IDEA!!

[amolol]

bigger quivers
to date the biggest quiver ive seen is 100 arrows
i think we should be able to get (easily) 200 arrow quivers

or quivers with stats that are more common.

also we need to try and find somthing to do about missile shield

like a 10th circle spell for rangers that has a chance to break it down.

i think if we got some or just one of these fixes rangering would be a little more fun and it would be a little esier to get into groups.

-senior deputy admin-

[Yayaril]

8)

Try thunder lance and breach. Harass your elementalist/enchanter to cast those.

[Adana]

Yetihide quiver holds 200.

:)

[Hyldryn]

Just use some +3, +4, +5 hitroll arrows to get rid of the shield.

Editted for grammer :oops:

[Stamm]

If you happen to know where 5 hitroll arrows can be obtained... let me know :)

[Hyldryn]

I know where to get +5 crossbow bolts. A large number of them are located in my tinkers bag.

[Cirath]

I'm just wondering the reasoning behind removing stats from nearly every quiver in the game. It isn't exactly like there were any horrendously overpowered quivers.

But maybe that's just me.

[Waelos]

My suggestion? Forget archery ;) During recent tests, melee outdamaged archery by a vast margin.

+4 arrows bust missile shield just fine. . . By the time you cast that 10th circle 'missile shield breach' spell at ******* the mob is 3/4 the way dead and you collect your 9 arrows from the corpse.

I'm surprised people are interested in getting bigger quivers. I have a 200 capacity quiver and have never even come close to running out of arrows during a fight. The largest fights in the game are usually obliterated by invokers long before I've targeted 3.mob with melee, let alone archery.

Truth be told, I wouldn't mind if archery was yanked completely. I think the code is great, the idea fun. . . but in general it doesnt accomplish any real objective. Rogues lure better. Invokers/rogues/ranger melee outdamages. . . I suppose saving 100 hps damage from fireshield is ok. . but in general I just rem weapon and rescue people instead of wasting time with archery.

Lost.

[mynazzaraxxsyn]

I'm just wondering the reasoning behind removing stats from nearly every quiver in the game. It isn't exactly like there were any horrendously overpowered quivers.

But maybe that's just me.

Why remove the stats from badges? Because it originally it was an equipment slot NOT meant for stats. It was a utility slot.

[Waelos]

Myna? He said quiver. . .not badge.

Generally 'utility slots' are getting stats more and more. Spell component bags have stats. Quivers are going that way. . . and I'd be very surprised if there wasn't a badge or two with stats out there (from god quests and whatnot). And why not? Adds more fun and utility to utility slots!

Lost

[mynazzaraxxsyn]

Myna? He said quiver. . .not badge.

No shit? Miner's badge used to be +1 dam.

Quivers were nobits then became full of stats, then their stats are being removed. Same thing.

Was a comparsion.

[belleshel]

Truth be told, I wouldn't mind if archery was yanked completely.

Finally you join the club;)
Drop archery its a waste of code/time. Fix melee.

[Sesexe]

...

[Vahok]

Personally, I'd love to see more +stat quivers and/or badges. With the new roller, and it has been pointed out before, some of us really didn't roll our character real well. So, these quivers could solve some con problems for older mages, maybe str problems on draggers...

Vahok was rolled a bit flawed. I love playing him, so I'm not about to change anything (ie. reroll) , but it would be nice if I could find an easy, little used slot (on a warrior), to fix him.

Or heck, lemme switch around my stats as well. Shrug, it seems newer rolled characters have it easy, which it should be. Rolling a character shouldn't be chore (5 days rolling), but the older players would thank the admin for some easy to get +stat quivers I think. Then maybe I wouldn't be so upset by the newer, strong warriors.

[Gura]

i still dont see why the hulburg quiver lost its stats!

[Arilin Nydelahar]

cough, spec melee, spec archery. Make them useful, just make it a choice for rangers which one gets used. :P

[Waelos]

LoL Bel I think Treladian is the one that still wants to stay on the Archery Boat ;) I had hope for it for a while. . . but in all honesty I think its purpose is to lure every so often and maybe shoot something if I'm bored. I am convinced that there is a bug in it that is giving more damage if you have lower skill/level too!

Anyway. . . can't id dice on arrows. There is some complex (?) formula that determines your damage. I think it is based on damroll. Unless each arrow is gonna do 3X my damroll, there isn't any reason to use it over melee. Procs, 5 attacks vs 3, etc. . .just no return for the investment. I was even considering selling my arrow collection!

Snicker

Lost.

[Gromikazer]

Yea I have no Idea.

I do know there is dice on bows, and arrows. I don't know if it combines them, or takes the average, if it uses offense, or what. Archery at this point is just something you use to level, until you get good weapons.

[Arilin Nydelahar]

Yea I have no Idea.

I do know there is dice on bows, and arrows. I don't know if it combines them, or takes the average, if it uses offense, or what. Archery at this point is just something you use to level, until you get good weapons.

Don't forget all important luring! You know, if you don't have an illusionist, or a rogue, or a multitude of other classes.

[Ragorn]

Should just yank all this stupid magic arrow crap, and put the dice on the bows themselves. Let rangers that quest a 5/5 bow shoot through missile shield with regular arrows.

Oh god! Rangers would be overpowered! See also: poll results.

[Gromikazer]

I knew the poll was for you to start campaigning for ranger upgrades!! ROFL.. :P

[kiryan]

archery is a lot of fun.

for that reason alone it shouldn't be removed because some people will enjoy it tremendously be it for an hour a day or several months.

It may not be as uber as promised, and it does get annoying (especially after you lose your first corpse full of arrows to a crash), but it is fun and can always be modified to be better. To remove it would be pointless, really that suggestion, obviously sarcastic, was just spiteful and shows a total lack of imagination, creativity and desire to do anything positive.

As with many things in this game, you need the right zones to make certain "underpowered" aspects respected.

for example a zone full of demons that had perm fire shield but were not mage that track but also sense life and bash would increase the value of archery quite a bit if there was uber eq on the other side.

Much in the same way that PFG is a weak spell when compared to PFE, holy avenger > unholy avenger, invokers compared to rogues, archery has its strenghts and weaknesses and it takes a huge varied environment to allow every skill to shine. Right now, were probably lopsided in zone/world content... no bash mobs, evil aligned, multiple caster. The skills that are effective in these areas are valued highly today. Tomorrow could be different if we develop some underutilized dynamics.

I would say that I don't see an equal escalation in archery equipment as I see in 1h gear (nor did we see an equal escalation between 2h gear and 1h gear)... Now maybe eq doesn't mean much when the archery or melee is calculated but if it does, and you escalate one without escalating the other... Someone should go back and look at what archery was supposed to do and what it does...

im thinking specifically damage decked ranger using archery as compared to a decked rogue with 3 BC daggers and a khanjari. Then look at it again with missile shield in the picture. Then look at it again realizing how often and how devestating it is to lose a months collection of quested / expensive / zone arrows. Then fix the losing arrow thing and adjust the spheres appropriately.

[kiryan]

tiamat quiver holds 250 i think.

[amolol]

ok first of all i know there are 200 arrow quivers out there i asked for more common ones

second those quivers with stats should be ranger only

third i think if we had a 10th circle spell that broke down missile shield and was effective to cast alot more ppl would bring rangers... the hole thing about an ele breaking down missile shield ... alot of times i get told to F off and dual wield. so for all you nazi mages out there *bird*

[Arilin Nydelahar]

ok first of all i know there are 200 arrow quivers out there i asked for more common ones

second those quivers with stats should be ranger only

third i think if we had a 10th circle spell that broke down missile shield and was effective to cast alot more ppl would bring rangers... the hole thing about an ele breaking down missile shield ... alot of times i get told to F off and dual wield. so for all you nazi mages out there *bird*

<-- Has a 50th level ranger. 50+ days ptime on him.

I'd never use the spell, not unless archery was made worthwhile.

[Waelos]

Sad thing is, I own a tia quiver. I can't remember the capacity. . .would need to log in and check.

See, thing is I wasn't kidding or being sarcastic about removing archery. Only people that would affect is rangers leveling up, and all that would do is create less high level 1W guardians. If archery was removed I wouldn't even notice.

I've posted idea after idea about changes, fixes, etc and nothing's happened. I really don't mean to sound bitter, because I'm not. Archery is dead to me ;) I've just filed it under 'trap' and 'forage' and 'surprise'

So personally I'd rather archery was left alone, and concentration on improving the ranger class be funneled into melee oriented. If some 'specialization' is offered that is cool too, if they're balanced.

I've tested archery this way and that, with +4 arrows, with +1 arrows, with missile shield, without missile shield. Been involved with it since we were messing stuff up with bright magenta GODLYs and red HAWKEYE! messages. Just think its time to move on =(

Lost

[Waelos]

Amolol -

People ask you to dual because it is better than archery. If I insisted on casting my 'nukes' (Sticks, chain!) instead of dualing I think my groupmates would call me a dumbass and tell me to dual too. Or if invokers were using cone of cold instead of force missiles, or if any class was using an ability that was a poor choice, people grouping with them would try and push them to the better ability.

People will not bring more rangers if there is a ranger only missile shield breaking spell. First, there are allready spells that do that. Second, archery sucks (sorry, I dont mean to sound harsh). It would be like making a spell that upped damage from the magic missile spell in hopes it would cause more elementalists to be grouped.

Lost.

[thanuk]

I think archery should be a ranger skill you get to use on top of your melee damage. Every 2nd or 3rd round you should be able to use archery like you would use kick. let rangers wear bows on them like they wear quivers now. Make it bonus damage instead of forced to choose damage.

[Yayaril]

8)

Unless the game incorporates thri-kreen rangers, I have no clue how a ranger would be capable of wielding a bow and their other weapons at the same time.

[thanuk]

8)

Unless the game incorporates thri-kreen rangers, I have no clue how a ranger would be capable of wielding a bow and their other weapons at the same time.

You're right, it would upset the amazing level of realism we have around here! STFU.

Weylarii sheaths his sword and quickly begins firing his bow!

Lightning quick, Weylarii returns his bow to his shoulder and re-draws his weapons!


Don't nit pick. This isn't the bell yaya, you don't have to pull every little hair out when you drop the taco on the ground.

[belleshel]

archery is a lot of fun

It's a leveling tool, thats about it.

for that reason alone it shouldn't be removed because some people will enjoy it tremendously be it for an hour a day or several months.

Monk's were fun to.

It may not be as uber as promised, and it does get annoying (especially after you lose your first corpse full of arrows to a crash), but it is fun and can always be modified to be better. To remove it would be pointless, really that suggestion, obviously sarcastic, was just spiteful and shows a total lack of imagination, creativity and desire to do anything positive.

Actually this wasn't sarcastic, it was realistic. Try not to tell other rangers who know a lot more about the class, what we are thinking.

As with many things in this game, you need the right zones to make certain "underpowered" aspects respected.

Are you being sarcastic? Sorry its totally moronic to write zones to justify a single skill.

for example a zone full of demons that had perm fire shield but were not mage that track but also sense life and bash would increase the value of archery quite a bit if there was uber eq on the other side.

Why? I'd still be using melee.

I would say that I don't see an equal escalation in archery equipment as I see in 1h gear (nor did we see an equal escalation between 2h gear and 1h gear)... Now maybe eq doesn't mean much when the archery or melee is calculated but if it does, and you escalate one without escalating the other... Someone should go back and look at what archery was supposed to do and what it does...

Thats the point, they shouldn't waste time on archery, they should fix the 'bigger' issues. Melee which effects the entire game not just a 'nitch' skill.

[Yayaril]

You're right, it would upset the amazing level of realism we have around here! STFU.

Weylarii sheaths his sword and quickly begins firing his bow!

Lightning quick, Weylarii returns his bow to his shoulder and re-draws his weapons!


Don't nit pick. This isn't the bell yaya, you don't have to pull every little hair out when you drop the taco on the ground.

You should add this in for spellcasters, too.

Oteb finishes casting inferno, and lightning quick flings a barrage of force missiles at his foe!

[thanuk]

You should add this in for spellcasters, too.

Oteb finishes casting inferno, and lightning quick flings a barrage of force missiles at his foe!

They already have it, its called quick chant. Good try though, maybe next time!

[mynazzaraxxsyn]

You should add this in for spellcasters, too.

Oteb finishes casting inferno, and lightning quick flings a barrage of force missiles at his foe!

They already have it, its called quick chant. Good try though, maybe next time!

Or stave/wand

[Yayaril]

They already have it, its called quick chant. Good try though, maybe next time!

Thanuk must have discovered some form of quick chant that lets casters fling their spells off instantly, because last I checked, quick chant only allows casters to half the spell-casting time. Would you like hot, mild, or fire sauce with that?

[thanuk]

They already have it, its called quick chant. Good try though, maybe next time!

Thanuk must have discovered some form of quick chant that lets casters fling their spells off instantly, because last I checked, quick chant only allows casters to half the spell-casting time. Would you like hot, mild, or fire sauce with that?

And how many of those spell times, when cut in half, work out to less than the time between combat rounds? How many of those spells do multiple times the damage of 1 round of arrow shots? You're grasping at straws here, and its obvious. You also have no comeback for wands/staves. So just stop arguing, its painfully obvious that you are wrong, and you're just embarrassing yourself. But I guess when you work at t-bell, its hard to embarrass yourself further.

[mynazzaraxxsyn]

They already have it, its called quick chant. Good try though, maybe next time!

Thanuk must have discovered some form of quick chant that lets casters fling their spells off instantly, because last I checked, quick chant only allows casters to half the spell-casting time. Would you like hot, mild, or fire sauce with that?

And how many of those spell times, when cut in half, work out to less than the time between combat rounds? How many of those spells do multiple times the damage of 1 round of arrow shots? You're grasping at straws here, and its obvious. You also have no comeback for wands/staves. So just stop arguing, its painfully obvious that you are wrong, and you're just embarrassing yourself. But I guess when you work at t-bell, its hard to embarrass yourself further.

Don't eat when you're reading thanuk bash yayaril. I just made a huge mess of dr pepper and pop corn on my work pc.

[Hyldryn]

Really? From what I've seen in groups (xp/zone) archery typically does more damage than melee (being hasted included). This may be partially a result of the defensive skills (dodge/parry) mobs have against melee, however even if the mob doesn't dodge much (is blind) archery comes out ahead in damage.

However there's a bunch of problems with archery that the slight increase in damage does not come close to compensating for:

1) Loss of arrows. Arrows with high hit/dam are hard to get. Add the possiblity of losing all the arrows you've shot into a mob because the mud crashed, and you get most rangers only using easily replacable low hit/dam arrows. This reduces the damage potential, not to mention missle shield breaking ability.

2) Group leaders hate looting your stupid arrows. Well, it may be just me but that's one of the reasons I don't like rangers arching in zones.

3) Reduced effectiveness of emergency tanking role.

4) Increased liability for the group. If rarer arrows are used the group is forced to track down and kill every mob you've shot at. Looking for a single cloud giant priest with 50 arrows on it would suck.

There's also minor things like some weapon procs are actually useful... slightly (blind/heal/stun/hot lesbian). If anything missile shield is only a very very minor nuisance. And quiver size only an inconvenience. Changing the two won't do much.

[Treladian]

Not all of us have Valhallas you know :p

Seriously though, I use ranged mainly because I get annoyed at seeing the mob constantly parry, shieldblock, and dodge my attacks if I don't manage to get myself really low on the attack queue so that all the warriors are the ones eating up the defenses. I'd be happy if they balanced melee and yanked archery since I'm sick of having to keep track of every time a stray hits a caster's pet (to say nothing of the pucker effect you get when the game crashes with a mob full of arrows), though I hope I'd be able to sell all my arrows to a shop after spending over 10k on arrows (I've spent too much time messing around in certain areas). Until then, ranged still seems to be more effective for me (or possibly until I have time to get myself a bec and other stuff).

Oh, that and my hitroll's shaky since the eq changes and I haven't had time to retool myself.

[Waelos]

Hyld-

Really. It is very noticable (the difference in damage). Maybe the rangers you've been hanging with are not 50th with maxed skills (I really do believe that the lower your level/skill the higher your damage output.

Trel. . . I know what you're saying, but I dont think everyone needs valhalla to out damage archery. . . could dual musp scims, or wield windsong and musp scim, etc. 2d4 X2 (offhand) isn't going to make too much of a difference.

Bel & Trel - you concur with my observatoins about archery and damage? Pretty much the only place it is even worth considering is smoke invasion with shieldblocking djinn?

Lost.

[kiryan]

archery is a lot of fun

It's a leveling tool, thats about it.

its still a fun skill to play with that does good damage even if its not the best damage for every situation.

It may not be as uber as promised, and it does get annoying (especially after you lose your first corpse full of arrows to a crash), but it is fun and can always be modified to be better. To remove it would be pointless, really that suggestion, obviously sarcastic, was just spiteful and shows a total lack of imagination, creativity and desire to do anything positive.

Actually this wasn't sarcastic, it was realistic. Try not to tell other rangers who know a lot more about the class, what we are thinking.

dire raiders get archery too. and the comment was still a self defeatist whine that rangers suck so bad that you might as well remove archery cuz it sucks worse than rangers

As with many things in this game, you need the right zones to make certain "underpowered" aspects respected.

Are you being sarcastic? Sorry its totally moronic to write zones to justify a single skill.

I suppose it would be as retarded as making zones that require a rogue (locked chest with no key for instance) or making zones with mobs that hit so hard they require a scaler + illusionist to keep your group alive.

for example a zone full of demons that had perm fire shield but were not mage that track but also sense life and bash would increase the value of archery quite a bit if there was uber eq on the other side.

Why? I'd still be using melee.

For luring? The sense life is so rogues will get found and bash for killing them off making rogue lure impratical (and im sure i can find another way if you think you'll just reduce). I'm sure that i could make melee unattractive compared to archery in a zone if I wanted.

I would say that I don't see an equal escalation in archery equipment as I see in 1h gear (nor did we see an equal escalation between 2h gear and 1h gear)... Now maybe eq doesn't mean much when the archery or melee is calculated but if it does, and you escalate one without escalating the other... Someone should go back and look at what archery was supposed to do and what it does...

Thats the point, they shouldn't waste time on archery, they should fix the 'bigger' issues. Melee which effects the entire game not just a 'nitch' skill.

but maybe your right, we should just yank all the archery code from rangers cuz its obviously trash, cant be salvaged or improved and the class "ranger" wants nothing to do with stupid bows and arrows.

please leave archery code in for dire raiders, make it uber too so we can listen to rangesr whine about why they dont have archery after they weighed in and said they could give a flying fuk if you removed it.

[thanuk]

I'm sure that i could make melee unattractive compared to archery in a zone if I wanted.

And im sure ppl would just bring 4 invokers and nuke the shit out of it instead, just like now.

[amolol]

howabout the fact that not all rangers can get musp scims or windsongs... at least i cant... ive been trying to get groups to help me for months....

any way i was just posting as small ballance ye know. i figured its a start its easy to code i would presume... and we are in middle of eq changes any how so now is an opportune time....

fixing melee would work to but that seems to be a bit extensive

[Treladian]

Bel & Trel - you concur with my observatoins about archery and damage? Pretty much the only place it is even worth considering is smoke invasion with shieldblocking djinn?

I haven't been playing enough recently to really gauge my melee vs. ranged damage. I wouldn't be able to make accurate conclusions anyway since I still need to rebuild my hitroll (when you have below 32 hitroll, you're not going to get a good assessment of melee vs. ranged). But smoke invasion isn't the only place I've fought mobs that seemed to be dodging, parrying, or blocking 2 or 3 out of 5 attacks. Seelie mobs do it too for instance. Course, seelie mobs may not be your average zone mob either. I imagine they get a huge agility and dex boost as faeries.

On another note, despite the quality of what Kiryan's typed, keeping dires in mind is something that needs to be done. Dires don't get as many attacks dual wielding as a ranger while hasted so they would definately have more use for archery than a ranger and actually would see a downgrade if it was yanked.

[Waelos]

Thing is, archery has been in development for around 5 years. Our coding resources are diluted, and if we had to pick something to pour that talent into, I'd have to say the better choice would be melee, as that would benefit a greater number of people. No significant progress has been made with archery for some time now, so I figured it would be better left as it is, and focus any 'upgrades' elsewhere.

Kir? I read what you wrote several times, and I'm having trouble translating your points. I'll do my best to address them:

Luring has always been done with rogues/illusionists and other casters as they do it better with mm scrolls/etc. So, melee is still the better option because luring is done better with those classes. Also, there's no chance of missing and hitting the wrong mob. Even if you could come up with a zone that was archery based thats just one zone. That does not solve any class balance.

"but maybe your right, we should just yank all the archery code from rangers cuz its obviously trash, cant be salvaged or improved and the class "ranger" wants nothing to do with stupid bows and arrows."

that is a pretty retarded statement. The idea of yanking archery all together is offered on the presumption that the code will NOT change, and remain the same. Might as well yank it for all its 'usefullness'. IF it is made more usefull, then it is time to reevaluate the skill and its use. Yanking it from one class then upgrading it and saying 'haha you asked for it' is just plain retarded. Should I expect more from you? I had hoped so. . . but man, keep coming up with these spitefull and stupid arguments and I'm going to be forced to categorize you as an uninformed dolt who posts just to see himself spew.

I do agree that since dire raiders seem to rely on this skill more, that it should get more love, OR, focus them more towards melee. Hell, Dire's can't even mounted archery =P Wtf is that about? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't dires just as useless on a whole as rangers are? Could that be because they rely on a skill that is sub par?

In summation:

Reason to suggest archery be left alone, or removed is to take one issue off of the coder's plate (so to speak) so that they can concentrate on more pressing issues.

If somehow the code is revamped, thats cool. At that time I thnk everyone would reevaluate the skill. As it is now, it is not what it needs to be.

Feel free to flame away, if you've got anywhere near 8 years of ranger experience and/or helped extensively on archery code tests. If not, enjoy a nice hot cup of stfu and try not to choke.

Lost.

[Treladian]

I do agree that since dire raiders seem to rely on this skill more, that it should get more love, OR, focus them more towards melee. Hell, Dire's can't even mounted archery =P Wtf is that about? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't dires just as useless on a whole as rangers are? Could that be because they rely on a skill that is sub par?

The REALLY odd thing about it is how when we did that test of archery on the testmud, we COULD use archery while mounted. Course, Miax had no idea what it did and was just glad it didn't cause things to blow up.

Making dires useful without ranged wouldn't be too hard though. The staff could either give them the same flag that lets rangers and rogues get the second attack from haste, boost their mounted combat and tanking skills, or boost their melee skills while mounted if they want something unique.

[belleshel]

In summation:

Reason to suggest archery be left alone, or removed is to take one issue off of the coder's plate (so to speak) so that they can concentrate on more pressing issues.

Exactly. No reason to have the limited resources trying to wade into something like archery when melee effects the entire mud and is seen by everyone that knows the mud as the biggest single Toril Issue.

I still carry a bow, but as long as we have casters, you wont see me using it.

Belle

[moritheil]

As with many things in this game, you need the right zones to make certain "underpowered" aspects respected.

Are you being sarcastic? Sorry its totally moronic to write zones to justify a single skill.

Niche skill or not, I believe there are existing (?) zones wherein one can make good use of archery.

Now, with regard to the damage, we all have seen archery do more damage. Clearly the usefulness of archery is not a coding problem, but rather one of simple balance. Turn the damage up too far, and invokers complain. Turn it down too far, and we wind up with the situation we are now in.

If you really want some sort of suggestion, I suggest that you make archery a straight skill check that negates any armor worn by the target. That way if you find a mob that you can't hit with melee, archery becomes a viable option. Yes, this is rare at high levels. But, should it be?

[kiryan]

Thing is, archery has been in development for around 5 years. Our coding resources are diluted, and if we had to pick something to pour that talent into, I'd have to say the better choice would be melee, as that would benefit a greater number of people. No significant progress has been made with archery for some time now, so I figured it would be better left as it is, and focus any 'upgrades' elsewhere.

ok i can agree with where best to invest our coding resources, not that we make that decision, but sure. But how hard is it exactly to take care of some of the basic complaints... missile shield nerfs it (remove the missile shield spell from mob ai or make missiles ignore it in the combat engine)... damage is too low add an extra attack or *=1.5... As mori said, its not a matter of code although there are some things that should be improved (losing arrows to crashes) its a matter of the developers agreeing what archery is supposed to do and agreeing at how effectively its objective is being accomplished.

Luring has always been done with rogues/illusionists and other casters as they do it better with mm scrolls/etc. So, melee is still the better option because luring is done better with those classes. Also, there's no chance of missing and hitting the wrong mob. Even if you could come up with a zone that was archery based thats just one zone. That does not solve any class balance.

Rogue / illusionist lure is mainstream and Archery luring is niche today. If zones were made differently archery could be mainstrean and rogue / illusionist niche. We don't need a bunch of gimmicky zones, but some variety will give opportunity for specialized skills to shine. Archery has redeeming features... there is no other lure skill that you can employ from a different room. That has so much potential.

"but maybe your right, we should just yank all the archery code from rangers cuz its obviously trash, cant be salvaged or improved and the class "ranger" wants nothing to do with stupid bows and arrows."

that is a pretty retarded statement. The idea of yanking archery all together is offered on the presumption that the code will NOT change, and remain the same. Might as well yank it for all its 'usefullness'. IF it is made more usefull, then it is time to reevaluate the skill and its use. Yanking it from one class then upgrading it and saying 'haha you asked for it' is just plain retarded. Should I expect more from you? I had hoped so. . . but man, keep coming up with these spitefull and stupid arguments and I'm going to be forced to categorize you as an uninformed dolt who posts just to see himself spew.

ya that was pretty retarded, just irritated because i can't figure out how removing archery creates less work (cuz you have to remove it rather than just prioritize other projects ahead of it) or how it makes rangers or melee better simply by being removed.

This also tapped into some rage with how and im so gonna sterotype rangers use RP in attempts to justify this and that then come back here and talk about removing ARCHERY cuz it doesnt do this or that... rangers... bows... i just dont get it.

I do agree that since dire raiders seem to rely on this skill more, that it should get more love, OR, focus them more towards melee. Hell, Dire's can't even mounted archery =P Wtf is that about? Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't dires just as useless on a whole as rangers are? Could that be because they rely on a skill that is sub par?

well... i think one decked rogue and dire raider is useful to have in a group. They're damage output doesnt compare to spells, casters dont ration their spells anymore so we mem anyways... you bring them for utility, bark skin, luring, ect... Dire raiders do have couple things going against them the most important being that there isn't a pbase to support non core classes and no epic weapon.

In summation:

Reason to suggest archery be left alone, or removed is to take one issue off of the coder's plate (so to speak) so that they can concentrate on more pressing issues.

If somehow the code is revamped, thats cool. At that time I thnk everyone would reevaluate the skill. As it is now, it is not what it needs to be.

Feel free to flame away, if you've got anywhere near 8 years of ranger experience and/or helped extensively on archery code tests. If not, enjoy a nice hot cup of stfu and try not to choke.

Lost.

I can get on board with leaving archery alone, i take offense to the suggestions that it should be removed which is mostly what I am reacting to.

Coders can be prioritized. and really i think if we they agreed (with us) about what archery is supposed to do and also agreed about how effective it was fulfilling its objective we could see changes quickly. you could go along ways with damage *=1.5 and ignoring the missile shield clause which would take how long 5 minutes?

Why would you spend a bunch of time balancing and fixing melee class damage issues without thinking about and addressing archery at the same time. Its like saying lets balance melee without considering how spell damage fits in. or lets balance defensive spells without seeing how they interact with defensive skills.

[Maedor]

There's also minor things like some weapon procs are actually useful... slightly (blind/heal/stun/hot lesbian).

Yes Please.