Ranger or Monk?

[webrunner5]

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

...What exactly do Rangers solo effectively?

Animals, just like a Druid does. Bow Kiting now and Fear kiting when Velious comes out.

Now, in Kunark, as a Ranger, you need to root or snare kite a mob down to like 60% with arrows then engage them Melee, snare and they turn at like 18%. So you only really get hit like 40% of the mobs health.

In Velious you just snare, fear animal, and Melee or shoot them in the ass with arrows when they run. Or Snare kite normal mobs like above in Kunark.

Either way it is a SLOW process and takes a lot of time and a shitpot full of arrows lol. On live or EQmac you get the AA Endless Quiver so you pretty much never run out of arrows and you only need one killer damage arrow. But here you can get the Tolan's Bracer but arrows suck damage wise. But a giant help non the less.

A Ranger is a pretty cool class solo. With Harmony easy to pull mobs outdoors. They just don't work out well in groups sad to say.

[webrunner5]

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

I'll admit I haven't played on Live since 2008, but I'm surprised by your comments because at that time Rangers were becoming more and more powerful with each expansion. I tanked for most of my groups and parsed on top for a couple of raid fights.

To address this statement the last 2 expansions have upped the HP, Damage that mobs do now are through the roof. Almost impossible to solo anything now. Like 3 expansions ago a Mage COULD solo but even that isn't happening now.

So a Ranger is just not able to survive anymore Tanking. Not a monk anymore either. I have pretty much stopped playing the 90 through 100 level zones because I like to solo and that ain't happening now. Mobs are just WAY over the top.

And now you have to do 50 Million Quests to even get into the high end zones. Almost impossible Solo.

[Ciroco]

Yeah, that's not what I consider effective.

Love being a Ranger, but "solo class" isn't one of the phrases I'd used to describe them.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.