Best Trio That Doesn't Use Enchanter

[PatChapp]

How much mescaline did you smoke before writing that

[cd288]

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

what the fuck did i just read?

He turned the chat bot back on for that one

[Troxx]

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

Ranger is a better tankthan Paladin.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Zuranthium]

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

They mostly bleed from my experience. Rangers bleed slightly less.

WTF are you talking about. Look at the actual numbers in the game coding. Monks have the highest damage reduction. Then Pally/SK. And then Ranger (who also have less HP than Pally/SK).

This is inarguable. The random shit you're saying is wrong.

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

Rangers bleed normally. I can warn my party when rangers tank when I get lom, with paladins, it's death all at once.

Ranger often has the higher dps, and gets DPS aggro, but they also have root as well.

If we're talking things besides their damage reduction and HP when it comes to tanking, this is still not very accurate. Paladins have root and better heals than Rangers. They don't have an issue gaining aggro and they generally stop more damage than Rangers can, not just from their base stats but also from their other abilities.

There are a few things that can be argued in favor of Rangers:

1.) Snare - this is mostly irrelevant to the situations you're talking about. Root already provides crowd control. Where snare does help is keeping a Charm pet snared, providing more room and time to react on breaks.

2.) Access to 50% slow proc (whereas otherwise slow will just be 35%). While this can help, it's not reliable, and a Ranger tanking a 50% slowed target is still going to take more damage than a Monk tanking a 35% snared target. Compared to a Pally/SK, the Ranger may have a small advantage in damage reduction. I'd need to see some more detailed number crunching for that. However, the Pally getting a bigger return from C-heal and having better healing of their own certainly tips the scale in their favor overall.

3.) Better DPS (things dying faster = less damage taken). Some direct testing will be required to further debate this. I'd very much like to see someone set up a Paladin vs Ranger test scenario (will require "equal level" of gear) where the trio has to kill some very hard MOB. Let's see in which scenario the Cleric ends the fight with more mana. What I do know for sure is MONKS have the highest DPS and damage reduction, plus the amazing feign death addition, making them the best choice of any melee class for this trio.

[Vexenu]

The trio of non-Enchanter POWER trios for maximum style and effectiveness:

Monk/Shaman/Necro
IKS/IKS/IKS

Monk/Shaman/Bard
HUM/BAR/ELF

Mage/Mage/Mage
GNM/GNM/GNM

[Rimitto]

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

WTF are you talking about. Look at the actual numbers in the game coding. Monks have the highest damage reduction. Then Pally/SK. And then Ranger (who also have less HP than Pally/SK).

This is inarguable. The random shit you're saying is wrong.



If we're talking things besides their damage reduction and HP when it comes to tanking, this is still not very accurate. Paladins have root and better heals than Rangers. They don't have an issue gaining aggro and they generally stop more damage than Rangers can, not just from their base stats but also from their other abilities.

There are a few things that can be argued in favor of Rangers:

1.) Snare - this is mostly irrelevant to the situations you're talking about. Root already provides crowd control. Where snare does help is keeping a Charm pet snared, providing more room and time to react on breaks.

2.) Access to 50% slow proc (whereas otherwise slow will just be 35%). While this can help, it's not reliable, and a Ranger tanking a 50% slowed target is still going to take more damage than a Monk tanking a 35% snared target. Compared to a Pally/SK, the Ranger may have a small advantage in damage reduction. I'd need to see some more detailed number crunching for that. However, the Pally getting a bigger return from C-heal and having better healing of their own certainly tips the scale in their favor overall.

3.) Better DPS (things dying faster = less damage taken). Some direct testing will be required to further debate this. I'd very much like to see someone set up a Paladin vs Ranger test scenario (will require "equal level" of gear) where the trio has to kill some very hard MOB. Let's see in which scenario the Cleric ends the fight with more mana. What I do know for sure is MONKS have the highest DPS and damage reduction, plus the amazing feign death addition, making them the best choice of any melee class for this trio.

You guys keep saying it's "the best" but every time I see a monk die in my party trying to pull something I keep thinking to myself "why didn't they just roll ranger or something useful". I can share a story of highkeep basement.. very mellow group at the time, had a ranger, a shaman, a wizard, myself. It was an okay party and we were splitting raiders and warriors fairly well thanks to harmony. An iksar shaman came down and wanted to party, he was a few levels above us, and had that fabled holgresh beads. He was using the eye to pull things, and completely messed up the camps we had split, which eventually lead to a huge train and killed the wizard and nearly everyone else. I think the ranger might have also died near the bank trying to run away. This monk got uppity after that and when called out for his lack of skill, he ranted off about how he has the best gear in the game and then logged off. After that the ranger began pulling again and things went smoothly from that point on for a few hours until the party ended.

That's just one example of the type of monks I've dealt with.


Paladins aren't all that much better from my experience. Sure they can tank, but I've seen rangers tank better, warriors and shadowknights are clearly the best tanks since they require so little healing simply by comparison. Paladins are about on average with the same as rangers, they both bleed, but rangers have higher technical skills than paladin. I've seen paladins struggle heavily with aggro before, and when they finally do get it, they just bleed. I've honestly NEVER seen a ranger have problems holding aggro, which is one of the primary rolls of the tank archetype. Yes, that's right, I've seen paladins fail to hold aggro, and when they do, they bleed.
Rangers bleed too, but they actually kill the monsters. Doesn't take a genius to see the enormous difference in these 2 statements, the dps actually matters from a healing standpoint, especially when talking about the "Best Trio" that doesn't include enchanter.

I'll try to explain this in mathematics since you're focused more on the code than the results. lets' say it takes me 12% mana to heal a paladin or a ranger from half health to full health. If the med time it takes for me to regenerate that 12% mana is more than the health loss of said paladin/ranger, I will be playing a losing game trying to catch up mana and will eventually have to call to stop pulls. That's simple math.
Let's say, for example, I only regenerate 6% mana before needing to heal again. This means that eventually I WILL have to call for a stop. At that point, the only difference in the party will how many monsters will be killed in that time. You can argue what things should be and how they're coded all day, but time is a factor that cannot be ignored, abused, or sidelined. Even a single round can be life or death, which leads to minutes of recovery, which leads to minutes of loss.

Trying to calculate all of these variables leads to one ultimate conclusion, that the "best" option is the most viable and least outlandish.
Much like how Tom Brady was the best Quarterback in the NFL, despite being so mediocre, the best party combination is the same way. It's stability that the BEST needs, not arbitrary stats.

Rangers can tank.
Rangers can pull.
Rangers can do CC.
Rangers can DPS.

These are inarguable facts.

I'll give you this question to think about....
Why do Monks always die on pulls but rangers never die on pulls? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[plzrelax]

That reminds me of a time when I was in a group in KC and there was this fancy ranger that joined in and he had all these fancy items like his epics and cool looking armor and stuff but then he literally died three times while we were playing and eventually just left and I was just sitting there laughing like lmao rangers suck

[Rimitto]

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

That reminds me of a time when I was in a group in KC and there was this fancy ranger that joined in and he had all these fancy items like his epics and cool looking armor and stuff but then he literally died three times while we were playing and eventually just left and I was just sitting there laughing like lmao rangers suck

willing to bet his main was a gnome.
pretty sure the monk I had issues with was also a main gnome.

[Toxigen]

I'm convinced Rim has never had a char higher than 40.

Guy is either clueless or the best troll we've seen in a while.

[Elizondo]

Paladin's ceiling for making big plays far exceeds any other tank class

It's not even close