Ranger: Deepwood Stalker Changes

[Grailhawk]

I would rather see DWS crit range in t5 and also only working against favored enemies. You would still be able to get both, but would have to use a t5.

They had a chance to make Rangers better against Favored Enemies they passed on it IMO we are too late in the design phase to go back to that.

[Grailhawk]

Why did they even allow dervish to exist after the critical range/multi boost ? Remove dervish or replace it with something much much less powerful please.

Same reason Paladin Holy Sword exists.

At least in the case of Ranger they have a chance to not go over the deep end if they make people choose between 2 of these 3 things.

[DevilYouKnow]

Same reason Paladin Holy Sword exists.

At least in the case of Ranger they have a chance to not go over the deep end if they make people choose between these 2 of these 3 things.

Rangers get their own holy sword. But they also get such a huge amount of doublestrike fromd dervish and whirlwind (30%) as well ?

Zeal (10%) is a piece of trash compared to that...

Varg why not give rangers blood strength as well ? Just saying...

[CeltEireson]

Rangers get their own holy sword. But they also get such a huge amount of doublestrike fromd dervish and whirlwind (30%) as well ?

Zeal (10%) is a piece of trash compared to that...

Varg why not give rangers blood strength as well ? Just saying...

Dervish only gives the doublestrike to the offhand.

[Arlathen]

I don't understand the sheer outrage now being poured out. From my perspective:

• Crit boosts were repeatedly asked for in the DWS / Tempest threads, and we we're given them at the expense of some of the initially integrated Melee Power in both tree's and some of the power in ATC
• To get both Crit boosts and a Capstone requires a huge AP investment in Ranger(42AP, 62AP with a Capstone). Paladins have far more flexibility due to having that boost as a spell.
• Even taking all these Crit boosts and a Capstone still leaves Ranger DPS behind Barbarians
• T5 / Capstone choice between Tempest and DWS is quite an interesting (read:difficult) choice dependant on how you want to play your Ranger
• Rangers should be ahead of Paladins in DPS, as they rightly are now. Paladins have much better defenses to call upon, and with LoHs & enhancement Heal Amp have better Self-Healing available.
• Defensively, Rangers are the worst off between Barb / Paladin / Ranger, but from my perspective it's decent enough to keep them in the game in EEs
• The tradeoff in defense for Rangers allows them there Versatility with a bow. Perfectly happy with that.
• From my perspective, Holy Sword can now be left alone, allowing Paladins to keep there DPS gain they had from there pass
• Barbarians bonuses are brought in line with other class enhancements, with Crit Rage being typed Competence

From my point of view, I'm very happy with how things turned out.

[Avenir]

From my point of view, I'm very happy with how things turned out.

I completely agree, having lots of fun on my very first toon.

[Grailhawk]

I don't understand the sheer outrage now being poured out. From my perspective:

• Even taking all these Crit boosts and a Capstone still leaves Ranger DPS behind Barbarians

I'm not sure that's true the going though that I've heard is that Barbs are best when TWF (open to correction on this) Rangers have:
100% off-hand proc,
Dual Perfection,
30% Doublestrike (whirlwind and dervish)
10 Melee power
~20% Doublestrike (Killer)
+14.5 Base damage (Growing Storm, Whirling Blades, Thrill of the Hunt)
+4d6 Sneak Attack
+13 Favored Enemy Damage
+1 Crit multiplier
+1 Crit Threat Range

Barbarians Have:
Rage (+17 STR??)
+1 Crit Threat Range
+2 Crit Multiplier on 19-20
25 Melee Power
+15.5 Fury (Raverger Core 1) and Improved Power Attack and Storms Eye
+8d6 Vicious and Touch of Pain
400 Damage on Vorpal


Which one of those looks better to you? (Did I miss anything? Assuming a standard 41/31 type split)?

From my point of view, I'm very happy with how things turned out.

I'm not unhappy I'm concerned they went too far just like they did with Bard and Paladin which IMO would be horrible and worse then leaving them under powered.

[Axeyu]

I'm not unhappy I'm concerned they went too far just like they did with Bard and Paladin which IMO would be horrible and worse then leaving them under powered.

This!
Some of us realise that when the hype is gone and the dust settles in a couple of weeks/months this will become the newest example of how "powercreep is killing the game" that pops up every day in various forms.
We are not out to rain on anyones parade, we just don't want the devs to keep making the same mistakes over and over.

[Arlathen]

I'm not sure that's true the going though that I've heard is that Barbs are best when TWF (open to correction on this) Rangers have:
100% off-hand proc,
Dual Perfection,
30% Doublestrike (whirlwind and dervish)
10 Melee power
~20% Doublestrike (Killer)
+14.5 Base damage (Growing Storm, Whirling Blades, Thrill of the Hunt)
+4d6 Sneak Attack
+13 Favored Enemy Damage
+1 Crit multiplier
+1 Crit Threat Range

Barbarians Have:
Rage (+17 STR??)
+1 Crit Threat Range
+2 Crit Multiplier on 19-20
25 Melee Power
+15.5 Fury (Raverger Core 1) and Improved Power Attack and Storms Eye
+8d6 Vicious and Touch of Pain
400 Damage on Vorpal

Which one of those looks better to you? (Did I miss anything? Assuming a standard 41/31 type split)?

My Ranger on live is actually running Barbarian PLs at present, and after taking him out for a spin in EEs, and then my wife's Ranger out tonight on Live, I feel Barbarian > Ranger still in a straight up melee fight. And I'm totally cool with that. For the record, I'm using LD as main destiny on both characters for that.

Killer, despite being alot more useful now and somewhat less stressful to try and keep up, still isn't as good in live play as it sounds on paper. Some of the Barbarian damage adds also scale with Melee Power, and abilities like Slaughter and Cruel Cut can knock wads of HP off enemies quickly, and more importantly, repeatedly.

I'm not unhappy I'm concerned they went too far just like they did with Bard and Paladin which IMO would be horrible and worse then leaving them under powered.

At this point, I think they've made the right call. The next difficult balance point is going to be with Fighters; I've never been one for playing Fighters tbh (My Ranger's Fighter PLs were done as 12 Fighter / 8 Monk multi-classes). But where I "generally" see the DPS spectrum now:

Barbarian > Ranger > Paladin & Swash

For the Fighters out there, I would expect Fighters with there Specialised Weapon choice to be ahead of Barbarians, and for any other weapon to be behind Barbarian but ahead of Ranger. If it takes adding a Crit Multiplier to Kensai to do that, then all power to the Fighter players out there. Fighters have deficiencies in Self-Healing and Saves to account for, after all.

So I guess it also depends on how the Dev's see fit to balance out the Fighter short-comings, maybe taking a lesson or two out of the Barbarian pass.

[sjbb87]

I don't understand the sheer outrage now being poured out. From my perspective:

• Crit boosts were repeatedly asked for in the DWS / Tempest threads, and we we're given them at the expense of some of the initially integrated Melee Power in both tree's and some of the power in ATC
• To get both Crit boosts and a Capstone requires a huge AP investment in Ranger(42AP, 62AP with a Capstone). Paladins have far more flexibility due to having that boost as a spell.
• Even taking all these Crit boosts and a Capstone still leaves Ranger DPS behind Barbarians
• T5 / Capstone choice between Tempest and DWS is quite an interesting (read:difficult) choice dependant on how you want to play your Ranger
• Rangers should be ahead of Paladins in DPS, as they rightly are now. Paladins have much better defenses to call upon, and with LoHs & enhancement Heal Amp have better Self-Healing available.
• Defensively, Rangers are the worst off between Barb / Paladin / Ranger, but from my perspective it's decent enough to keep them in the game in EEs
• The tradeoff in defense for Rangers allows them there Versatility with a bow. Perfectly happy with that.
• From my perspective, Holy Sword can now be left alone, allowing Paladins to keep there DPS gain they had from there pass
• Barbarians bonuses are brought in line with other class enhancements, with Crit Rage being typed Competence

From my point of view, I'm very happy with how things turned out.

agree

Ranger was one of the worst classes of DDO, now that finally shines. People are giving rage ....

The ranger is at the same level of rogues, paladins, barbarians, and bards

[Eth]

agree

Ranger was one of the worst classes of DDO, now that finally shines. People are giving rage ....

People repeated that line with paladins over and over aswell.

If they had listened to those same people holy sword would even be more overpowered today, because it would be a sacred bonus, stacking with competence crit. bonuses.

Yes we needed passes for some classes badly. If something is bad it sure needs some help, but it doesn't have to be so good that everything else pales in comparision. Then you just make it an eternal cycle of class passes. I wonder if people will rage about bards being completely underpowered, when the last class pass is done.

The ranger is at the same level of rogues, paladins, barbarians, and bards

The only thing I would like to know is what their intention is. Where are rangers supposed to be in their book. If they want tempests to beat barbs and paladins in DPS, than the pass is probably good as it is.
Barbs/Paladins generally better survivability could make an argument for that to be the case.
Rogue is already pretty similar in that regard.

[Requiro]

(...) Did I miss anything? (...)

Yes. Barbs have :
- Blood Strength - one of the best (if not the best) self healing ability for melee AND
- Lots of HP and Healing Amplification to be (almost) indestructible in fights.

About Double strike Rangers have:
- 5-9% passive doublestrike with +20% situational (killer)
- Off hand don't get double strike. It benefit only from Capstone (+25%)
Thus:
- Mainhand: 105-109% attacks (125-129% occasional)
- Offhand: 125% attacks

(...) Where are rangers supposed to be in their book. (...)

I don’t know what Devs are goals, but probably (at least this is logical) that Tempest, that is master in Dual wielding, be a little ahead in that one Combat Style (TWF). And be competitive overall because of his poor survivability, and not STR support (only DEX that is always inferior to STR)

[Ellihor]

Which one of those looks better to you? (Did I miss anything? Assuming a standard 41/31 type split)?

Yes you missed about 500 hp, amp, knockdown immunity and 10% speed, higher PRR and the time you don't loose healing. This last one will be easier to see when more people TR to ranger and start recording videos with different playstyles.

And on ranger side the fort bypass.

[Ellihor]

Cool, where can I get the refunds for my three Tier 3 TF warhammers? Took me only a couple months to craft them you know.

We need some kind of yellow dopant-like item for all crafting systems. Drops at 20th reward, small chance in chest and can buy at store or trade in game.

[Ellihor]

Rogue is already pretty similar in that regard.

Personally I belive rogue is above what it should be. They have the highest dps in the game, specially now that every boss has tons of PRR, so I don't get why people cry so much about paladins, barbs, warlock and now ranger but not so much noise about rogue.

[Grailhawk]

About Double strike Rangers have:
- 5-9% passive doublestrike with +20% situational (killer)
- Off hand don't get double strike. It benefit only from Capstone (+25%)
Thus:
- Mainhand: 105-109% attacks (125-129% occasional)
- Offhand: 125% attacks

Since there is no difference between off-hand vs main hand its the same thing now. If you want to average it out and say rangers get 34/2 = 17% double strike that works too and probably what i should have done.

Yes you missed about 500 hp, amp, knockdown immunity and 10% speed, higher PRR and the time you don't loose healing. This last one will be easier to see when more people TR to ranger and start recording videos with different playstyles.

And on ranger side the fort bypass.

I was strictly comparing DPS options. I agree that Rangers are behind Bard, Paladins, and Barbarians when it comes to Defense and Survival, and by a non Trivial amount.

The only thing I would like to know is what their intention is. Where are rangers supposed to be in their book. If they want tempests to beat barbs and paladins in DPS, than the pass is probably good as it is.
Barbs/Paladins generally better survivability could make an argument for that to be the case.
Rogue is already pretty similar in that regard.

Given that Rangers class defining feature is Favored Enemy and that it is by its nature a combat bonus an argument can be made that they should be one of the best if not the best DPS clasess, on top of the low survivability. Taking those two things into account and how Rogues are set up it makes sense.

Dev's will never comment on how they view the DPS pecking order but this does make it look like Rogues and Rangers are at the top and paying for it with lower survival.

[QuantumFX]

Regarding Competence bonus to Critical Damage Multiplier:

In the near future, we intend to change Barbarian Ravager's enhancement "Critical Rage" to be typed as a Competence bonus.

We wanted to let players know sooner rather than later.

Not having the benefits from enhancement trees stack is fine. But why don't you guys retune some of the epic destiny enhancements so that they stack? (Ex. Pulverizer).

[Saekee]

Regarding Competence bonus to Critical Damage Multiplier:

In the near future, we intend to change Barbarian Ravager's enhancement "Critical Rage" to be typed as a Competence bonus.

We wanted to let players know sooner rather than later.

Also this would pose a targeted nerf to every barbarian utilizing critical rage and pulverizer.

In the meantime rangers are the gods of melee. Sorry, but this is ridiculous.

Either remove the critical threat range buff from deepwood stalker or move both the effects
from tempest providing a +1 crit multiplier and the +1 crit threat range from deepwood stalker to their level 18/20 core ability.

Otherwise this would be the worst change and leave barbarians being shelved again.

Varg please consider boosting mob fortification so as to naturally nerf critical hits. This would necessitate tactical teamwork to reduce fortification on mobs, such as using destruction/improved destruction and the many enhancements available in various trees. It would challenge players without nerfing--a simple buff to mobs.

[DevilYouKnow]

Varg please consider boosting mob fortification so as to naturally nerf critical hits. This would necessitate tactical teamwork to reduce fortification on mobs, such as using destruction/improved destruction and the many enhancements available in various trees. It would challenge players without nerfing--a simple buff to mobs.

They already buffed mobs.

[Hazelnut]

Rangers have been a sad second for both melee and ranged for far too long. These updates to DWS and Tempest have brought them up to competetive with the not-yet recevied their pass melees and still not competetive with other ranged options.

The people I know who actually play the monk/ranger archer combo are figuring out adjustments but are still convinced it will rule in ranged DPS. In the mean time a properly build Rogue Mechanic with a great crossbow still outdoes a DWS or AA and an heavy-repeater built on an Artificer out does the Rogue Mechanic. At least in the upper heroic levels I've been able to test things.

The added PRR, MRR, and HP close the gap between the melee rangers and fighters or paladins in terms of survivability but with the increased damage output of monsters closing the gap just isn't good enough. Damage avoidance through dodge doesn't solve the problem. An increased miss chance of 30% does not equate to a 30% reduction in damage on every hit because of the timing issue with healing.