Bow Damage

[GrayOldDruid]

Just wondering how Bow Damage REALLY compares to Melee damage.

I've heard Fighters boasting "200 damage a hit" and stuff like that, but I don't buy it. Maybe on a crit with a good damage roll.

from my combat log :

(Combat): You attack Ancient Arachnid. You roll a 9 (+25): You hit.
(Combat): You sneak attack Ancient Arachnid for 16 points of pierce damage.
(Combat): Your weapon's flaming effect hit Ancient Arachnid for 3 points of fire damage.
(Combat): Your weapon's frost effect hit Ancient Arachnid for 3 points of cold damage.
(Combat): Your weapon's pure good effect hit Ancient Arachnid for 4 points of good damage.

26 points of damage from a +3 Frost Bow of Pure Good shooting Flaming Arrows (created from a wand) and +4 bow-strength bonus and sneak attack on a normal hit. The sneak attacked showed as 9 normal and 7 sneak. ( whole red numbers were 9+4+3+3+7 )

I have seen much higher numbers with crits - 64+8+#+# comes to mind - but for general attacks...

[Kalanth]

From a non-melee character that does a large volume of melee I will say that I believe the people claiming 200 on a hit, but only with adding all numbers together. With my cleric, who wields a Cloudburst most of the time, I have seen some good numbers. The best was a critical strike (as you mentioned), using a Smite Evil, with the Cloudburst effect going off. Base was aroun 65 - 70, Cloudburst was 55 - 60, Shock was about 4 - 6, and there was an additional number that I don't know where it came from (4 - 6 again). Using the low numbers only, that is 128 dmg in a single hit.

Strength multiplies (or should be, if DDO is calculating this correctly) on a critical hit. So a 30 - 32 str Barbarian or Fighter would have that +10 multiplied in there as well as the base dmg. Extra effects should not multiply (though I think they do in some cases, but that would be a programming error). It's going to be tough to do consistently, but it is possible to do very high amounts of damage. Maybe a Barbarian raging, with barbarian critical and a Maiming weapon (like a greataxe or something with a high multiplier) could average the 150 - 200 range. Certainly not impossible, just not common.

[Mad_Bombardier]

Yes, they are usually talking about a) all their numbers added together. or b) just physical damage on a crit. In either case, it's difficult to do and requires a lot of build specialization.

Bow rate of fire is about half of melee rate of attack. So, even with comparable weapon stats and Manyshot (averaged over 2 minutes), ranged will never have more than about 75% damage potential of melee. But, you do get the benefit of safety at range.

[Yaga_Nub]

It's comparable when compared to non-crit hits. When you start talking about critical hits then the whole conversation is changed and it's not that close. Best crit on a bow that I've ever had was around 80 (just damage not extras). On my fighter I've had crits in the 100s and I know of barbs that have posted crits in the 150s (the low end I think).

[GrayOldDruid]

It's comparable when compared to non-crit hits. When you start talking about critical hits then the whole conversation is changed and it's not that close. Best crit on a bow that I've ever had was around 80 (just damage not extras). On my fighter I've had crits in the 100s and I know of barbs that have posted crits in the 150s (the low end I think).

Okay, so my bow damage is not totally sucking... *whew*

On my numbers above, from what I figure - 9+4+3+3+7
9 is the d8+3 roll from the bow itself
4 is from my Strength Bonus (oddly enough, a +4)
3 is from Fire
3 is from Cold
7 is from Sneak Attack (a really average roll on 2d6)

[Missing_Minds]

Nope, your damage isn't sucking at all for range.

However, breaking 200 main damage itself may be possible. I've just about done that on crits with my barb.

lets see here..

str of 28 + barb rage (basic one, never bought the rage str enhancments) + rage pot + madstone rage + madstone rage clicky..

I forget what that puts it up to. 40 or so? (yes they all stack) So.. +15 str damage?

use a +5 heavy pick flaming maiming in one hand and a +1 seeker 10 sneak attack 1 kukri in the other. (yes, TWF barb)

So that gives me... 4 x (1d8+5+15+10)

assuming 8 for the dice roll, emm... 152. odd. because I've seen 175 before for main damage not burst, maming, or what have you.

Oh well, the point is you have to be specially speced to do such stunt. Me, I'm not. But if I get the latest rage choaker, I may be able to. I'd say that most of the those people are counting up all damge delt, and may even be using special creatures that could be taking double damage from something.

[Strakeln]

Cranked out and using the SoS, a babarian will have something around 2d6+55 damage. Thats around 62 damage on an average non-crit hit... but they're critting 35% of the time.

Ranged damage does not compare, nor should it. You have little/no risk of being hit by a counter attack.

[Yaga_Nub]

Cranked out and using the SoS, a babarian will have something around 2d6+55 damage. Thats around 62 damage on an average non-crit hit... but they're critting 35% of the time.

Ranged damage does not compare, nor should it. You have little/no risk of being hit by a counter attack.

Actually ranged damage should cause as much damage. I know this is a game but it's based on some real world ideas. It's a fact that a composite long bow (with around a 70 lbs. draw weight) can generate as much force as a .45 slug. That's a lot of force.

In DnD a characters number of attacks increases at the same rate whether they are using a melee or ranged weapon (unless that has changed in 3.5). So ranged weapons should be just as deadly.

Think of this, what does an infantry unit really fear the most? A sniper. Someone hitting them from range behind cover and/or concealment. Why? Because they are at range and their weapon is just as deadly from that range as it would be if it was 5 feet away or 5 inches away. But you know what? Infantrymen are trained how to handle a sniper attack and to counter it.

Ranged weapons having the same rate of attack wouldn't be the worst thing that happened in the game.

[Strakeln]

Actually ranged damage should cause as much damage. I know this is a game but it's based on some real world ideas. It's a fact that a composite long bow (with around a 70 lbs. draw weight) can generate as much force as a .45 slug. That's a lot of force.

In DnD a characters number of attacks increases at the same rate whether they are using a melee or ranged weapon (unless that has changed in 3.5). So ranged weapons should be just as deadly.

Think of this, what does an infantry unit really fear the most? A sniper. Someone hitting them from range behind cover and/or concealment. Why? Because they are at range and their weapon is just as deadly from that range as it would be if it was 5 feet away or 5 inches away. But you know what? Infantrymen are trained how to handle a sniper attack and to counter it.

Ranged weapons having the same rate of attack wouldn't be the worst thing that happened in the game.

Okay, fair enough. What you observe in DDO is a way to emulate real-world things such as the stopping power of a bow. As we have seen time and time again, real-world physics are often replaced by compensation in other terms.

Looking at ranged combat, it's pretty easy to make a ranged combatant that will only miss on a 1. It's equally easy to make a melee fighter who will do the same. It's a fact that it's easier to hit the person standing 2 feet in front of you with your sword than it is to shoot the moving target while you (the shooter) is in motion. Yet ranged combatants have essentially the same probability of a successful hit.

In reality, it is MUCH harder to hit a target with a bow than a sword. The further away from the target you get, the harder that shot becomes. If the target, the shooter, or both are moving, the shot becomes exponentially more difficult. Yet none of this is reflected in DDO. DDO's (and DnD's) compensation for this is decreased damage output with ranged combat.

You want more "realistic" damage from ranged combat? Fair enough. I want more "realistic" to-hit chances from ranged combat. Here's an off-the-cuff suggestion to make it more "realistic":

1) Increase bow base damage... double it, triple it.
2) If your target is moving, -5 to hit
3) If you are moving, -5 to hit (no shot on the run feat allowed)
4) For every additional 10 feet past a base distance (say 40 feet), you suffer a -10 to your to-hit.

I'm sure you see where I'm going here. Complain about ranged combat damage not being high enough, but remember that your ability to hit things at range is already god-like.

[GrayOldDruid]

Cranked out and using the SoS, a babarian will have something around 2d6+55 damage. Thats around 62 damage on an average non-crit hit... but they're critting 35% of the time.

Ranged damage does not compare, nor should it. You have little/no risk of being hit by a counter attack.

WHAT?!?!? LOL.... you're cracked. Plink one enemy good and theres suddenly four pounding on you - with the melee chasing them down because they can't grab the aggro. Then you're shoving arrows down the troll's throat while all he does is heal himself and the melee comes up and cuts them down from behind for the kill.

Sure, we have a slight delay as they run past everyone else in the party to get to us, but the little/no risk is bullsmurf. Similar to the caster problem of aggro. Only a Ranged guy can pull aggro off a caster with no problem... other than getting the aggro.

And - you already get penalties to hit if a target is moving and more if you are moving as well - the shot on the run feat is required to eliminate (or does it just lower it?) the penalty for YOU moving. The penalty for the target moving is - They are moving! if your arrow hits where they WERE, you miss them. Got to make it collide. If you want to take away ranged's feats, take away Power attack, Spring Attack, uber-weapon-focus...

I am not sure about the Range making a difference, but I am fairly sure that I don't hit targets far away as much as those close up... but then again I took point-blank shot... but its only +1.....

and.. have you ever been IN a sword-fight? It is a LOT harder to hit something that is just in front of you and paying attention to your swing, defending themselves, countering. REALISTICALLY you miss and get blocked or parried a LOT more than you hit anything important. With Range, it is a LOT harder for them to block or dodge.

Just try taking a couple broom handles and sparring someone... then, stand 30 feet apart and see how well they dodge a few pieces of gravel you throw at them. You'll hit with the gravel a lot more than hitting flesh with the broomhandle. (unless of course you just can't throw worth a darn)

[rpasell]

Agro Management.

[GrayOldDruid]

Agro Management.

Well, Yeah! But "Little/no risk of getting hit" ?? Come on!

Aggro management is Wait FOREVER until the melees have hit ALL the monsters at least once so you don't accidentally hit one that has not been damaged already....
... er... .. .

Good idea in Theory... but this is Eberron.

[Strakeln]

Lotta stuff here, going point to point in cowardly yellow.

WHAT?!?!? LOL.... you're cracked. Plink one enemy good and theres suddenly four pounding on you - with the melee chasing them down because they can't grab the aggro. Then you're shoving arrows down the troll's throat while all he does is heal himself and the melee comes up and cuts them down from behind for the kill. Maybe for your ranger. If mine decides to get involved in ranged combat, I don't stand around within clobbering range. A good example is the DQ raid... run it solo or short man. If she catches you, you're dead. I'm not cracked... you're just a lazy ranger, apparently (I know, you kite around too, just pointing out that your argument is somewhat absurd because only the fools stand around waiting for a beating... I'm kidding with you).

And - you already get penalties to hit if a target is moving and more if you are moving as well - the shot on the run feat is required to eliminate (or does it just lower it?) the penalty for YOU moving. The penalty for the target moving is - They are moving! if your arrow hits where they WERE, you miss them. Got to make it collide. If you want to take away ranged's feats, take away Power attack, Spring Attack, uber-weapon-focus... I am aware of the existing penalties. My point was that they are not particularly realistic, based off of the quoted text I was referencing (comparing a bow to a .45). Any ranger worth their salt knows how to kite enemies so that they line up with your arrows. That -4 to hit penalty makes it so my ranger hits on a 2... wow, big change!

I am not sure about the Range making a difference, but I am fairly sure that I don't hit targets far away as much as those close up... but then again I took point-blank shot... but its only +1.....Same roll, no penalty. Your shots might be getting blocked by something between you and the mob, or the mob may be on the move perpendicular to the direction you are firing.

and.. have you ever been IN a sword-fight? It is a LOT harder to hit something that is just in front of you and paying attention to your swing, defending themselves, countering. REALISTICALLY you miss and get blocked or parried a LOT more than you hit anything important. With Range, it is a LOT harder for them to block or dodge.Realistically, you rarely miss. You do get blocked or parried quite a bit. Have your co-worker stand two feet in front of you, start beating him with a wiffle ball bat. Count the misses, blocks, and parries. I'm willing to bet you won't have many (if any) misses. Furthermore, you can overpower blocks and parries.

Just try taking a couple broom handles and sparring someone... then, stand 30 feet apart and see how well they dodge a few pieces of gravel you throw at them. You'll hit with the gravel a lot more than hitting flesh with the broomhandle. (unless of course you just can't throw worth a darn) I strongly disagree and encourage you to try the experiment you suggest. I spent a lot of time as a kid sparring with sticks and throwing rocks at playmates... I assure you that the more dangerous activity is sparring. However, I recommend trying it with wiffle ball bats, as you can really put the power behind them for a more realistic experiment (overpower blocks and parries) with a smaller risk of injury.

[GrayOldDruid]

Replies in beautiful, serene Gray. ()

Lotta stuff here, going point to point in cowardly yellow.

Maybe for your ranger. If mine decides to get involved in ranged combat, I don't stand around within clobbering range. A good example is the DQ raid... run it solo or short man. If she catches you, you're dead. I'm not cracked... you're just a lazy ranger, apparently (I know, you kite around too, just pointing out that your argument is somewhat absurd because only the fools stand around waiting for a beating... I'm kidding with you).
Well, in that EXAMPLE, all he was doing was standing there healing himself. Yes, it really happened. IF they get close and start swinging, sword and board it is. :P ...and actually, I don't kite usually. I prefer the stand-my-ground approach. I can often (maybe not 'usually' but often) put them down before they get to me. Well, I may kite the mob through the caster's firewall, but I mean why not use it. And actually, often I DO step up real close to the melee to get within that 30' range.

I am not sure about the Range making a difference, but I am fairly sure that I don't hit targets far away as much as those close up... but then again I took point-blank shot... but its only +1.....Same roll, no penalty. Your shots might be getting blocked by something between you and the mob, or the mob may be on the move perpendicular to the direction you are firing. eh... possible...

Realistically, you rarely miss. You do get blocked or parried quite a bit. Have your co-worker stand two feet in front of you, start beating him with a wiffle ball bat. Count the misses, blocks, and parries. I'm willing to bet you won't have many (if any) misses. Furthermore, you can overpower blocks and parries. Sure, if he is just standing there... or he is just really really slow.. and unarmed. Ranged combat is more lethal.

I strongly disagree and encourage you to try the experiment you suggest. I spent a lot of time as a kid sparring with sticks and throwing rocks at playmates... I assure you that the more dangerous activity is sparring. However, I recommend trying it with wiffle ball bats, as you can really put the power behind them for a more realistic experiment (overpower blocks and parries) with a smaller risk of injury. Lol... okay.. Then I suppose you can't throw worth a darn <grin>. Or, I would be better off as a Ranger and you would be better off as a Fighter. We got bored with sticks and rocks (okay, we mostly used dirt clods because they have cool dust effect when they hit and you don't have to stop for injuries as often)... then we built catapults and ballista.

[Strakeln]

then we built catapults and ballista.

So we're in agreement that we need to have trebuchets introduced?

I think we could go back and forth for days comparing RL combat with DDO combat. There's an infinite number of things completely disregarded in DDO for sake of playability (examples: wind, intelligence), making our comparisons equally invalid. In my mind, it's easy to hit in melee combat (but difficult to score a major hit), whereas hitting with ranged weapons is notably more difficult... but nearly every hit is deadly.

Mind you, all the discussions about blocking apply to both ranged and melee. In "real" combat, it would be pretty difficult to hit a fighter hiding behind a tower shield... maybe even impossible.

The tradeoff of damage vs "hitability" is a fair one. Yes, if you stand your ground and shoot your arrows, you just may get creamed. But that's like bringing a knife to a gunfight. As you said, once they close within that range, it's time for melee combat. But during that time when you were ranging, you had little/no chance of being hit by anything. If you had decided to kite instead of standing your ground, your chances of being hit are still near zero.

Look at it this way: if fighters had a feat that would halve their damage but make them unhittable, would they take it? The resounding answer is YES... in fact, it would become the new standard, expected of ALL fighters. Ranged combatants, when properly played, already have this "feat".

(you'll notice that I'm conveniently disregarding NPCs with ranged capabilities... a stationary ranger is an open target to NPC archers... but when you move back to kiting, they generally can't do much of anything to you).

[GrayOldDruid]

So we're in agreement that we need to have trebuchets introduced?

I think we could go back and forth for days comparing RL combat with DDO combat. There's an infinite number of things completely disregarded in DDO for sake of playability (examples: wind, intelligence), making our comparisons equally invalid. In my mind, it's easy to hit in melee combat (but difficult to score a major hit), whereas hitting with ranged weapons is notably more difficult... but nearly every hit is deadly.

Mind you, all the discussions about blocking apply to both ranged and melee. In "real" combat, it would be pretty difficult to hit a fighter hiding behind a tower shield... maybe even impossible.

The tradeoff of damage vs "hitability" is a fair one. Yes, if you stand your ground and shoot your arrows, you just may get creamed. But that's like bringing a knife to a gunfight. As you said, once they close within that range, it's time for melee combat. But during that time when you were ranging, you had little/no chance of being hit by anything. If you had decided to kite instead of standing your ground, your chances of being hit are still near zero.

Look at it this way: if fighters had a feat that would halve their damage but make them unhittable, would they take it? The resounding answer is YES... in fact, it would become the new standard, expected of ALL fighters. Ranged combatants, when properly played, already have this "feat".

(you'll notice that I'm conveniently disregarding NPCs with ranged capabilities... a stationary ranger is an open target to NPC archers... but when you move back to kiting, they generally can't do much of anything to you).

Tebuchets?... yes. Man, the animation alone.....

But, fighters halving damage... the DPS obsessed, kill-count dependent fighters in DDO take a feat to halve their damage (no matter the reward)? They sacrifice "to hit" for damage as a standard. How many barbarians do you see using a shield? I see the point, but wouldn't happen. lol....

Okay, maybe I pseduo-kite by stepping to the side to avoid archer's fire - pretty easy to dodge arrows they shoot and spears, etc.... and if I really don't want to take the 10 seconds to switch from range to s&b, I tumble back and fire, tumble back, fire.... ( or just run right beside a melee who is in full swing )

Still, Melee is Uber and Ranged is nerfed.... hoping for some real good help from the Mod 6 plans...

[Yaga_Nub]

Okay, fair enough. What you observe in DDO is a way to emulate real-world things such as the stopping power of a bow. As we have seen time and time again, real-world physics are often replaced by compensation in other terms.

Looking at ranged combat, it's pretty easy to make a ranged combatant that will only miss on a 1. It's equally easy to make a melee fighter who will do the same. It's a fact that it's easier to hit the person standing 2 feet in front of you with your sword than it is to shoot the moving target while you (the shooter) is in motion. Yet ranged combatants have essentially the same probability of a successful hit.

There is already a penalty to hit while the shooter is moving so that's not a valid argument. I'll get to the penalty for a moving target at the bottom. But the ranged combatants don't have essentially the same probability of a successful hit.

In reality, it is MUCH harder to hit a target with a bow than a sword. The further away from the target you get, the harder that shot becomes. If the target, the shooter, or both are moving, the shot becomes exponentially more difficult. Yet none of this is reflected in DDO. DDO's (and DnD's) compensation for this is decreased damage output with ranged combat.

Do you bow hunt every year? I do. You take out distance and environment with practice. That's how military snipers can hit their targets from 1 mile away. It's how I kill deer every year in bow season. For two to three months before, I shoot 200 to 400 arrows a week. As it gets closer to season, I might shoot 100 a day. It's a workout but it gets me ready to hit a deer. DDO DOES compensate for this already and it's not by decreased damage output. What is it then? Auto-attack How the hell is auto-attack the compensation you're probably asking yourself. This is my explanation. IF a mob is just standing there, yes I can hit auto-attack and shoot him center mass all day long. If there is a difference in elevation or partial cover, auto-attack will miss all day long because of the built in aiming point. Now if I turn off auto-attack, I, ME, MY CHARACTER has to guess the path and distance to the mob and try to hit him. Have you been in the Abbott raid and done the asteroid puzzle? Thats what it's like. Now mob AI needs to change a bit because a ton of mobs will just beeline straight towards you. This makes it very easy to both auto-attack them or even attack on your own. There is no path that you have to guess. The devs need to look at making mobs move erratically when tracking you down to make it harder to hit them. They already do this in melee combat so hopefully it would be easy to implement.

You want more "realistic" damage from ranged combat? Fair enough. I want more "realistic" to-hit chances from ranged combat. Here's an off-the-cuff suggestion to make it more "realistic":

1) Increase bow base damage... double it, triple it.

Where the F did that thought come from? Why would you change the damage away from what it already is?

2) If your target is moving, -5 to hit

Not necessary because of the twitch skills needed with ranged as posted above.

3) If you are moving, -5 to hit (no shot on the run feat allowed)

No, DnD has already defined this as -4 unless you spend a lot of feats to get SOTR so why change a proven system.

4) For every additional 10 feet past a base distance (say 40 feet), you suffer a -10 to your to-hit.

No, DnD already has defined distance penalties. But in DDO we don't need them because of the twitch factor in ranged combat. Your video card only draws out to a certain distance with any great detail so you are limited to what you can see. If I can't see it, I can't hit it. The targeting system should be intuitive enough to know when something is out of visual range and turn off auto-attack if that is what you are using. if you aren't using it then you're just shooting blindly. Good look taking something down doing that.

I'm sure you see where I'm going here. Complain about ranged combat damage not being high enough, but remember that your ability to hit things at range is already god-like.

Come on Strakelin, be serious. Stop and think about the mechanics of DDO for a minute. If you don't play a ranger or ranged combat character much then I understand, if you do played a ranged combat character then ............

That stuff (not all of it) is already in the game. See comments above.

[GrayOldDruid]

... okay, the "can't hit it if you can't see it" thing... I will have to admit I HAVE taken down things like that. The example that comes to mind is the Omeran Sniper in Delera's part ... III ??

I was soloing and waiting on someone to come pull the dang lever so I can run up and pull the other lever to open the door... you know...

Anyway, I stood up on the walkway up above the Sniper's little cubby hole... Couldn't see him because of distance, but I knew about where he was and I just shot into that area... and Red Numbers! I kept plinking away and after a few shots, it came up "You killed Omeran Sniper" Sent a guild message with "I just Snipered the Omeran Sniper!! LOL"

It was hilarious.

[sigtrent]

A ranger's bow damage can be pretty decent on a per hit basis compared to a one handed weapon. You have a tiny extra potential in combining arrow and bow effects, but a small disadvantage in that bow is a bit weaker profile wise than a couple of one handers. A longbow is about eaual to a battle-axe (not a top tier melee weapon).

But the bow is quite a bit slower and you don't have the equivilent speed boost two weapon fighting nor the damage bonuses available from two handed fighting. And you don't have the +5/+10 bonuses on the later attacks.

Ranged should be less damaging than melee, otherwise it would be a no brainer for most situations. but I think they need more options for upping its effectiveness. Ranged power attack would be a good start.

Kiting and sniping still seem effective. I have a few characters with decent ranged options and I use them fairly often to good effect, but usualy when solo or in a small group. The worst is when a group has archers and melees and they don't understand eachothers needs and work to cross purposes. I find the most effective strategy is to have the party hold up with melees in front and the archer just behind them pulling in mobs which the melee's finish off when they get close.

[Strakeln]

Come on Strakelin, be serious. Stop and think about the mechanics of DDO for a minute. If you don't play a ranger or ranged combat character much then I understand, if you do played a ranged combat character then ............

That stuff (not all of it) is already in the game. See comments above.

Yaga, I don't know where to start with you. For example:

70# pull bow, 30" draw, 350 grain (22.68 grams) arrow. Speeds ot 270-315 feet/second.
...compared to...
.45 cal ACP, 165-230 grain (10.69-14.9 grams). Muzzle velocity of 850-1060 feet/second (inverse to the weight).

Do the force calculations and tell me how well your "facts" work out. I love it when people present "facts" where numerical values are readily available, but they can't be bothered to actually verify.

I probably shouldn't even bother to argue against you any further, given that these are the kinds of "facts" you will use in your argument. But I can't help it, I'm easily trolled.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not sure why you're having a hard time with this. Take a broomstick and try to hit a stationary object from a distance of 2 feet. Now compare it to trying to hit the same object from 200 feet with an arrow. Yeah, you may be a good shot, but common sense SCREAMS that you will miss more often with a bow than with the stick. I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand... it's something you can easily prove to yourself, over and over and over.

My point was clear: ranged damage may not be sufficient, currently (this is what Gray and I were talking about, in part - he thinks an arrow should smart a lot more than it appears to in DDO, and I have to say he's probably right). But ranged accuracy is inflated to godlike abilities. Sure, you can't DPS like a melee fighter (save those manyshot bursts)... but the exchange of being out of range of any serious threats more than makes up for the reduced DPS. To increasing ranged DPS, I say no (well, okay, maybe a wee bit). To increasing ranged damage, I say okay, but balance out the to-hit.

Why in god's name does my suggested change of "-5 to your to-hit when you are moving" bring out all the "you already get a -4 to your to-hit" monkies? I explicitly mentioned SoTR in the same sentence so you goofs would figure out that I was well aware that there is already a -4 penalty (I mean, sheesh, the SoTR feat does ONE thing, which is to eliminate that penalty...).

I love how the person who claims that you can't hit what you can't see also has the gall to come on here and question my skills as a ranged combatant. Try this: target something, back up til it is no longer on your screen (but in your focus orb). Fire. Let me know what happens. Right back at ya: If you don't play DDO then I understand, if you do play DDO then...

Hmmm... after further reviewing some of your posts, looks like you really have a misunderstanding about a lot of things. Like this:

On my fighter I've had crits in the 100s and I know of barbs that have posted crits in the 150s (the low end I think).

A crit on the low end of the 150's? For a barbarian? Did you make this post back in mod 2? Let's ask a third party: Shade, when was the last time you saw a crit anywhere near as low as 150, when using your build as it was meant to be used?