Suggestion Siege bows to longbows

As title may have made you understand, I would like to suggest siegebows to be converted to longbows.

After conversion longbows should have same dmgs and attack speed of before r185 = I guess dmg scaling like gwenfara's ghostbow and 0.83 speed (I mean the same as 2h hammers).

Also, atk speed runes should be changed, since there will be no 2handed for rangers.

Sets like Bloodmage, Q4, Q7, Black Widow etc have to be changed as well.

Also, bellicose set's unique values would need to be changed, I guess from 6% with 2 handed weapons to 3-4% with longbows (or both).

PS: obv, enchants should be changed, so that if you have 305% weapon dmg, it will be 205%...

 

Hmm, this would mean that what used to be a siege bow could now be used together with a quiver or shield. I think it would require a lot of new calculations and redesign work.

Also I wonder if rangers would be ok with being the only class who has no weapons taking up 2 slots (both hands) again...

It seems to me that the game goes in the direction of slowly removing longbows instead, as they pretty much work like shortbows, only a bit slower and a bit stronger. 20% concentration reduction is perhaps the only thing that keeps them alive, I guess.

Anyway, I'm not against drastic changes. I would just like to ask you to put forward some arguments or reasons for why you think the siege bow -> longbow conversion would be a good thing :]

I'm not voting yet.

 

Because double damage to marked foes-skills were(are) balanced with 1handed setups. I think this would help to balance things out, mostly because the most used 2h bow is Q7, that is broken EDIT.
And, most importantly (just for me, I'd say), because drastic changes are what kept me playing dso till next boring period

Nearly none would be OK to go from 400k EA's dmg to 200k

 

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand the point about double damage to marked foes. Emm, can you explain it more, please?

I agree the q7 set is totally broken. And btw. I was quite shocked when I read that the developers have absolutely no intention to change or tweak the way the q7 buff works.
They should definitely do changes to the whole weapon design thing, as now almost every ranger knows he'll be awesome if he gets q7 + some offensive set like witch seeker.

This is actually a problem of many games. The design is such that it allows you to build highly customized setups, but there's pretty much just one optimal way to be really good. Any other build will be worse.

Maybe combining the longbow with a really good quiver could make the damage reduction less significant?

 

Axes and swords, not hammers.

Wrong. Double damage to marked foes balances ranger vs the other classes. Longbows were balanced vs other classes' 2h weapons because they had base damage identical to DK's axe with the concentration cost reduction and the ability to use quiver, which was better than the base crit from DK's axe. Then some so-called "stupid elfs" whined that ranger is the only class that has no 2h weapon and it's unfair and stuff; the crying was so loud that the devs decided to add hoaxbows while nerfing longbows (and shortbows) and breaking the diversity completly.

Wrong. It would make the Q7 set even more broken and force completly every single ranger into that set. Well, except for PvP where some could use Q4... but those would be a few really bored high-end players with a couple of crafted 4/4 bows so that they can use one up to make a PvP specific build.

And I don't think they can step back now... They made a whole new system where weapon types of all the classes are the same.

Spoiler

Except for longbows which have a concentration cost reduction, and they are the only 1h weapon that really can compete with the 2h weapons. Maybe adding such a special value to the other 1h weapons would solve the 1h-2h disbalance...?

 

It is what you've read... Double dmg to marked foes existed to make a longbow setup deal the same damage (not min-max dmg shown in character stats, but damage dealt to mobs etc) as a par level 2handed setup, while having relatively less character dmg.
Now that rangers can have the same dmg stats because of 2handed bows, the "double dmg" thingy should not be needed... Just for 2handed obviously.

swords had 0.95 speed

So you are telling me that double dmg vs marked foes was balanced because longbows were balanced because they had the same damage as a 2h axe and concentration costs reduction?

What if I was talking about general balance and not specifically for rangers?

I'm not talking about 1H-2H disbalance, but about 2handed bows concept.
But anyway, even adding special bonuses to weapons, who do you think would be using 1handed weapons (out of balanced setups for PvP), when, as @Phyrix said, with a 2handed weapon you can do the same thing with half of the effort?

 

I'd rather just see a few new options for long bows with interesting unique values and sets that offered nice unique bonuses with long bows.

The main issue with long bows is pretty simple-- there aren't any good unique longbows in the game. Shrugs~

 

Totally not! If Q7 set is OP now, can you imagine a Ranger spamming Explosive Arrows with a Shield set up? Yes, damage would be lower but that would only make him unstoppable as DK were before R209. Totally not, at least now Q7 spammers can be easily killed.

 

i would also like a longbow-like option for mages and other classes

 

You would sacrifice cube set in order to use Q7, wich means you won't have +50% HP. Also Q7 is related to Net, wich is not exactly the best stun, but even tho this is true, one have still to take into account the chance to stun->activate Q7 buff.
In any case, this would be most likely deadly just for DKs because of longer cooldowns on antistun skills. So I'd say that wouldn't be a problem to pay em back for lv 50 and pre r209 ruling

Spoiler

I'm not talking seriously about "revenge"

None'a stopping you from writing it down on the creative corner

 

They( shadowy conspiratorial elite) are stopping me

they ignore suggestion anyway

And considering this is about increasing diversity for ingame sets, they wouldn't listen

 

There is your answer

No conversions are needed in the game ... this game needs new and reworked old USEFUL weapons/items.

 

If siege bows are converted to longbows and I can have q7 as a long bow, as it was before, I'll go and create myself a ranger right now. Especially if that bug comes back, where you could just throw the net anywhere on the map and then spam with explosives for 3 sec.
I'm wondering, if the sets and gems are removed from PVP, will be anyone interested anymore in these kind of discussions ?

 

First of all the set buff lasts for 2 seconds, secondly if we are talking about the same bug, it got fixed with r211 and involved only SM and DK.

The thread is not PvP oriented, nor Q7 oriented, you (plural) turned it that way. I opened it because I think 2handed bows are a bad concept when they are related to skills' %dmg on marked foes.

 

I said - as it was before. Maybe you're new around here, but when q7 was a long bow, the buff lasted 3 seconds. Was the time the rangers owned the pvp

 

Your "as it was before" is related to "when Q7 bow was a longbow", and as I stated in the first post, all 2hand bows converted to longbows will have their bonuses converted as well, wich means a non-crafted Q7 2hand bow that has 135% increased item dmg, will have like 80% increased item dmg, while the set bonuses will stay the same = no "as it was before" stats/set-wise.

Around a forum for sure, but even tho looking at my char you may see it is not the best, I started during Wild Forest Sargon event, so quite a while ago