Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Alpha Two Realms are now unlocked for Phase II testing!
For our initial launch, testing will begin on Friday, December 20, 2024, at 10 AM Pacific and continue uninterrupted until Monday, January 6, 2025, at 10 AM Pacific. After January 6th, we’ll transition to a schedule of five-day-per-week access for the remainder of Phase II.
You can download the game launcher here and we encourage you to join us on our for the most up to date testing news.
Why the Ranger shouldn't have better Single-Target than the Mage
Artharion
Member, Alpha Two
Lately, I keep seeing people on these forums and Discord complaining about the Ranger not having the strongest single-target DPS or even asking for the Ranger to deal more single-target damage than the Mage, the other range DPS class, relegating the Mage to AoE damage only, which is highly situational. For this reason, I feel compelled to write this post to clarify why this shouldn’t be the case and to explain the design philosophy behind each class. I believe many players misunderstand the roles of the Ranger and Mage in this game, and requests like these distort the balance that an MMORPG like Ashes of Creation should strive for. Additionally, they may create false expectations.
While the idea of the Ranger having more single-target damage might seem reasonable to some, given that the Mage's specialty is AoE, it makes little sense from the perspective of MMORPG class design. To illustrate this, I'll reference an MMORPG that, despite its critics, has proven to be a well-established game for decades, complete with numerous patches and class balancing: World of Warcraft. Like Ashes of Creation, WoW features a Mage and a Ranger-equivalent class (the Hunter).
In World of Warcraft, the Mage has always been designed as a Glass Cannon, meaning it sacrifices everything else—health, mobility, and utility—to maximize its damage output. This includes both single-target and AoE damage. While it’s true that the Mage is fragile and relies on tools like Ice Block (on a long cooldown) or Blink to survive, in return, it excels in ranged damage. This design has allowed it to dominate single-target ranged damage in nearly every expansion, with rare exceptions, such as in The Burning Crusade, where the Hunter (Beast Mastery specialization) managed to surpass it in single-target damage due to specific pet synergies.
On the other hand, the Hunter has always had a different role. It’s a versatile class that combines decent damage with high mobility and utility, including traps and slows. It also wears medium armor, allowing it to withstand more damage than a Mage. However, this flexibility means it cannot compete with the Mage in pure damage output, as it already has other significant advantages. The Hunter's design has always been about balancing these tools without becoming the highest-damage class. This versatility is especially valuable in PvP, where the Hunter has historically been a counter to the Mage in 1v1 encounters in several patches.
WoW has demonstrated how two ranged damage classes can be balanced while maintaining distinct identities and roles in battle. Ashes of Creation should aim to follow this model.
Relegating the Mage exclusively to AoE damage and granting the Ranger the highest ranged single-target damage would be a design mistake. The Mage is not designed solely for AoE damage; it is a class meant to excel at all forms of damage. Reducing its role would strip it of its primary purpose in the game. Conversely, giving the Ranger the highest damage output would break the balance, as the Ranger already possesses mobility, utility, and better survivability than the Mage. If it also had the highest damage, there would be little reason to choose a Mage aside from niche AoE situations.
Let’s not forget another key aspect of the Ranger: it is the class with the longest range thanks to its longbow, even surpassing the Mage. If you decide that the class with the longest range also has the highest single-target damage, you’re directly making the Ranger completely OP.
Additionally, the Ranger has skills like camouflage and excellent mobility, which make it even more powerful. Imagine a class that can eliminate others extremely quickly from a great distance without giving them the chance to get close. This is exactly what would happen if the Ranger led in damage: no other class would have a chance to counter it in combat.
This is why the class with the longest range cannot be the class with the highest damage. The Mage, on the other hand, is a ranged class but is designed to fight in mid-range. In fact, some of its abilities, like Prismatic Beam, require the Mage to be practically in melee range, forcing it to take on greater risks to maximize its damage.
That said, I don’t believe the Ranger is perfect in its current state. There are aspects that could be improved, such as the casting time of Snipe, which is too long and makes the class feel clunky, the duration and cooldowns of its marks, or the synergy between its skills. These adjustments could make the Ranger feel more dynamic and enjoyable to play without unbalancing its design or infringing on the Mage’s Glass Cannon role as the premier ranged DPS class.
It is crucial for players to understand the classes they choose. The Ranger is not a Glass Cannon like the Mage; it is a hybrid class offering versatility. If your goal is to deal the highest ranged damage, you should play the Mage. Expecting the Ranger to surpass the Mage in damage undermines the natural balance of MMORPGs and would ultimately harm the long-term health and class balance of the game.
While the idea of the Ranger having more single-target damage might seem reasonable to some, given that the Mage's specialty is AoE, it makes little sense from the perspective of MMORPG class design. To illustrate this, I'll reference an MMORPG that, despite its critics, has proven to be a well-established game for decades, complete with numerous patches and class balancing: World of Warcraft. Like Ashes of Creation, WoW features a Mage and a Ranger-equivalent class (the Hunter).
In World of Warcraft, the Mage has always been designed as a Glass Cannon, meaning it sacrifices everything else—health, mobility, and utility—to maximize its damage output. This includes both single-target and AoE damage. While it’s true that the Mage is fragile and relies on tools like Ice Block (on a long cooldown) or Blink to survive, in return, it excels in ranged damage. This design has allowed it to dominate single-target ranged damage in nearly every expansion, with rare exceptions, such as in The Burning Crusade, where the Hunter (Beast Mastery specialization) managed to surpass it in single-target damage due to specific pet synergies.
On the other hand, the Hunter has always had a different role. It’s a versatile class that combines decent damage with high mobility and utility, including traps and slows. It also wears medium armor, allowing it to withstand more damage than a Mage. However, this flexibility means it cannot compete with the Mage in pure damage output, as it already has other significant advantages. The Hunter's design has always been about balancing these tools without becoming the highest-damage class. This versatility is especially valuable in PvP, where the Hunter has historically been a counter to the Mage in 1v1 encounters in several patches.
WoW has demonstrated how two ranged damage classes can be balanced while maintaining distinct identities and roles in battle. Ashes of Creation should aim to follow this model.
Relegating the Mage exclusively to AoE damage and granting the Ranger the highest ranged single-target damage would be a design mistake. The Mage is not designed solely for AoE damage; it is a class meant to excel at all forms of damage. Reducing its role would strip it of its primary purpose in the game. Conversely, giving the Ranger the highest damage output would break the balance, as the Ranger already possesses mobility, utility, and better survivability than the Mage. If it also had the highest damage, there would be little reason to choose a Mage aside from niche AoE situations.
Let’s not forget another key aspect of the Ranger: it is the class with the longest range thanks to its longbow, even surpassing the Mage. If you decide that the class with the longest range also has the highest single-target damage, you’re directly making the Ranger completely OP.
Additionally, the Ranger has skills like camouflage and excellent mobility, which make it even more powerful. Imagine a class that can eliminate others extremely quickly from a great distance without giving them the chance to get close. This is exactly what would happen if the Ranger led in damage: no other class would have a chance to counter it in combat.
This is why the class with the longest range cannot be the class with the highest damage. The Mage, on the other hand, is a ranged class but is designed to fight in mid-range. In fact, some of its abilities, like Prismatic Beam, require the Mage to be practically in melee range, forcing it to take on greater risks to maximize its damage.
That said, I don’t believe the Ranger is perfect in its current state. There are aspects that could be improved, such as the casting time of Snipe, which is too long and makes the class feel clunky, the duration and cooldowns of its marks, or the synergy between its skills. These adjustments could make the Ranger feel more dynamic and enjoyable to play without unbalancing its design or infringing on the Mage’s Glass Cannon role as the premier ranged DPS class.
It is crucial for players to understand the classes they choose. The Ranger is not a Glass Cannon like the Mage; it is a hybrid class offering versatility. If your goal is to deal the highest ranged damage, you should play the Mage. Expecting the Ranger to surpass the Mage in damage undermines the natural balance of MMORPGs and would ultimately harm the long-term health and class balance of the game.
0
Comments
Here is why:
Okay, lets begin with WoW.
Mages are not "squishier" than hunters, and have not been for *many* expansions. Anyone who has ever played arena knows this. This is partly due to iceblock, but also due to shields like frost shield that the mage has access to as well as a ton of CC (this is especially true for the frost mage who used to be often - though not always - the main pick in arena PvP during all the years I've played). The difference between the two is that the hunters usually wear the mage out with steady damage income and shorter CDs while the mage has very high bursts (but with longer CDs) that will leave any class dead if you do not pop defensives.
From a PvE perspective, mage and hunters have pretty much always filled the same role in WoW. They both offer CC and utility for M+ along with damage - polymorph, frost nova, mana biscuits, counter spell etc for mages where the ranger had freezing trap, mob buff dispell, a slightly shorter CD interrupt, and other soft CC (and one hard CC if BM). Depending on expansion and set, their damage outputs have been varied but in *in general* both have been brought to the group for the very same purpose. And this has been especially true since like... Mists of Pandaria where all DPS classes started getting both respectable single-target and multi-target damage. The time when one was singletarget and one was multi-target is long gone; it is more of a burst vs sustain question nowdays.
As for Ashes...
You speak of utility, but what good utility do rangers in Ashes have that mages do not? We have a very (currently) underwhelming thorns buff, a heal that hardly matters outside of solo/duo play, speed buffs (that works 50% of the time in its AoE function, although I admit being a big fan of this ability) and marks that lasts for a few seconds with a minute CD. We have some soft CC and a very clunky hardly-functioning interrupt (especially against mobs where you miss 50% of the time regardless of high acc).
Meanwhile, mages has weapon buffs that they can throw about that is already arguably better than both of the ranger buffs, as well as respectable damage in both single target and multitarget. They have a blink that has longer range than our leaps (and one leap is even slower than running/dodge rolling so...); so there is hardly any difference between a mage and a ranger in mobility - unless you count in combat; because you guys can move around much more than us while casting spells.
At the same time you guys burst quicker than we do, and your spells has lower CD and lower mana costs than ours. We do not win PvP against mages *unless* we hit first (aka, get a free snipe). And you are certainly MUCH tankier than we are with the shield you guys have that scales with your magical power rating.
To finish...
We are not a support class, we're not bards. We are designed to be damage dealers by the definition of the class - "death from afar" and all that. That is Steven's vision and well... damage wise, we're not in a bad spot per se; but it is everything else in the ranger kit that feels... missing or amiss. Yet, I'll be honest; I wouldn't even mind having less damage than the mage by default (in whatever circumstance, really) but then the other part of the ranger's advantages has to actually be true. We need to actually have meaningful buffs, utility, debuffs and A PROPER INTERRUPT THAT IS NOT AMMO DEPENDANT WITH A SETUP AND LONG CAST TIME...There has to be a reason for the ranger to be in the party; if the mages has better damage outbut, better offensive buffs via weapon enchants, better tankiness, better burst, better mana conservation... Why would you even bring a ranger? What would the ranger bring?
Mages should be stronger against Tanks
Rangers should be stronger against Fighters.
Fighters should be stronger against Mages
Tanks should be stronger against Rangers
Tanks vs Fighters are a wash
Mages vs Rangers is a wash
Any class can spec into AOE or single target focus. Your gear will dictate how 'glass canon' you want to be.
Ashes is not a 1v1 balance system and never will be. It's group vs group balance metric.
WoW balanced? WTF are you smoking.
In the title of the thread, I specifically talk about Single Target DPS. At no point do I say that the Ranger shouldn’t have better utility. In fact, I mention in the thread that the Ranger should excel in that, and I also acknowledge that certain aspects of the class may need to be adjusted or balanced.
Don’t forget that some abilities, like Camouflage, Silence, and others that are yet to come, are currently bugged. I’m sure that once the Ranger can properly hide or silence Mages, things will change.
However, if we are talking specifically about pure single-target DPS, a class that already has the longest range cannot also have the highest DPS. That would literally break the class and unbalance the game. This is what I’ve said, and, by the way, you haven’t disagreed with me on that.
Now tell me, if tomorrow they buff the Ranger’s damage and make it the ranged class with the highest Single Target DPS and the longest range, would you consider that balanced?
I know exactly what you said - and you already brought up the entire utility instead of damage. I said that is all fine and good; but we do not have that (at least yet) - so what do we have if not damage (as of this moment)? If they are planning on giving the ranger a viable interrupt, fix their buffs to not feel awful and perhaps at least give us some well-thought-of T3 talents, then I'll be more than happy even if its not something that'll match badass mage T3 talents. Honestly, if they would buff ranger damage to be the highest damage dealer tomorrow (assuming they are not right now)? I'd just frown as I do not feel like that is the issue with ranger atm. And numbers can be tweaked, it is just that our current kit as it is designed does not feel very good from the utility perspective, nor class fantasy. We do not have any special kind of resource to build up and spend in varying ways, we do not have interesting and intriguing abilities that work with each other (other than a very clumsy and long setup for a clunky interrupt).
Our ammos (although I absolutely adore the concept) does not feel very fun as they are nothing unique to the ranger - all of them can be found in the weapon skill trees. I enjoy being able to apply bleed to enhance my fighter's damage output (as they deal more damage to bleeding targets); yet that is nothing he can't do himself ... and I could do with just my weapon talents.
Thorns is a buff that deals a teeny weeny amount of damage, and has a chance of applying bleed to attackers. If they perhaps added a slight defensive to it - such as a little bit of physical damage reduction or merged it with our teeny weeny heal (regeneration) and made it into something slightly more impactful like a small % hp buff with a small % physical damage reduction, or something then that would be all good for me. But currently, while I love the idea of having buffs to give to the party or myself, these scale terribly and even if you tune the numbers they don't really *feel* useful. The speed buff is amazing, I just want it to actually work in it's AoE form.
And as for marks, if IPS want to give rangers more damage then buff our marks (and hence the rest of the party as well!) - if they are the signature ability of the ranger then let us at least feel that more than a few seconds every minute...
So TL;DR - Here I can only speak for myself; but I do not want to play a glass canon marksman (yet that is oddly enough what rangers and hunters almost always become in MMOs) - I want to play a survival specialist with utility for the party. Not quite being a support, but feeling like I bring more to the group than just damage numbers.
(... And yes, chances are very high that I will choose either summoner, bard or cleric when we get secondary archetypes... x] )
Ranger already has better single target damage than a mage idk why people think otherwise, but that's all ranger has, decent damage, the rest of their entire kit sucks, their mobility sucks, their cc sucks ( this is all in a PvP environment) so if all they have is damage then yes it should be higher than a mages, ranger right now just feels like every other class has had 4 more hard passes on their skills and ranger is in some weird place where someone thought it was a good idea to make all their abilities cast times and not able to kite
In what world is a fighter ever meant to beat a mage, mages generally control fighters to death and fighters are generally susceptible to CC that is the point (in most if not all MMOs I have played), sure if you are talking about VERY SMALL group (for example 3v3) play a fighter might win due to pocket support allowing the fighter to stick to the mage and overwhelm it but in larger scale fights the fighter is also forced to push the line which generally getting out of position like this to chase down a mage would end in you being focused and killed anyway as you are not just able to get back behind your team anymore and recover.
Generally I would see hunters and rogues as the ones that are best at taking out mages, in many games hunters out range or out damage mages since mages have more (or better) cc/utility than a hunter, and rogues are generally stealth in burst a squishy target preferably when their defences drop and use their steath/mobility/whatever other escape (depending on game) to get away. Rogue is generally high risk high reward play style.
Although I already knew you were wrong and invalidated your entire argument when you brought in WoW as a class balancing example.
WoW has no class balance, every class is made to be the same with different flavors added in the mix, visual smokes and mirrors.
Summarizing your entire argument:
I want ranger to be worse than the mage because mage has CC, Shield, crazy AoE and single target burst and Ranger has a bit of damage.
Doesn't seem very fair that the class that is tankier than ranger also deals more damage and has more CC, does it now?
Allow me to be blunt with you. In the time it takes ranger to cast Snipe, Cleric does higher burst damage.
If high-end you mean +25, they haven't published the kit yet. If you mean lvl 25, most ranger skills are AOE.
I mean this is not true, all the high end spells are aoe, your only st damage spell is barrage, snipe and headshot that you get all before level 5, not to mention a LVL 25 rangers entire rotation is just barrage, and seeing as the rest of our abilities are cast times and interrupt weapon chains they are a dps loss to even cast at 25
Your final question makes no sense as Ranger doesn’t have longer range. If it did, then I think it’s fair to lower its damage but since it doesn’t, yes, I think it’d be balanced to give Ranger higher single target damage. Especially since mage has shield.
Long bows technically the longest range but anyone can use those the skill ranges are the same as mages though last i looked.
the one thing ranges has going for it over anyone else is the vertical mobility other than that there out preformed in everything else currently. (fighter might have the same with the leap they get but i didnt get high enough on the fighter to see how much verticality it allowed)
they could play on this and give rangers bonuses based on elevation to the target though might be a cool mechanic for rangers either in form of dmg in some way or range bonus