To the folks saying that ranged cannot get valour; I must disagree. Certainly, it is a bit more difficult than playing a 2h str-hero or something, but I have seen many players on NA1 that are ranged get valour, including myself on occasion. I am currently a 15-24 arbalestier with a MW arbalest as my only loom I am using. Now, that is a loom certainly, but this is my first generation as arbalestier, or even ranged-dominant and I feel that my lack of experience should somewhat mitigate the fact that I have a loomed arbalest. I've gotten valour about 5-6 times on NA one since it was changed, and I feel that I do not deserve any more or any less. If I shoot a lot of bitches, I get valour. If I don't, I do not get valour. Nothing wrong here that I see.
As a secondary point, people without heirlooms should consider NOT playing a ranged class. The first thing many new players do is grab a bow because that is how it's done in the native singleplayer and modded singleplayer, where these people often come from. cRPG as a game/mod will always benefit those that have put more time in to the game, both due to leveling/looms and the (comparatively, I mean look at recent games coming out) ridiculous skill-curve. I don't think that a generation 1 new player, even at 30, should be able to reliably get valour unless he is somehow fucking godly at the game out of nowhere. If the score formula was somehow changed to benefit ranged-classes, and score ended up being used for something besides dick-waving, it would encourage new and old players alike to go ranged. In my opinion, ranged, lancers, ranged cav, etc are fine in small numbers, but in large quantities of any of these classes, the fun wears out real quick for me.
