Why rangers don't suck

[koros]

What class can act as a better tank than a ranger assuming mana isn't constrained?

[Grizzin]

An actual tank, for one. I know it sounds great on paper for a Cleric or whatever to not have to CH a Ranger over and over, but it's indisputable that actual plate wearing classes mitigate damage at a better rate than a Ranger ever could, and I promise you any healer is always going to prefer having an actual tank over a Ranger tank.

For one, tank classes mitigation abilities have higher skill caps than a Ranger. Those skill caps go higher for a reason; it's not just for looks.

There's a reason you don't see many Ranger's main tanking groups out there, and why most healers prefer an actual plate wearing tank for the role.

I don't think it's fair to factor in some of our spell utility, especially our ability to root mobs (Many, many classes can perform this exact thing as easy as we can) in regards to who can be the better tank. :P Yes, we can pull higher dps than tank classes can, but pulling higher dps does not a better tank make. Fact is, though we may be able to pull more dps, we can not mitigate damage on the same level.

[koros]

Well sure, I meant if mana isn't constrained then you gain a benefit over having a ranger as a tank vs a pally or sk in terms of dps, and you gain benefit over a warrior by having better snap aggro.

[Flunklesnarkin]

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

What class can act as a better tank than a ranger assuming mana isn't constrained?

unlimited mana


cleric aoe heals pull wicked aggro >_>