Feedback talk:User/Dan Dan Teddy Bearz/What a hunter should be.

I think it is practically a requirement for at least a Sylvari Ranger to possess the ability to blend into their surroundings, especially amongst forestry, enough to allow them to move about their foes unnoticed at least until their first strike. This would have been a logical addition to the Assassin profession of GW1, as well, but I don't know if this option was even considered at the time. Rangers are scouts. In so being, they are trackers. In so being, they are hunters. What is a hunter without stealth? A hunter without stealth is like a ninja that uses huge flashy magic(I'm a big fan of Naruto, I follow the series to this day, so don't start with me). It simply defeats the purpose. What good is being a "Trapper" if your enemies can see you lay them? If you're going to improve the AI, you'll need to think of these things that would be common sense outside of the game.Dan Dan Teddy Bearz 00:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Stealth is already confirmed for the rangers.

@Dan Dan Teddy Bearz About the Sylvari Ranger, I don't think a race advantage would be a good idea and they've already stated multiple times that each profession will be played by all the races in the exact some way, no race-profession benefits (except *possibly* for some minor PvE-only racial skills). --217.129.133.230 23:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I was hoping that hinting at an obvious advantage a particular race would logically possess would spark its spread throughout all of the races, making it more of a professional benefit than a racial one. I'm glad that this option has been confirmed. Unfortunately, this says the stealth option will only be available while static. That's worse than simply creeping outside of aggro range. What's the point of being stealthy if you're paralyzed? You may as well be dead. I would prefer the stealth option fading directly after the player's first attack, as would be both more realistic and beneficial. As it is now, it's just playing dead and anyone who can check vitals can take advantage of the huge handicap you've just given yourself. I'm sorely disappointed. If they leave this as it is, I'm likely never going to use it. You're losing points, already, GW2.Dan Dan Teddy Bearz 23:56, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Okay, so Rangers basically have to play dead while thieves can frolic freely? I suppose, from a lore perspective, it makes sense. Rangers gaining the benefit of camouflage(/stealth) by remaining still within the bushes/amidst the limbs, while thieves being masters of acrobatics and deceit possess more freedom of movement while visually evasive(/stealthed). I just don't like it. I find any mechanic that encourages a player to wait, visibly or not, for something to find and kill them to be a really bad idea. Teddy Dan, yo. 22:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)