Personally I'd like to see all the suggestions I am going to make implemented but would be happy for anything.

1) Make it so that it can not be placed in combat.

2) Make it so that it does not work in revealing rangers. (Explaination below.)

3) Give it a wear off timer in the assassins affects list.

4) Make it increase the assassins stealth abilities against the marked target in that they can hide so well that they are effectively duo in civilized environments against their target only.

5) Give it a save based upon a comparison between the assassins int and wis vs the targets int and wis and the differential between the civilized/wilderness time of the two opponents.

6) Make Locate mark a togglable skill that automatically gives updates on the mark and deducts coinage when ever the assassin enters his guild.

About #2 The reason I would like to see mark not work in wilderness is for a few reasons. Given that it can be used in conjunction with "Locate Mark" to locate marked targets suggests that it is a mark that only the secret society of assassins can detect and is thus something rooted in networks and society. I find myself struggling to see the justification that a streetwise killer is able to head to Yellowstone National Park and hunt down and kill a Delta sniper because he has a mundane method of seeing the unseeable. I'm okay with the bonus remaining for disarming and for the mark retaining it's potency vs the ranger in other areas, especially what I listed above. (Disarming and locating in cities)

Assassins have so many tools for fighting rangers(And every other class) already that I feel they don't need to be able to nullify the rangers biggest offensive move and defensive ability with a 10th level skill. Perhaps allow the ranger/Outie to camouflage but not ambush.

My most PK successful character was a Dark-elven assassin that more or less feasted on rangers in their natural habitat. Enough so that I was able to gather a couple edges from PK's alone. That's huge for me!

The skill just seems magical to me. Certainly more powerful than it should be on a class that's already amazing in all arenas.

If the assassin who has you marked dies to you, he loses the mark. I have been marked, killed the assassin only to have him still be able to see me with mark when he unghosted. That to me is the only change that wouldn't nerf the skill, but help balance it slightly for ranger.

.

All it does there is give him a chance to see you before a multi-kill occurs.

evbqwv

And rangers don't have much to fear from assassins in the wild, marked or not, unless the person in question is a rager or scout, which is Iklahn's situation.

A tribunal, imperial, or scion assassin trying to retrieve from outlander is in a bad situation, marked ranger or not.

The assassin v ranger match up is a fairly even match up. Now, the assassin landing mark is a very necessary part of the process. Just because the assassin died doesn't mean they should get an advantage in the next go around, if there is one. Does that make some sense?

but if a ranger beats my assassin once, if I can't beat him the first go around, I'll be damned if I'd go into the woods if he isn't marked already.

Your approach, though making sense, just encourages the assassin to say 'F@## that' and avoid the wilderness entirely.

Do you really want fewer fights?

They already have everything on a silver plater.

Ok, let the assassin recite a haste scroll, brandish an aura stave, and then run into the woods to invite the waylay, the snare, and the coup de grace.

Oh, wait.

or more of what you sited.

Assassins are superior to Rangers over all and an even match even in the Rangers home terrain.

It's not his or my or anyone's fault if a ranger gives away all of scrolls, talismans, and snares and doesn't have a plan for how to compensate for missing those awesome skills.

some people have been trumpeting as assassin killers, where as all assassins have the skills neccesary to be ranger killers.

If you feel like there are things that you, personally, cannot beat without those skills, then don't give up those skills.

Other people were saying rangers could do this that and the other thing to over come that loss and I am stating that in many cases that is categorically incorrect.

That's all. Matrik laid out the evidence that rangers do kill assassins more than assassins kill rangers below, but something tells me this is one of those cases where stats don't tell the whole story.

Either way I'm happy to let it rest.

The times where I have actually managed to beat an assassin head up tended to be in a raid/retrieval situation. Its not so much a matter of less fights, but keeping the fights more interesting and on an even playing field. Yes, I think that if you only focus on one very distinct ranger build, the fight is skewed towards the ranger over the assassin 99% of the time. However, not every ranger is a cloud giant mountaineer beastmaster in Outlander. So what this does is allow the fights to stay even.

If the assassin kills me the first time, he still gets to hide and use all of his abilities. The only difference is that he has to re-mark me. If I kill him the first time before this change, I still have lost one of the greatest abilities that the ranger class has if we fight again.

I have played a ton of rangers and assassins, and when we are not talking about battle, I think the edge goes to rangers when they are in the wilderness even without prepping. Any outlander ranger I have had has never really worried about assassins after they have marked me. Even my hunters, who although they couldn't kill the assassin, never felt significantly threatened by any assassin outside of those played by a handful of players.

Your proposal, in my mind, makes assassins retrieving from Outlander have it even harder than they have it already.

As it is, rangers are the one class that can pretty much allow you to eat and drink as a character, and then as a player go have a bowel movement without worry that someone is going to find you and pk you.

The mark has long been stripped going the other way (that is, if the assassin is the killer) and it just seems consistent to me.

The logic of stripping it is consistent with that of stripping all effect flags upon death; I question that the minimal power that mark offers the assassin is so much it should be stripped because it nerfs rangers, as our original sub-poster suggests.

Wouldn't that imply the mark is magical? Wohoo, new targets for my next rager!

No. :P

My main goal with Sumeraj was to seek out the ancient magic of assassins. help files or lyceum or something hints at them once using black arcane arts. It also explains that the knowledge has been lost and they learned how to do many of the techniques (like killing with a touch, assassinate) without the magic components.

I assume OOC this refers to when they had hellfire and blindness or whatever, but it seems like a cool route to take RP wise. Maybe a Scion assassin seeking the ancient black arts.

That requires some manuvering in many cases at least.

NT

Just for the sake of discussion, you do understand that rangers are like 90% of the reason mark even exists for a class with build-in detect invis and hidden, right?

Because I can't see how anything you said make sense if you understand that but I also don't see how you could have missed it.

Of all the points I made I would be satisfied if it couldn't be used in combat. At least make them flee and return to use it.

I'm curious as to how many other ranger players are frustrated by assassins. Like I wrote earlier. My most PK successful character was a Drow Assassin farming rangers.

Shamans annoy the hell out of me. Not because they are deadly. Just because they are so hard to take down. Nothing should be killing you in the wilderness post pathfinding (level 7) unless it can perma lag you, lag with big burst damage (orc), or you let them drain your moves to nil. Being able to walk around with no lag is huge.

edvav

Sword warrior with saves will give them a run for their money at least. I generally hate trying to whiddle down a shaman, but I will try anyway.

I think you're missing a few key notions at work here.

1. You have a lot of ranger experience, more than 90% of the MUD, probably. When you have that sort of experience, you become aware of the class's weaknesses and know how to exploit them. It makes total sense that you were able to take an assassin and kill a bunch of rangers. You know how they work.

2. You're giving assassins way too much credit. In skilled hands an assassin can be extremely dangerous. For someone who is new to the class through someone who is average with the class they will lose against any skilled player playing any class much of the time. Obviously lowbie assassin against lowbie invoker goes to the assassin, but by the time you're at hero any skilled player should be able to crush most assassins.

3. Mark of the Prey is an awesome skill, but you seem to be neglecting a couple of important limitations it has. You can't stalk your mark, so that entire avenue of your arsenal is out of the question. Secondly, if you're marking someone that means you're not using another command. Most of the time for assassin v. ranger that means you're in civilization. If you're marking him you're not tripping him, which may (depending on how far you are from the woods) be the wisest course of action. By marking him you're basically expecting the fight to go into the woods where the ranger (despite what you say) has the advantage. Now, if you're marking in combat you're giving up a lagging move, a damage move or a malediction to land that mark. Anyone who's played a few assassins will tell you that often times one command is the difference between winning and losing a fight, so that's big.

In the woods or out.

It's assassin 101.

I'm not going to school novice assassins on ranger killing but there is very little reason an assassin shouldn't be able to defeat a ranger at any level.

You're better off doing 2 x serpent strike or entangle than dirt kick in most cases. The race is to getting your opponent to 0 hp. Neither of you have a ton of it.

Wait for the tick. Dirt kick him, flee return ambush. Dirt wears off, flee return ambush call lightning.

That's assuming he didn't flee at the ambush or mark you when the tick passed.

Is the tactic working? Sounds like it isn't since you are losing to assassins?

I wouldn't do that against an assassin ever. Simply because what you said: Mark. I'd rather serpent strike while he is trying to maladict. continue if he fails, retreat/return if he succeeds.

And that is one of the common ways I can kill them.

the maladicts wear off or you heal them. Return to murder 2., serp, serp, serp. Or whatever damage skill you want to use. With axes.

vavrv

You mean "return to what" as in they will be gone?

Every engagement doesn't have to end in death. Return to the next engagement later on downt he road if you prefer.

Or, quite easily, just cover the stat loss of those maladicts. At least enough to wield a light weapon and keep your dex up. The dex part I find pretty easy to do. I even stick to "light armor" as a ranger for RP purposes like I'd assume you do. Covering str is harder + wielding a big weapon. So work on finding a couple lightish axes and/or axes that have +str.

IIRC my level 20 ranger set is all light/bone armor and gives at least +5 str. More on dex.

Of the top ten most deathful assassins, only two of them perfected MotP.

This indicates to me that this skill isn't being used as often as you think it is, especially considering that you can perfect it by marking people you're talking to.

Now, even if in every fight vs. a ranger they're trying to mark their prey, it's not a sure thing. Now how many commands do you want to spend on something like this? There's no benefit to marking someone if you're dead two rounds later.

Because it's only used to fight rangers and it lands most times anyway if not the first it will the second.

I have fought few assassins who haven't marked my rangers.

It's not only used against rangers. Combined with locate mark it's very useful against anyone.

It's supremely useful against rangers, trannies and bards (you can see them even in fantasyland.)

Yet, only two of the most deathful assassins have managed to perfect it? Why might that be?

Probably because at least fifty percent of the time there is a better option than marking someone you're already fighting, even if it's a ranger. Even if it's in the wilderness.

If MotP were an "I Win" button it would be the correct move 100% of the time, but it's not.

Are you one of these muppets that falls into the meme that assuming is bad?

Because it's not.

If you have sufficient information, making an assumption can be the same as making an educated guess, which is the best that most of us can offer most of the time. I assume the stocks I'm holding will grow in value. I assume my girlfriend loves me. There's nothing wrong with these assumptions as I have conducted due diligence in both my finances and my relationship.

However, if I come to a conclusion or an assumption based on a feeling, a notion, or without exploring all the information I have at my disposal, I'm pretty much just guessing. And that can be fine, too, but I'd be an idiot to simply guess that a certain stock is going to perform one way or another or that the person I'm in a relationship with isn't a total psycho.

You give the impression that you base a lot of your assumptions on feelings and even when confronted with information that explicitly contradicts your gut, you're unwilling to accept the idea that you might be wrong.

Several knowledgeable players and staff members have explained why MotP functions as it does and that it's not the nuke against rangers that you seem to think it is, yet you don't seem to be making the connection that maybe the way you've interpreted the skill is part of the problem (your seeming inability to adapt to it being the other part.)

Also, it doesn't look like it's going to change, so what's your solution? Never fight assassins? Where's the fun in that? Don't forget that many, many assassins are played by the newest players to the game. You should be kicking their asses so hard that you feel bad about it and begin to just creep by them unseen. As for those assassins played by Isildur and the like, run, just run.

I've seen you play ranger a time or twelve.

You lean really, really heavily on ambush.

I've not seen anyone else play ranger and put so many of their tactical eggs in that one basket.

So it makes sense to me that you feel like a marked ranger is done and it makes sense to me why most everyone else who has spent a while playing ranger disagrees.

fvdwfvwv

Unless with a savage onslaught.

And it was you Daevryn that told me a couple years ago that I should open with ambush more and that if I'm in a fight were someone survives 2 ambushes there's something wrong.

Which I thought was odd because there are different kinds of ambush and so my damage reduction out there, I don't like to ambush because the lag let me get maladicted on heavily protected opponents.

Just moments ago I was debating dirt kick over ambush with Matrik.

Well, don't get me wrong. Ambush has a place in the ranger toolkit and when I play a ranger I lean on it heavily for about the first half of levels.

And I'm not talking about ambush solely as an opener, either.

For me personally, and yes I have fought plenty of
assassins.. I was never worried about them in the
wild.

But I can also understand your frustration if you have
had an issue..

Only times I worry about assassins is if I think they may have
a chance or are in a position to assassinate me, and if they are
a part of a gang..

>Assassins have so many tools for fighting rangers(And every
>other class) already that I feel they don't need to be able to
>nullify the rangers biggest offensive move and defensive
>ability with a 10th level skill. Perhaps allow the
>ranger/Outie to camouflage but not ambush.
>
>My most PK successful character was a Dark-elven assassin that
>more or less feasted on rangers in their natural habitat.
>Enough so that I was able to gather a couple edges from PK's
>alone. That's huge for me!
>
>The skill just seems magical to me. Certainly more powerful
>than it should be on a class that's already amazing in all
>arenas.
>

Re: the above, IMO assassin v. ranger, post-wilderness fam, is one of the most fun matchups in the game with two determined opponents. I think it's slightly tilted in favor of the ranger, but requires some cleverness and guts from both sides. Removing mark from that equation will disrupt something that is working.

For RobDarken's benefit, the bases for my opinion are:

1. The ranger can permalag, but the assassin can't. Played well on the ranger's part, the assassin's choice to mark may cost him his life.

2. The ranger also knows at least one weapon the assassin does not. Makes it likely the ranger will win in a slug fest.

3. The assassin can maledict and the ranger, relatively, can't. Increases assassin's chances when the fight draws out.

4. The ranger can use staves and scrolls, and the assassin cannot. DR advantage to the ranger when the fight draws out.

5. Both classes dodge extremely well (in the wilds) and both can heal themselves and escape quickly (pathfinding and vanish). So the battles can take some time without the old flee/quaff.

6. And finally, pertinent to your point: both classes can see each other at all times in the wild - it's the best chance they have to kill each other so both are encouraged to stick around as long as possible. If you remove mark from the equation, the assassin will just try to assassinate the rare times the ranger is in the open, effectively killing one of the most fun matchups in the game.

You wrote : 1. The ranger can permalag, but the assassin can't. Played well on the ranger's part, the assassin's choice to mark may cost him his life.

Only some rangers can permalag in some niche circumstances. Their ability to permalag can also be countered with preps, the evade skill (which is typically highly developed in an assassin by the time a ranger can effectivly lag) and assassin specific edges. So in short assassins can not be permalaged.

You wrote: 2. The ranger also knows at least one weapon the assassin does not. Makes it likely the ranger will win in a slug fest.

The ranger, being unable to effectivly lag an assassin will not be holding that weapon. In the event he manages to lag the assassin those weapons are easily dodged. Assassins dodge very well already and have edges that let them dodge even better.

You wrote: 3. The assassin can maledict and the ranger, relatively, can't. Increases assassin's chances when the fight draws out.

Exactly.

You wrote: 4. The ranger can use staves and scrolls, and the assassin cannot. DR advantage to the ranger when the fight draws out.

The rangers that permalag can not use scrolls, and assassins can use preps that give the same DR as any scroll. Staves have tremendous lag and cost a weapon/shield slot to use. In the time it takes to brandish again, you have a broken wrist. Rangers have one edge that gives them a little boost with talismans but it's not a game changer that I can see.

You wrote: 5. Both classes dodge extremely well (in the wilds) and both can heal themselves and escape quickly (pathfinding and vanish). So the battles can take some time without the old flee/quaff.

Assassins dodge better in more places than rangers do. Assassins dodge better in the wilds than some rangers do. Especially with some assassin/racial edges. Herbs has a very very long lag and the ranger has to run far to safely use it. By the time he returns the assassin is likely to be in fighting shape, unable to be surprised and ready to put the same amount or more hurt on you since if he managed to mark you, you can't burst damage on him except with a very niche build or call lightning, which not all rangers have. The fight is effectvly over for most ranger assassin match ups when the mark is placed. For me at least.

My own addition to this with regard to perma lag. It requires preps that can be counter prepped and if you are a cloud you have the disadcantage of being highly vuln to a very common attack type.

It would not be a fun matchup.

They give the ranger a better match up.

I for one recommend never fighting an assassin as a ranger once you've been marked. At least not the average player.

Don't need your advice. They are better at this game than you.

I knew I should have left that line out because fruit bats such as yourself would sieze on it rather than the message and derail this.

We get it. If the situation was reversed, we'd have to listen to how ranger's are overpowered and bearcharge should be toned down because you got permalagged and evade didn't help, or whatever it is that you believe caused you to lose. You play a handful of classes poorly, RP in a way that doesn't mesh with the CF environment and then complain about how X is broken on the boards.

I don't know why Malakhi wasted time try to explain why the matchup is interesting the way it is when you are just going to stick by whatever opinion you have originally formed an no amount of logic or reasoning will ever change your outlook on it. You have created or cause the last 4 big threads on gameplay and in each case your interpretation of the situation is wrong. I would prefer our Imms dedicate their time to something other than refuting yet another of your insane claims.

>I don't know why Malakhi wasted time try to explain why the
>matchup is interesting the way it is

This one is easy. I recently moved and am having issues with my Internet. So I'm stuck discussing CF on my iPhone. :(. Plus, I've spent 2k plus hours of my life playing rangers and talking about them is like having beers with an old friend.

Talking X with Pro less so.

How do you manage to deal with the crushing boriness of not being able to find targets in the wild as a hero-rank ranger? My last was a Nexun and even with the ease of finding fights in the "rager box" I still just couldn't justify sitting around waiting enough to make it playable for me.

efvwvew

I keep trying to rank up goodie and neutral rangers and I keep falling into that same boredom trap. I agree it is crushing. I did manage to play a neutral ranger for 1000 hours, but that was a unique situation where (1) I liked the RP and (2) Outlander was heavily outnumbered and underpowered (no insect swarm) then which meant I actually got to fight people in the wilds when they came with gangs of 3-4. Ironically, if I had insect swarm, it probably would have increased my boredom.

I will ABSOLUTELY play another ranger when/if frost giants become an option again. I keep begging Scar or whoever to do it, but I've started to sound a little desperate.

How did you fight assassins and defeat them where you are supoposed to be at your strongest?

This is not a comment on the match up of the ranger vs assassin, but ranger vs assassin scores in general.

Ranger top 5:
295, 265, 194, 160, 147

Assassin top 5:
315, 289, 227, 196, 189

Not much difference despite Assassins being "bad ass everywhere" and rangers only being "bad ass in the bush."

Pre-30 I eat assassins for breakfast with my rangers. Wield axe, dual axe, serpent strike. Broken bones? Flee and laugh as they can't catch you since they have movement lag in the wilderness and you don't. Or just cover your str/dex loss with equipment. Not terribly hard to do. They don't have many hp, so all it really takes is 1-2 failed attempts to break your bones and they are done for. Explorer is even better since you can just fix those bones once you have tend wounds.

Caprivitiose (plains/explorer) gave Sumeraj (my assassin) absolute hell in the wilderness. All I could do is hope to land a wrist break and even then I'm as like to vanish and get the hell out if I can.

Warriors, orcs, and other rangers are the only things I ever fear in the slightest as a ranger, in the wilderness, pre-30.

I can't comment on post-30 as I usually move on to something else by then.

Yes warriors and orcs are tough everywhere.

There are edges to help against Orcs.

And unless the warrior has the correct legacy neither he nor the orc are going to be able to hunt you down.

I get what you are saying about running. Lord knows I did it enough with broken bones and no place to hide.

I'd say the stats, if anything, show just how bad ass rangers are.

Assassins can fight everywhere well. They can kill in one shot. Yet they still just BARELY beat out rangers.

I don't know how to grep PBFs for specifically assassin/ranger matchups, so no data there.

Orcs and warriors both can faerie fog you provided they aren't villagers. I avoid warriors because rangers have low hp pre-30 and warriors get more attacks. I avoid orcs because rangers have low hp and orcs get the lag + big burst damage.

Running is what rangers do. It's a hit and run class.

Just like the orcs and warriors, despite faerie fog or Mark, you can always choose not to engage in the first place.

saereaer

QHCF "PK Stats" link. Even if you don't want to participate there. May be worth having an account to use the various tools.

Top ranger has 99% ratio vs. top assassin's 88% btw. Assassin has a higher pkph. Rest of the top five are pretty similar compared to each other.

Top ranger is evil/chaotic felar outlander. Mountaineer/Beastmaster. No class specific link in PBF but had endure cold and the beast kinships.

Top ranger:
PK Wins by Class
VS. transmuter 7
VS. thief 9
VS. warrior 119
VS. paladin 14
VS. anti-paladin 13
VS. assassin 29
VS. ranger 6
VS. invoker 9
VS. necromancer 4
VS. bard 10
VS. shaman 6
VS. healer 7
VS. conjurer 18
VS. berserker 8
VS. shapeshifter 36

No deaths vs assassin. Only like 4 deaths though.

Top assassin:
PK Wins by Class
VS. transmuter 2
VS. thief 5
VS. warrior 148
VS. paladin 30
VS. anti-paladin 3
VS. assassin 22
VS. ranger 11
VS. invoker 11
VS. bard 17
VS. shaman 6
VS. healer 10
VS. druid 5
VS. conjurer 7
VS. berserker 4
VS. shapeshifter 34

No deaths by ranger.

Ranger has more assassin kills than the assassin has ranger kills.

There are ranger tricks for fighting assassins, but once that ranger is marked it's pretty much over. Time to go sleep it off.

I'll accept this as evidence that rangers have the edge in the wilds over all.

You decided, (Actually, you probably don't decide much, you probably react without reflection.) to just flame.

And what advice would you give to an assassin about fighting rangers in the wild if they could not mark the ranger?

http://www.qhcf.net/phorum/read.php?18,743607,743607#msg-743607

Without mark, fights in the wilderness wouldn't happen. And avoiding mark, and trying to land mark without dying, is part of the fun of the matchup.

Also, your advice is one way to go, but it's not fun or challenging, and being marked is not an unwinnable situation:

http://www.qhcf.net/phorum/read.php?3,898539,898539#msg-898539

You don't get better than average unless you find ways to win as opposed to reasons why you lose.

That said, if your point is restricted to hunters, in particular, and not rangers in general, I agree hunters suck at PK - not just against assassins, but they're challenged against a lot of things. That's why last Christmas I wished for them to get dual wield (and was immediately shot down by players who thought that would make hunters OP ?!?!!!)

I would suggest they stay in the cities though, just like rangers stay in the woods.

Why do Assassins have to be awesome everywhere? And specifically against rangers when rangers are beatable by nearly anyone once they leave the wild and even there they are still screwed by Faerie fire.

Which would be my suggestion to an assassin. ---> Faerie Fire

...you're not allowed to bitch about rangers needing an extra skill :)

n/t