Bard or Ranger?

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by deezy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

During a raid I always give whatever buff is asked for. After considering the downtime a monk has, in the past I've asked some of them not to pull and stay on a mob 100% of the time. Consistently monks were either on par or came short.

If true and with gear level (monks with their monk weapons and ranger with BiS general weapons) and buffs were literally all right on par, there’s got to be some reason. I do not suspect the attack bonus could compensate for having a fairly significant skill cap disadvantage which also includes literally fewer opportunities to hit in having both lower dual wield and double attack.

On these fights were you utilizing trueshot or straight up meleeing? Do you own/use a BFG? If we’re incorporating trueshot (up 2 min with 72 refresh) and/or using BFG it makes total sense but that doesn’t reflect actual expected ranger damage globally. Rangers spend 35x more time not in trueshot than under disc. Regarding BFG you can’t exactly summon/fletch enough arrows to keep it up continually.

If we’re talking literally melee damage vs melee damage ... I don’t know man. It simply doesn’t make sense. It could be true, but it neither computes nor have I heard this to be a consensus generally held by the community. I certainly have not seen it. I’ve seen ToV rangers beat lesser geared monks. I’ve parsed Aikons (old friend) sustain numbers with just my shaman’s gimp ass haste that I’ve never seen any ranger consistently maintain.

It’s better weapons, more hits, higher offense, more total hits vs innate ranger attack + ??

I dunno. Maybe? Doesn’t make a lick of rational sense though.

What I do know is my epic/sos monk 34% worn haste consistently beats out a 60 ranger buddy with blam stick and swiftwind.