Do you think it is good that the ranger has to be a minimum distance from the enemy to use a bow?

ArchivedUser

I can't imagine how allowing one class to maintain max damage from a distance and close up is a solid answer to the question... but I suppose if a fighter could do the same out to the same range as a ranger it's good.

ArchivedUser

Ranger already has Retreating Shot, as @Jaikant said.
Point Blank Shot is common for Rangers in RPGs, as @T-Elf said.
Also, any class can use any weapon, so expect Rangers to switch to a melee weapon while in melee range.

ArchivedUser

A ranged attacker should actually be rewarded by being able to come in closer for a shot that has more power behind it/better aimed.  But the risk for doing so should be offset by the party being subject to cleaves/ae affects if timed incorrectly.  Solo play, if a ranger is caught, melee attacks should stun the bow attacks.  To me this just makes sense.

ArchivedUser

Quinlan1998 said:

I say no. The RANGER should not have range limitations, but anyone using a bow should. They would not be able to notch an arrow while dodging a sword. There should be an ability that is mele while a bow is equipped. I picture Natiri from the movie, "Avatar" firing her arrows as she jumps in to save Jake's ass from the dog things. When she gets close she starts smacking the shit out of them with the bow before finally pulling her blade.

ArchivedUser

No because any class can pretty much use any weapon and why limit the ranger if you are not going to limit all spellcasters and their ranged abilities or any rogue, warrior, etc who might have some ranged abilities.

If you are going to say "sorry ranger you can't use your poison arrow skill if someone is in melee with you" you need to also say "sorry mage/necromancer/summoner/druid/rogue/warrior/priest/cleric/ etc., you can't use your ranged abilities if someone is in melee distance."

Any arbitrary range restrictions on a single class just doesn't make sense.

ArchivedUser

Well, while I don’t mind a minimum distance, if they have some close shots or possibly even some dagger attacks or something so they aren’t useless upclose, I don’t think it’s a big deal. I am sure there will be some classes in PvP that will be able to hug you and be on top of you the whole time due to CC. There is going to be a lot of testing and a lot of the guys on the team came from games with great PvP IMO. I think they will handle it well come the time of release!

ArchivedUser

I am with @GrimHarlequin, all classes should be limited to using ranged attacks within a certain proximity. Same for melee attacks.

ArchivedUser

GrimHarlequin said:

No because any class can pretty much use any weapon and why limit the ranger if you are not going to limit all spellcasters and their ranged abilities or any rogue, warrior, etc who might have some ranged abilities.

If you are going to say "sorry ranger you can't use your poison arrow skill if someone is in melee with you" you need to also say "sorry mage/necromancer/summoner/druid/rogue/warrior/priest/cleric/ etc., you can't use your ranged abilities if someone is in melee distance."

Any arbitrary range restrictions on a single class just doesn't make sense.

I do agree with this. Unless ranger had another load out or skills changed within melee proximity, but that would kind of defeat the purpose of being a “ranger”

ArchivedUser

I've never liked that archers can use all of their high damage shots while standing next to the mob/enemy and yet it always seems to be that way in most MMOs.  It makes no sense to use "rain of arrows" or "volley" or whatever the skill might be when you're 6 inches away from your target.

Personally I've always used my bow to pull mobs and hurt them until they get into melee range.  The I switch to a melee weapon to finish them off.  If they try to run then it's back to the bow.  It's much more realistic that way and makes the combat more dynamic.

ArchivedUser

Noemad said:

I've never liked that archers can use all of their high damage shots while standing next to the mob/enemy and yet it always seems to be that way in most MMOs.  It makes no sense to use "rain of arrows" or "volley" or whatever the skill might be when you're 6 inches away from your target.

Personally I've always used my bow to pull mobs and hurt them until they get into melee range.  The I switch to a melee weapon to finish them off.  If they try to run then it's back to the bow.  It's much more realistic that way and makes the combat more dynamic.

Yeah but in PvP which a lot of players will be doing, it deafeats the purpose and instantly makes them weaker to any actual melee class. And volley use to be a channel in wow and was interruptible or when you were hit the skill got shortened 

ArchivedUser

Is a melee character without a ranged ability instantly weaker to any ranged class in PvP? Especially if ranged classes can spam attacks that ground enemies with attacks that allow them to 'sprint backwards'.

*Edit, really bad grammar this morning...

ArchivedUser

Absolutley no lets not even begin with the fact that a gap closing ability will be the doom of any range class, I would rather the rangers attack speed to be reduced when an enemy is in meele range but nothing else.

ArchivedUser

Quinlan1998 said:

I didn't vote because there isn't enough information. To vote yes or no effectively, you would need to know some variables Like what will shooting speed be like. How much will shoot speed be affected by things like talents, potions, boosters etc.

You need to know how closely archery in AoC will mirror reality. Realistically and roughly speaking anything over 5 yards should be fair game but only if the time to setup, draw, aim and shoot are kept in realistic balance and any manner of incoming damage should dramatically setback your shot time; assuming a 5 yard range capability.

For instance; you should be able to shoot at someone 5 yards away but in the time it takes you to setup that shot they could easily be 10 yards away or they could already be on top of you pounding you making the shot unrealistic.

Perhaps certain archery abilities should have different ranges with the closest range abilities doing the least amount of damage and being more inaccurate.

ArchivedUser

Shooting speed and accuracy should mimic real life, and the same should be said for shooting distance.  I don't think there should be any restrictions on having to be a minimum distance.  I could pull arrow, draw the bow, and shoot and hit something a foot away in real life so..... 

ArchivedUser

@Warkov
unless a huge gust of wind just so happens to .... nvm 

ArchivedUser

Eragale said:

@Warkov
unless a huge gust of wind just so happens to .... nvm 

@Eragale
 ....and that was the story of how he shot his neighbor's hay farm with the burning arrow!

ArchivedUser

  Like others have said, if other ranged casters can dps from melee a ranger should be able to use a bow.  Realistically it makes sense, and gameplay wise it does.   Some people try to argue that min distance makes it fair for melee classes.  This makes no sense if they don't do it for all ranged classes.  Where the melee classes should get the advantage at close range is by causing spell/casting pushback.  Basically making anything with a cast time take longer to cast.  So a ranger's damage output would be a lot lower at close range but they wouldn't be completely gimped.  If you are going to give the ranger disadvantages that you don't give other ranged, they should be given extra advantages to make up for it.  Like an extra CC break, just makes sense.

 

  Also, if we can only have a single bar with about 10 skills on it, there will be no space for melee skills to be able to switch and melee at close range.  If a rangers CC break is on CD, should they just have to stand there doing nothing and watch someone beat on them?  Or should they have to gimp their class by having to use some slots for melee dps?

 

  I played a WoW hunter a long time ago and the min range was extremely broke in certain arena's.  People would be able to pillar hump and it was impossible to hit them with your ranged weapon even if you snared them.  This made it so when a melee class got low on health they could just run around the pillar until their teamate healed them.  I believe WoW eventually removed the stupid min distance mechanic but I could be wrong, I left that game during Lich King.  Other than these arena's, the min distance wasn't that bad, but ranger's had multiple skills to deal with melee and enough space on the UI to hold those skills.

  My guess is most people that voted "yes" don't play ranger classes.  Ranger should be balanced vs melee, and also be equal to other ranged classes.

ArchivedUser

My favorite class in almost each game is bow user class. I think the minimum range gives us some flavor in our gameplay. A thing what need to focus to be good. But I would avoid the 'you can shoot if the enemy is too close'. Instead of that I suggest a "debuff" for example a big miss chance.
I also support that the ranges should have some melee skills. Not as strong as a real melee class has, but you should be able to finish off an already weakened enemy.

ArchivedUser

Isn't the answer obvious for Casters and Bow users?  When they're up close, in melee range, they stand a large chance to be INTERRUPTED.   Why? Because someone is hitting them physically with a big, sharp/heavy weapon.   You don't have to create all of these additional rules, just let the melee user interrupt a cast or bow shot fairly easily when in melee range.

That will make a Ranger *want* to switch to melee up close and a caster to flee for distance to cast.

ArchivedUser

No , to the minimum distance ...here is why ...If your in combat ,and you don't notice the guy coming at you on your side. Well he is there now within 15 feet of you. while you have time to draw your bow. Your intent is to quickly fill him with arrows but you don't have time for a full draw of your bow . So a diminished return on your damage may apply. with certain skills not available , Soon with attacker in your face and not be able to draw your bow as he/she is head butting you with his plate helm.... And that would be the reason for you to pull out your daggers and or swords and melee for close combat....And to the people talking about minimum on Mage flame / fire blast yes because of catching your own robes on fire from splash damage of course.

ArchivedUser

If a mage/archer is in close range then something very bad has happened

ArchivedUser

Like Nagash just said, I feel like if a mage gets hit at close range while casting a spell it should blow up and damage both people, if an Archer type class is hit while drawing a projectile he should be staggered and loose the shot.

But as far as an actual range limit; I think not, because if anything. An archers shot should be strongest at close range and damage should fall off as it goes away from the user to emulate drop off/loft (which in an MMO it would be hard to do from a network standpoint because of the netcode involved)

ArchivedUser

As a tank I think yes is a good idea. I never understood those standing in my way when they really don't have to kiss the named.

ArchivedUser

Well if a an archer could have daggers as backup and mages could potenitally create a magic blade to fight with, but still reduced casting/drawing speed should be enough at the same time there should be penalties for meele classes like large reduction in movement speed when they are attacked from a distance.

ArchivedUser

AutumnLeaf said:

Well if a an archer could have daggers as backup and mages could potenitally create a magic blade to fight with, but still reduced casting/drawing speed should be enough at the same time there should be penalties for meele classes like large reduction in movement speed when they are attacked from a distance.

see that's what should happen 

ArchivedUser

Yes, without doubt.

but ranger is not the only archetypes that can attack from distance.

ArchivedUser

AutumnLeaf said:

" Well if a an archer could have daggers as backup and mages could potenitally create a magic blade to fight with ... "

i personally think you described a (prototype) Mage/Fighter 

• This 

• Into this via Close-range - Fire taking form of a Sword .... although it might cause the User DMG-over-time since its ... well ... its still Fire 

As far as close-range ... I'd always thought the Wind-abilities could be used to push-back the enemy that's close-range. Or maybe abilities that has quick-activation by default ... only downside being that it MUST deal less dmg than most other spells  

• Soo ... think of a sudden-burst ... similar to the gif below
• 
  

ArchivedUser

have you never seen touch of ash? it's a close range spell that you have to touch someone at close range. the spell increases the ageing process until you turn to ashes. spells like this should be in ashes.

ArchivedUser

Well for mages it's pretty easy to come up with some close range spells, but rangers could even have enchanted arrows that they can simply stab into an enemy close range.

ArchivedUser

I think I forgot to add my 2 cents to this thread

I'd like to see you knock an arrow with a fighter swinging a broadsword at your head...

even if you could draw, you surely would not be capable of aiming properly before release.  now, having said that... there is a guy on youtube that you have to watch (be forewarned, there is a lot of controversy over this guy, and he does not tell you or show you just how many takes he had to do to get his videos correct...)

lars anderson

after watching his videos, I recommend searching for Shadiversity and watching his video about lars...  I like shad's video's and hope that Ashes has someone like him providing info about their designs... hint hint (not needing to be him, but someone with his knowledge and ability to research even after making an opinion about something)