. Sword and Shield has Blocking DR and make great Intimitank style of play. Two Handed Fighters do Strength and 1 Half Damage and get glancing blows for a bunch more damage. Two Weapon Fighters are the Quisinarts of the DDO world and attack a huge number of times (though possibly not as many as they should). That said the following should be considered.

1.Change the base RoF of Ranged attacks to 60% that of Sword and Shield Melee(hence forth with regard to Ranged RoF refered to as Melee). (if melee swings 100 times in a minute then Archers and thrown weapons should fire off 60 shots without any modifiers)

2.Rapid Shot should increase the RoF to 75% that of Melee

3.The Feat Improved Rapid Shot should be implemented to give an additional 10% bringing Ranged to 85% the RoF of Melee

4.Manyshot should be changed to a Stance with the following conditios and modifiers.
4a. Many Shot cannot be used in conjunction with Rapid Shot or Improved Rapid Shot thus reducing the RoF back down to 60% Melee.
4b. Numbers of Arrows used should be selectable with limitations by BAB. 2 at BAB 6, 3 at BAB 11, and 4 at BAB 16.
4c. Each arrow should give a cumulative penalty. I suggest -2 to hit for the first additional arrow and -1 for each beyond that and a RoF penalty of -5% per additional arrow thus reducing the RoF of a Many Shot to 45% at BAB 16 with 4 Arrows flying and a -4 to hit penalty. (note: In PnP Many Shot is a Standard Action which means it can only be fired once per round and comes with a penalty of -8 for firing 4 arrows at the same time. While this (sorta) works in PnP in a Real Time MMO the penalty would be slightly out of balance with the rest of combat to have the RoF reduced to 20% melee)
4d. It may already be there but as Melee has a reduce RoF while moving so too should Ranged. As Many Shot would already encompass a RoF Penalty that is to emulate the Standard Action the movement penalty shouldn't stack to further reduce the Many Shot.

b. Ammunition: Ranged needs a better selection of Ammunition.
1. Basic Elemental types Should be made available to purchase. Flaming, Frost, Acid and Shock. Favor Rewards should be implemented to make available other ammunition types (Holy, Axiomatic, Burst effect, Cursespewing etc... almost any weapon effect can be placed on ammunition)
2. From the SRD I would like this translated into all normal ammo being 10% returning and Masterwork and magic being 15%(or more) returning.

Range: Range and distance seem a bit off right now.
1. Please increase the Range increments. As it stands now, Point Blank Shot only kicks in at a range almost being able to swing a sword at the critter I'm attacking. 30 ft seems much closer to 10.
2. Also add in Range Increments. even if it is only 5 of them with the ranges being touch, short, medium, long and extreme. throwing a hammer from accross the valley shouldn't hit as effectively as an Arrow from 10 ft. which brings me to the next part
3. Penalties. have penalties kick in beyond medium range. -2 for long range and -4 for extreme. let Point Blank range be within the Short Range category.
4. Implement Far Shot as a Feat. Have Far Shot increase the effective range of Point Blank Shot to Medium and decrease penalties by 2. (note let this also affect Sneak Attack range)
5. Implement Guided Shot (Ranger/Wiz Spell level 1 that negates Ranged Penalties for 1 round ... of just a short time here), Sniper Shot (level 1 ranger/wiz spell lvl 1 which removes the range limitation on Sneak Attack for 1 shot...or just a short time here), and Arrow Mind (ranger/wiz spell level 1 which makes it so ranged attacks don't cause Attacks of Opportunity... here it would negate the AC penalty)

Bow Strength: I understand that when first starting it appeared that rangers needed a little love... and they might have. I also understand that in an environment where crafting was not existant that requiring Composite bows that match your characters strengh could get problematic. However making Archery a Ranger only ability is a bad bad thing. If you needed to, just add Bow Strength to Point Blank Shot and give the Bow Strength to rangers anyway (since they bypass PBS and go straight on to Rapid Shot). Fighters and other range Centric characters shouldn't need to splash Ranger to make an archer.

Basically, this sums up nicely anything I could say about the issue. :)

[Missing_Minds]

That is completely and totally untrue. English longbowmen used powerful bows that only a minority of modern humans can bend. If the target survives the first shot, he's still tactically dead because there are 11 more arrows coming within a minute.

Furthermore, even if the armor could survive the arrow, the wearer would be pushed back and down and be unable to progress towards the archer before the next shot hit him.

Actually the full plate could survive arrows (to a degree), and the reason why, Angles. Hence the different arrowheads. The thickness of the metal too also helped in this area. Afterall, metal was a resource and couldn't really be wasted. Arms use the thinest metal, but because they are moving and the angles are so odd, you seldom ever can hit it flat on like -|, so arrows would bounce off. The chest region as well got curved to help this but made to be thicker than arms. Helmets are the thickest of all and darn hard to penetrate.

As for the second part of the volley, bingo. What was it.. an English powerder rifleman could get off 3 shots in the time it took a charger to run 100 meters? I forget the distance. (or was it timing?) I can only imagine that an archer could get off more. I mean a trained archer can aim in half a second. It becomes second nature. They start to aim during the draw afterall.


Actually I'm always a bit confused on this topic. Since Codog's manyshot change, Manyshot actually visually shows multiple arrows for each arrows fired. Wasn't Codog's change supposed to stop things like that to conserve resources? I suppose it's possible it was a more back-end problem, with multiple arrows clogging up the combat system.

Visual aspects are handled by the client. Very easy to keep track of one arrow that is visually marked to show up a 2+.

[EightyFour]

With the lag introduced in instances with large numbers of teleporting mobs and places where players are likely to spam spells like dancing balls and firewall we can write off lag as being a main reason for holding ranged combat back, it maybe a secondary reason but not a good one.

My logic for this would be if multiple arrows following trajectory paths cause high amounts of crippling lag then large numbers of teleporting mobs (which have a greater animation and effect load that they place on the servers) would cause either the same amount or more lag. Seeings as they did are preventing one thing but not the other it would seem that lag is not the main factor in limiting the number of ranged attacks that can occur.

(Also just figured I would tell you a understand what you are saying and I follow your logic, and this is not a good reason if they are going to allow mob's in that teleport every few seconds to cause so much lag and cause mob's to switch agro so often when you haven't even agro'ed them so that they teleport that much, they shouldn't be using lag as a reason to prevent something from going through. But how much lag are we talkig here, we don't know. Also that is the reason that Codog is giving us, we don't work there so don't have the intimate understanding that he dose have, so we have to take his word on it, so we have to come up with solutions that can be used to get around this problem, and it looks to me increasing the rate of fire is not one of them.)

This is the post I was speaking of:
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1428958#post1428958

Some of the things I noticed in this post were:

"...However the worry about mass creation of a bunch of projectiles in the world and their performance implications became a pretty big concern. So a part time buff is what resulted without the penalty. I can't say that this was a savory solution or an example of engineering or design that I'm proud of...."

"...
The good news is that for Module 6, there is a silent feature that I've put in that doesn't really change much on the outside appearance and the functionality from a gameplay perspective. As I said, the problem is inherently a performance concern of having too many missiles in the world being created and that scaling up as you level up. Manyshot will be creating 1 projectile that represents N projectiles when it collides. I did _not_ have time to consolidate die rolls so that they all get the same to hit roll and critical confirmation rolls. This will take a few significant departures that aren't necessarily difficult, but would require a full QA regression of combat testing which is literally many, many man weeks of QA time which isn't budgeted for this next cycle...."

"...The status on manyshot then is that the technical hurdles that was causing it to be buff instead of a toggle has been removed. Not everything has been thoroughly tested and this change might have to be backed out if there is some catastrophic halo effect that we didn't anticipate. The game systems team can now discuss what to do about this feat going forward without the performance spectre stalking and paralyzing us...."

Remember that he is saying the "spectre stalking and paralyzing us" he is speaking of the manyshot feat, he is not talking about the rate of fire or missiles themselves. He is talking about the missiles projected by the manyshot feat.

What I think he is saying here is that he was able to make a change to have the three to four missiles represented as one missile for the purpose of collision detection, which cuts down on lag, meaning that they well be able to make changes to manyshot to make it so that you could shot more arrows, but all the arrows are detected as one collision, so from point A to B it's all one detection to show that you were facing the target, there was nothing in the way so now it's time to make a to-hit roll, now all the to hit rolls are seperate right now, so you could shoot one arrow or 100 arrows in one shot and the run off the same collision detection, causing less lag. So if you turn up the rate of fire than that is more collision detections per minute that have to be made so causing more lag.

So if that is still the case, I say let's make more bite if we can't get faster bite, and on top of that lets add in some more active ways to run a bow, can you imagine stuning blow on an arrow, stuning for 10 seconds, for 10 seconds you are getting x3 damage, how good is that? Than if you add snares or exploding ammo or even trip so you don't have to kite as much, I mean there are so many possiabilites that could be done, an arrow debuff that works on red names, 100% extra damage for 10 seconds with a 20 second timer, there are just so many things you can do with it to become more active with a bow, it's like having spells but for a melee, I think it's a good idea and would be fun to play with. The only thing is how do you add it? Enhancements? Feats? How do you get some cool abilites out there with making a cost so people can use it, but not making it to much of a cost so people just can't do it.

[orcbanian]

I'm sure its already been said, but here are a few reasons why Ranged combat isn't broken:
Example of level-appropriate run of Stormcleave.

I take my ranger in there with an Axiomatic of Pure Good bow and a selection of Acid, Frost, and Holy arrows. I run (usually faster than anyone else) with the party. When we come to the mob I stand still, target the first enemy, hit the sniper shot then hold down the fire button and be sure to cycle to the next target just before the previous one dies. Dealing out (1d8+2d6+1d6+1d6+str) X 2 per shot for the during Manyshot without even having to worry about being hit is very nice. Yes there is a nasty cooldown timer and not all quests will work this way, but the ranged build has enough strengths to compensate for its weaknesses.

[Turial]

I'm sure its already been said, but here are a few reasons why Ranged combat isn't broken:
Example of level-appropriate run of Stormcleave.

I take my ranger in there with an Axiomatic of Pure Good bow and a selection of Acid, Frost, and Holy arrows. I run (usually faster than anyone else) with the party. When we come to the mob I stand still, target the first enemy, hit the sniper shot then hold down the fire button and be sure to cycle to the next target just before the previous one dies. Dealing out (1d8+2d6+1d6+1d6+str) X 2 per shot for the during Manyshot without even having to worry about being hit is very nice. Yes there is a nasty cooldown timer and not all quests will work this way, but the ranged build has enough strengths to compensate for its weaknesses.

Sadly though there arent enough of blank damage arrows without spending a bit on the AH to cover normal use during quests so most ranged combat users are relying fully on the power of the bow rather then special arrows. Also as things increase in hp the 1d6 add from an arrow starts to fall off as a good increase to dps, unless you can get piles of greater bane arrows. It works in a pinch but there needs to be a more reliable supply. *Cough Cough Arcane archer Cough Devs*

[Strumpoo]

I'm sure its already been said, but here are a few reasons why Ranged combat isn't broken:
Example of level-appropriate run of Stormcleave.

I take my ranger in there with an Axiomatic of Pure Good bow and a selection of Acid, Frost, and Holy arrows. I run (usually faster than anyone else) with the party. When we come to the mob I stand still, target the first enemy, hit the sniper shot then hold down the fire button and be sure to cycle to the next target just before the previous one dies. Dealing out (1d8+2d6+1d6+1d6+str) X 2 per shot for the during Manyshot without even having to worry about being hit is very nice. Yes there is a nasty cooldown timer and not all quests will work this way, but the ranged build has enough strengths to compensate for its weaknesses.

Yes, now take that same archer into a high level quest. Not Stormcleave, which is a archers dream, with long expanses of wasteland to shoot over.

Take that same bowman into the Orchard or into the Vale and suddenly he fires....and fires.....and fires.... and the the mobs is on him and still has 98% of its hitpoints left.

As a "ranged" ranger, I think we definitely could use some help. The Tier III bows have helped a little, but we could use some extra, as the only time we can even come close to melee damage output is when many-shotting.

If letting us loose more arrows is too much of a lag problem, than let us loose more powerful arrows, so that they hit harder or something.

[Galapas]

That is completely and totally untrue. English longbowmen used powerful bows that only a minority of modern humans can bend. If the target survives the first shot, he's still tactically dead because there are 11 more arrows coming within a minute.

Furthermore, even if the armor could survive the arrow, the wearer would be pushed back and down and be unable to progress towards the archer before the next shot hit him.

While the English longbow was the most powerful drawn bow in western Europe, it was actually quite weak compared to other bows in use at the time, and weaker than the compound designs used by modern bowhunters. The benefit of the longbow was not its power, but its ease of production. Yew staves make a naturally composite bow, resisting compression on the inside and expansion on the outside. Even so, they are terrible compared to the composite horn/sinew bows used by the Turks and Mongols, however, they were very easy and cheap to make quickly and in large numbers.

For comparrisson, most longbowmen had a maximum range of less than 300 yards, with a record length shot of 482 yards. Turkish archers were expected to be able to shoot 600 yards, with a record shot of 915 yards. This was possible despite the greater strength of the longbowmen.

In any event, neither of these types of bows were shooting through the 2 mm steel plates well enough to kill the men wearing plate armor with padding underneath. You could get a lucky shot through the eye, or a poorly made armpit, but you were never shooting though the breastplate into his guts or chest.

Of course, swords couldn't penetrate the armor either, so there's no reason to screw archers over in game.

[Alavatar]

Heavy crossbows that required a crank to pull could penetrate armor, but not really bows. If you got a lucky shot then maybe a light crossbow or a regular bow could penetrate the armor, but plate armor was designed to provide glancing surfaces to deflect incoming fire.

Archers that used bows had to aim for the weak and uncovered spots in order to be effective (i.e. neck, groin, elbow, armpit when arm is raised, etc.) against plate. Just the same as a person with an edged melee weapon. Truly, the best weapons against someone in plate were blunt weapons and none were better then the flail. If you could cave someone's plate armor into their chest, side, arm, back, etc or put a large enough dent into their helmet then that person is effectively put out of commission.

[dameron]

That is completely and totally untrue. English longbowmen used powerful bows that only a minority of modern humans can bend. If the target survives the first shot, he's still tactically dead because there are 11 more arrows coming within a minute.

Furthermore, even if the armor could survive the arrow, the wearer would be pushed back and down and be unable to progress towards the archer before the next shot hit him.

Perhaps in a video game or a movie, where the laws of physics bend for dramatic effect, but an arrow that bounces off armor isn't going to substantially effect someone's momentum. Also, while a medieval bowman (who is in every way a "modern human") might have been able to pull a 200 lb. bow, I highly doubt he could continue to pull it at that strength for very long, so the shots would get progressively weaker.

In any case plate armor likely stymied all but the most skilled or luckky longbowmen, as has been demonstrated in several exhaustive scientific demonstrations (and an excellent summary can be found here (http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.php?p=910137#post910137)).

[EightyFour]

I'm sure its already been said, but here are a few reasons why Ranged combat isn't broken:
Example of level-appropriate run of Stormcleave.

I take my ranger in there with an Axiomatic of Pure Good bow and a selection of Acid, Frost, and Holy arrows. I run (usually faster than anyone else) with the party. When we come to the mob I stand still, target the first enemy, hit the sniper shot then hold down the fire button and be sure to cycle to the next target just before the previous one dies. Dealing out (1d8+2d6+1d6+1d6+str) X 2 per shot for the during Manyshot without even having to worry about being hit is very nice. Yes there is a nasty cooldown timer and not all quests will work this way, but the ranged build has enough strengths to compensate for its weaknesses.

I well agree with you to a point that the lower level content is balanced well enough for archers, esp. SC, but when you run with a good THF or TWF, they are going to out dps you every time. Sure you can get a few shot's in with your manyshot, but your not going to be taking out as many as the melee's.

How much is your str going to go up over the next 10 level's, another +3 to +6 extra damage maybe, guess what, your rate of fire is going to remain the same, which means you could take your bow user into the vale right now and be doing about the same damage you are doing now. Sure, you might have 4 arrows on your manyshot, but you well be moderatly effective for 20 seconds and than you well be out of the fight for 2 minutes, how many melee's you see fight for only 20 seconds and than drop out of the fight for 2 minutes, I can tell you, it's not many. And you well not drop a mob in the vale in 20 seconds with arrows, now if you have a WoP bow or repeater, than your going to be doing a lot better, but how many of those you see running around.

The fact is you think your doing good now, but just wait, you well start feeling the pain as you get higher and higher in level.

[EightyFour]

Well from what I can see from posts and just thinking over everything I've read, I believe the current idea is to turn manyshot into a stance and allow you to pick different attack penalties for different amounts of arrows. Now this would be the impression I'm given by Codog as to what he want's to do and what would happen based on feedback, now I can't say this is what well happen as you never know if everyone is on board with it or even giving the go ahead.

[redoubt]

What about just one more attack per round?

Please no flames, I'm just kinda shooting blind and thinking the stuff we've suggested so far is too hard to code. Maybe this would be easier...

Any thoughts on

...how this would improve or damage game balance?
...easier/faster to code than some of the other ideas?

[Varr]

...............If I ever have any questions about ancient archery, and likely any type of historic combat.........go to Galapas.......

In two posts he has proven to me he knows his stuff.

[shores11]

Both in real life and in D&D rule set it takes a little longer to set an arrow in a bow and fire it no matter how good of a bowman you are than to swing a sword or mace. Not taking into account any scientific analysis thats just plan common sense. The same reasoning applies to crossbows which would have a little slower firing speed that a bow. To draw back the bolt to its catch point then to aim and fire common sense again it will be slower.

I play a level 16 pure ranger and I love playing him very much. I accept his weaknesses and strengths and play around them. He is maxed out in ranged profiecency and also duel wields rapiers and short swords very well. I find I melee more often than I range as its just more particle in closed dungeons. This is role playing in the very simplist terms and that is fine. Fighters understand when they make a fighter they will not cast spells and mages (most of them) now they will not melle fight as well as fighters, etc... A ranger is a hybrid character that can range better than any other class and melee better than some and not as good as others.

For players to suggest that a ranged weapon should be able to attack with the same speed as a melee wepaon is not being practical and they are the players that want to make the game into some kind of non-realistic cartoon show. Please really think hard about the overall game play and not just well I want the ranged attack to be the same as melee because I want it. Who cares if it makes the game into a joke.

DDO has already made the ranged attack impractical in terms of what it is suppose to be by D&D ruleset so be happy with that. How about applying a -4 to hit (for aiming) when you try to attack an enemy already engaged in melee with another player?

Basically it should be alot more difficult than it is to used ranged weapons not the other way around.

[Coldin]

Both in real life and in D&D rule set it takes a little longer to set an arrow in a bow and fire it no matter how good of a bowman you are than to swing a sword or mace.

This just isn't true, and saying it is means you don't know how the 3.5 rule set works.

A ranged weapon gets just as many attacks as a melee weapon, barring any special feats or abilities. Two Weapon Fighting obviously gets more attacks, but that's because you're using two weapons opposed to one.

The fact of the matter is, ranged combat in 3.5 is just as fast as melee combat. And this should be more closely represented in DDO.

[Aesop]

This just isn't true, and saying it is means you don't know how the 3.5 rule set works.

A ranged weapon gets just as many attacks as a melee weapon, barring any special feats or abilities. Two Weapon Fighting obviously gets more attacks, but that's because you're using two weapons opposed to one.

The fact of the matter is, ranged combat in 3.5 is just as fast as melee combat. And this should be more closely represented in DDO.

Just to Clarify

BOW attack rate is just as fast as Melee... with Feats modifying this out a little. TWF get more Attacks ... actually let me put it this way


Single Weapon= Bow speed

Rapid Shot Bow Speed > Single Weapon

2WF= Rapid Shot Bow Speed

ITWF> Rapid Shot Bow Speed

GTWF>Rapid Shot Bow Speed

so fastest to slowest its

GTWF
ITWF
TWF + Rapid Shot Bow
Bow+ Single Weapon


this only includes basic rules.

disadvantages towards 2wf is the half strength off hand and the high dex and feat requireements to maintain it

Bow also is Feat intensive to be truly good at it and the biggest limitation is limited strength application (and the whole ranger thing with the Bow Strength is just silly in my opinion)

Aesop

[Coldin]

Bow also is Feat intensive to be truly good at it and the biggest limitation is limited strength application (and the whole ranger thing with the Bow Strength is just silly in my opinion)

Aesop

Thanks for clarifying Aesop.

And totally agree about Bow Strength. I don't have a problem with rangers getting the ability to add their full strength bonus to bow damage, but other classes should have access to a similar ability, either from composite bows or feats.

[geoffhanna]

This is a highly entertaining thread, and educational too. :)

There are three topics in here that are forcing me (forcing me! I want to resist :D) to respond.

The idea that ranged attacking needs to balance with other attack style DPS. No it doesn't. Ranged attackers take no damage. That ends this topic, yes?
That a 100% ranged attacker needs to be easily viable: No it doesn't. No other play style is easily viable 100% of the time. Ever play a nuking-only caster? Even Zergly the Barbarian cannot 100% zerg without the support of his team
That PnP ranged is better and Turbine gimped it. No it isn't. In DDO you can fire into melee without penalty. You can target anyone without rolling concealment because a team member is in the way. And the DDO implementation of Precise Shot and (especially) Improved Precise Shot are way more ranged-friendly than D&D version.

I think most of the ideas in this thread would be unbalancing, and some of them would be really severely unbalancing.

The system could stand a tweak but it doesn't need major adustments.

[Aesop]

This is a highly entertaining thread, and educational too. :)

There are three topics in here that are forcing me (forcing me! I want to resist :D) to respond.

The idea that ranged attacking needs to balance with other attack style DPS. No it doesn't. Ranged attackers take no damage. That ends this topic, yes?

Not in current end content and not in a lot of other content


That a 100% ranged attacker needs to be easily viable: No it doesn't. No other play style is easily viable 100% of the time. Ever play a nuking-only caster? Even Zergly the Barbarian cannot 100% zerg without the support of his team


I'm not sure if someone said it always needs to be easily viable or even viable in the 100% range... but it should be more viable than just a few areas and a few quests


That PnP ranged is better and Turbine gimped it. No it isn't. In DDO you can fire into melee without penalty. You can target anyone without rolling concealment because a team member is in the way. And the DDO implementation of Precise Shot and (especially) Improved Precise Shot are way more ranged-friendly than D&D version.


Yes and on that same note PnP doesn't let you drop a fireball on your party or wander through walls of flame simpply because it wasthrown by a party member. However beyond that they also made the damage of said spells more than 5x more powerful while in comparative form to melee and casting they slowed Ranged attack rates down... significantly.

Precise Shot in PnP lets you shoot into melee without penalty.
Improved Precise Shot lets you ignore concealment.
so in a way yes they are more powerful... to do what Improved Precise shot does you'd need

Penetrating Shot from the Player Handbook 2


Please don't confuse what I'm saying. I'm not saying that ranged combat doesn't have a place here or that it is more gimped out than a 20 intelligence Paladin ... I'm saying that relative to the other forms of attack it needs some improvements. I'm not even asking that it match Melee in terms of RoA (Rate of Attack) only that it has a chance to come closer to it. As it stands ranged with all the feats attacks at about 60% of Melee speed... that is silly. Especially in Teleporting Devil Land. With fireball and NPC ranged attacker throwing attacks at the same rate wehen melee NPCs throw attacks at less than half the speed (triple smash not withstanding)



I think most of the ideas in this thread would be unbalancing, and some of them would be really severely unbalancing.

The system could stand a tweak but it doesn't need major adustments.


I'll disagree on the not needing major adjustments but balance does need to be maintained

Aesop

[redoubt]

This is a highly entertaining thread, and educational too. :)

There are three topics in here that are forcing me (forcing me! I want to resist :D) to respond.

The idea that ranged attacking needs to balance with other attack style DPS. No it doesn't. Ranged attackers take no damage. That ends this topic, yes?

Ah... no. When ranging I am often hit by enemy arrows, spears, rocks, fire ball chuckie things (kobalds), and spells. How is it that ranged takes no damage again?

That a 100% ranged attacker needs to be easily viable: No it doesn't. No other play style is easily viable 100% of the time. Ever play a nuking-only caster? Even Zergly the Barbarian cannot 100% zerg without the support of his team

Why shouldn't a character that is 100% ranged be viable? Maybe we are not using the same definition of viable. Most people do not feel that ranged attacks (not counting spells) do not do enough damage to be a viable combat style anywhere except the shroud parts 4 & 5.

That PnP ranged is better and Turbine gimped it. No it isn't. In DDO you can fire into melee without penalty. You can target anyone without rolling concealment because a team member is in the way. And the DDO implementation of Precise Shot and (especially) Improved Precise Shot are way more ranged-friendly than D&D version.

Sorry, as I've told others before... I'm not a PnP player. I just enjoy DDO.


I think most of the ideas in this thread would be unbalancing, and some of them would be really severely unbalancing.

1 more shot per round is unbalancing?

The system could stand a tweak but it doesn't need major adustments.

:D

[geoffhanna]

Aesop : I don't contest your viewpoint. I think we have distilled the argument down to opinions, and yours is as valid as mine. Well okay no it's not, I'm right :D. p.s. I do not think we are as much disagreement as much as may appear.

Redoubt :

(1) A melee attacker is subject to enemy melee counterattacks that cannot be dodged. A ranged attacker that receives counter-fire can dodge (in fact just jumping up and down while shooting makes pretty much everything miss).

(2) A character that is 100% ranged is viable, but not easily so. There are a handful of situations where even a skilled player cannot kite while ranging, but only a few. Although this won't be popular with the tanks :)

Also, I think your idea of one arrow per round may fall into the category of a tweak. It depends on how you define round.

[EightyFour]

I'll agree that ranged combatant's take less damage due to them not being in the thick of things, they still do take damage though. However the DPS is way off the scale, I'm not saying that ranged combat should become better than melee combat but it should be comparable. I am even willing to take a hit on damage due to the fact that I could do that damage from a distance, but a 50% hit on damage vs. a melee is to big a hit in my mind. I would take a 10 to 20% hit and that would make me a lot happier.

The fact is I don't understand why it is that you would want someone in your party that is going to do far less damage than you as a melee, I mean ranged attacks shouldn't become the best thing sense sliced bread, but they need to be improved a bit from the current state of things.

Is your opinion formed from the idea that you think the developer's should be spending time and money in other area's of development?

Do you have a level 16 ranged attacker?

If you do have a level 16 ranged attacker, what bows/crossbows do you use?

Is your ranged attacker half ranged and half melee, or fully ranged?

The reason I ask these questions is I want to get a better understanding of how you formed your opinion, and if I can get more information I can see how your logic works on this subject, as for right now I don't understand how you can think that doing far less damage than a melee is a good thing.

[Twerpp]

Ranged damage should be nowhere near melee damage. Even a rogue shooting in sneak attack range has very little risk of getting hit....add the fact that actual rangers have evasion which is near immunity to AoE spells, theyve got it pretty good. Also consider the fact that you get BOTH ranged and twf pathways FREE unlike PnP, the versatility to do massive melee dps yourself and back off and range, life is pretty **** good. Ranged combat speed does not need or deserve an increase.

[iruka41]

Ranged damage should be nowhere near melee damage. Even a rogue shooting in sneak attack range has very little risk of getting hit....add the fact that actual rangers have evasion which is near immunity to AoE spells, theyve got it pretty good. Also consider the fact that you get BOTH ranged and twf pathways FREE unlike PnP, the versatility to do massive melee dps yourself and back off and range, life is pretty **** good. Ranged combat speed does not need or deserve an increase.

If Devs seperate those 2 ranger special abilities, (by forcing rangers to choose their way, either TWF or Ranged)
and if the ranged combat is improved,

then Fighters can be effectively specialized in Ranged combat and still capable of competable DPS.

I see this way as more attracitve and right, balanced.


P.S. I was quite happy to have both abilities (TWF and Ranged) because Rangers were seriously gimped and got no love long time ago, but seriously there's no need for that advantage anymore when Tempest rangers are this powerful now. They're good enough w/o ranged weapons these days.

[EightyFour]

Well I would like to play a ranged character, so my idea's about ranged combat are a bit different sense that is my primary source of damage. It just seems to me there are a handful of people that say ranged combat is fine the way it is.

My question to you is do you play a ranged combat character that is only ranged combat?

If the answer is no, than I must say that I believe your conclusions are not founded from experience, but are opinion's formed from your observation's of maybe others playing ranged characters? Or maybe you are a melee that uses a bow from time to time and do not depend on it as your primary source of damage?

Also ranger's are not the only bow/crossbow users, so using rangers as a bases for supporting your argument of ranged combat not needing a boost is not well structured, and it show's me that you are not considering the overall game but focusing only on ranger's with a certain make up of of stats.

However currently you can not play a ranged combatant in this game as effectively as a melee, your dps well be far less. What I do understand is that you well be able to make a tempest Ranger/Fighter, to become both effective as melee and range, so you could do dps up front and when you get a little low you could drop back and be effective at ranged as well.

I'm just wondering what is the fear here that I keep seeing, currently ranged damage and melee damage are vastly different, I'm not saying ranged should become better, but it should be balanced, and by balanced I don't mean equal with melee damage, but it should be comparable. Don't you want people that want to have fun with ranged combat have fun and be able to help you out as well, or do you like the significantly less damage of another person in your party. Do you enjoy taking more damage because someone's dps is not as good as yours on a melee?

What I don't understand is that this is not a PvP game, you are not in competition with your fellow players, you are in a group with them, but now that I think about it, some people are in competition and maybe this is where some of this is coming from?

It just seems that most people that say ranged combat does not need to be fixed do not think about throwers, bow users, or crossbow users. And to top it all off, they normally don't play a character that dose ranged combat so they say what they think but they have no experience in the area.

[Aesop]

Ranged combat is way too slow.


its Damage is too low with the exception of a 20 sec burst of damage every 2 minutes from Many Shot... which is a broken ability anyway. No single Feat should more than triple your damage output . Its why I made the suggestions I did

with all Feat and abilities combined ranged combat is at less the 60% the speed of single weapon combat. infact it is at ~60% of Falchion speed... pretty much the slowest melee

the lowest form of damage for melee is S&B (which I also think needs a boost) and it still far outpaces Ranged in terms of DPS.

those are my opinions on the matter

Aesop

[iruka41]

Well I would like to play a ranged character, so my idea's about ranged combat are a bit different sense that is my primary source of damage. It just seems to me there are a handful of people that say ranged combat is fine the way it is.

My question to you is do you play a ranged combat character that is only ranged combat?

If the answer is no, than I must say that I believe your conclusions are not founded from experience, but are opinion's formed from your observation's of maybe others playing ranged characters? Or maybe you are a melee that uses a bow from time to time and do not depend on it as your primary source of damage?

Also ranger's are not the only bow/crossbow users, so using rangers as a bases for supporting your argument of ranged combat not needing a boost is not well structured, and it show's me that you are not considering the overall game but focusing only on ranger's with a certain make up of of stats.

However currently you can not play a ranged combatant in this game as effectively as a melee, your dps well be far less. What I do understand is that you well be able to make a tempest Ranger/Fighter, to become both effective as melee and range, so you could do dps up front and when you get a little low you could drop back and be effective at ranged as well.

I'm just wondering what is the fear here that I keep seeing, currently ranged damage and melee damage are vastly different, I'm not saying ranged should become better, but it should be balanced, and by balanced I don't mean equal with melee damage, but it should be comparable. Don't you want people that want to have fun with ranged combat have fun and be able to help you out as well, or do you like the significantly less damage of another person in your party. Do you enjoy taking more damage because someone's dps is not as good as yours on a melee?

What I don't understand is that this is not a PvP game, you are not in competition with your fellow players, you are in a group with them, but now that I think about it, some people are in competition and maybe this is where some of this is coming from?

It just seems that most people that say ranged combat does not need to be fixed do not think about throwers, bow users, or crossbow users. And to top it all off, they normally don't play a character that dose ranged combat so they say what they think but they have no experience in the area.

Well, I am sure most of us here have once tried to build a ranged character, and disapointed, rerolled.
So it's kinda tricky to say they don't have expirience. It's just that they don't play it anymore.

When talking about ranged combat, Rangers SHOULD be the standard. It's not wrong at all. They should be the best at ranged combat, if built right. If rangers are fine with ranged combat, then it's well balanced. Picking some other non-ranger classes to say that ranged combat is broken, THAT is not fair IMO.

Not that I disagree that current ranged combat needs improvement, but just saying that 'If rangers are satified, then it's all good' (And most rangers are NOT satisfied ATM)

On a side note, yet redundant, the best Ranger I've seen so far is not a common Dwarven-Tempester, but a Elven Repeater Ranger. His main weapons are heavy repeaters, including Banishing, WoP, Green Steel Tier3. He does stat damage and pure DPS with his repeaters 99% of the time. I have seen it several times just in front of me and I have to say repeaters are out of concern. It is already powerful enough. (He can solo every Vale quests except Devil, in 15~20 min, Raindow in 10 min.)

BTW, Bow is not a DEX-based weapon. It's a STR/DEX-based weapon. To do DPS with it, you have to find your way to max your STR. Without that, complaining about ranged DPS is nonsense.

For example, if an elf started with 14STR and invested all of her level up stat points into DEX, then it's not a build for ranged DPS, IMO.
Max your STR first, and then complain.
I mean, for Elves, starting DEX of 18, +4Enhancement, +6Item, +2Tome = 30.
With Bow Enhancements, initial to Hit is like, BAB16 +DEX10 +Enhance2 +Bow5 +GH4 +Haste1 = 38.
No reason to invest into DEX at all.
Instead I'll consider couple levels of Barbs, and look for the Madstone Boots.)

[Aesop]

Well, I am sure most of us here have once tried to build a ranged character, and disapointed, rerolled.
So it's kinda tricky to say they don't have expirience. It's just that they don't play it anymore.

Well if that's the case wouldn't it be true that Ranged COmbat needs a boost to at least be more interesting


When talking about ranged combat, rangers SHOULD be the standard. It's not wrong at all. They should be the best at ranged combat, if built right. If rangers are fine with ranged combat, then it's well balanced. Picking some other non-ranger classes to say that ranged combat is broken, THAT is not fair IMO.


The best Ranged class in PnP is a Fighter. Ranger is not a Ranged calss they are more akin to a scout with good melee and ranged abilities. DDO has given them an extra perk that makes at least 1 level required for any Bow build. Which is silly


Not that I disagree that current ranged combat needs improvement, but just saying that 'If rangers are satified, then it's all good' (And most rangers are NOT satisfied ATM)

On a side note, yet redundant, the best ranger I've seen so far is not a common Dwarven-Tempester, but a Repeater Ranger. His main weapons are heavy repeaters, including Banishing, WoP, Green Steel Tier3. He does stat damage and pure DPS with his repeaters 99% of the time. I have seen it several times just in front of me and I have to say repeaters are out of concern. It is already powerful enough. (He can solo every Vale quests except Devil, in 15~20 min, Raindow in 10 min.)


That just shows that repeaters are a little off


BTW, Bow is not a DEX-based weapon. It's a STR/DEX-based weapon. To do DPS with it, you have to find your way to max your STR. Without that, complaining about ranged DPS is nonsense. (For example, if an elf started with 14STR and invested all of her level up stat points into DEX, then it's not a build for ranged DPS, IMO. Max your STR first, and then complain.)

A Ranger with a Starting STR of 14 could end up with a STR of 24 (26 if 2 fighter splash)quite easily which is plenty for damage capacity on any finesse heavy character. The fact that it is believed needed to be effective to have strengths in the high 20s and 30s (though ask most barbs and they say mid 40s) is a problem with the system in general


Aesop

[seldarin]

Someone may have already said this, but IMO melee is melee, ranged is ranged. It would seem to me that someone is a bit ticked that they cant do as much damage as a melee. Last time i checked, there isnt a heros roster for who does the most damage, or who kills the most. If you arent soloing, you are in a group, ie, more than one, that means you are a team, you are working towards a common goal, and that is to complete the quest. For those that say a ranged combatant does no damage, i guess that 100 or so pts a hit would be considered no damage. Ranged weapons are no different to melee weapons, they are situational. Each mob has things they are vulnerable to and things they arent. You will do less dmg to a skellie with a bow than you will with a mace, why? Because they have dmg reduced against piercing and edged weapons, thats a DnD thing, not just DDO. You dont need to have 30 plus str to be effective in a party as a ranged combatant, will help do more damage, especially if you have bow str from ranger lvls.

Before i get totally off track, short story, dont get beat up over the fact that a ranged combatant isnt beating the beejezus out of something, whereas a melee does. Do you feel discrimated against by other players because you are a ranged combatant? If the answer is yes, its the players mindset that needs to be addressed, not the gaming mechanics. Ranged shouldnt do the same dmg as melee, otherwise who would melee? Why would you melee? Damage your armor and pretty weapons, dont think so. Everyone would range and aggro would be bounced all over the shop. The balance between ranged damage and melee is as it should be and is adequate. To say that you dont enjoy a ranged toon because you cant outpoint a raged barbarian with 50 str is borderline ridiculous. Thats just my $0.02 worth.

[iruka41]

Well if that's the case wouldn't it be true that Ranged COmbat needs a boost to at least be more interesting

Already said that I don't disagree with that :)


The best Ranged class in PnP is a Fighter. Ranger is not a Ranged calss they are more akin to a scout with good melee and ranged abilities. DDO has given them an extra perk that makes at least 1 level required for any Bow build. Which is silly

Well, DDO is not PnP :(. There's no 'scouty' things in DDO ATM.
(Though I agree that well-built ranged Fighter SHOULD be qually great at ranged combat.)


A Ranger with a Starting STR of 14 could end up with a STR of 24 (26 if 2 fighter splash)quite easily which is plenty for damage capacity on any finesse heavy character. The fact that it is believed needed to be effective to have strengths in the high 20s and 30s (though ask most barbs and they say mid 40s) is a problem with the system in general

Ranged combat already has its benefit (out of dangerous melee combat).
It will break the balance if ranged DPS could match any type of melee combat, even Finessed TWF.
I don't see it as a problem.
(Well, it's seriously lower now, that'll be the problem, yeah. But it shouldn't be the same too.)

BTW, Elf, 16STR +4Level +6Item +2Rage +2Ram +4Barb_Rage +2Tome easily makes 36. (While maintaining self-buffed +37 to Hit)
If with +3Tome, Madstone Boots, already at 40s. No need to ask those barbs, SHE can be a barb, a ranged barb.
(Heck, 1Ranger/15Barb will hit 40s w/o Madstone, but will suffer like -1 to hit again. Big deal :D)

If the Barb_Rage is not concerned because it's not constant,
there's a paladin spell coming next mod, the Righteous Fury. +4 STR.
I can think of Elven Ranged 6Ranger/12Paladin, or something like that.

[Twerpp]

If Devs seperate those 2 ranger special abilities, (by forcing rangers to choose their way, either TWF or Ranged)
and if the ranged combat is improved,

then Fighters can be effectively specialized in Ranged combat and still capable of competable DPS.

I see this way as more attracitve and right, balanced.


P.S. I was quite happy to have both abilities (TWF and Ranged) because Rangers were seriously gimped and got no love long time ago, but seriously there's no need for that advantage anymore when Tempest rangers are this powerful now. They're good enough w/o ranged weapons these days.

Agreement. They should be separated as in PnP, melee focused ranger could have tempest II and the toughness line they can put to good use. Bowman would need something much better than whats available now though if they were to sacrifice TWF. And of course they could still choose to spec the feats and have both styles, just not for free as it is now.

[Turial]

Agreement. They should be separated as in PnP, melee focused ranger could have tempest II and the toughness line they can put to good use. Bowman would need something much better than whats available now though if they were to sacrifice TWF. And of course they could still choose to spec the feats and have both styles, just not for free as it is now.

Also agreed. Seeing as there is the ability to split monks into the two paths it would seem that the tech is now available to do the same for rangers.

[redoubt]

Ranged damage should be nowhere near melee damage. Even a rogue shooting in sneak attack range has very little risk of getting hit....add the fact that actual rangers have evasion which is near immunity to AoE spells, theyve got it pretty good. Also consider the fact that you get BOTH ranged and twf pathways FREE unlike PnP, the versatility to do massive melee dps yourself and back off and range, life is pretty **** good. Ranged combat speed does not need or deserve an increase.

Twerpp,

You are assuming that ranged attackers are rangers. This is not the case. Rangers get evasion at level 9. Rangers get bow feats and twf feats. Bowbarians, Fighters archers etc get neither of these and I'm sure there are other ranged characters that don't go very far into the ranger class.

The discussion is about bow rate of fire. Not rangers.

[Coldin]

Someone may have already said this, but IMO melee is melee, ranged is ranged. It would seem to me that someone is a bit ticked that they cant do as much damage as a melee. Last time i checked, there isnt a heros roster for who does the most damage, or who kills the most. If you arent soloing, you are in a group, ie, more than one, that means you are a team, you are working towards a common goal, and that is to complete the quest. For those that say a ranged combatant does no damage, i guess that 100 or so pts a hit would be considered no damage. Ranged weapons are no different to melee weapons, they are situational. Each mob has things they are vulnerable to and things they arent. You will do less dmg to a skellie with a bow than you will with a mace, why? Because they have dmg reduced against piercing and edged weapons, thats a DnD thing, not just DDO. You dont need to have 30 plus str to be effective in a party as a ranged combatant, will help do more damage, especially if you have bow str from ranger lvls.

Before i get totally off track, short story, dont get beat up over the fact that a ranged combatant isnt beating the beejezus out of something, whereas a melee does. Do you feel discrimated against by other players because you are a ranged combatant? If the answer is yes, its the players mindset that needs to be addressed, not the gaming mechanics. Ranged shouldnt do the same dmg as melee, otherwise who would melee? Why would you melee? Damage your armor and pretty weapons, dont think so. Everyone would range and aggro would be bounced all over the shop. The balance between ranged damage and melee is as it should be and is adequate. To say that you dont enjoy a ranged toon because you cant outpoint a raged barbarian with 50 str is borderline ridiculous. Thats just my $0.02 worth.

I don't know where to even start, but it's this kind of attitude towards ranged combat that annoys me. Yes, ranged and melee are different, but there's things in place to counteract the benefits of both.

And no one here is saying Ranged should be superior to melee or even equal to it in terms of damage. I think most people understand that it's a generally safer method of damage, and should be a tad weaker. But at it's current level, it's vastly below the damage curve of even a sword n' board player. And the only time a bow user catches up is with manyshot, which isn't really a feat designed for that purpose in PnP. All it's really supposed to do is let you make multiple attacks in a Standard action (at a significant penalty) and still let you take a move action.

Really, I think basically the key thing here, is that the average archer just doesn't feel very effective in their role unless they're using manyshot, or they're a crazy repeater build. The whole point should be getting ranged combat to feel like a good way to contribute to your party, and the first step of that is increasing the speed of basic RoF.

(Possibly second is to make several different animations for firing a bow, so it doesn't seem so monotonous and hence more exciting and interesting.)

[Turial]

....
(Possibly second is to make several different animations for firing a bow, so it doesn't seem so monotonous and hence more exciting and interesting.)

I like the close range "stab the creature in the eye with the arrow before knocking it and shooting the creature" move. (only thing refering to what you wrote Coldin)

The second thing is, yes ranged combat is "safer" then melee. The tradeoff is a greater vulnerability once mobs get close to you (no shield and -4 ac). Remember ranged combat is balanced against shield and warhammer combat in pnp (warhammers and bows being the most similar in damage, crit range, and crit multiplier).

Ranged based combat should not beat two-handed or two weapon fighting anymore then swoard and board should, because these two forms of melee combat have increased vulnerability and cost to make up for their increased damage output. You will see very few ranged combat users even say that ranged should be equal to these.

Most ranged combat users, know deep down in their hearts (they may not admit it), that a boost to ranged combat will likely come at the cost of the current form of manyshot. Depending on how things are handled it may be a good thing.

[Coldin]

I like the close range "stab the creature in the eye with the arrow before knocking it and shooting the creature" move.

Well, not exactly what I was thinking, but that would be pretty cool. An arrow only deals 1d4 damage though, so everyone would be complaining about that. :)

[Turial]

Well, not exactly what I was thinking, but that would be pretty cool. An arrow only deals 1d4 damage though, so everyone would be complaining about that. :)

I would be happy with that. Cause if thats all I have wrong with the game its a good thing.

[Zenako]

Some replies in yellow. While not specifically addressed to me, I offer these thoughts.


I'll agree that ranged combatant's take less damage due to them not being in the thick of things, they still do take damage though. However the DPS is way off the scale, I'm not saying that ranged combat should become better than melee combat but it should be comparable. I am even willing to take a hit on damage due to the fact that I could do that damage from a distance, but a 50% hit on damage vs. a melee is to big a hit in my mind. I would take a 10 to 20% hit and that would make me a lot happier.

Problem is, just looking at the output dps ignores a lot of the rest of the system and effects of the encounter. A ranged attacker will in general take a lot less damage, require a lot less healing resources (spell points) and in general not tax the party as much. What colors this is poorly played archers, just as a poorly played meatshield barbarian can run thru a clerics entire blue bar in one minute. Way too many archers want to be stuck on using just one bow. You need to use the right ones for the mobs at hand. If you do, the NET effect can be significant. Also any Ranger archer who does not also have appropriate melee gear for when it is called for is not playing effectively either.

The fact is I don't understand why it is that you would want someone in your party that is going to do far less damage than you as a melee, I mean ranged attacks shouldn't become the best thing sense sliced bread, but they need to be improved a bit from the current state of things.

At many levels of the game, dps ends up being irrelevant when compared to effects that IK the mob anyway. About the main thing lacking from ranged attacks (bows, Xbows) are Vorpal Effects. Against Red names, DPS will matter, but then, you can select your gear to suit that one foe and be very efficient. It is rare for anything but a Raid Boss to live longer than a single Manyshot duration from what I see.

Is your opinion formed from the idea that you think the developer's should be spending time and money in other area's of development?

Partly and the fact that I like to think I am looking at the whole system/encounter at once and not biasing my preferences by favoring the common playstyle which tends to make many tactical advantages not a factor. When you can overwhelm the enemy with a suitable expenditure of resources (often repeated mass healings) then why use other methods that would take longer is a mindset that I see quite often.

Do you have a level 16 ranged attacker?

yes

If you do have a level 16 ranged attacker, what bows/crossbows do you use?

Silver, W/P, W/E, almost all Greater Banes, +4Transmuting of Pure Good, etc

Is your ranged attacker half ranged and half melee, or fully ranged?

As circumstances require. I have perhaps 8 sets of dual wielding weapons too.

The reason I ask these questions is I want to get a better understanding of how you formed your opinion, and if I can get more information I can see how your logic works on this subject, as for right now I don't understand how you can think that doing far less damage than a melee is a good thing.

[Coldin]

Some replies in yellow. While not specifically addressed to me, I offer these thoughts.

Zenako, you really should be on our side if you really do use archery so much...


Problem is, just looking at the output dps ignores a lot of the rest of the system and effects of the encounter. A ranged attacker will in general take a lot less damage, require a lot less healing resources (spell points) and in general not tax the party as much. What colors this is poorly played archers, just as a poorly played meatshield barbarian can run thru a clerics entire blue bar in one minute. Way too many archers want to be stuck on using just one bow. You need to use the right ones for the mobs at hand. If you do, the NET effect can be significant. Also any Ranger archer who does not also have appropriate melee gear for when it is called for is not playing effectively either.


I'm not sure you really actually read any of the other posts here. Most of us for improved archery agree that ranged is generally safer than melee combat. But the benefits are not equal to the lower DPS.

You also say that you need to use the right bows. Sure, Greater Banes can help a lot with DPS, but melee get just as easy access to those weapons as well, plus they attack faster. Bows get the small advantage of combining different arrow and bow effects, but unfortunately different varietes of arrows are way too difficult to come by to be a main consideration in average ranged DPS.


At many levels of the game, dps ends up being irrelevant when compared to effects that IK the mob anyway. About the main thing lacking from ranged attacks (bows, Xbows) are Vorpal Effects. Against Red names, DPS will matter, but then, you can select your gear to suit that one foe and be very efficient. It is rare for anything but a Raid Boss to live longer than a single Manyshot duration from what I see.

I'm actually a little sick and tired of this whole "I use Manyshot and kill it very quickly" argument. What about the archer who doesn't have Manyshot but still wants to be effective and useful to the group? What about when your Manyshot timer is up, and you're back to that slow standard pace? Ranged should be more than just about Manyshot. Frankly, I wouldn't mind if Manyshot was removed from the game completely, so long as base RoF was increased greatly to compensate.


Do you have a level 16 ranged attacker?

yes

If you do have a level 16 ranged attacker, what bows/crossbows do you use?

Silver, W/P, W/E, almost all Greater Banes, +4Transmuting of Pure Good, etc

Is your ranged attacker half ranged and half melee, or fully ranged?

As circumstances require. I have perhaps 8 sets of dual wielding weapons too.

First off, you have 8 sets of dual-wielding weapons, don't really say you're ranged attacker unless you're spending about 80% of time using a bow. Really keep track of how often you're whipping out that bow. Is it only when you can use manyshot? If so, it's more abusing an overpowered mechanic, than really sticking to archery as viable means of combat.

Plus, you have Wounding of Puncturing bow. That's pretty much the king of all weapons. Of course you're going to be killing things fairly easy with it. An 80-year-old atrophied kobold with only one eye can be effective with a Wounding of Puncturing.

/sigh

Really, I don't understand why people are so resistant to ranged combat being improved. Do you people think that improving ranged combat will in so way nerf melee? Do you think that it will make melee combat obsolete? Really, I want to know why we keep having to explain to you guys that ranged combat needs to be improved, over and over again.

[Aesop]

/sigh

Really, I don't understand why people are so resistant to ranged combat being improved. Do you people think that improving ranged combat will in so way nerf melee? Do you think that it will make melee combat obsolete? Really, I want to know why we keep having to explain to you guys that ranged combat needs to be improved, over and over again.

Because people are afraid that their dual wielding WoP Barbarians will be outkilled by an archer

j/k ... sorta

[Zenako]

Zenako, you really should be on our side if you really do use archery so much...

First off, you have 8 sets of dual-wielding weapons, don't really say you're ranged attacker unless you're spending about 80% of time using a bow. Really keep track of how often you're whipping out that bow. Is it only when you can use manyshot? If so, it's more abusing an overpowered mechanic, than really sticking to archery as viable means of combat.

Plus, you have Wounding of Puncturing bow. That's pretty much the king of all weapons. Of course you're going to be killing things fairly easy with it. An 80-year-old atrophied kobold with only one eye can be effective with a Wounding of Puncturing.

/sigh

Really, I don't understand why people are so resistant to ranged combat being improved. Do you people think that improving ranged combat will in so way nerf melee? Do you think that it will make melee combat obsolete? Really, I want to know why we keep having to explain to you guys that ranged combat needs to be improved, over and over again.

The breakdown on Ranged vs Melee will vary strongly based on the quest and the topography. In some layouts you really don't have much line of sight, making advantages of ranged attacking a lot more problematic. It also depends on the composition of the group I am running with (or if running solo). I try to compliment the group.

That being said, the problem comes with the full range of gear that is available in the game and the various features/feats you can achieve. If something is made powerful/competitive with nominal gear, it might very very easily become overwhelming with some of the top end stuff. That top end gear exists and is not going away, and more of it shows up every day. (I only very recently picked up the W/P bow.)

What I percieve is many players look at how the game is being played out in the groups they run with and in those ranged attacks are fundamentally gimped, just as bards songs would be if no one ever gave them a chance to sing them or waited around...(oh yeah that happens all the time even now...sigh). That is not a fundamental issue with RoF or DPS, but how various groups choose to play the game. That choice is not wrong, but it does limit the benefits of other actions once you head down that path. In addition, a great many players are so well off that blowing $$ on supplies is a non issue. They think nothing of dropping 100 Heal scrolls on a quest, and that aspect creates another imbalance with reduces the benefits of ranged combat by removing the reduced incoming damage most ranged attackers take.

So the brute force (melee) approach is subsidized and enabled by both the economy (which funds the supplies) and the desires of many players to optimize quest completion time. With those factors in place, the higher dps of hand to hand melee becomes the preferred choice of combat. What many seekers of increased dps for ranged are looking for is a way to have the completion time cake and get to use their ranged attacks as the method, when by the very design of the methods, the choice to balance them was structured on granting ranged attacks a lower risk of death, damage and resource expenses.

Combat is part of the whole system, and the balance the designers attempted to construct was to find that elusive sweet spot between risk and rewards. It looks to me like part of the concept was more about using efficient tactics, but in a context where time to completion was not anywhere near as important as it has become. If the general player base was happy to complete a quest like Redwillow in an hour, instead of usually taking 1/3 that time (or less), then the way you approach combat and feat and skills balance is different.

Think back to some of the Enhancments for Paladins that had something like a 120 Minute reset (Or something huge like that) when first presented. Those were quickly laughed at since it would be once a night, not even once a quest usage. It was revised down to 10 minutes IIRC). Even then, that seems like an eternity for some players.

Where am I going with this? Balance is a very tricky issue. Do you make the balance exist in the 10 minute quest completion style or do you create a balance with a 60 minute style? I personally think the various styles are very balanced in the "60 minute" style right now, but that if the deisre is to achieve greater parity in offensive potential in the "10 minute style" there are things that could be done, but any change there will unbalance the siutation in other styles.

Something as simple as reducing the cooldown timer on manyshot by 50% (and like it or not, manyshot is a core component of ranged attacks and evaluating them so it cannot be ignored, it would be like ignoring Raging and all its effects when looking at barbarian melee) would enable it to be used more often in the "10 minute style", but still not all the time. It would make it an almost "all the time" option in the "60 minute style".

As it is right now, a starting character who uses a low level elemental repeater can almost singlehandedly own most quests. (I know, I twinked one that way...). What I see are many of the solutions out of context. IF only working on ranged attacking, the changes seem quite reasonably and in fact hard to not support, but for some of the same overall balance reasons they have not created HEAL potions and the best you can find/buy are Cure Serious Pots, the reason is overall game balance, between characters, rates of doing healing, damage whatever, and the paradigm of making grouping and working together the most desireable and efficient way of tackling quests in the game.

[EightyFour]

I would just like to repeat to everyone here, that increasing RoF well not happen, it causes way to much lag. Due to the change in Mod 6 though, we may get an improvement to the manyshot feat making it a stance with selectable amount of arrows at different penalty's to the selection, i.e. More arrows you use, the higher your negtive to you to-hit mod. less arrows you use lower penalty to your to-hit mod.

[Angelus_dead]

I would just like to repeat to everyone here, that increasing RoF well not happen, it causes way to much lag
Incorrect. The devs could double bow ROF if they wanted to. They won't, but that's because of game design, not technical limitations. There is really NO reason arrow attacks need to be laggy at all. It can be easily worked around.

[EightyFour]

Well, I am sure most of us here have once tried to build a ranged character, and disapointed, rerolled.
So it's kinda tricky to say they don't have expirience. It's just that they don't play it anymore.

OK, but they do not feel the same pain. They gave up on something that is broken, heck I know people that even quit playing DDO because of this, what they wanted was ranged combat, I must admit this was more towards the first 8 months of the game, and I only know 4 people that quit because of this.



When talking about ranged combat, Rangers SHOULD be the standard. It's not wrong at all. They should be the best at ranged combat, if built right. If rangers are fine with ranged combat, then it's well balanced. Picking some other non-ranger classes to say that ranged combat is broken, THAT is not fair IMO.

What I'm trying to get people to focus on more than just the ranger class is the system of ranged combat, now I well not say anything about repeaters, as I think they are find the way they are, IMHO. Also sense you say yourself rangers are the best at ranged combat, that is exactly why I say they are not the standard, and again I'm trying to move this away from the ranger class and get it focused on where it belongs, on the system itself.


Not that I disagree that current ranged combat needs improvement, but just saying that 'If rangers are satified, then it's all good' (And most rangers are NOT satisfied ATM)

I well agree with you on this point. I do think if the rangers are satisfied than everyone else well be, minus the only change being only to the manyshot feat and not to the system itself, this well make the rangers happy and anyone with manyshot, maybe, but it well not make any ranged users happy that do not use manyshot. What about the duel dagger thrower? Are they happy?


On a side note, yet redundant, the best Ranger I've seen so far is not a common Dwarven-Tempester, but a Elven Repeater Ranger. His main weapons are heavy repeaters, including Banishing, WoP, Green Steel Tier3. He does stat damage and pure DPS with his repeaters 99% of the time. I have seen it several times just in front of me and I have to say repeaters are out of concern. It is already powerful enough. (He can solo every Vale quests except Devil, in 15~20 min, Raindow in 10 min.)

I agree.



BTW, Bow is not a DEX-based weapon. It's a STR/DEX-based weapon. To do DPS with it, you have to find your way to max your STR. Without that, complaining about ranged DPS is nonsense.

For example, if an elf started with 14STR and invested all of her level up stat points into DEX, then it's not a build for ranged DPS, IMO.
Max your STR first, and then complain.
I mean, for Elves, starting DEX of 18, +4Enhancement, +6Item, +2Tome = 30.
With Bow Enhancements, initial to Hit is like, BAB16 +DEX10 +Enhance2 +Bow5 +GH4 +Haste1 = 38.
No reason to invest into DEX at all.
Instead I'll consider couple levels of Barbs, and look for the Madstone Boots.)

I've seen a barb/ranger range bow user, and I have to say, even though better than some with his 40 str, he still was not as effective as a melee as I was playing the melee, although I would have to say if we were in an all ranged group for some crazy reason, he would by far be doing the most damage, but even he was suffering from the lack of attacks, so I think something like a feat that opens up several different enhancements, like a stunning blow for ranged, some kind of cripple attack or a slow of some kind, trip's or hamstrings, exploding arrows, slaying arrows as in your can create an arrow that just slays anything, with timers on all of these of course, I'm just thinking not only would this make ranged combat more effective with a reduction in lag but at the same time give people more options and make the ranged based character a lot funner to play.

So I ask those here, what is it that would interest you into playing a ranged character, everyone one is welcome to throw out idea's, let's stop with the ranged combat need's to be fixed or it's fine the way it is? I mean really you think everything is fine that way it is? You can't think up one thing that would be cool enough to make you want to play a ranged character? I mean if you don't play a ranged character and you are saying the system is fine there there is something seriously wrong here, a system that works fine but have groups of people that don't want to play it mean that the system is not fun, which tells me the developers failed to make ranged combat fun for anyone, which means that anyone building a game like DDO could capitalize on this weakness.

Give me a good build for a Duel Throwing Hammer or Duel Axe or Duel throwing dagger build, and don't forget to make up your own rules to make it effective, in fact I'm going to make a thread about that where we can all start building our duel throwing dagger builds and such.

[iruka41]

I've seen a barb/ranger range bow user, and I have to say, even though better than some with his 40 str, he still was not as effective as a melee as I was playing the melee, although I would have to say if we were in an all ranged group for some crazy reason, he would by far be doing the most damage, but even he was suffering from the lack of attacks, so I think something like a feat that opens up several different enhancements, like a stunning blow for ranged, some kind of cripple attack or a slow of some kind, trip's or hamstrings, exploding arrows, slaying arrows as in your can create an arrow that just slays anything, with timers on all of these of course, I'm just thinking not only would this make ranged combat more effective with a reduction in lag but at the same time give people more options and make the ranged based character a lot funner to p

So I ask those here, what is it that would interest you into playing a ranged character, everyone one is welcome to throw out idea's, let's stop with the ranged combat need's to be fixed or it's fine the way it is? I mean really you think everything is fine that way it is? You can't think up one thing that would be cool enough to make you want to play a ranged character? I mean if you don't play a ranged character and you are saying the system is fine there there is something seriously wrong here, a system that works fine but have groups of people that don't want to play it mean that the system is not fun, which tells me the developers failed to make ranged combat fun for anyone, which means that anyone building a game like DDO could capitalize on this weakness.

I have been thinking that, if we ever get more special arrows, that will do just fine.
Like in your example, Exploding Arrow -> And implement Enhancement lines like "Increase your AoE arrow effect 50%".
And then they can add Fire/Cold/Lightining/Acid/Force/etc type of AoE arrows.
Then those AoE arrows can have more effect like, Burn/Slow/Stun/Etc, also possibly thru Enhancement lines, or for free.

Charm Monster Arrow? Otto's Dancing Arrow? Ray of Enfeeblement Arrow? Firewall Arrow? Cloudkill Arrow anyone? :)

Also, like you said, Bludgeoning Arrow, Slashing Arrows will be must too.

That should do just fine I guess, without changing current Ranged Combat system. (Will be easier for devs too, all they have to do is make the arrow like spells.

[Coldin]

Well, I just can't leave this post without responding to it. I will fight for Ranged Combat till the death! (Or until I can't play DDO anymore)


The breakdown on Ranged vs Melee will vary strongly based on the quest and the topography. In some layouts you really don't have much line of sight, making advantages of ranged attacking a lot more problematic. It also depends on the composition of the group I am running with (or if running solo). I try to compliment the group.


You didn't really say exactly how often you're using your bow. Is it only when Manyshot is up? Is it only when you can fire from down a hallway? Just how often are you really using your bows, compared to your dual weapons? If it's not even 50%, I really don't think you understand just what we are having a problem. Go and try to play a few days using mostly bows in your quests (staying away from that W/P bow too). See how well you actually enjoy it.


That being said, the problem comes with the full range of gear that is available in the game and the various features/feats you can achieve. If something is made powerful/competitive with nominal gear, it might very very easily become overwhelming with some of the top end stuff. That top end gear exists and is not going away, and more of it shows up every day. (I only very recently picked up the W/P bow.)

You do make a good point. More powerful gear in the hands of someone maxed out in using it will be on a higher damage curve than that same (or equivelent) weapon in the hands of someone not as devoted. The real issue however, is that while a single weapon and bow are supposed to be mostly balanced towards each other, the single weapon is far beyond more effective.


What I percieve is many players look at how the game is being played out in the groups they run with and in those ranged attacks are fundamentally gimped, just as bards songs would be if no one ever gave them a chance to sing them or waited around...(oh yeah that happens all the time even now...sigh). That is not a fundamental issue with RoF or DPS, but how various groups choose to play the game. That choice is not wrong, but it does limit the benefits of other actions once you head down that path. In addition, a great many players are so well off that blowing $$ on supplies is a non issue. They think nothing of dropping 100 Heal scrolls on a quest, and that aspect creates another imbalance with reduces the benefits of ranged combat by removing the reduced incoming damage most ranged attackers take.

You are right that the plethora of healing supplies available does offset the melee vulnerability, but players still have to pay for those. Clerics burning through dozens of heal scrolls are not very happy by the end of the quest. There's a big difference by the way, between Bard Songs and ranged DPS. Bard songs just have to be heard to be effective. Ranged needs some very special circumstances to ever really shine in the game. Bard Songs do not need fix, Ranged combat does.


So the brute force (melee) approach is subsidized and enabled by both the economy (which funds the supplies) and the desires of many players to optimize quest completion time. With those factors in place, the higher dps of hand to hand melee becomes the preferred choice of combat. What many seekers of increased dps for ranged are looking for is a way to have the completion time cake and get to use their ranged attacks as the method, when by the very design of the methods, the choice to balance them was structured on granting ranged attacks a lower risk of death, damage and resource expenses.

Combat is part of the whole system, and the balance the designers attempted to construct was to find that elusive sweet spot between risk and rewards. It looks to me like part of the concept was more about using efficient tactics, but in a context where time to completion was not anywhere near as important as it has become. If the general player base was happy to complete a quest like Redwillow in an hour, instead of usually taking 1/3 that time (or less), then the way you approach combat and feat and skills balance is different.

That's silly logic. I think the Devs know by now most players want to run quests as quick as they can (especially by the 3rd or 4th run through).Maybe not blitz through in 10 minutes, but I think most people would like to move fairly quickly between each fight. Anyway, the devs should balance towards the middle of that spectrum anyway. It's silly to deal with absolutes. Plan for the 30 minute quests.


Think back to some of the Enhancments for Paladins that had something like a 120 Minute reset (Or something huge like that) when first presented. Those were quickly laughed at since it would be once a night, not even once a quest usage. It was revised down to 10 minutes IIRC). Even then, that seems like an eternity for some players.

120 minutes was ridiculous (I think it might have been 40 minutes though). It made the ability near unusable. And the devs stated multiple times that it was a new idea, and they would most likely change it after testing. Well, they did change it, and now it's mildly useful. They haven't changed manyshot since DDO was released. Still the same cooldown and the same duration.


Where am I going with this? Balance is a very tricky issue. Do you make the balance exist in the 10 minute quest completion style or do you create a balance with a 60 minute style? I personally think the various styles are very balanced in the "60 minute" style right now, but that if the deisre is to achieve greater parity in offensive potential in the "10 minute style" there are things that could be done, but any change there will unbalance the siutation in other styles.

Again, you don't reach for one extreme or the other. You try to strike a middle ground between them. But right now with ranged combat, I don't believe it really caters towards any real playstyle other than the "Wait till Manyshot recharges" style.


Something as simple as reducing the cooldown timer on manyshot by 50% (and like it or not, manyshot is a core component of ranged attacks and evaluating them so it cannot be ignored, it would be like ignoring Raging and all its effects when looking at barbarian melee) would enable it to be used more often in the "10 minute style", but still not all the time. It would make it an almost "all the time" option in the "60 minute style".

Manyshot is a core component of ranged combat, because it's the only time us rangers can actually get out some decent DPS and truly contribute to a fight. And if Ranged combat is changed, Manyshot will have to be changed right along with it. Most of us understand that. But for the sake of discussion, we should look at how ranged without manyshot, and compare that to a player using one weapon, and balance it from there. Then, add in a radically different manyshot mechanic (preferably one that closely mirrors the PnP feat).

As for being able to use manyshot all the time if the cooldown was drastically decreased, I don't think anyone asking for that anyway. Most of us want base ranged RoF to increase, not for manyshot to become more powerful. We want to be more effective ALL of the time, not more frequently but still short bursts.



As it is right now, a starting character who uses a low level elemental repeater can almost singlehandedly own most quests. (I know, I twinked one that way...). What I see are many of the solutions out of context. IF only working on ranged attacking, the changes seem quite reasonably and in fact hard to not support, but for some of the same overall balance reasons they have not created HEAL potions and the best you can find/buy are Cure Serious Pots, the reason is overall game balance, between characters, rates of doing healing, damage whatever, and the paradigm of making grouping and working together the most desireable and efficient way of tackling quests in the game.

Come on, any low level character with an elemental weapon can burn through those harbor quests. And a properly specced repeater player can be the most broken thing in the game. (And I'm amazed that noone seems to have a problem with their massive power). You're saying that these proposed changes would break the game balance, but melee's already done that to ranged combat. Ranged needs to catch up to melee.

And Heal potions compared to Cure Serious potions is not a fair analogy to Ranged vs Melee. Well, unless you're saying that Melee is the Heal potion, and Archery is the Cure Serious potion. Then I could agree with you.

I still want to hear a plausible reason why you guys don't want improved Ranged combat. If you truly used bows often like you say, you should be first people agree with us. I really just don't get it.

[Turial]

....
Come on, any low level character with an elemental weapon can burn through those harbor quests. And a properly specced repeater player can be the most broken thing in the game. (And I'm amazed that noone seems to have a problem with their massive power). You're saying that these proposed changes would break the game balance, but melee's already done that to ranged combat. Ranged needs to catch up to melee.

And Heal potions compared to Cure Serious potions is not a fair analogy to Ranged vs Melee. Well, unless you're saying that Melee is the Heal potion, and Archery is the Cure Serious potion. Then I could agree with you.

I still want to hear a plausible reason why you guys don't want improved Ranged combat. If you truly used bows often like you say, you should be first people agree with us. I really just don't get it.

The thing that I find to be the most funny and at the same time the most sad is that repeaters were the reason ranged combat was changed back in beta and some time later the barriers to repeaters were removed (repeaters have almost the same attack rate as S&B) but bow based ranged combat is still wallowing in the dust.

[Zenako]

One significant reason it is hard to give any one answer on how much I used bows vs melee is that it really does depend on the circumstances (quest or area) and the group. When running solo, I would estimate I end up using ranged attacking 90% of the time in areas and quests, since I can take the time to line up and prep the encounter for quick disposal (up until very recently with Silver or Greater Bane X or Special (Disrupt, Smite, etc). When runnning a quest like Madstone using a fairly recent run, I used my bows almost exclusively. But when running Crucible with a group, except for clearing out the gnolls near the maze, used melee since encounter range was close all the time and it is very hard to keep targets in the damage arc when they are popping around you a lot. In Rainbow in the Dark, almost all ranged attacks, while in Running with devils the mix was closer to 50/50. Out in the Vale running about, almost 100% ranged. In the Shroud, 90% melee part one (start with bow out during initial mobs, then move to portal killing with dual wielded GCB's), Part 2 depends on the role I need to fill so about 50/50, part 3 doesn't matter. Part 4, I use melee on initial devil mobs, ranged on gnolls and Pit Fiend, 100% ranged in part 5.

Anyone who tries to use ranged attacks 100% of the time is gimping themselves in some situations, just like the Sorc with only Wall of Fire as a Damage Spell. Sometimes you really need to pull out that Cone of Cold, or melee weapons, close quarters, bouncing mobs (making ranged targetting almost impossible to maintain) (could be Devils teleporting or Undead Phasing in and out). It will vary.

I guess my point is that while sure, it would be neat to have more ranged attack love in the nature of certain changes, but from where I see things, I don't see the need as being as severe as some players do. It did not take very much to turn the general opinion of Rangers from being wastes of Party Slots to sought out members of raids. (I get more invites on my Ranger than Cleric for the Shroud for example...I also have rogue levels and can pop the doors on part 3 easily...hell I can open Cabal Traps...albeit on Normal but not Elite....). So any change needs to carefully considered. On how it impacts the viability of any combat character who is not using ranged attacks via design and or build. I know I proposed a few ways that aspects of ranged attacking could be enhanced: Enhancement choices to lower cooldown timer on Manyshot was one, Making special arrows more available, perhaps as favor rewards from various houses, not just House D. House J Favor reward has Undead Bane Arrows available for example. The Twelve makes Outsider Bane Arrows arrows available. Agents of Argonessean make Giant Bane and Monstrous Humanoid Bane available...etc, etc. Changes like the second one would not require any Game Mechanic changes, but could really change the outlook for dealing damage.

[Coldin]

One significant reason it is hard to give any one answer on how much I used bows vs melee is that it really does depend on the circumstances (quest or area) and the group. When running solo, I would estimate I end up using ranged attacking 90% of the time in areas and quests, since I can take the time to line up and prep the encounter for quick disposal (up until very recently with Silver or Greater Bane X or Special (Disrupt, Smite, etc). When runnning a quest like Madstone using a fairly recent run, I used my bows almost exclusively. But when running Crucible with a group, except for clearing out the gnolls near the maze, used melee since encounter range was close all the time and it is very hard to keep targets in the damage arc when they are popping around you a lot. In Rainbow in the Dark, almost all ranged attacks, while in Running with devils the mix was closer to 50/50. Out in the Vale running about, almost 100% ranged. In the Shroud, 90% melee part one (start with bow out during initial mobs, then move to portal killing with dual wielded GCB's), Part 2 depends on the role I need to fill so about 50/50, part 3 doesn't matter. Part 4, I use melee on initial devil mobs, ranged on gnolls and Pit Fiend, 100% ranged in part 5.

Anyone who tries to use ranged attacks 100% of the time is gimping themselves in some situations, just like the Sorc with only Wall of Fire as a Damage Spell. Sometimes you really need to pull out that Cone of Cold, or melee weapons, close quarters, bouncing mobs (making ranged targetting almost impossible to maintain) (could be Devils teleporting or Undead Phasing in and out). It will vary.

I guess my point is that while sure, it would be neat to have more ranged attack love in the nature of certain changes, but from where I see things, I don't see the need as being as severe as some players do. It did not take very much to turn the general opinion of Rangers from being wastes of Party Slots to sought out members of raids. (I get more invites on my Ranger than Cleric for the Shroud for example...I also have rogue levels and can pop the doors on part 3 easily...hell I can open Cabal Traps...albeit on Normal but not Elite....). So any change needs to carefully considered. On how it impacts the viability of any combat character who is not using ranged attacks via design and or build. I know I proposed a few ways that aspects of ranged attacking could be enhanced: Enhancement choices to lower cooldown timer on Manyshot was one, Making special arrows more available, perhaps as favor rewards from various houses, not just House D. House J Favor reward has Undead Bane Arrows available for example. The Twelve makes Outsider Bane Arrows arrows available. Agents of Argonessean make Giant Bane and Monstrous Humanoid Bane available...etc, etc. Changes like the second one would not require any Game Mechanic changes, but could really change the outlook for dealing damage.

Of course using a bow 100% of time for every quest wouldn't be feasible. I don't believe anyone here is trying to say so. But you should be able to use one at least 80% of the time if you're dedicated to it and still be useful. The Shroud happens to be one of those special case places. People like taking rangers (the class) for that quest because they know they're getting someone that can use manyshot, has evasion, and is a source of easily healable DPS. But really, outside of the Shroud, I don't see many requests for Deepwood Sniper rangers, and I think most people expect the ranger to be a mostly TWF.

Various arrows are a concern about range, but it isn't the entire problem. Quivers, while freeing up some inventory space, still don't really serve the purpose of allowing a player to collect the many different arrows on a quest. There does need to be a way of obtaining elemental arrows and lesser bane arrows for the average archer in high quantities. But this isn't an "either/or" problem. Really, having all those arrows will only help archers slightly, and they're still way behind the DPS curve.

Ranged Combat does need a mechanic change, so it can be easily effective across all levels, and for all classes. In a perfect world, I'd like to see half of the player base using some form of ranged combat. If we get to that point, then I'd say ranged combat is right where it needs to be.

[EightyFour]

Incorrect. The devs could double bow ROF if they wanted to. They won't, but that's because of game design, not technical limitations. There is really NO reason arrow attacks need to be laggy at all. It can be easily worked around.

Read this please, the reason for not increasing rate of fire maybe both, I'm not saying if they removed the technical limitations that they wouldn't keep things the same due to design, but what I am saying is that there are currently technical limitations currently limiting the increased rate of fire. I would have to work at Turbine and be in the meetings to determine designs limitations, so unless you can show me a post that says this is the case than I well not believe you as I believe that you do not work at Turbine either.

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1428958#post1428958

[Coldin]

Read this please,

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1428958#post1428958

That post is from back in 2007, and Mod 6 and 7 have already come and gone. It was, as Codog stated, a problem with manyshot, but first, that's been generally fixed (I assume). Second, the problem was mostly about creating bunches of arrows all at once, lagging down the game. Increasing base RoF (assuming Manyshot gets altered in the process) would probably have far less significant impact on performance than allowing Manyshot to be an always on mechanic at current RoF.

If Manyshot and RoF does get changed, I would like to see it actually apply a negative RoF, as that is more in line with what Manyshot is supposed to do.

[EightyFour]

That post is from back in 2007, and Mod 6 and 7 have already come and gone. It was, as Codog stated, a problem with manyshot, but first, that's been generally fixed (I assume). Second, the problem was mostly about creating bunches of arrows all at once, lagging down the game. Increasing base RoF (assuming Manyshot gets altered in the process) would probably have far less significant impact on performance than allowing Manyshot to be an always on mechanic at current RoF.

If Manyshot and RoF does get changed, I would like to see it actually apply a negative RoF, as that is more in line with what Manyshot is supposed to do.

True, but this post is about the Mod 6 change that came and went, currently as I understand it, there where no changes made in Mod 7, and it has been fixed, all the arrows have been consolidated into a group all with there own attack rolls. Just imagine if they doubled rate of fire, you are creating twice as many arrows as you were before, this increases the lag of those extra creations. And doubles the amount of lag you would get from those creation if not increasing it much further than that due to the rate you fire them at.

"...However the worry about mass creation of a bunch of projectiles in the world and their performance implications became a pretty big concern...."

"...The good news is that for Module 6, there is a silent feature that I've put in that doesn't really change much on the outside appearance and the functionality from a gameplay perspective...."

"...Manyshot will be creating 1 projectile that represents N projectiles when it collides...."

If you look at this you can see that this was planned for Mod 6, and there major concern about "creation of a bunch of projectiles in the world and their performance implications" which leads me to believe that by turned up the rate of fire to double what it is now would cause some serious "performance implications" considering the main concern was each arrow has "combat callbacks/hooks are tied to physics collisions", however I have never seen a post that states that this was a design implementation. And considering that rate of fire increases have been asked for sense this game began I'm sure that the developers have not been held back in doing this because of design as they would at least look at the problem if it has been going on this long, so I have to believe that this is not the developers ignoring the players requests to a reevaluation of ranged combat but technical limitations that has prevented this, that is if it is easy enough to turn up the rate of fire.

So I admit that I could be wrong about this, there maybe some piece of information I've been lacking, again I don't work at Turbine, but this information is collected with other sources of information that I have collected on this subject that leads me to believe that this is the case. Also I try to back up what is being said here with as much information as I can collect, however I don't see people that post the opposing perspective with anything to lead me to believe that this is a design limitation.

Also I should add that I'm still waiting on an answer from CoDog is this post:
http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?p=1813051#post1813051
I added the question about is this was a design implementation or a technical limitation, as I figured this might be a better question due to what you say here and maybe we can get an answer to this. I'll post it here if I get one. As I well admit there could be flaws in my logic as this was not a direct statement about rate of fire. These are conclusions I have reached with the information that is currently there.

[Coldin]

True, but this post is about the Mod 6 change that came and went, currently as I understand it, there where no changes made in Mod 7, and it has been fixed, all the arrows have been consolidated into a group all with there own attack rolls. Just imagine if they doubled rate of fire, you are creating twice as many arrows as you were before, this increases the lag of those extra creations. And doubles the amount of lag you would get from those creation if not increasing it much further than that due to the rate you fire them at.

"...However the worry about mass creation of a bunch of projectiles in the world and their performance implications became a pretty big concern...."

"...The good news is that for Module 6, there is a silent feature that I've put in that doesn't really change much on the outside appearance and the functionality from a gameplay perspective...."

"...Manyshot will be creating 1 projectile that represents N projectiles when it collides...."

If you look at this you can see that this was planned for Mod 6, and there major concern about "creation of a bunch of projectiles in the world and their performance implications" which leads me to believe that by turned up the rate of fire to double what it is now would cause some serious "performance implications" considering the main concern was each arrow has "combat callbacks/hooks are tied to physics collisions", however I have never seen a post that states that this was a design implementation. And considering that rate of fire increases have been asked for sense this game began I'm sure that the developers have not been held back in doing this because of design as they would at least look at the problem if it has been going on this long, so I have to believe that this is not the developers ignoring the players requests to a reevaluation of ranged combat but technical limitations that has prevented this, that is if it is easy enough to turn up the rate of fire.

So I admit that I could be wrong about this, there maybe some piece of information I've been lacking, again I don't work at Turbine, but this information is collected with other sources of information that I have collected on this subject that leads me to believe that this is the case. Also I try to back up what is being said here with as much information as I can collect, however I don't see people that post the opposing perspective with anything to lead me to believe that this is a design limitation.

I think the main concern was having bunches of attack rolls, damage rolls, ect. all at once. An archer with 4-arrow manyshot generates a bunch of attack rolls all at once, even more than a TWF. But even if RoF was doubled, it wouldn't come close to how fast manyshot is currently. Now, if Manyshot was left the same, and RoF was doubled, then maybe there might be some serious repercussions performance wise.

[Angelus_dead]

I would have to work at Turbine and be in the meetings to determine designs limitations, so unless you can show me a post that says this is the case than I well not believe you as I believe that you do not work at Turbine either.
No. To understand design possibilities requires a moderate knowledge of soft realtime network programming, which I do possess.

[EightyFour]

I think the main concern was having bunches of attack rolls, damage rolls, ect. all at once. An archer with 4-arrow manyshot generates a bunch of attack rolls all at once, even more than a TWF. But even if RoF was doubled, it wouldn't come close to how fast manyshot is currently. Now, if Manyshot was left the same, and RoF was doubled, then maybe there might be some serious repercussions performance wise.

I don't think that they were talking about to-hit roll's being the problem, I believe they were talking about the physics of the animation, to make the arrows hit it's target, when an arrow is fired from point a at x,y,z it has to find the selected target point which shows a hit, which is why you can dodge arrows by running/jumping back and forth, so it has to find target at x,y,z to calculate a hit, otherwise you would be able to run away from a mob while not facing them and still attack them with ranged attacks.

The computer has to calculate each arrows path, so with manyshot being the case, all three arrows each had there own path to take causing the lag because of the physics calculation. The way this was fixed that now all three arrows, or 4 after this was added, can now all share the same physics path, makeing the physics engine only have to calculate one flight path, but the flight path also knows that it is carrying three/four arrows instead of one arrow, the idea I'm after here is that with the increase in rate of fire, you have to do twice the amount of physics calculations than you had to do before, unless every arrow path counted as two meaning every path would carry two arrows.

[Zenako]

Don't forget Manyshot, with Improved Precise Shot and hitting perhaps dozens of mobs (in an ideal world). One click and you have to determine if the vector of the shot intersects not 1, not 2 but many moving targets at the time the arrows intersect the locations of the mobs, plus if any obstruction comes into the line of fire and stops all shots. Often when firing at distant targets you can have multiple volleys of arrows in the air at once and you could be moving as well.

The difference with melee is at the moment of swinging you have an XYZ coordinate, a reach and a facing, and every potential target near you has the same. A one time check if the XYZ and reach intersect and you know if you even have a chance to hit. With ranged attacks you have an XYZ plus vector for the arrows having to intersect the XYZ plus movement vector of the target(s). The calc is clearly more involved. Not sure if any of these calcs are done locally on the client and uploaded or it is all server based (more likely) but it could significantly increase the potential for heavy duty crunching during combat.

[EightyFour]

No. To understand design possibilities requires a moderate knowledge of soft realtime network programming, which I do possess.

But even with that understanding, you don't know the effect of the lag it well create. Which is a concern to the DDO developers.

[sephiroth1084]

Full plate special forces? I think you are confusing terms now.

How well do you know your history when it comes to warfare? I know that I do not know a whole lot, but even I know the French knights hated and feared English long bows. Wonder why that was.

Probably because of the battle of Agincourt. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

I always find that one amusing.

[Turial]

At this point if ranged combat is causing more lag then other forms of combat then they should be looking to eliminate the cause of the lag. Seeing as they have implemented large numbers of teleporting mobs I am fairly sure that lag generated from ranged combat is less of a concern then it was in 07 when manyshot was changed to deal with some ranged lag.
But even with that understanding, you don't know the effect of the lag it well create. Which is a concern to the DDO developers.

[EightyFour]

At this point if ranged combat is causing more lag then other forms of combat then they should be looking to eliminate the cause of the lag. Seeing as they have implemented large numbers of teleporting mobs I am fairly sure that lag generated from ranged combat is less of a concern then it was in 07 when manyshot was changed to deal with some ranged lag.

In my mind I would think this not to be true, but here's a what if for you, what if by changing range combat in that way it caused even more lag than teleporting mob's, would you want it in the game than? The fact is we only have enough information to guess at what is going to be a lag monster and what is not, I'm just saying that most people are crying for a rate of fire increase, the reason this is? I believe people want to be able to do more damage in the lines of the D&D rule set, but what if this con not happen, what I propose here is that we come up with other ways to improve ranged combat as it stands now other than increasing rate of fire.

People have been complaining about rate of fire sense DDO opened it's doors in Feb of 2006, well maybe a little later than that as people were just starting out, but as people became higher level the complaints grew, so in more than 2 years time the idea that the rate of fire increase needs to happen has not, so this either means the developers don't like ranged combat, the developers have had technical limitations preventing this fix, the developers feel that ranged combat should not be used as a sol source of damage output and think that ranged combatant's should not be played, I'm sure there are more reasons but those are the one's off the top of my head,

What I would like to say is stop crying about rate of fire increases and focus on the true problem, damage output.
Increase in rate of fire * damage output = More damage
Rate of Fire * increased damage output = More damage

So if these two things end in the same result and currently we have had no luck with an increased rate of fire, maybe what we need to start to focus on is how do we get what we are after without trying to only solution that people have been proposing.

Let's start to focus on other things that can help out as well other than dropping the rate of fire needs to be increased, ok, this would help out in other area's as well, like banishers, disrupters and other such, but I'm not as concerned about that as much as giving bow users a means to do more damage. If you want to increase rate of fire, great, we have beaten the dead horse enough, under the conditions that this well not be possiable tell new tech. is made than we need to focus on what can be done now, how about coming up with another idea other than increase the rate of fire.

[Turial]

In my mind I would think this not to be true, but here's a what if for you, what if by changing range combat in that way it caused even more lag than teleporting mob's, would you want it in the game than? The fact is we only have enough information to guess at what is going to be a lag monster and what is not, I'm just saying that most people are crying for a rate of fire increase, the reason this is? I believe people want to be able to do more damage in the lines of the D&D rule set, but what if this con not happen, what I propose here is that we come up with other ways to improve ranged combat as it stands now other than increasing rate of fire.....

You do realize that repeaters shoot almost twice as fast as bows do right. If that amount of "lag" is fine then why wouldn't lag generated by bows be just as acceptable? (note in pnp repeaters shoot slower then bows)

[Turial]

....

What I would like to say is stop crying about rate of fire increases and focus on the true problem, damage output.
Increase in rate of fire * damage output = More damage
Rate of Fire * increased damage output = More damage

So if these two things end in the same result and currently we have had no luck with an increased rate of fire, maybe what we need to start to focus on is how do we get what we are after without trying to only solution that people have been proposing.
....

In the current set up stat damage is superior to damage in all but a few encounters. To compensate for the slow rate of fire by increasing damage (need to make up ~ 60% loss) you would have to vastly increase the damage beyond that of pnp and we don't need to keep moving further and further from pnp.

[EightyFour]

Yep, your right, I checked the repeater, and it dose work at a very fast rate, so I guess I was wrong, you can create multiple instances of arrows and not have problems, I guess the only thing I can say is that someone on the development team dose not care about ranged combat, I say someone or even some people as I know that there have to be some that do care and know there is a problem, but they are prevented from working on it due to others deciding not to spend time or resources, but that's all right, I give up, it's not worth it to me either to care about ranged combat enough to want to do anything about it. I've maxed out ranged as hard as I can push it and still come up way to short, I think eventually he well be deleted, I just hate deleting a character with all the stuff that I've gotten for him trying to make ranged combat work. I'm just done, unless I pull a WoP repeating crossbow, ranged just is not worth it ot me any longer. Well that only took 10 days from caring enough to say something, to just not caring at all.

Rock on and piece out.

[Twerpp]

Twerpp,

You are assuming that ranged attackers are rangers. This is not the case. Rangers get evasion at level 9. Rangers get bow feats and twf feats. Bowbarians, Fighters archers etc get neither of these and I'm sure there are other ranged characters that don't go very far into the ranger class.

The discussion is about bow rate of fire. Not rangers.

If you read my post you would know I didnt assume that, I said ".add the fact that actual rangers". Yeah Bowbarians dont get evasion and neither do fighters, but regular rangers dont get extended crit range or mad feats.

[shores11]

This just isn't true, and saying it is means you don't know how the 3.5 rule set works.

A ranged weapon gets just as many attacks as a melee weapon, barring any special feats or abilities. Two Weapon Fighting obviously gets more attacks, but that's because you're using two weapons opposed to one.

The fact of the matter is, ranged combat in 3.5 is just as fast as melee combat. And this should be more closely represented in DDO.

To Coldin's quote all I can say is prove it by copying some portion of the D&D 3.5 rule set into this thread. I read into weapon specialization and weapon speed and nothing actually wrote what the weapon speeds were. However they did go a little into the mechanics of using a bow versus a melee weapon. They referenced some real life ideology behind the speed of a weapon and it made a lot of sense. Unlike in the D&D 2.0 rule set where bows were a little slower than a single melee weapon and weapon speeds where very easy to find documented.

Setting aside D&D or DDO ruleset it makes perfect sense to me that bows and espeially crossbows fire at a slower rate than a single melee weapon. I play a pure class level 16 ranger and am ok with the setup now. I have learned how to make my ranger effective using both TWF and range as needed. In my opinion the ranged rate of fire and damage for a fully speced ranged pure class ranger is right on.

[Coldin]

To Coldin's quote all I can say is prove it by copying some portion of the D&D 3.5 rule set into this thread. I read into weapon specialization and weapon speed and nothing actually wrote what the weapon speeds were. However they did go a little into the mechanics of using a bow versus a melee weapon. They referenced some real life ideology behind the speed of a weapon and it made a lot of sense. Unlike in the D&D 2.0 rule set where bows were a little slower than a single melee weapon and weapon speeds where very easy to find documented.

Setting aside D&D or DDO ruleset it makes perfect sense to me that bows and espeially crossbows fire at a slower rate than a single melee weapon. I play a pure class level 16 ranger and am ok with the setup now. I have learned how to make my ranger effective using both TWF and range as needed. In my opinion the ranged rate of fire and damage for a fully speced ranged pure class ranger is right on.

It's hard thing to prove because I don't believe there's any actual phrase in the books that says "A bow uses the same number of attacks as a great-axe or longsword."

But, for what it's worth, there is this.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#fullAttack


Full Attack

If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#doubleWeapons) or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.


Notice, it does not single out a bow or sword, but merely states "weapon".

Edit: Just for good measure, multiple attacks per a round are determined by Base Attack Bonus.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm

Base Attack Bonus
A base attack bonus is an attack roll bonus derived from character class and level or creature type and Hit Dice (or combinations thereof). Base attack bonuses increase at different rates for different character classes and creature types. A second attack is gained when a base attack bonus reaches +6, a third with a base attack bonus of +11 or higher, and a fourth with a base attack bonus of +16 or higher. Base attack bonuses gained from different sources, such as when a character is a multiclass character, stack.

[Turial]

You are correct Coldin. Base attack bonus determines how many attacks you get a round regardless of weapon type. Prior to 3.0 there were weapon speeds but they were discarded because it complicated combat in a needless manner.

A character who uses a bow will have exactly the same base number of attacks, power, damage output, and critical chances as another similarly built character who uses a warhammer in pnp.

Exerpt from my thread on ranged combat to show roughly how 3 types of ranged combat might compare if ranged was fixed.


If it was up to me ranged ROA would be equal to melee attack speed, for all classes and before applying any feats. The Rapid shot feat would allow for a player to make an extra attack during a sequence, thus raising the ROA by 1 shot for each sequence and applying a -2 attack penalty while it was active (rapid shot would have to be a toggle feat). Manyshot would be a toggle feat that allowed the ranger to make an attack that fires the correct number of arrows per BAB on each shot while applying the corresponding penalty to those shots, the kicker would be that it slows your ROA to 1 attack per sequence. Also composite bows should have the feat bow strength applied to them so that any user can apply their str to the damage portion of the attack. Bow Str should be left as a ranger feat to reflect the pnp theme of the ranged ranger.

Lets say for ease of number crunching that a player at BAB can get off 100 attacks in a minute through melee. This comes to 20 attack sequences of 5 attacks each. A player using ranged combat and no additional feats would also get 100 attacks over a minute. Using rapid shot that ranged combat used would see 120 attacks in the same minute but at a penalty of -2. If you didnt take SOTR and moved around during that time, like many ranged combat users do, the penalty would be -6 for each shot. A player that uses manyshot full time during that sequence would see 80 attacks during that minute all at -8 to hit. If they also applied rapid shot you would see 100 attacks at -10 to hit. If you also happened to move and didnt have SOTR the total penalty would be -14 to hit.

Setting the world as such adds balance because a ranged combat user would be more likely to pick up SOTR to eliminate the penalties associated with infinate kiteing or might have to make a choice about when to use particular feats. In pnp manyshot is great for taking out large, high hp, but low ac creatures. The penalties may have to be adjusted based on the relative values of AC in the game as we don't see many mobs with low AC and high hp, they tend to be high on both.

A light crossbow user with no feats would see 20 attacks in a minute and a heavy crossbow user would get 10 attacks in the same minute. A repeater user would see 10 attacks of 5 bolts each for 50 attacks in a minute.

Add in rapid reload and the light crossbow user can obtain 100 attacks in a minute as the reload is changed to a free action rather then a move action. A heavy crossbow user would be increased to 20 attacks as the reload is no longer a full round action but a move action. The repeater user would then see 20 attacks of 5 bolts each for 100 attacks in a minute.

So in the end the crossbow does see a slowdown in ROA but it comes up to full martial weapon ROA with the addition of a single feat. Not bad overall for a ranged weapon that can be used by all classes and has a better crit range then a bow. The SRD doesnt list the differences between the light and heavy repeaters in terms of reload times and number of bolts that they can hold so I just listed a blank repeater. The benafit of the repeater is a quick burst of attacks from a weapon with a higher crit range then a bow, which is a game were on critical effect matter a large amount is decent for an exotic feat.

I dont know how rapid shot and crossbows interact in pnp. I would think that so long as you could make multiple attacks in a round you would be able to apply the effects of rapid shot. So a light crossbow user with rapid reload and rapid shot could have 120 attacks in a minute with a total penalty of -2 to each shot. It doesn't seem that rapid shot would work with heavy crossbows or repeaters because you can only reduce the reload time to a move action and thus wouldn't get an additional attack. This is because you can only take 1 standard action with a move action in a single round.

[Zenako]

let me also add in, in PnP D&D there is no such things as DPS. Damage per round perhaps, but that end ups being very different.

In D&D everyone (humanoid characters) starts with getting one attack per round. When you BAB hits +6 you are eligible for iterative attacks one at +6 to hit and another at +1 to hit if you do not move more than you are allowed to (normally a single 5 foot step). As you hit BAB +11 you get three and +16 gives you 4 attacks at +16, +11, +6 and +1 to hit.

Feats such as Rapid shots give you one extra attack at a penalty to hit (-2). Spells like haste can give an Extra Attack when you are getting a Full Attack. To be honest the Two Weapon Fighting Rules changed a number of times and I am not sure where they ended up, but in general when fighting level appropriate mobs with appropriate AC it was generally a wash or a losing proposition to use TWF if you had a good shield due to the penalties to HIT. IN DDO we have so many boosts to hit prob, plus the horribly inverted BAB scheme that to hit penalties are all but irrelevant most of the time.


So a Level 6 Ranger with Rapid Shot Feat and Under a Haste Spell could in PnP D&D fire off 4 arrows, with base hit probabilities of +6-2, +6-2, +1-2 and the Haste Bonus at +6-2. (The -2's are for using Rapid Shot). So 4 attacks at +4, +4 -1 and +4 to hit (before magic weapons, dex, other feats and spells.).

The Manyshot Feat allows mutiple arrows to be fired in one attack and was useful when you were not able to take a Full Attack. The to hit penalty depended on the quantity of arrows being fired.

[shores11]

First off we need to stop refering to attacks in terms of a minute and instead refer to it as a round. D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 and DDO use a round to desscribe its combat, a round is a 6 second interval.

D&D whether D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 or DDO clearly has intended for the attacks per round of a bow to be different than a melee weapon. I will quickly illustrate some of the breakdown found in the D&D 2.0 players manual explaining weapon speed or speed factor.

Weapon - Speed Factor (the lower the speed factor the faster the weapon)
Longsword - 5
Dagger - 2
2-Handed, Sword - 10
Longbow - 8
Comp. Longbow - 7
Shortbow - 7
Comp. Shortbow - 6
Crossbow, Light - 7
Crossbow, Heavy - 10

These are just some examples and unfortunately D&D 3.5 is not very clear on weapon speeds. However by reviewing the table above you can see some very clear relation to how fast the rate of attack (fire) is in DDO.

Summary: The ranger is good the way it is.

[Coldin]

First off we need to stop refering to attacks in terms of a minute and instead refer to it as a round. D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 and DDO use a round to desscribe its combat, a round is a 6 second interval.

D&D whether D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 or DDO clearly has intended for the attacks per round of a bow to be different than a melee weapon. I will quickly illustrate some of the breakdown found in the D&D 2.0 players manual explaining weapon speed or speed factor.

Weapon - Speed Factor (the lower the speed factor the faster the weapon)
Longsword - 5
Dagger - 2
2-Handed, Sword - 10
Longbow - 8
Comp. Longbow - 7
Shortbow - 7
Comp. Shortbow - 6
Crossbow, Light - 7
Crossbow, Heavy - 10

These are just some examples and unfortunately D&D 3.5 is not very clear on weapon speeds. However by reviewing the table above you can see some very clear relation to how fast the rate of attack (fire) is in DDO.

Summary: The ranger is good the way it is.

Wow, just wow. You ask for where in 3.5 it talks about weapon speeds, multiple people give you example, you disregard that, show off 2.0 rules, and state that's why ranged combat is fine.

First off, DDO is based on the 3.5 ruleset. 2.0 is vastly different from 3.5, there's not much point in even showing those rules for argument.

Second, yes, rounds are 6 seconds. 3.5 gives everyone wielding 1 weapon (either sword or bow) a certain amount of attacks per round based on BaB. 2.0 again uses completely different rules, and really can't be used as an example.

Third, the Ranger (the class) for the most part is fine. Ranging (aka archery) is not fine, and needs to be changed.

[Brother_Tuck]

First off we need to stop refering to attacks in terms of a minute and instead refer to it as a round. D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 and DDO use a round to desscribe its combat, a round is a 6 second interval.

D&D whether D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 or DDO clearly has intended for the attacks per round of a bow to be different than a melee weapon. I will quickly illustrate some of the breakdown found in the D&D 2.0 players manual explaining weapon speed or speed factor.

These are just some examples and unfortunately D&D 3.5 is not very clear on weapon speeds. However by reviewing the table above you can see some very clear relation to how fast the rate of attack (fire) is in DDO.

Summary: The ranger is good the way it is.

Let me preface by saying that obviously you really do not understand the difference between an MMO and role-playing. I have played rangers since the early 1980s and I would say I have a pretty good understanding of the class. Rangers are not good the way they are as their biggest strength is their ranged combat which is the biggest weakness in DDO. A properly played ranger in the role-playing is one of the strongest classes as they can rain fire down upon an enemy and kill them before they attack, before they can reach the rest of the party or in a variety of ways. Not so in DDO. The information you provided is from the 2.0 version of the game which is NOT what DDO is based on and is not even relevant. Their are other modifiers to weapon speed as well which you did not include.

I am not saying that rangers are gimped in anyway with my point above, I merely am trying to point out the incorrect information that is provided. The ranged combat in the entire game is gimped and not the class. This has been discussed many times on the forums and agreed to by most players and gamers alike. I would suggest not trying to agrue the opposite as its a useless and baseless discussion.

Just my humble op....

[shores11]

Wow, just wow. You ask for where in 3.5 it talks about weapon speeds, multiple people give you example, you disregard that, show off 2.0 rules, and state that's why ranged combat is fine.

First off, DDO is based on the 3.5 ruleset. 2.0 is vastly different from 3.5, there's not much point in even showing those rules for argument.

Second, yes, rounds are 6 seconds. 3.5 gives everyone wielding 1 weapon (either sword or bow) a certain amount of attacks per round based on BaB. 2.0 again uses completely different rules, and really can't be used as an example.

Third, the Ranger (the class) for the most part is fine. Ranging (aka archery) is not fine, and needs to be changed.

Let me say that saying wow, just wow does not mean that I have seen information in D&D 3.5 that says a bow gets a certain number of arrows off per round or a melee weapon gets a certain number of attacks per round. I do agree that D&D 3.5 states that a standard round is the same for melee as it is for range however that does not mean the same as rates of fire or attack. I only put in information from D&D 2.0 as a reference point not as a comparison to DDO as D&D 2.0 is the only ruleset that gives information as detailed about attack speed. However D&D 2.0 explains that a bow can fire up to 2 arrows per round and a longsword for example can be swung at about 2.5 times per round or 5 attacks per two rounds. I also know that there are modifiers for everything such as magical weapons and ability bonuses I was just referencing the basics.

I can agree that some changes need to be made in terms of speed of attack example a bow should fire faster than a 2-handed weapon but not as fast as a single handed weapon like a longsword. I do not agree that a strength bonus should apply to damage for crossbows (you pull a trigger) as there is no strength used in firing the weapon. Yes, there is strength used in arming the weapon but it has nothing to do with firing the weapon. I also agree with D&D 3.5 rules that only composite longbows, shortbows and slings should have a strength bonus for damage (slings would be a nice addition to the game).

I also agree that pen and paper rules can not be directly translated to DDO however it is obvious that in some areas the developers tried to place the concept into DDO when they could. I do agree that according to D&D 3.5 ruleset they missed a little bit on bows.

[redoubt]

Give us one more attack per round with bows. Change nothing else and see how it goes.

(Scale as needed, i.e. maybe not an extra attack at level one, but make the number of attacks with a bow scale up to one more than it is now.)

Thanks! :D

[Coldin]

Let me say that saying wow, just wow does not mean that I have seen information in D&D 3.5 that says a bow gets a certain number of arrows off per round or a melee weapon gets a certain number of attacks per round. I do agree that D&D 3.5 states that a standard round is the same for melee as it is for range however that does not mean the same as rates of fire or attack. I only put in information from D&D 2.0 as a reference point not as a comparison to DDO as D&D 2.0 is the only ruleset that gives information as detailed about attack speed. However D&D 2.0 explains that a bow can fire up to 2 arrows per round and a longsword for example can be swung at about 2.5 times per round or 5 attacks per two rounds. I also know that there are modifiers for everything such as magical weapons and ability bonuses I was just referencing the basics.

I can agree that some changes need to be made in terms of speed of attack example a bow should fire faster than a 2-handed weapon but not as fast as a single handed weapon like a longsword. I do not agree that a strength bonus should apply to damage for crossbows (you pull a trigger) as there is no strength used in firing the weapon. Yes, there is strength used in arming the weapon but it has nothing to do with firing the weapon. I also agree with D&D 3.5 rules that only composite longbows, shortbows and slings should have a strength bonus for damage (slings would be a nice addition to the game).

I also agree that pen and paper rules can not be directly translated to DDO however it is obvious that in some areas the developers tried to place the concept into DDO when they could. I do agree that according to D&D 3.5 ruleset they missed a little bit on bows.

I don't think you're actually listening to me.

The rules make no distinction between a single weapon or a bow for attacks per round. Crossbows without the rapid reload feet fire slower because you have to take a move action to reload them.

Let me try to explain this again. A round in 3.5 lets you take a move action and a standard action, or a full round action. Full Round actions include a Full Attack, which lets you make a number of attacks per round based on BaB. At BaB 1-6, you get to make 1 attack per round. At BaB 6, you get make 2 attacks. BaB 11, 3 attacks. And so on and so forth. Wielding 2 weapons grants a few additional attacks with that extra weapon, depending on the level of TWF feat you have.

Crossbows and regular bows do not in fact allow you to add Strength to damage. Only Composite Bows do, though this is not implemented in DDO.

Again, 2.0 rules don't belong in the discussion. DDO is based on 3.5 rules, which has weapon speeds all the same, except for certain feats, abilities, ect.

[Turial]

First off we need to stop refering to attacks in terms of a minute and instead refer to it as a round. D&D 2.0, D&D 3.5 and DDO use a round to desscribe its combat, a round is a 6 second interval.

.....
Summary: The ranger is good the way it is.

We refer to attacks per minute because it is the only way to actually see the affect of many shot on bow based ranged combat vs melee. Mainly because it takes 2 full minutes to recharge many shot and use again.

Melee gets ~ 91 attacks per min which is 9.1 attacks per 6 second round...so a round is not really 6 seconds. Bow based ranged combat gets 53 attacks per min without many shot for 5.3 attacks in a 6 second round or [(20/6)*5.3]*4 = 70.6 attacks during the time many shot is active (20 second period) or 21.39 attacks in a 6 second round (during many shot). 159 ranged attacks with a bow over 2 minutes vs 182 melee attacks.

(very simplified example)
Warhammer = 4.5 average damage* 182 attacks in 2 minutes = 819 or ~6.9 DPS

Longbow = 4.5 average damage* 159 attacks in 2 minutes with many shot = 715.9 or ~5.9 DPS (only possible to reach this if the mob lives for a full 2 minutes)

Longbow = 4.5 average damage* 106 attacks in 2 minutes without many shot = 477 or ~ 3.9 DPS (ranged combat without many shot is half as effective as melee with a warhammer)

Yes rangers are fine.
People have to separate ranged combat from rangers, rangers shouldn't be the only people picking up ranged weapons. When I talk about improving ranged combat I want to improve it for all classes; paladins, clerics, fighters, bards, sorcs, wizards, barbarians, rogues, etc.

[Ikuryo]

I agree with the people that say that ranged with bows is slower then it should be. The ways the Rangers were better at ranged includes several spells they do not get in DDO right now, I assume because they would be hard to implement. One of my favorites that I would love to see is one that shoots an arrows at every mob in range in an arc in front of you. With improved precise shot rangers could clear rooms with that spell. There are several others that do area attacks and such as well.

Repeaters are actually firing faster then they should be. The repeater builds at one point complained loudly on the boards and the Devs allowed another feat or 2 to increase their attack speed then increased the attack speed of repeaters when they put in a slight increase to all attack speeds as your BaB goes up. The repeater is supposed to be a mechanical device that holds 5 bolts before being reloaded. It still requires a full-round action to reload it, just like a Heavy crossbow. The advantage was that it could be fired more often then a normal crossbow before needing to be reloaded. Both light and heavy repeaters had the same clip size, firing rate and reload speeds.

Bows, as has been said, are listed as just a normal weapon with the same rate of attack as the 1 hand weapons.

I do remember one group I was in where all the melee pulled out a bow and shot stuff as it was coming before switching to melee when they got close. It was a nice feeling, people don't seem to do that as much though since they can just zerg in and count on the cleric to keep them alive now. Its a bit lazier now..

[Talon_Moonshadow]

/sigh

of course we need balancing in a game.
And fantasy has no requirement to equal real life.....nor can most of us even agree on real life combat stats.

Add magic, and talking about RL weps is meaningless IMO.

But D&D was created so we can be fantasy chars.

Conan!
Legolas!

I have the right to be Legolas!

Now....the worst part of ranged combat right now, is that a fighter or barb who is not specced for ranged is so unbelievably gimped if they pull out a bow, that it's not even worth trying.

And it's even worse for a cleric or wizard. :(

Ranged combat needs to be fixed for the non-ranger a lot more than for the ranger.

If you actually take a ton of ranged feats, you can make a decent archer in DDO.
Unfortunately, he is still only about equal to the average melee guy (if that)......after totally specializing in his chosen form of combat.
That ain't right.

What I want to see most is for ranged combat to be sped up enough so that the barbs and pallies will pull out a bow when it is tactically sound to do so.

We have these gnoll archers, up on perches, laying into us, and our weapon expert fighters have no option at all to deal with them....when what they should do is for the whole part to whip out ranged weps and take down the bad guys.
Right now that would be futile at best, even if the player base wasn't so opposed to any tactic that takes more than a micro-second to pull off.

:(

[Milolyen]

In D&D everyone (humanoid characters) starts with getting one attack per round. When you BAB hits +6 you are eligible for iterative attacks one at +6 to hit and another at +1 to hit if you do not move more than you are allowed to (normally a single 5 foot step). As you hit BAB +11 you get three and +16 gives you 4 attacks at +16, +11, +6 and +1 to hit.

Feats such as Rapid shots give you one extra attack at a penalty to hit (-2). Spells like haste can give an Extra Attack when you are getting a Full Attack. To be honest the Two Weapon Fighting Rules changed a number of times and I am not sure where they ended up, but in general when fighting level appropriate mobs with appropriate AC it was generally a wash or a losing proposition to use TWF if you had a good shield due to the penalties to HIT. IN DDO we have so many boosts to hit prob, plus the horribly inverted BAB scheme that to hit penalties are all but irrelevant most of the time.


So a Level 6 Ranger with Rapid Shot Feat and Under a Haste Spell could in PnP D&D fire off 4 arrows, with base hit probabilities of +6-2, +6-2, +1-2 and the Haste Bonus at +6-2. (The -2's are for using Rapid Shot). So 4 attacks at +4, +4 -1 and +4 to hit (before magic weapons, dex, other feats and spells.).

The Manyshot Feat allows mutiple arrows to be fired in one attack and was useful when you were not able to take a Full Attack. The to hit penalty depended on the quantity of arrows being fired.

The problem with this is that DDO is and is not really based on normal rounds. Sorry but a lvl 1 mage with a bab 0 makes his 1 swing faster than once every 6 seconds. If it took a full 6 seconds to make that swing this game would be SO SLOW it would really SUCK. Could you imagine takeing a full bab char from lvl 1 to 6 with only getting one swing every 6 seconds in this game? much less a 2/3's or what (is it 1/3 or 1/2)bab char? It would have turned a lot of gamers off due to how slow the fighting would be. Then at 16 you would be makeing the 4 swings in 6 seconds which would not be to bad and then you could apply the negatives to hit because while you are getting a smaller to hit you are swinging more in the same amount of time.

Okay so how bout we move it to 3 second rounds instead of 6 second rounds for game play. Now you are makeing 4 swings in 3 seconds ... not sure about you but would seem a little fast to me. Sorry but don't see anyone swinging a greatsword or greataxe 4 times in 3 seconds.

Then also there have been a lot of comparisions between how often you swing with a bab of 14 and a bab of 15 with the "extra" attack that have shown you are actually losing a swing or two over a min. Add in the fact that you are also takeing a hit to your to hit with those "extra" swings and you have a **** good reason not to have a higher bab.

Now back to topic I still feel that ranged combat is fine the way it is. Their should be a draw back to fighting from relative safety and if you are not relatively safe when ranging then you are not doing it right. You don't have to be a ranger to take manyshot, precise shot, improved precise shot and improve crit ranged and these are the feats that give ranged fighting a lot its power.

Milolyen

P.S. Talon the reason that the vast majority of the fighters, barbs and others do not is more to the fact that the mobs have so many hps that it is ineffective for a non-ranged spec char to whip out a bow. There is no way that a non-speciallized char should be able to range compairitivly to a ranged specced char. With that said I know a few that have a nice set of returners that really help in the cases you mentioned.