well, you necro'ed a two year old thread in order to spread ranger propaganda, so let's clear up some misconceptions here

if you don't mind the hybrid exp penalty.

root parking isn't referred to as "ghetto CC" because it's fabulous

rangers do not innately have slow (unless you actually meant snare)

this is insanely difficult to obtain and unreliable at best

this is item haste, not spell haste, and every class in the game has access to item haste. the only classes at this point that can boast self haste are monk and bard.

the amount healed by ranger heals as negligible at best. as a direct result, the amount of aggro gained by ranger heals is also negligible at best.

they do have decent aggro from spells, but cannot take a hit. they wear chain at best and gain defensive skills late. ranger disciplines make them reliable raid tanks for a pull, but it's short lived. i remember a strat we had on live to use rangers to tank VS, but it was a rotation of ranger after ranger after ranger once they died as soon as their disc wore off.

no. see above.

yes, rangers can be good outdoor pullers, but druids have the same spells without the hybrid penalty and can do everything else mentioned so far better. bards, paladins, or SKs can split pull without the zone limitations, and enchanters, monks, clerics, and necros can split pull without zone limitations or the hybrid penalty.

at 39

at 55

not really :(

rangers are the most poorly implemented class in everquest until the introduction of AA's in luclin. there's really no more discussion necessary. the jack of all trade, master of none title is reserved for bards.

i wouldn't go so far as to say it's a liability to have a ranger in your group, but if you don't mind the exp penalty and need another melee without any special attacks and spells that have very little effect... well, i cannot think of any situation it would be desirable to have a ranger at this point.

druids have much better heals while still having the adaptability, monks/bards are much better pullers, war/sk/pal are much better tanks, rogues/monks are much better melee DPS

ranger is undisputedly the worst class. period.

plus, it doesn't help the ranger image when fennixad is just constantly AFK in groups

Rangers have dual wield - exactly how bad is their dps in say, vanilla EQ, compared to other classes?

I mean a couple of ykeshas and I'm pretty sure they do more sustained dps than wizards

In vanilla Ranger was superior to Warrior in a lot of ways, I knew a number of Warriors who rerolled as Rangers out of disgust in '99 (yay rubicite). In Kunark Rangers gained little (comparatively) and fell well behind. Overgeared Ranger is decent tank/puller in outdoor xp group.

edit: xp penalty is beyond retarded

Just thought I should point out, although late in their bard lives, they are the masters of movement speed buff in groups. Selo's Song of Travel sir.

monks and rogues have dual wield but also have special attacks. rogues have backstabs and monks have all of their different types of kicks and punches, both of which can be a substantial increase to DPS.

rangers just have simple 5 damage kicks, and they cap lower than warriors or monks.

so you could say that the ranger DPS is equal to the rogue DPS if you removed backstab or the monk dps if he didn't have his kicks or punches.

(bards also have dual wield, but never learn double attack)

so in all, ranger DPS would be very similar to warrior DPS, which is unfortunate considering warriors are not a DPS class.

those are tank weapons because they proc a DD+stun. i do not believe rangers would out DPS a wizard with C2 by just twinking proc aggro weapons. he definitely wouldn't live longer.

By the rubicite reference I think you mean because rubicite was like plate and gave access to plate to classes that could only wear chain?

There was more broken with Warriors back in '99 than just rubicite though - they had the same hp/ac/whatever as hybrids without any of the spells.

This got patched up in the summer of '99 though and resulted in more HP, AC, and crippling blows etc. I believe.

Maybe. But my classic experience was anyone getting a SSoY that could find one because it was pretty much the best 1hs available outside the planes.

we're well past that at this point in the game. basic kunark weapons are much better than SSoY as far as DPS is concerned.

Rangers are much better than people give them credit for.

* Their melee dps is very similar to warriors (and like warriors they need vp/epic/deep sky gear to make it happen. Most of the reason people think rogues and monks are so much better is that their epics are easy)
* They can sneak in DoTs, Call of Flame, and bow shots on the pull. I think a well played ranger can do pretty well on the dps front
* The Earthcaller is great in groups (rangers can tank slowed mobs just fine) and solo. So is the Dark Cloak of the Sky - a Ranger can haste themselves to 70% (!!) with the epic
* Snare is great in zones like Sebilis with the new run code
* Great utility with tracking, cancel magic, bind affinity, off heals, natureskin etc

I know Klubba and Bompoi have duoed the fungi king, even before Bompoi was 60. And this is just indoors, outdoors rangers get SoW and Harmony making them very, very good pullers. Velious will help their case considerably as well with group +atk buffs and weaponshield discipline and hybrid casting haste and the removal of the xp penalties.

In fact in Velious I think they are pretty reasonable; in Kunark they are a bit weak but not nearly as bad as say a Druid.

no? rangers can't bind.

http://wiki.project1999.org/Dark_Cloak_of_the_Sky = spell haste clicky


Splorf probably meant bind sight, not bind affinity.