ArenaNet talk:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Bows

Bows Firing At Melee

Well it's just that it seems pretty hard to load a bow and fire it when someone keeps hitting you with a sword. It irritates me because if you're a ranger then of course you use bows but when others come melee then is stupid with a bow and just grabbing the bow and hit the enemy couldn't hurt that much and if you're R/W then there is almost no space for abilities you could only have 4 w spells and 4 r spells. Then you cant make good combinations and then you're pretty screwed so if all rangers could be equipped with a dagger that levels up with and is indestructible then it would make more sense. Hungub 17:21 April 21 (UTC)

I don't think its gonna work, because shooting a bow with a spear in your chest seems pretty hard as well, and shooting a bow while in a firestorm is pretty hard too. You would have to be consequent and apply that to everything, even spell casting, which would seriously change the gameplay, and I don't think that would be in a good way. -Brabbel 19:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

This suggestion has my full support, for the sole reason that it would mirror a game mechanic from the best game series ever, Fire Emblem. Seriously though, if GW was trying to be realistic, why are one-handed swords as big as you are? Why can you use magic? Why can you survive more than a hit or two from a weapon? Not realistic, because perfect realism sucks. 71.31.149.63 19:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

But still he has a certain point in LOTRO (Lord of the Rings Online) you "hunter"will take out weapons for melee combat. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Small and deadly (talk).

Instead of focusing on "small" stuff, why don't you just put small blades at either end of the bow, and at both ends of the handhold? It would be effective for defense, and stylish too. The only problem I can think of would be to allocate damage points, and switching between melee and range. 70.144.79.213 00:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Well there would be two ways to do this imo. You could boost the actual bow attack and make the melee weapons weaker, or change them based on the bow itself. So that they would just do that same damage. Actually you could have daggers that have the same style as the bow. OR you could have the melee part attached to the bow as the previous person mentioned --Waggie 21:27, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

He's making it seem as if melee trumps ranged, which it isn't. I can turn the tables around and say, "it sucks that I can't throw my sword repeatedly at that ranger from afar, warriors should have shurikens!!!". → BROWNSPANK 09:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the problem is the same when you can see your Parangon throwing his spear on a foe standing half a meter of him and see the spear reappear in his hand...You should be able to fight in melee with a bow or a spear with a motion more adapt--90.40.122.177 11:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

How About Just Grabbing An Arrow and (like spear i guess) lunging the arrow into the Foe or maybe some close combat using arms, elbows, fists, legs,..

What about giving chars a ranged and a melee weapon slot and a pre-setup skill set for each that you can switch as you play. -- Winter_Reborn 6/1/2008

Some of you may think of this as off topic, but how about you just find ways to not get hit? I mean, in the handbook it says Rangers are best from above because they can fire down on enemies, but there's no point in doing that if the warrior can just run right up the hill at you? if there was some way to erect defenses or more hills that you can't climb from a certain side, I think that would be better than worrying about meleeSirius 21:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)Syreas

Why don't you just make and item like metal gloves or brass knuckles so when you're a ranger and someone's stabbing you you can punch them in the face or groin stunning them so A. you can run away and start firing again or B. you could just keep punching away? Also this way when you put your sword or bow away and someone starts killing you you always have your hands and feet on also I'm assuming you could still have your metal gloves or brass knuckles on while using a weapon so you can put your bow away and kill the enemy like a man with fists or feet

There's always the hidden dagger like in Assassin's Creed --The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]]).

I don't think this would work so good. The ranger would not stand a chance versus a warrior if he gets difficulties with aiming. And if he pick up a sword he need to use points in swordsmanship too, a lot of attribute spread that way. Goody 17:43, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Realistically, a longbow would have armor penetration and an effective range of nearly 200 yards and an axe to the face would generally be lethal. Guild Wars is a fantasy RPG, not a medieval combat simulator. -- Gordon Ecker 03:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Any one of you ever play Samuray Warriors from Koei? there is a bad ass japanese general named INA, she is an archer, but you can engage in melee combat with her too, using bladed bows or spike bows like someone says up here. Its a easy way to deal with this. Obviusly to balance gameplay, the melee atack has to be extremely slow or weak. In the other hand, caster are criying for melee weapons too, so the implementation has to be for all the profesions.. but.. hey!.. maybe they dont even implement a profession system!!!!Kioga 15:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC) (sorry about my english!!!)

The Impact of Arrows

Really nice, I suggest the arrows can probably disappear when u rest, like when your health starts regenerating. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:147.236.33.231 (talk).

Melee Features for Bows

Rangers have Range in their name. Thus, not melee. ~~ frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 18:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha! look at my dagger!! | stab! | stab! lol that's cool. Actually, the ranger is a person of the ranges, or a person that travels across ranges. They're more likely to be seen with a hunting knife or machete than a bow. *cough* The rangers short blade isn't really used for fighting, but more for cutting away vines and things like that. I can see it being used defensively though. (Terra Xin 10:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC))

Still a bad idea. ~~ frvwfr2 (talk · contributions) 15:02, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm okay with a close combat weapon for rangers as long as it just cripples and doesn't turn into a major weapon. Some games I have played has ranged weapon users use their arrow (which in this game the arrow head was much longer than usual) as a close range weapon just fend off the attacker until they could use their bow. Don't know if that is what you were thinking. ~Nixon4prez

If it cripples, you can bet every vital organ in your body it will turn into a major weapon. --76.25.197.215 00:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

This whole concept idea reminds me of Inahime in Samurai Warriors. az :D 15:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that ranger doesn't need a dagger. Ranger could get overbalanced from the other professions. Ranger is not a melee profession --Rated Five 14:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Is this suggestion about giving rangers blades in addition to bows, or is it suggesting adding blades onto bows? IMO adding blades onto bows would be silly. -- Gordon Ecker 09:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Can make the rangers a bit more realistic. there was another suggestion like this 1 (I think), that said small daggers o r any other new ranger weapon should still b a part of marksmanship, and can use bow attacks, but the attributes name should b changed, and the attack name should b changed too. If any weapons like these r made, they should b quite weaker than bows, and they should have expertise or wilderness survival skills that will make them have hit and run effects, so the rangers could use them just to get back to bow range quicker. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:147.236.33.231 (talk).

Increase Bow Shooting Range

The problem with this suggestion is that it could make rangers highly terrain-dependent. If they're balanced around tight, high-cover areas, they could be overpowered in open, low-cover areas. If they're balanced around open, low-cover maps, they could be underpowered in tight, high-cover areas such as caves. Making damage decrease at longer ranges could be a solution, however non-damage skill effects may also need scaling. -- Gordon Ecker 09:31, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the statement that "A ranged class is supposed to have a significantly bigger radius of attack range than other classes.", as, based on the context, it seemed to imply that casters (and, indirectly, paragons) aren't ranged professions, and that the developers wanted casters to have a shorter range than ranged martial professsions, which I have not seen any evidence of, and seems to be contradicted by the rarity of half-range, touch and PBAoE spells compared to full-range spells. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 09:06, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Merging

I'm merging all articles relating to bows into this one here. It will look more streamlined seeing them in one place than having 5 different articles talking about the same weapon. (Terra Xin 04:03, 30 June 2008 (UTC))

I've removed the ones not relating to bows. I don't understand your point about removed info. Those details are still at their original pages. Backsword 04:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

yes but I had them marked for deletion, which you've removed. The two articles you took out do relate to bows. One is a crossbow and the other is an offhand for a bow. I'll leave it as you have it but trust me when I say that there are going to be hundreds of suggestions about bows and your action will ensure that those two unique ideas will get lost in all of the junk ones. Condensing is a great way to preserve information, not keeping it apart.(Terra Xin 04:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC))

ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Bows contains text from ArenaNet:Guild Wars 2 suggestions/Bow Changes. All copyrightable edits to the source page prior to the merge were made by 76.185.177.139, 76.25.197.215 and 00ahmed00. -- Gordon Ecker 02:57, 30 July 2008 (UTC)