Cant Decide! (Bard or Ranger)

[Poison85]

I've heard that bards melee and that they are spell casters. I've heard that rangers are bowmen, but they do better with melee. Are bards more melee or are rangers more melee? I've also heard that almost everyone has made a bard, is that true? :confused: Would appreciate any help. :)

EDIT: Are bards as hated as people say they are?

[loramin]

Bards are hated when they swarm kite (fight a lot of monsters at once) because it makes it harder for others to kill stuff. The rest of the time everyone loves them ... but I don't think it's true that "almost everyone" has a bard.

Both classes melee primarily (Rangers can do some interesting stuff with archery, especially with certain soloing styles, but in general they melee). Technically only Rangers "cast spells", but Bards get songs which are very similar to spells.

Bards are, in my opinion, more powerful than Rangers. The two are similar, but Bards get plate (Rangers get chain). Bards can charm, Rangers can't. Rangers can track better, but both can track. Bard's can't heal, they can only speed up regen ... but Ranger healing isn't great. The main thing Rangers have is greater DPS and animal fear kiting (which let's them solo better than most melee/hybrids ... but bards are still probably the best melee/hybrid soloers).

All that being said, you should play whatever most appeals to you. There will always be more powerful and less powerful classes, but A) this server would be a very boring place if everyone only played the most powerful classes, B) if you pick a class just because it is/isn't popular/powerful you're not going to enjoy playing it, C) "powerful" is not one set thing, it varies by context.

One final thought: because they try to "twist" multiple songs at once (which involves hitting the same 4+ keys over and over every few seconds) Bards are by far the hardest class in the game on your body. If you play one be sure to practice proper ergonomics or you will give yourself carpal tunnel.

[Samoht]

Personally, I wouldn't play either. Rangers are gimp and Bard song twisting can be hazardous to your health.

The classes themselves are not comparable. One is a melee DPS class and the other is a melee support class.

Ranger damage is comparable to a Rogue without backstab and level 9 Druid spells. Their only good feature is the ability to track.

Bards are like a hybrid Enchanter-Rogue-Ranger class that wears plate armor. They are truly a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none class. They can track short distances, pull with speed and lull, CC, charm, add an insignificant amount of melee DPS (sometimes with just an empty hand), sing mana songs when they're in the healer/caster group, sing resist and haste song when they're in the melee/tank group, open some locked doors. Although it's probably not advised to try to do it all at the same time. They also have the easiest path leveling to 60. Bards will find groups much easier than Rangers, too.

Overall, Bard is actually a diverse class that's fun to play. Twisting songs is not.

If you're trying to decide on a new main, I like self-sufficiency as a factor in deciding what class to play. Bard definitely fulfills that better than Ranger. But Enchanter, Shaman, Druid, Necro, Cleric, Mage, or Wizard would each be a better fit with me than having to twist songs.

[Troxx]

Rangers:
-do less focused damage than rogues, monks, mages, necromancers
-damage comparable to a warrior
-track can be a huge boon depending on where/what hunting
-situationally are assets via snare, regen (higher lvs if none other can cast)
-root cc could be situationally useful
-unresistable harmony outside is amazing
-could tank if needed (aggro is easy) but not ideal.

Summary: *modest* damage dealer with some extras that could be useful or might not be worth anything. A smart and well played ranger is an asset but not really min/max.



Bard
-some of the lowest melee damage in the game, comparable to a paladin or shaman pet unless they have raid gear and even then it is bad
-can track but short range
-can lull effectively in all zones, resistable but works everywhere
-can lock down multiple mobs via mez. when focusing on this job. The fewer mobs to lock down the more they can focus on other jobs
-can short duration charm as means of cc while adding some dps
-can provide up to 50% haste for the group in the absence of enchanter/shaman
-some nifty group buff songs for combat
-lv 55 cantana gives more mana regen than clarity 2 and stacks with everything
-regen component of cantana and (pre 55) regen from level 6 song are modified by lute effectively giving your entire group 2 fungis that stack with everything
-Nivs as a niche is 5 more hp regen modifiable by lute and stacks with the other song line allowing you to give nearly THREE fungis when combined with the above lines to the whole group
-mana pulse is a flat 7 per 3 second song that stacks with everything
-it is possible to stack up to 72dps sustained in dots once all are loaded onboard at level 60 but you can't sing anything else
-faster and more mobile than any class in the game.
-hold aggro better than any other class. AC is ok but his are low. They can get the job done.
-can pump resists up insanely high
-Cannot do all of the above at the same time and need to stay flexible and constantly adapt to the needs of the group.

Summary: bard melee sucks. Bad bards focus on meleeing. Good bards do all the other stuff and melee as an afterthought. Bards do their best by making everyone else's job easy. they solo for fast xp. Good ones are always busy.

Did that help?

[Fasttimes]

That's with melee ranger with bfg and trueshot do rogue comparable damage.

Edit : with my moderate weapons and raid buffs I've hit 77dps with melee on vindi. Could do better with bard which I didn't have. So it's not that bad and I don't have bis weapons.

[Samoht]

That's with melee ranger with bfg and trueshot do rogue comparable damage.

What do you do for the 70 minutes while Trueshot is on CD?

[Fasttimes]

What do you do for the 70 minutes while Trueshot is on CD?

wait on the next dragon. or melee, just with less effeciency

[GinnasP99]

What do you do for the 70 minutes while Trueshot is on CD?

Resummon all the arrows you just used :D

[Stonewallx39]

Ranger is less strenuous. It's pretty weak early on power wise, he basically just a melee with a few useful spells. Ranger really becomes fun around 30+. Heavy gear dependency.

Bard is constant interaction with the key board. You might not be able to enjoy group interactions/pick up groups due to being too distracted to mingle.

Bard has major upside for fun factor and can make you feel elite. You really have to work for it. Bard is definitely less gear and more skill dependent.

[Doctor Jeff]

Resummon all the arrows you just used :D

You lose a lot of damage by using garbage summoned arrows

[Jimjam]

What do you do for the 70 minutes while Trueshot is on CD?

Have you never played a ranger?! Send tells to clerics for rezzes of course!

[Superranger]

Ranger best class, Bard 2nd best class but playing well in group and twisting non stop will drive a man mad and kill your hand

[Ravenlok]

Ranger is less strenuous. It's pretty weak early on power wise, he basically just a melee with a few useful spells. Ranger really becomes fun around 30+. Heavy gear dependency.

Just to piggy back on this thread, I've seen this on the forum a lot i.e. bard is a steady and strong rise in power as they level but with ranger it really amps up quickly but NOT until you start getting to higher levels. Is there a particular spell or set of spells that make that the case? Is there ONE piece of gear that is particularly important for Rangers (especially to solo)?

[Troxx]

Excluding aoe kiting,

Grouping:
Bards are actually a powerhouse class very early in the game. Hymn of restoration at level 6 and modified by lute at 8 makes bards the best healer class in the early game. Lull at 8 establishes bards as a pulling class very early in the game with first haste at 10. Though melee dps comparatively sucks at the high end, in the early game they hold their own well. As melee dps declines with levels, bards acquire the more complete toolset that sustains the powerhouse status in the late game. Unlike traditional 'powerhouse' classes, bards are a lot more ill-defined. The only role they do undeniably best is mana regen potential, but they can pull off crazy stuff in ways no other class can. With the monk fd/sneak changes, bards in many cases make more capable pullers in a lot of areas. Mostly, bards excel by sliding neatly into almost any duo/trio/group improving everyone else's performance and efficiency while being able to fill almost any role. They can even function as the primary source of heals allowing a group to get by with a non-cleric priest just for backup healing. High dps isn't something the bard can pull off but if the group needs literally nothing else from the bard it's possible to stack up to and maintain 70+ Dps in dots between single target chants and aoe dots. The last few dots in this stack aren't available until the last few levels with the longest dot available at 60.

Solo:
Bards just own. Again, excluding aoe kiting - charm killing paired with dots makes for killing speeds faster than necro/chanter/druid. Low level charm takes no mana until you're hunting over level 37 mobs. Higher level charm carries you to 60. Alternately, fear kiting with dots/melee ... lots of options. Class is ridiculously mobile - escape and travel is always easy.

Most bards are/were rolled with AoE kiting and powerleveling in mind - which is a shame. Most bards are pretty bad and don't understand their toolset.



As for rangers ... they're never a powerhouse class. They are capable in good hands and have a good set of tools. Gear twinking notwithstanding, they always lag behind the real dps classes, handily owned by rogues, monks, mages, and necros. Warriors generally put out as much or more dps. Tanking is decent but mitigation woes make lots of other classes (including bard) better choices. At the high end things are not any better.

Rangers are always decent. Sometimes they're excellent (harmony is amazing). They synergize well with other classes, but rarely in the most ideal of ways. Rangers aren't and never will be on this server a powerhouse class. On live servers AM3 and endless quiver made them premier dps in Luclin and lower PoP. The niche of archery then slowly declined in following expansions.

[Jimjam]

Troxx, it is interesting you mention mitigation woes. It is commonly cited against rangers.

Looking at parses against XP mobs, I have found that rangers actually can mitigate pretty similarly to any other tanking class until you are fighting 50+ mobs. I suppose this is due to the fact that every class rolls at level 1 with a full set of thurgadin quest armor (hyperbole), which lessens the importance of the defence skill.

However, rangers' low hp gives the impression they are taking bigger hits than they are (and reduces cheal effectiveness). Where rangers really struggle is actually avoidance: their defence skill of 200 means they avoid significantly worse than any other tank options.

On top of this, are we familiar with the knight defence red skill bug? Where knight defence is a few point lower than it should be? Rangers suffer something similar with their dodge/parry kills being in the red at low 100s instead of 200ish. Rangers are missing a large chunk of their ability to avoid hits to the front.

I always try to work with the positives though. The fact is, rangers are a sufficient tank for most group content. With velious it is easy to stack AC, and generally groups will have someone slowing and someone providing AC buffs. Any deficit rangers suffer in avoidance (whether low defence skill or bugged dodge/parry) is not devastating to a group, really all it achieves is improve the dps done by the rangers damage shield!

[Troxx]

It's not just an illusion of their health dropping fast due to low hp totals. They take more damage in terms of mitigation (low defense capped at 200 + chain armor archetype) and avoidance (melee defensive skills not yet improved). Bards also suffer low relative hp totals but have high defense caps and wear plate armor. Ranger defense and parry get improvements soon to 220/185 respectively but bard defensive skills also get a nice bump. Bard aggro is unparalleled and mobs hit camp preslowed to 35%.

Point is - not an illusion.

Rangers make perfectly adequate tanks and perfectly adequate dps. Snap aggro allows for immediate slow and no aggro bounce, both of which are a lot more important than differences in damage intake. Having 1-2k less hp and worse mitigation matters in very few locations.

Back to the OPs question - it really boils down to how you want to play. Bards are stupidly busy. Rangers are a lot more laid back. Both are a blast to play.

[Jimjam]

It's not just an illusion of their health dropping fast due to low hp totals. They take more damage in terms of mitigation (low defense capped at 200 + chain armor archetype) and avoidance (melee defensive skills not yet improved). Bards also suffer low relative hp totals but have high defense caps and wear plate armor. Ranger defense and parry get improvements soon to 220/185 respectively but bard defensive skills also get a nice bump. Bard aggro is unparalleled and mobs hit camp preslowed to 35%.

Point is - not an illusion.

Rangers make perfectly adequate tanks and perfectly adequate dps. Snap aggro allows for immediate slow and no aggro bounce, both of which are a lot more important than differences in damage intake. Having 1-2k less hp and worse mitigation matters in very few locations.

Back to the OPs question - it really boils down to how you want to play. Bards are stupidly busy. Rangers are a lot more laid back. Both are a blast to play.
I'm aware of the difference in defence skill and equipment archetype.

From my personal experience (parsed) in group content there is not much difference in average hit between my ranger and the other melees.

Perhaps my ranger is overgeared for the content he does. Perhaps I'm more conscientious about getting my ac buffed than other players? Perhaps it is easy to reach the level of diminishing returns for AC on the content I am doing. I don't know; this is what my parses have told me; average hit is broadly the same, avoidance is a hell of a lot worse.

In fairness, I think there may be a sectional bias here on my part. I'd be happy to tank seb King groups with a mediocrely geared mid 50s warrior, but wouldn't want to do so on my ranger with much better equipment. Based on this moment of insight, I guess I may be getting the results I see because I ensure I only tank stuff which I know is trivial for a ranger to tank?

For reference, my ranger has about 210 AC at 58, which is still quite far from the 'cap' for the level.

[Jimjam]

Sorry to double post, but pulling up some numbers from a pervious thread where I mentioned mitigation:

I took a look at my logs for 20k+ of damage to my ranger and a few paladins tanking some of the tougher mobs in KC (Spectral Protectors, Spectral Knights, Skeletal Warlord, Skeletal Scryer, Skeletal Protectors, Skeletal Captain, Skeletal Berserker, Knight of Sathir, Hangnail, Decayed Prisoners, Caller of Sathir, A Drolvarg Warlord, a drolvarg captain, a drolvarg bodyguard, a cursed hand, a construct).

Paladin 1 (level 51)
Average hit 70,
Real hits 53%

Ranger (lvl 52-53)
Average hit 64
Real hits 51%

Paladin 2 (level 55)
Average hit 66
Real hits 43%

Paladin3 (level 56)
Average hit 66
Real hits 46%

[Troxx]

My 60 bard in full visible thurg and some crappy non-visibles is sitting at 200; admittedly I could pretty cheaply add another 30 raw AC without too much difficulty and use a shield if I needed. I just haven't found the need as a bard - mobs are always slowed at least 35% by the time they're engaged. I also learned a long time ago to carry a stack of dots. On tougher content I make sure I've got symbol to help with the 1-2k hp I have less than a knight or warrior.

210ac raw worn AC is quite good for a 58 ranger - higher than most for sure. At that level and that AC tanking all of KC, most of seb, and most of velks is trivial. Comparably geared and leveled knights, warriors, and monks will still do better - but at that point you've passed the functional.

An ranger of average gear and low to mid 50s will have a much harder time than an average geared/leveled knight/war/monk/bard.

[Troxx]

Sorry to double post, but pulling up some numbers from a pervious thread where I mentioned mitigation:

I took a look at my logs for 20k+ of damage to my ranger and a few paladins tanking some of the tougher mobs in KC (Spectral Protectors, Spectral Knights, Skeletal Warlord, Skeletal Scryer, Skeletal Protectors, Skeletal Captain, Skeletal Berserker, Knight of Sathir, Hangnail, Decayed Prisoners, Caller of Sathir, A Drolvarg Warlord, a drolvarg captain, a drolvarg bodyguard, a cursed hand, a construct).

Paladin 1 (level 51)
Average hit 70,
Real hits 53%

Ranger (lvl 52-53)
Average hit 64
Real hits 51%

Paladin 2 (level 55)
Average hit 66
Real hits 43%

Paladin3 (level 56)
Average hit 66
Real hits 46%

Numbers are always good but those don't tell a whole lot. Best way to get a better idea would be to pull a single mob unslowed and with sufficient healing to get as little as a 7-10 minute parse on the exact same mob (same everything). This would let you compare two tanks much more accurately as all other factors would be equal. If you're interested in doing this I can always bring my shaman. With torpor heals are limitless in a place like KC. Can always root a mob so a warrior or knight can just stand there and get hit.

Important things to look at:

Avoidance rate
Demage interval spread
Average dps
Average hit

Can repeat this process across multiple zones.

[Jimjam]

Agreed, it's not that empirical. It would be better to just face one mob on its own for the 20k damage than have it spread across a bunch of mobs. You do have the avoidance rate and average hit here, which gives the two measures we were discussing (avoidance and mitigation), but you are right the spread would also be salient.

All the stuff there is about lvl 48-51, so not that wide a spread of levels. It is fairly representative of what you would be fighting overall if you were camping hands. Each tank did take 20k or more damage, i.e. 300+ hits, so it was pretty extensive.

It really surprised me to see such a similar average hit across the board.

I believe at 52/53 I was sitting at about 190 AC. More or less ivy etched with easily soloable high AC items like targishan's mask and a couple of crystal chitin items from grouping at velks zone in.

Edit: oh and yeah, I would be interested in testing worn ac vs defensive skill caps, etc if you are too?

[Troxx]

Avoidance and average hit are only relevant if you're fighting the exact same mobs at the exact same levels. In a zone like KC - that's important. You've got a very wide range of mob types and level for each mob. Mobs higher than you will hit you more often and for harder. Mobs that are lower level will miss you more and hit for less. VS pit mobs and drolv BGs hit a lot harder than sentries or curates at the zone in. Data is always good, but you have to be very careful looking at large, irregular wads of data. One tank getting more or less of any mob type (highly likely) can very VERY heavily skew results.

Average hit means very little if you don't at least have a strict control of mob type.

To parse defense with any semblance of accuracy you have to go to great lengths to control whatever variables you can.

PS: I'm always happy to parse and gather data. I'm genuinely curious. I spent an insane amount of time doing this for the infamous hp vs AC wars that raged on thesteelwarrior and evil gamer.net back in the day.

[Jimjam]

I just combined a fight of cursed hands, constructs, drolvarg bodyguards, drolvarg warlords, constructs of sathir, decayed kylong iksar, decayed soldiers, knights of sathir, specral knights and spectral protectors from today. We killed other mobs, but these ones are around the same level so the only ones I included.

My 58 ranger was sharing tanking with a 54 monk.

average hit taken:
Ranger: 71
Monk: 70

real hits:
Ranger: 51%
Monk: 39%

riposte, parry/block, dodge
R 4.5, 6.5, 6%
M 2.5, 19, 6%

I think excluding the decayed prisoners (unlike the sample of the 53 ranger vs the paladins) skewered the average hit up a little bit, but as you can see the results are similar; average hit of 70ish, 50% avoidance rate for the ranger, with the monk avoiding even better than the paladins (thanks to block being better than parry on top off the improved defence skill).

This supports my assertion: for most xp content rangers can attain equivalent mitigation to the other melee classes, but it is their avoidance and hp total that let them down.

[Troxx]

58 vs 54 in KC will have a large impact on incoming damage. Was the monk under the weight cutoff? Comparable gear to you?

The take away I see is that a 54 monk took 25% less damage than a 58 ranger with very high AC for level. Getting hit 39% of the time vs 51% of the time. That same monk in same gear plus 4 levels will be mitigating and avoiding a lot better due to relative npc/pc level.

[Jimjam]

The take away I see is that a 54 monk took 25% less damage than a 58 ranger with very high AC for level. Getting hit 39% of the time vs 51% of the time. That same monk in same gear plus 4 levels will be mitigating and avoiding a lot better due to relative npc/pc level.

Exactly the take away I was trying to point out. People cite mitigation as the ranger weakness. With gear and AC buffs it isn't that much of a problem (and note: my rangers gear isn't that great. It's not like it is full skyshrine. It is largely stuff I have found in the field while travelling or XPing). The problem is their low avoidance (and I jokingly mentioned that at least their poor avoidance improves their dps from damage shields).

54 vs 58 won't make much difference btw; my defence skill capped at level 40, my worn AC almost falls within the level 54 cap (I have ~210 worn, the 54 cap is 205). Parry/dodge are bugged so they haven't raised beyond the old caps either.

For reference this is my gear: orc fang earring x 2, circlet of talon, targishin's bone mask, griffon talon necklace, Ivy Etched Tunic, Imbued Granite Spaulders, dark cloak of the skies, spider fur belt, skyshrine quest sleeves, bracer of vajeen, hero bracer, crystal chitin guantlets and boots, gladiator chain leggings, velium fire wedding ring, some 15 AC ring from ToV, a wurm slayer, swiftwind and either an orc impaler or a spectral bow. Almost all of this you can acquire equivalent or better in xp or solo locations, so I am reluctant to call a largely self found toon 'decently geared'. I think the only thing I bought was the wurm slayer and was gifted the bracer of vajeen at a low level.

[Samoht]

What happens when you compare your stats to a tank instead of a monk? And then separately to a tank with a shield?

[Jimjam]

What happens when you compare your stats to a tank instead of a monk? And then separately to a tank with a shield?

TBH I am interested to find this out. Especially the shield part!

I already included a compilation of fights comparing the ranger to several paladins a few posts up. (I foolishly included decayed prisoners in that compilation as I forgot they were lower than everything else at hands/basement).

Troxx I have a chunk of free time coming up soon if you fancy spending a few hours on your shaman comparing several AC builds? I have a warrior we can also use.

[Troxx]

Where a mob hits on the damage interval spread is a direct function of the mobs attack level, your REAL (not displayed) AC, and the relationship between the mobs level and yours. KC is a zone where you effectively overpower the content at or around 56-57.

There is indeed a big difference (both avoidant and mitigation) between 54 and 58 in KC. Having a difference in level spread 4 levels deep in a zone like KC is quite huge.

At 58 tanking KC on my monk feels like god mode, and that's after liquidating the monks fungi and black panther armor to fund my shamans torpor. Right now I'm rocking nodrop crescent crap from dalnir. Only items worth mentioning are weapons, epic, dragonborn sash haste and a thurg quest bracer. I'm anal about staying under weight limit and float buffless at 950 displayed AC.

[Jimjam]

Hmm, that is very interesting. Don't remember hearing that a level comparison was involved in mitigation before. Always thought it was straight attack vs mitigation ac.

That doesn't explain why the ranger tanked similarly at 52/53 to 58 in terms of average hit.

If I include decayed prisoners and look at the average hit for all melee at 58, the average hit was 64, the exact same figure as it was at 53*. Kind of depressing as there is no improvement at all, despite raising worn AC and the supposed worn cap!

I suspect your monk is still mitigating well at 58 with bare bones gear it may be due to a mixture of the monk low weight bonus, an increased defence skill and an undertuned mob attack value in KC?

It is certainly an interesting point you raise! If your monk and shaman are on separate accounts do you have a friend who can play one of them so we can throw him into the tests too?


*I realised that my 58 ranger vs 54 monk comparison used the average hit of 'hit' type attacks, so was excluding crush/slash/pierce and importantly kick/bashes too. So for my 58 vs 53 ranger I have included them to have a like-for-like comparison.

[Troxx]

TBH I am interested to find this out. Especially the shield part!

I already included a compilation of fights comparing the ranger to several paladins a few posts up. (I foolishly included decayed prisoners in that compilation as I forgot they were lower than everything else at hands/basement).

Troxx I have a chunk of free time coming up soon if you fancy spending a few hours on your shaman comparing several AC builds? I have a warrior we can also use.

Would love to. I can donate a 60 bard and 58 monk to the pool for tanking. When not gathering data on those two melee I can heal endlessly on shaman vs an unslowed mob to get lots of data points. Ideally we would want to use literally the same mob - do you have access to a healer that can root for gathering data on my two melee? Bard can nearly solo heal himself with Nivs + cantana.

I'm in Amsterdam for a few more days before heading back home. I play Euro time zone.

I fully expect that with gear power otherwise equal mitigation will break down to (100 as warrior baseline) - nobody with a shield:

Warrior 100
Pal/Sk 110-115
Monk at weight 115-120
Bard 115-120
Ranger 125-130

Factor in avoidance and monk rivals warrior in total damage taken.

Functionally, ignoring hp totals: warrior >= monk > knight > bard > ranger

On hard content factoring in hp AND cleric to complete heal and excluding aggro dynamics ...

Warrior >> knight > monk >>> bard > ranger

Both ranger and bard will benefit greatly with next patch. Ranger defense bumps to 220 with parry 185. Bard parry jumps from like a pitiful 75 to 185 as well.

[Jimjam]

I don't have a lot of options for healing. My ranger can do about 100/second heal and 10/tick regen (mana permitting). My static group does have a 50ish cleric that I could borrow, though.

That is good news if ranger defence is going to be bumped up, I was under the impression that was a post Luclin change so I won't get my hopes up! TBH I will miss all of that extra DS DPS I have been doing :P.

Something that might be interesting would be to test how the characters do naked? On corpse runs it always feels like I am taking a lot more max hits, even against greens.

Once we have that data point, we then see at what point adding worn AC seems to stop being effective? -This would be really useful information for anyone wanting to level up a character through the 50s!

Perhaps we should take this to PMs / new thread?

[Troxx]

http://www.ttlg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5782

Details of next patch.

-Rangers-

Rangers were the most complex class we looked at during this evaluation. Rangers were clearly lacking in their ability to tank, and also proved to be doing slightly less damage than was desirable. After evaluating several possible solutions, we made upgrades in both of these areas. Keep in mind, rangers are an offense-oriented hybrid, giving up the ability to tank well in exchange for doing similar damage to a warrior.

In order to put rangers in the right place offensively, we made two changes. First, we upgraded their Double Attack skill cap from 235 to 245. Additionally, we gave rangers an innate offensive bonus beginning at level 55, and increasing until level 60. This has the net effect of allowing them to double attack a bit more often, and hit harder on successful attacks. These two changes put the ranger exactly where we want him, doing approximately the same damage as a similarly equipped warrior.

Part of the balancing factor of the ranger is the inability to tank well. This penalty will remain, though we are making some changes to lessen it. Prior to this patch, rangers were taking more damage than we desired. After these changes take effect, rangers will tank better than they did, but not nearly as well as the knight, bard, and warrior classes.

We are raising the Defense skill cap for rangers. This increase begins at level 51, increasing a few points each level until it caps at 220. We are also raising the ranger’s Riposte skill cap to 185 starting at level 51 and scaling up to level 60.

Bards get:
-1hs/1hb to 250 (225 now)
-pierce to 240 (210 now)
-offense to 252 (225 now)
-same melee table as warriors (this will be huge)
-still do less than knights, but less than the new improved knights
-parry raised to 185 (currently a pitiful 75)
-defense stays at 252
-riposte stays at 75

Bards retain the advantage of greater defense and plate gear.
Rangers maintain avoidance with parry/riposte at 220/185 vs 185/75 bard

I'm cautiously excited to see what this actually does for our crappy dps. With luck, I'll be able to sustain 30 melee dps (lol).

[Jimjam]

Good to read! Looks like it just snuck in before luclin (which was start of December, and very messy release!)

[Onus]

It's a funny thing. Bards are lauded as a group class, which they definitely are. But, well, they are arguably the best soloer in the game. Just a quick google search of "swarm kiting" will show you what I mean. For instance, I get a level around every 20minutes by myself. That is something I could never do on my ranger or any other class.

Rangers are really fun, too. Your spells are situationally important - you are not a druid. Still, flamelick is invaluable and, actually, so is their little baby heal which everyone tends to disregard.

It is definitely more taxing to play a bard. Both classes are really fun. Bards are way more powerful/valuable. Also, bards can swarm kite with nothing more than a couple instruments. You can literally be NAKED and level faster than any other class.

GL

EDIT: I should add that swarm kiting is not for everyone. Simply, not everyone is actually able to do it/get the hang of it. Also, if you are on blue, getting a group may not be as big of an issue as it can be on red. Soloing on a ranger is definitely doable (lvl 54 almost entirely soloed as a ranger) but it is definitely not the fastest. *shrug* Try ranger until at least lvl 30 and do the same for bard. Both really start shining around that time, imo.

Bards are awesome in group and solo situations alike. Rangers...eh...I'd much rather group (if the group would even want me).

[Gustoo]

Bards are one of the most powerful classes in the game and we're not even close to being exploit d to full potential by many folks on live.

Leveling a bard without swarm kiting is a great way to learn to actually play the class.