rangers

[deda]

been dabbling in rangers so I noticed a couple of things:

- they lose three movement points per room in forest, same like everyone else
- they are only pure fighting class with no recovery
- useless skills: skin, flank, tailored skins
- and most of the time - animal call

ideas:
1. since they are so attuned with wildlife, they should lose no more than 2 movement points per forested room

2. could give them recovery and remove one/both pets, and they can have only one via manual

3. remove completely skin/flank/tailored skins

[arre]

good idea

my points:

- flank can be used;
- knights too have no recovery..it is done purposefully.
- ranger without pets, and with recovery, already exists, it is warrior.

other then that, it's fine.

[Arjugha]

Yap, i did offer to Habbakuk to give to rangers Pathfinding skill ala Carrionfields.

[deda]

good idea

my points:

- flank can be used;
- knights too have no recovery..it is done purposefully.
- ranger without pets, and with recovery, already exists, it is warrior.

other then that, it's fine.

aree, you seem so smart about everything so please tell me WHEN rangers use flank? Also, knights have no recovery but have numerous powers, outcasts have numerous spells, what powers/spells rangers have?

instead of recovery, maybe make ranger barkskin work same way like druid without any changes in resists/ ac...

also, I heard that you managed to slay Avari 6 times and he was a ranger in the camp... doesn't that say anything to you?

[arre]

same situations, when knights use flank.
the fact you had never use it doesnt mean it is useless.

As for Avary instance, it shows differ between more and less experienced players, not classes advantages.  All fights were not in forest. And, the mentioned Avary, kicked my other character (cleric) ass as a piece of cake.

The fact rangers are powerhouse nowadays is proved by quantative ratio of rangers in camp to other classes.

[Kontis]

Flank - pretty useful sometimes.
Skin - relatively useless. Maybe at higher levels (or from some corpses) should make a burn-proof sack.
Tailored skins - I'd rather propose to make them better.
Animals - are you kidding? Any defensive ranger is relying on them more than on himself. Of course, tame would be more interesting than animal call, but anyway it is one of their defining skills.

Recovery - well, they do lack it, but are still very dangerous for most fighter-like classes, so adding it would require to nerf something else.

[moq]

make better chances on animal call to improve or liberalize conditions for manual of the wild

[omledufromage]

- I used to use flank a lot. It is very usefull in clan battles.
Animal call is nice, don't take it away.
Skin and Tailored Skins have nice RP use, but I agree they are useless as skills.
Recovery - don't see the need for it... specially if it is going to nerf something else.
Would be nice to not use so much movement while in the wild.

[omledufromage]

By what I'm seeing with clan battles and stuff... rangers really miss disarm. Not having disarm makes flail specialization a "must-have", which I don't think is correct...

[Vasq]

Anything else? Maybe cleave?

Want to disarm - use flails. Don't use flails and want to disarm - play as warrior.

[bluesky]

Or chemosh cleric, they are also good in disarm. Or transmuter with stag.

[omledufromage]

Vasq, it's a simple matter of balance. One specialization should not be better then another and period.
"Another thing?"
Yeah, you know your finger? Stick it up your *ss, but not before you use it to clean your ears.
I explained why I suggestid this, and you simply ignored. Do I have to repeat everything for your retarded brains to understand? I mean, dude, how old are you? Nine?

[Vasq]

What balance are you talking about? Ranger are strong enough already. Just learn to play each class and don't whine about it's underpower. Or I will start whine topic about necromancers

[Raider]

forcing rangers into flail spec is wrong.

[zondra]

i guess i was gone when rangers were stripped of disarm. any reason to why? i don't see why they shouldn't have it.

[deda]

what's the point in rangers having disarm? it sucks too much as it is. For all my fighters with skill and weapons mastered disarm failed 3/4 or 4/5 times... that's 5-6 rounds + lag per fight. disarm chance should be improved. hell, chemosh cleric has more chance of disarming than a warrior.

[deda]

The fact rangers are powerhouse nowadays is proved by quantative ratio of rangers in camp to other classes.

forgot to reply this: there were and are so many rangers in the camp because of camo, not ambush+outrage combo.

[omledufromage]

I'm actually fine with disarm being difficult. It would be totally crappy if dirt-disarm turned out the ultimate fighting combo to win battles and steal weapons. I would only play assassins from there on, or fighters with hand-to-hand spec, or alterers.  
Nope, I don't think disarm has to be improved. I just think they should be a small chance for rangers who do not have strip weapon. Nothing overpower, especially since most rangers chose flails. It comes down to what Raider said:
One specialization being clearly stronger then another is just wrong.

[Vasq]

I think necromancer must have disarm too! Or lash, like in CF.

[omledufromage]

Yeah, sure, if you really think that, share your opinion, I don't mind. If your just mocking my ideas. Then again, i ask you, how old are you?

About necromancer having disarm... I don't see how it would make much of a difference for them. It's not like they would stop casting cone of acid to start trying to disarm. And they can pretty much disarm already, and with high rate of success, by casting plague, poison, and weaken.