Ranger Pets

[Honzo]

Really hard to tell how much to nerf it by with these standards because its only 2 plate wearers and only 1 medium support XD.

With an OAD bow and arrows it's 155-194. So under a pally in terms of max dps, but higher min.

Cav: 167-224
Pally: 150-201
Bard: 147-197

Not going to lie here, I have no clue where they -should- belong. Looking again at your math below if you used those figures that means that you would end up with a max potential of 1049. That's still pretty huge with 23 Charisma. This is a GOOD thing though imo because they are a dps class. Cavs get like 900 max dmg potential and they were plate and have shields. What exactly is the difference in the tanky pet and the pvp pet though? If taking out the pet first becomes the strategy will the pet be better than the 3 attack pet because it has harder hitting attacks that have to hit less, but also tankier? Just food for thought ^_^. I was just curious, what about the dps #s for ppl that wear similar armor? assassin/druid/sorc/barb dmg potential? I think it'd be easier to configure the dmg based on the more "dmg based" classes.

[daedroth]

Wouldnt it make more sense to start at 0% buff (10chr) then work into a bonus?

[Thi]

What is the average damage for Rangers with highest OAD atm and model strength(20 or whatever). That's probably a good first step in knowing how much they need the dmg nerfed XD. And who is supposed to be the highest? Sorc? Where are they supposed to be in terms of dps again? #2/3? Could you do something that made pets with 2 attacks only do 75%/60% of the dmg that pets with 3 attacks get? From my understanding that's the big difference in pets right? 2 attacks = pve 3 = pvp?

With an OAD bow and arrows it's 155-194. So under a pally in terms of max dps, but higher min.

Cav: 167-224
Pally: 150-201
Bard: 147-197

They aren't terrible but it's not like they are 'seriously' lacking.

That's excluding pet damage right? That's insanely good, if you consider pets will hit as well they are likely higher than Cavs.

Shouldn't we balance overall damage / totals adding pets to it?

[Honzo]

That's excluding pet damage right? That's insanely good, if you consider pets will hit as well they are likely higher than Cavs.

Shouldn't we balance overall damage / totals adding pets to it?

Yes max potential damage. Rangers damage should be higher than a Cavalier. They are a medium armor class using a 2 handed bow with arrows that give them extra damage as well. Keep in mind that you technically have 6/7 attacks per round if you are including your pets in addition. With the calculations he did higher up on the forum it seems pretty fair. He is working on balancing the overall damage right now, by only allowing a % amount of the stats based on charisma bonus. Keep in mind, Slayers can also do 1000+ dmg in a round and also wear medium armor and no shield(optional). Doesn't seem too outlandish to me to have similar dmg, it makes sense to me if anything. The big difference is they hit for high min and have to hit multiple attacks where as a Slayer would only have to hit 2 attacks for big chunks. Just different ways of doing dmg.

[Thi]

That's excluding pet damage right? That's insanely good, if you consider pets will hit as well they are likely higher than Cavs.

Shouldn't we balance overall damage / totals adding pets to it?

Yes max potential damage. Rangers damage should be higher than a Cavalier. They are a medium armor class using a 2 handed bow with arrows that give them extra damage as well. Keep in mind that you technically have 6/7 attacks per round if you are including your pets in addition. With the calculations he did higher up on the forum it seems pretty fair. He is working on balancing the overall damage right now, by only allowing a % amount of the stats based on charisma bonus. Keep in mind, Slayers can also do 1000+ dmg in a round and also wear medium armor and no shield(optional). Doesn't seem too outlandish to me to have similar dmg, it makes sense to me if anything. The big difference is they hit for high min and have to hit multiple attacks where as a Slayer would only have to hit 2 attacks for big chunks. Just different ways of doing dmg.

So you're saying they are supposed to be better fighters than monks and up to par to assassin's?

By the way your overall analysis should be over sustained DPS, not burst DPS, so, speaking of sustained DPS if they are up to par or better than monks and this is expected, let me know so I can start a ranger because they are a support that adds more damage than a pure fighting class.

[Honzo]

So you're saying they are supposed to be better fighters than monks and up to par to assassin's?

By the way your overall analysis should be over sustained DPS, not burst DPS, so, speaking of sustained DPS if they are up to par or better than monks and this is expected, let me know so I can start a ranger because they are a support that adds more damage than a pure fighting class.

I'd love for you to not take things out of context, please. Nothing of the sort was said. I think that in general with class discussion people are often quick to jump the gun and assume things that aren't implied or get offended. I said that it wouldn't be outlandish for it to have similar dmg. What is a Monks armor class at 25 with the highest OAD? Do Rangers get extra dodge just for being a ranger? Do they get 5 attacks and roundhouse for extra dmg? Exactly my point. Every class has different benefits and different ways of dealing damage.

Just for your information I'll post this here.

Monk
Attack Increments At Levels: 4, 13, 25
Needed EXP to Level 25: 350mil
Can wield staves
Can wear light and cloth
Can dual wield
7.5% more dodge rate
10% MR Bonus
Immunity to poison (75% duration reduction)
Can roundhouse. After 2 successful hits, roundhouse will take into effect next attack and will deals 2.0x. Missing or moving restarts the count.
+1 armor per level
+6 (level 1) to +14 (level 25) attack modifier. +1 per 3 levels.

Ranger
Attack Increments At Levels: 2, 8, 25
Needed EXP to Level 25: 300mil
Can wield swords, blunt, staves, daggers, and bows
Can wear medium, light, cloth, shields, and helmets
Can use /track. /track gets more useful as you level up and can become a very handy tracking tool.
Can have a /pet. Pets need to be /capture'd first.
Ranger Pets will automatically attack the target you are attacking.
4% MR Bonus

Do you consider these 2 classes equal?

Monks are okay sustain and bursted. I doubt Rangers are very good burst but seem good sustained. Slayers are great burst but not very good sustain. I wanted the numbers for the damage of the other classes that wear similar armor as well. You need to remember to factor in all of a classes traits when determining balance, especially for damage. Otherwise we would end up with all the same class doing all the same thing. This is why the proposed changes to Ranger Pets are even being made because he knows that they are imbalanced as hell right now.

I'm not saying I have the answers but this is a discussion, everyone is entitled to an opinion but just saying something to be snarky is not going to help. Rather than try to be sarcastic, supplement your opinions with numbers of your own or at least ideas. Thanks. At least I'm trying to be productive. These discussions should be as impartial as possible. It's not our game, nor do we have any say so. The ultimate choice is NiteHawk's and always will be. It doesn't mean that we can't help when asked for opinions or try to help spur new ideas of his own through random suggestions.

[Thi]

That's one big post, not gonna bother arguing the drama since you seem to be be rather offended while I'm good thanks.

Anyway, if NH can post sustained damage comparisons we can discuss the niche rangers will fit and their overall purpose instead of theory crafting over what ifs.

Kthxbye

[Honzo]

That's one big post, not gonna bother arguing the drama since you seem to be be rather offended while I'm good thanks.

Anyway, if NH can post sustained damage comparisons we can discuss the niche rangers will fit and their overall purpose instead of theory crafting over what ifs.

Kthxbye

Who said anything about being dramatic or offending anyone? I was just reminding people to play nice and to not suspect doom and gloom based on simple ideas or opinions being thrown out there for the "think-tank".

I would just like to say: classes should be balanced (by that I mean they should all have a role and bring something to the table), offence/defence should not. I hope I have the right context. Im fuzzy headed right now.
Tanks, DPS, Support, Control. They perform different rolls.
Rangers should do lesser damage compared to knights etc, they have a pet to add to their damage and to take some flak.

I agree that they should all have purpose but there is no classification in this game. From my understanding there is no defined role for anybody, though people do certain things such as Cavs and Guards can tank and druids and clerics can heal etc. Rangers do less damage without the pet than Cavalier already. What is being asked is the dmg the pets should do and trying to adjust charisma to calm down pets some and give advantage to one of the stats that is useful to Rangers already. The pet is still going to be customizable how you want it as far as I know.

[Folder]

lol Thi lacks tact sometimes but he's lovable.

I feel like we're having a bit of an identity crisis with classes here, like Honzo said somewhere. I think its best to figure out what we want to classes to do before we fix numbers. I'm trying to think of some things right now and don't have time to write it all out but will comment more later.

[NiteHawk]

lol Thi lacks tact sometimes but he's lovable.

I feel like we're having a bit of an identity crisis with classes here, like Honzo said somewhere. I think its best to figure out what we want to classes to do before we fix numbers. I'm trying to think of some things right now and don't have time to write it all out but will comment more later.

I mean, I think you are all complicating this though. It has a pet that helps damage. It's role is probably going to be DPS since that's virtually all it does if we need a role here. In terms of skills or roles it's fairly simply as well, pick target, pewpew, pet attacks what you attack and is smart. There isn't much issue with rangers as a class, just overall DPS needs looking into.


Right now the pets are insanely powerful. The King Scorpion does need to be balanced but I think with Iron gear it does somewhere between 160-180 damage. Which has 3 attacks.

The next one belows probably do between 140-160 damage x3 attacks. And then skeletalbeasts which is 140-160 but x2 attacks.


Pets can be classed as DPS or Tank depending on their taunt level. Normally tankier pets will have less damage but more taunt, and then the higher end ones will typically be DPS more. I'm not sure how well this is utilized yet and it might be needing a look into.

----

In terms of DPS, Pets have a harder timer hitting players, as they are NPCs. they have a flatrate of 15% less hit rate with same stats, but also are effected by their own AGI too. They obviously also add armor to the ranger which works out okay when the pets out.


Rangers could be adjusted to something like:

139-174 (10% reduction in damage). While pets could be around 60-100 damage per attack. You're looking at 2-3 attacks, and probably 60-80 for 3 attacks, and 80-100 for 2 attacks in higher level monsters. That would probably be based on a drakeblood or something with high str and high char, otherwise the shift of damage will be either more damage on pet a little (ELF), or more actual damage with ranger (HO/etc)