Ranger or Monk?

[deneauth]

I like playing rangers because of their ability to track and their utility in groups, in an out door zone you can't go wrong with harmony. Works in Fear and Hate too. Soloing Allizewsaur in OOT on my 60 ranger right now so they do have solo ability. Quillmane cloaks, Hunter/Forager cycle in TT for farming if you are into that sort of thing, and comic relief haha!

[Clark]

Monk

[koros]

Rangers suck solo at the moment... one of the absolute worst solo classes in terms of kills/hour. But they rock in groups, no idea why you'd claim otherwise, especially so outdoors. I handled root CCing 5 mobs at a time while stuff was repopping for a total of 10 mobs in a KC basement group with no chanter and a dead cleric (no druid or sham either) last night. We made it no problem. Only a pally would have been able to pull off a similar feat and live (or maybe a good necro).

A ranger with clarity can put out near monk DPS, snap aggro, root CC, cast regrowth, tank well enough for almost all group content, pull outdoors, etc. This bs about rangers sucking in groups is well, bs.

[kaev]

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

Rangers suck solo at the moment... one of the absolute worst solo classes in terms of kills/hour. But they rock in groups, no idea why you'd claim otherwise, especially so outdoors. I handled root CCing 5 mobs at a time while stuff was repopping for a total of 10 mobs in a KC basement group with no chanter and a dead cleric (no druid or sham either) last night. We made it no problem. Only a pally would have been able to pull off a similar feat and live (or maybe a good necro).

A ranger with clarity can put out near monk DPS, snap aggro, root CC, cast regrowth, tank well enough for almost all group content, pull outdoors, etc. This bs about rangers sucking in groups is well, bs.

Seriously now, you people all need to solo a Paladin (or for the true masochist, a Warrior) at 40+ before announcing that class Xxx sucks at solo. Not being a demi-god solo (Enchanter, Necro, Druid) is not the same as sucks at solo. There are classes that define sucks at solo, and Ranger is not one of them.

But I agree, a well-played Ranger is great to have in a group.

[koros]

At 55, I have insane downtown soloing level 40ish dogs in KC if slow doesn't proc quickly. Warriors at least take way less damage, can heal with bloodpoints (and at 55 can solo almost non-stop), and Paladins also take way less damage for only a marginal dps fallout, and have better healing spells. Trust me.

Pre 50, rangers do solo alright. But I'd say that we're worse than any class but rogue after 50 in terms of potential kills/hr for xp.

[webrunner5]

[QUOTE=koros; A ranger with clarity can put out near monk DPS, snap aggro, root CC, cast regrowth, tank well enough for almost all group content, pull outdoors, etc. This bs about rangers sucking in groups is well, bs.[/QUOTE]

You are on Drugs if you think a Ranger can nearly out damage a Monk. They can't out damage a Warrior. Warriors are really not made to DPS like hell. Just take hits, hold agro.

There is a REASON nobody wants them. I have one myself. Good luck getting into a group or even soloing over 50. Hell even over level 30 is not easy.

[Lanuven]

Originally Posted by webrunner5 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are on Drugs if you think a Ranger can nearly out damage a Monk. They can't out damage a Warrior. Warriors are really not made to DPS like hell. Just take hits, hold agro.

There is a REASON nobody wants them. I have one myself. Good luck getting into a group or even soloing over 50. Hell even over level 30 is not easy.

Id sure like to see your comparison of these classes against each other with "on par" gear. You do realize rangers have spells that you cant parse unless you are the ranger right ?

Are you comparing epic monk to non-epic ranger? Then yeah, a ranger without 41% haste isnt going to keep up. Ive seen some of the weps warriors use in pickup groups and they are far from "good dps" weapons. 9/20 and 8/22 ( sarnak warhammer and yak skimmy) are the most popular from what I've seen. Then take into effect the DS the ranger should be casting if no one else is. Your not seeing the big picture of the ranger class. They don't do 1 or two things very well, they do multiple things about average. Utility class means just that.

[fadetree]

its true. This is primarily why I am waiting for Velious at 52. Plus it'll be fun not being 60 when vel drops.

[phacemeltar]

if youre playing on this server, i would recommend monk. all you get as a ranger is hate from players due to the xp penalty (which is in place for a reason), unless you can find a static group.

as far as the better class, i would say ranger hands-down. FD is great sometimes, but tends to get the cleric killed in a group. snare is imo the best in-game mechanic, plus forage and track make you a viable asset to lots of groups. Also if u can manage to make it to level 39 you can cast SoW.

my ranger has used arbitors sword and fbss since level 20 and the dps is noticeable when casting between swings, according to many groups ive had. Also dpsing with arrows/nukes is fun as hell, even though its broken until velious.

[fadetree]

? I can out-damage a warrior, and knights too for that matter. If you can't you might be doing some things less than optimally.