Ranged Weaponry

[Artega]

Being a Warrior, I have the chance to train myself to be able to use guns, bows, and crossbows (for 100 skill points each - eigh!), but I find myself wondering if it's actually worth it. I would figure that using Taunt while in Defensive Stance would work fine for pulling purposes (or I could just go up and whack it upside the head and take a few hits as I run back to the party), and the 100 skill points would be much better-used in getting the next rank of either Mining or Blacksmithing (which is better?) So are ranged weapons really worth the huge skill point investment?

[Tal]

Yes. There are quite a few times where it would be safer to pull with a ranged than with a body pull. My warrior Shalandrax uses the bow all the time for pulling. Not to mention that you can do 100+ damage on a pull that way. If you have a slower opponent you can even back up and get another shot off. ;)

[Nystul]

Unless things have changed in the last push, a warrior's "ranged" skills have a very tight area of effect (not sure if this applies to the ones with long cooldowns, or if any of this has been tweaked in this phase of the beta). By "very tight" I mean, if you aren't close enough to punch the enemy in the nose you probably aren't close enough to affect them with your various non-weapon skills (taunt, demoralizing shout, thunderclap) either. This is a small point that I think gets overlooked in some discussions, particularly about aggro management.

Anyways, here is how it affects pulling. Sometimes, you get a few enemies close together that are "linked" such that if you pull one you also pull the other. But sometimes, you will be in an area that is pretty thick with enemies who aren't linked but still somewhat close to each other. In this case, it is possible to pull one without the other. With a ranged attack, it is easy. Without one, it is easy to screw up. So having a ranged attack makes pulling much easier and more reliable. However, it is quite possible to do the single pulls without a ranged attack in most cases. You simply walk to a spot where one enemy can see you but the other is too far away, pause to let the one see you and attack you, and then back off.

I wouldn't be in any hurry to invest in a ranged weapon. When you reach a point where the skill points don't seem like that much of an issue, you can consider whether it is worth it. It does make things simpler, especially when soloing. Or if you don't want to be bothered with trade skills at all, go for it. But otherwise you will want to build up your trade skills first and think about the ranged weapon later.

[Tal]

I realized I neglected to mention that if you pull with a ranged, rather than your body when in a group situation it's easier to maintain aggro. Since you start off with the mob ticked off at you, and if your group waits before attacking, you can get in a swing or two to get the rage for taunting for when the group does unload. ;)

[Bolty]

Right - under most party engagements with a warrior, it goes like this:

1) Warrior pulls monster with a ranged attack. Group waits.
2) Monster(s) closes distance and approaches melee range. Warrior switches to melee attack. Group waits.
3) Warrior takes a swing at monster/taunts/begins full combat, taunting other monsters that may have joined in.
4) Group commences wailing on monsters in turn, healing the Warrior when necessary.

Without a ranged attack, it usually goes like this:

1) Someone else pulls monster with a ranged attack, then runs to the back. Warrior waits. Group waits.
2) Warrior tries to hit monster to pull its aggro away. Not always successful. Group waits.
3) Original puller stands there and gets beat on while Warrior tries to pull monster(s) aggro away. Group may try to help, especially if there's more than one.
4) Original puller may die due to multiple monsters attacking it. Warrior has a much harder time keeping aggro simply because it did not get the first hit (which apparently gives an aggro jump). Priest/Druid/Paladin is forced to try to heal the original puller, which can then pull other monsters to the healer. Total chaos ensues. :)

Yes, a ranged attack on a Warrior is a Good Thing.™ You will Win Friends and Influence People with a ranged attack. However, it isn't necessary to have one until you start running instances, which would be after level 20 or so. I think the 100 skill point requirement for Warriors is a bit unfair. Cloth casters never NEED to spend skill points on any weapon - it's always optional, but I don't consider the ranged attack to be optional for Warriors. Party members will expect the Warrior, as the primary puller, to have the ranged option. There's too many situations where it's too useful.

-Bolty

[--Pete]

Hi,

I'm biased towards ranged weapons, so keep that in consideration.

First, 100 skill points is nothing much. If you pick up the "gathering" skills and one processing skill, you'll still have those other 100 points before it becomes critical to upgrade any of the trade skills.

Second, using Taunt for pulling has a few drawbacks. It costs rage, which you normally will not have at the beginning of an encounter, so that you need to use Inner Rage which has a pretty long cooldown and is a level 20 ability. Which leaves you without a useful pulling tool for ten levels. Besides all that, Taunt has a 5 yard range, barely adequate. Finally, Taunt does no damage.

On the other hand, ranged weapons overcome all those limitations. They cost no rage, they can be used as fast as the "shooting" time, they have a considerably longer range, and they do damage. They actually do enough damage that you can trade attacks with some ranged critters and kill them at range, useful when you want to take out a spell caster first but would draw a bunch of melee types before getting to it.

And, for soloing, a ranged attack is almost mandatory (well, at least extremely useful).

"So are ranged weapons really worth the huge skill point investment?" I'd say that the cost is trifling for the benefits.

--Pete

[TriggerHappy]

I'm curious, how are guns, bows and thrown weapons balanced against each other in WoW currently? Is there a reason to choose one over the other?

[lemekim]

Guns and bows are about equal - it's about style preference and skillpoint cost. Although if you had to choose between two, pick a gun, mainly because they are more available, and you are able to buy projectiles (or make) that do 17 damage instead of 9, which adds to your overall damage. However, all ranegd weapons require a quiver or an ammo pouch to use, which only holds the ammo for that weapon. Thus you have to give up a bag slot currently in order to use a gun or a bow.

As for thrown weapons, they do not require a quiver or anything of the sort, so you do not waste a bag slot. You can just stick them into ranged slot and use them. The drawback is that the last upgrade to the thrown weapons can be obtained at level 20, and after that there are no thrown weapons whatsoever. So you can still pull with it, but you will do almost no damage.

[TriggerHappy]

Sounds interesting. Thanks.

As I understand it, one only has time for a single shot before a mob closes distance with you. So it looks like Guns are the ranged weapon of choice, since they'll do more damage with that shot.

[TheDragoon]

With most guns you'll generally only have time for one shot but with some of the faster weapons (which means mostly bows) you have ample time to get off two shots before mobs close the distance. This is useful particularly in groups when you can shoot two of the attackers when you pull more than a single mob, and so get them to target you more strongly than if you didn't shoot it.

Personally, I pick the weapon type that fits with the race and type of character I want to play. With my gnome, I use a gun since it just makes more sense to me for a gnome to use a gun. But if I played a Night Elf I'd definitely go with a Bow and Arrow since Night Elves don't strike me as a race that would make extensive use of guns.