Confusion: Archer to Bard? Where is the Ranger Job?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coglin

Thats generally the descrition for most wizard/black mage type classes. They are generally accompanied by a mellee counterpart. Thats why the call them Damage Dealers, which has iconically been a staple archtype in MMOs since there inception. Tanks tank, healers heal, Buffers buff, Batteries refill MP/TP, Crowd controllers control the flow, but Caster/Mellee damage dealers don't get to do damage ?

They don't exactly "relax". Good DDs stay in the safest location at an optimal range. Put out the strongest, most consistant damage they can, while maintaining a ballance just below the peel limit (the limit before they over damage and peel the mob off the tank). This takes as much skill as any class. Figure in the spells/abilities that deagro, they have to use them accordingly and find a fine balance.

---

mages tend to have multiple useful party skills, and the pure DD mages tend to have no other useful abilities, and generally really dont outdmg melee dps overall. They may see some big numbers, but when you add the consistent dmg of melee, and lack of casting times, usually ranged is not the highest DPS caster or not.

And yeah ranged attackers advantage is range, i think it makes perfect sense that the ranged damage dealer is not the best DD. Melee will always have to either avoid attacking at times, or take AoE dmg and status, whereas an archer, in most situations can stay in one place and spread consistent dmg

heres what bard could bring to the fight, the safest damage with a good tank (the greatest ranged distance attack in game belongs to archer mages have less range, and less hp)
superior CC abilities, also at the greatest range,
burst damage (they need to build this back into the class)
and buffs.

if a physical ranged class is to be on equal DD footing with melee, they are going to have to lose somewhere else, defense is irrelevant, so where do they lose?


now this is not me saying archers dont need changes, right now they have no real synergy, they arent that entertaining, even if there dmg is not the highest, the class as it is, doesnt make sense within itself, other than being a ranged physical attacker. The nerf to multishot makes it so its questionable whether its better than shooting a regular shot at all, other than getting a first hit. It really has no interesting mechanics anymore, and its enmity reductions are a bit redundant, now that it isnt the craziest dps, or even a large burst damage.

still needs work, but imo shouldnt be equal dps wise with others, especially not the bard

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

one day they may add a ranger offshoot to archer, but not today. Dont worry though, theres a good chance bard will overall be a really powerful job, combining buffing with decent damage, is a pretty good pick, especially since no one else will have the ability to do any noticeable status boosting, and they will probably have good CC options.

---

I guess i'll have to unsubscribe until that class is added to the game, if ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

And yeah ranged attackers advantage is range, i think it makes perfect sense that the ranged damage dealer is not the best DD. Melee will always have to either avoid attacking at times, or take AoE dmg and status, whereas an archer, in most situations can stay in one place and spread consistent dmg.

---

That's why they design encounters with more variety of spells for the boss. There can be both melee and ranged aoe spells, Ifrit already does this to an extent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

if a physical ranged class is to be on equal DD footing with melee, they are going to have to lose somewhere else, defense is irrelevant, so where do they lose?

---

Again more dynamic encounters. Ranged classes, DD and support alike usually take care of any adds or extra jobs during an encounter. For example in the batraal encounter, I was always in position to bring the skeletons to our designated kill spot. Being ranged i was able to quickly target and hit them before they got to anyone else. I was also always the first one standing in the circle to deactivate his defense followed by either mages or a melee depending on the group make up. In short, encounters can easily be designed to break away from the faceroll of simply standing in one spot doing damage, without having to remove the ranged DD altogether.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

still needs work, but imo shouldnt be equal dps wise with others, especially not the bard

---

It should be an equal dps, that's called balanced game design.

"ARC needs to be a DPS it's the only way it can be used. I'm leaving till they implement." What about the people who liked Bard and wanted to play that while having some solo abilityand damage on the side? But no, it's all about you. Cherry bye <3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vyncent

I just found out that the progression of classes will see Archers utilizing the Bard job. I'm not sure I understand why this is the case. Does some other company own some sort of "Ranger class" trademark?

---

Most likely because Archer is Ranger, just a different name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lavani

I guess i'll have to unsubscribe until that class is added to the game, if ever.



That's why they design encounters with more variety of spells for the boss. There can be both melee and ranged aoe spells, Ifrit already does this to an extent.



Again more dynamic encounters. Ranged classes, DD and support alike usually take care of any adds or extra jobs during an encounter. For example in the batraal encounter, I was always in position to bring the skeletons to our designated kill spot. Being ranged i was able to quickly target and hit them before they got to anyone else. I was also always the first one standing in the circle to deactivate his defense followed by either mages or a melee depending on the group make up. In short, encounters can easily be designed to break away from the faceroll of simply standing in one spot doing damage, without having to remove the ranged DD altogether.



It should be an equal dps, that's called balanced game design.

---

balanced in what way? if they can build mechanics that have a ranged attacker taking the same risks as a non ranged attacker sure, but I ve yet to see that in this game or others i have played. But the real reason they are getting bard is because they wanted to give every class a role, and they realized they had no support role, and a lot of DD roles.

So yeah you got to go for what is good for you, if you re all about high powered ranged physical dps, then yeah you probably got to take a long break before they will release that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lakefingers

"ARC needs to be a DPS it's the only way it can be used. I'm leaving till they implement." What about the people who liked Bard and wanted to play that while having some solo abilityand damage on the side? But no, it's all about you. Cherry bye <3.

---

No one is saying they should not have a bard class, people don't seem to understand that. I can also use your own words to re-explain what i've been saying "What about the people who like ranged physical dps and want to play that?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

balanced in what way? if they can build mechanics that have a ranged attacker taking the same risks as a non ranged attacker sure, but I ve yet to see that in this game or others i have played.

---

It is balanced because there will be a viable class that fits the type of play style of different individuals. Just because there are no current encounters that have a ranged attacker take the same risks as a non ranged does not mean there won't or there shouldn't be any.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

But the real reason they are getting bard is because they wanted to give every class a role, and they realized they had no support role, and a lot of DD roles.

---

Yes I know why they are getting BRD, im not saying they shouldn't i'm saying there should also be a ranged physical DPS that is viable. Not the current ARC we have now>>. I've been saying this from the start but people don't seem to understand that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Physic

So yeah you got to go for what is good for you, if you re all about high powered ranged physical dps, then yeah you probably got to take a long break before they will release that.

---

I'm afraid I will have to :(. I was starting to enjoy the game, until I got to level 50 and people didn't wan't anything to do with Archers, unless they were friends or LS members from pre nerfbat. If SE wan'ts to alienate that demographic, it's their game I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reliquia

Did you just call BRD weak in FFXI? You know that BRD was the most sought after jobs for years in FFXI, it was a very busy and important job because the support was always good. After what the PT members wanted you could basically give then just about any status benefits. BRD was one of the best job additions in terms of balance, what you refer to as it beaing "weak" was the power to strengthen just about anyone, including itself.

---

I meant weak as in their damage potential thus the air quotes ", in terms of their role as support in a PT and how sought after job was in XI yes they where very strong.
However in raw damage or survability they where one of the weakest classes in any MMO I've ever played.

I kinda like this direction, it's like getting XI's Corsair early, and it makes a lot more sense for Gridania's lore. Let the Pew Pew Ranger class come in when we can equip double-barreled shotguns.

Just wait and see what they have in store for the class changes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Onidemon

Most likely because Archer is Ranger, just a different name.

---

Where do you base this incorrect assumption?

Marriam-Websters says:

Rangers are persons who range over a region to enforce law or regional rule

or

Fighters trained in close range fighting and raiding tactics.

Encyclopia Britanica says:

Ranger units originated during the French and Indian War (1756–63), when the British formed special units of expert woodsmen and marksmen to range the forests on scouting, screening, and harassing missions.

Ranger referes to one who ranges an are not one who uses range weapons.