I keep hearing this but what is it that makes them so bad? I have not played one (was looking at them) and it seems that they can dish out more damage than a sk or paladin and can even use kick to interupt spells. Not to mention they get sow/snare/tracking/archery.

Paladin stuns will be resisted just as much if not more than ranger snare. They also get root which lands less than snares. So this leaves paladins with no sow and a bigger heal that you can interupt with kick. SKs get some lifetaps but the damage is pretty minimal if you are in their face while they lifetap and kite them while they are higher in hp. SKs also get a snare that I did not think was as good as ranger snare and no archery or sow.

The plus I know is that these other hybrids wear plate. But in pvp its not "that" much better. I would rather have better damage and utility.
Am I missing something?

Here's a refresher on live 1999 resists:

if you had > 100 magic resist, you resisted everything. As in, snare/root/stun/etc would land about 5% of the time.


They were gimped warriors in PvP - particularly group PvP. For some reason Verant thought it fitting to make that class chain-based (with lower hps) even though their spellset was worse than paladins and their pvp damage was lower than shadow knights. That's why they got overhauled so drastically in Velious.

Yea I could see having no spells land anyways being a bane in pvp for all the hybrids as far as snares go. Why do you say SK damage is better? Lifetaps seem to have lower damage than autoattack/bow and he just uses a 2hander with double attack. Which in theory isnt duel wield double attack a bit more dps? And ranger even has higher weaponskills slightly.

Yeah...I only piddled with RZ and didn't go serious PvP until SZ, so I missed the "true classic" Ranger.

But...knowing the problems with resist mechanics beforehand, I really think a lot of that stuff is going to be overhauled for Red99.

Given that, Rangers wouldn't be too bad even limited to classic. (imo). Would be nice if they tuned the archery problems for the class too.

I'm no eq expert and I was usually drunk when I was playing on TZ back in 99-03 era... but I remember this, maybe will shed some light:

I can't count how many times I was sitting there with either of my "main" guys, an enchanter and/or necro.... let's say mid 40s, 50s... a SK comes from behind me and I'm LOADING PLEASE WAIT before I could put the beer back on the table often times. Usually some big bastard ogre or troll.

Then sometimes a Ranger might do the same thing but without the LOADING please wait part. After I get the first chuckle out, then we might have ourselves a fight.

just files from my memory.

Kick does not interrupt.

Paladins are MUCH harder to kill, have higher base defense/hp, and do nearly as much damage.

Shadow Knights can dish out unresistable spike damage that makes rangers cry (life leech + boil blood + harm touch?), and have actual utility in pvp with shadowstep and harmshield. And they also have better defense/hp. Do not kid yourself into thinking that SK damage is "minimal" in pvp.

You don't use DW in pvp (most of the time) because you aren't fighting NPCs, you're fighting a pc target that is moving constantly and frequently negating the fact that your weapons have low delay.

In the event that you NEED to use your spells or attack from a range, a SK's unresistable DoT/lifetap work a hell of a lot better than the Ranger trying to hit you with Immolate. Or a paladin using greater healing while a ranger is stuck using normal healing.

I work best with pictures.

SK:

http://www.fest21.com/files/images/M...LI.preview.jpg



Ranger:


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1bihBTkxZP...3049787-59.jpg


End result:


http://www.historyguy.com/sportshist...nny_liston.jpg

Yeup. If Ogres could be rangers they might be on the same playing field.