ArenaNet talk:Skill feedback/Ranger/Incendiary Arrows
|
Note: As of September 2, 2009 this page is no longer active. If you have suggestions for Guild Wars skills please go to Feedback:Main to learn how to submit suggestions that ArenaNet can use. |
Archive
Post-august update talk
Firstly, take into account that Marksmanship all ready has some awesome elites. Secondly, the attribute spread in regards to it being in WS and requiring a bow helps balance out that it is a NEARBY AoE Burning from a martial weapon. Thirdly, while my "buff-ranger" side of me wants to see 1...3...4, the "balance" side of me says that the burning duration is fine as it is, mostly because having burning up ~3/5-1/2 the time on up to 3 people along with any other condition-causing preparation--after all, it is in Wilderness Survival--is pretty dang good. I'd almost say a little too good, but whatever floats Izzy's boat. --Ezekial Riddle 00:43, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
- It's that kind of attitude that's the reason why over 85% of skills still suck. If you don't complain, unused skills don't get buffed.
- I would say either change the scaling OR move it to marksmanship. Both of them together is overpowered. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.22.211 (talk).
- TBH, this skill is pretty good right now (maybe slightly too good) so there's no way it should get another buff (at least not one which isn't balanced by a nerf of at least the same magnitude). --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:82.3.255.222 (talk).
- Just because an attribute has a few overpowered skills and a lot of skills that are complete BS does not make it balanced. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.211.43 (talk).
- TBH, this skill is pretty good right now (maybe slightly too good) so there's no way it should get another buff (at least not one which isn't balanced by a nerf of at least the same magnitude). --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:82.3.255.222 (talk).
Readem's idea is stupid
This skill needed a buff, and now it's actually useful. I think someone gets owned quite often by this skill...
If you don't like it, bring antidote signet. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.64.14.219 (talk).
- Readem is always right. This post is no exception. -- NUKLEAR
IIV 14:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC) - Having a counter doesn't make a skill balanced. Also, Readem is right. Dark Morphon(contribs) 16:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Rangers don't need more 10 energy long recharge bow attacks thank you. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.230.18 (talk).
10 Seconds is retarted. there's about two seconds between each shot, and with three second recharge, that's a 2 second downtime, and if you arent aware someone is shooting at you or that your too close to an archer to kite, you deserve to get owned. But its suggestions like this that get smiter's boon style nerfs. It elite readem, you dont need to kill the G'damn skill. 5 recharge is much more reasonable. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:Phill Gaston (talk).
- Agreed. Rangers need more 5 energy low recharge bow attacks. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.230.18 (talk).
- Care to explain where you found him suggesting 10 recharge? If you can't read, use glasses. Dark Morphon(contribs) 10:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't say that he suggested 10 recharge. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.16.18 (talk).
- Thanks for nothing Readem, Anet just ruined a perfectly balanced skill. I propose that from now on all of Readem's skill suggestions get deleted for causing Anet to make retarded decisions. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.219.145 (talk).
- Dude, this is still a pretty god damned good skill, regardless of recharge. Nearby range is actually bigger than it sounds, and to be able to apply conditions with a short recharge is pretty insane. 3/7, 3/8 uptime for burning seems more fair. --Ezekial Riddle 02:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- The burning duration deserves to scale at 1...4...5 seconds or be moved to Marksmanship at 1...3...4 seconds now. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:96.233.8.248 (talk).
- There is no need to buff it any more, it serves its purpose as condition spreading. --Ezekial Riddle 05:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- What about people who don't want to use it for condition spreading? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.64.6.160 (talk).
- For what else would they use it? Damage? If you want the damage aspect and not the condition spreading aspect, use Burning Arrow. --Ezekial Riddle 19:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Some people can't afford Nightfall or don't want to pay more for a game that has already failed? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.212.37 (talk).
- That would be user fault, not host fault. ;) --Ezekial Riddle 11:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'll pay for more chapters once Anet can prove that they are more competent than a bunch of monkeys randomly typing on keyboards. I'm not going to reward Anet for throwing Build Wars into the trash for 2 years straight. I'm not going to reward them for adding title grind. I'm not going to reward them for doing a lousy balancing job. And as a responsible consumer, you shouldn't either ;) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.21.250 (talk).
- As a responsible consumer, it's my job to buy what ever satisfies me. I was satisfied, initially, with each of the games (not so much EotN). However, it's the 1+ years of minimal content release with no major content release in sight that is bugging the bajeezuz out of me. --Ezekial Riddle 03:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- Which is what I was originally saying-I'm not going to spend anything on a failed game that will not have anything significantly new developed for it. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.21.250 (talk).
- As a responsible consumer, it's my job to buy what ever satisfies me. I was satisfied, initially, with each of the games (not so much EotN). However, it's the 1+ years of minimal content release with no major content release in sight that is bugging the bajeezuz out of me. --Ezekial Riddle 03:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- I'll pay for more chapters once Anet can prove that they are more competent than a bunch of monkeys randomly typing on keyboards. I'm not going to reward Anet for throwing Build Wars into the trash for 2 years straight. I'm not going to reward them for adding title grind. I'm not going to reward them for doing a lousy balancing job. And as a responsible consumer, you shouldn't either ;) --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.21.250 (talk).
- That would be user fault, not host fault. ;) --Ezekial Riddle 11:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Some people can't afford Nightfall or don't want to pay more for a game that has already failed? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.212.37 (talk).
- For what else would they use it? Damage? If you want the damage aspect and not the condition spreading aspect, use Burning Arrow. --Ezekial Riddle 19:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- What about people who don't want to use it for condition spreading? --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.64.6.160 (talk).
- There is no need to buff it any more, it serves its purpose as condition spreading. --Ezekial Riddle 05:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- The burning duration deserves to scale at 1...4...5 seconds or be moved to Marksmanship at 1...3...4 seconds now. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:96.233.8.248 (talk).
- Dude, this is still a pretty god damned good skill, regardless of recharge. Nearby range is actually bigger than it sounds, and to be able to apply conditions with a short recharge is pretty insane. 3/7, 3/8 uptime for burning seems more fair. --Ezekial Riddle 02:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for nothing Readem, Anet just ruined a perfectly balanced skill. I propose that from now on all of Readem's skill suggestions get deleted for causing Anet to make retarded decisions. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:72.71.219.145 (talk).
- I didn't say that he suggested 10 recharge. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:71.174.16.18 (talk).
The 5 second recharge unnecessarily nerfs the skill, as Anet kept the skill in wilderness survival. Moving it to Marksmanship or expertise would help reduce the condition spreading as poison is also wilderness survival. Having to put 12 pts to get 3 seconds of burning in a high price to pay especially considering minimal benefit other wilderness skills gain. If theyre going to keep it like this, then change the burning break down 1..3..4. This nerf greatly diminishes the rangers ability to put pressure on Monks...healing breeze --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:67.187.181.4 (talk).
- I agree with your statement on "nerfs rangers ability to put pressure on Monks", but real monks do not use healing breeze. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:96.233.13.191 (talk).
- "nerfs rangers ability to put pressure on Monks [and everyone]" was what ANET was going for, did you not read the dev updates? --
Riddle 16:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
- "nerfs rangers ability to put pressure on Monks [and everyone]" was what ANET was going for, did you not read the dev updates? --
