Is warrior aggro greatly exaggerated?

[Snaggles]

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

yeah no...

It is silly to say the class that shares the same aggro spell that can pull mobs off charmed creatures (as done by druids in WW) is only a 'touch' higher in generating aggro compared to knights.

When considering Rangers vs Knights, the general consensus is that Rangers will often do more raw damage (DPS) than Knights in a damage-dealing role.

Here's why:

Knights often tank: Knights when tanking in groups and raids focus on generating and maintaining aggro, often through low level spell spamming, which reduces their melee damage output.

Rangers focus on damage if tanking: Often focusing on maximizing their melee utilizing damaging spells (nukes, DoTs) as well.

While Knights and Rangers both have fast casting melee spells Rangers get two snap aggro damaging nukes (Call of Flame and Calefaction)

Rangers offense is at 252 and knights are still at 225

Rangers 2H is 250 while knights are 225

Rangers Double Attack is 245 while knights are 235

Rangers have a number of buffs that *proc damage* (and while knights do too they aren't equal)

Better utility spells for damage: Just about every root they have does damage and snare is cheap to cast.

Sorry but Rangers can gather more aggro than knights faster, do more damage and damage taken in a controlled exping group is very manageable.

This thread should really be about:

Enchanter, Necro and Druid Charmed pets are the best tanks and damage dealers in exping groups
Rangers got good damage and massive aggro in exping groups
Warriors got good damage and some aggro in exping groups
Monks got good damage and some aggro in exping groups
Knights got some damage and have a touch more aggro than a warrior in exping groups

Rangers, SK, and Paladins can generate all the aggro in the world. Rangers don’t take hits nearly as well, nor have close to the hps on average, who cares if they make 20% more aggro? I tank VSR with my Paladin and don’t melee…exactly how I do it with my Ranger but with more concern.

Knights don’t lose dps when casting level 9 spells. You dont lose a swing and FoL is 1.5 seconds.

Calefaction and Call of Flame are low aggro spells.

Call of Sky or Call of Fire are very high aggro procs (micro-stun). Nobody buffs with that unless they are trying to stop gaters in PoH.

No ranger is casting dots unless you count flame lick.

Swing aggro is ratio and attack speed, not DPS. Attack isn’t aggro or raid tanks would get avatar (they don’t).

Aggro is a small piece of the puzzle. Even though in grind groups it’s most the puzzle (because xping isn’t hard). I’m a real ranger nerd but I’m not that delusional.

[Jimjam]

Rangers may make more aggro than knights, but that is irrelevant as knights already make more than enough.

Likewise, knights may tank better than rangers, but rangers can tank fungi king fine pre 60, what worse will they need to tank in an xp group?

I don’t think it matters who you have tanking in an xp group - you take what is available (or in a static you take what wants to be played).

[Snaggles]

Yea, agreed. Play what you want to play is most important. Of all the tanks mentioned unless stuff if slowed early a ranger will take a lot more damage than the rest. That doesn’t always matter though and between pulling and rooting for proximity aggro, a ranger can be just fine. If they are smart.

[Botten]

I just see this all as someone is upset about the aggro generation changes in general.

Then tries to invalidate either warriors or knights to get them agitated (in an uproar) enough in hopes of a reversal to the changes (with help from both sides; upset).

That is why when someone complains about aggro or damage from a tank in an exping group of all things I throw out ranger is better at both.

A kind of truthful bomb to so much the absurdity to the crying.

The reality is this type of patch was part of the roll out of Everquest patches. Probably because encounters were being trivialized by tanks spamming instant aggro items and damage spell types to gain aggro right away.

They were just trying to add some minor difficulty to game in hopes to make it more engaging.

[Goregasmic]

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

Rangers may make more aggro than knights, but that is irrelevant as knights already make more than enough.

Likewise, knights may tank better than rangers, but rangers can tank fungi king fine pre 60, what worse will they need to tank in an xp group?

I don’t think it matters who you have tanking in an xp group - you take what is available (or in a static you take what wants to be played).

Yeah, the biggest complaint about rangers is their damage mitigation falls off a cliff after 50 but most exp group zone content don't really have many mobs that are 50+ and/or a big threat. So you get an alright tank with decent DPS that can be a puller if you already have a tank. Don't know about y'all but usually when grouping I've found myself wishing for more DPS than sturdier tanks most of the time.

[zelld52]

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

Yeah, the biggest complaint about rangers is their damage mitigation falls off a cliff after 50 but most exp group zone content don't really have many mobs that are 50+ and/or a big threat. So you get an alright tank with decent DPS that can be a puller if you already have a tank. Don't know about y'all but usually when grouping I've found myself wishing for more DPS than sturdier tanks most of the time.

It's really unfair how far rangers mitigation falls off. I duod with a ranger with like 1100 AC and a green unslowed mob got him down to 50%. Rogues have better mitigation than rangers - and theyre supposed to be the ones actively evading combat and attacking from behind.

[kjs86z2]

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

War, Clr, Enc

fixed that for ya...don't think theres many camps that support 4x enchanters lol

[Naethyn]

Leveling my warrior during each pull I'd drink 5 brandies for imbibery aggro. Most people say it doesn't exist. What they don't consider is brandies lower your avoidance for easier berserk resulting in more crippling blows (aggro).

[Naethyn]

Also, alcohol tolerance goes to 255 no matter what skills window / wiki says.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by zelld52 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's really unfair how far rangers mitigation falls off. I duod with a ranger with like 1100 AC and a green unslowed mob got him down to 50%. Rogues have better mitigation than rangers - and theyre supposed to be the ones actively evading combat and attacking from behind.

I think it was snaggles that said they're the kings of cheese. High haste on gear, slow on weapons, run speed, snare/root, ranged attack, heals, DS, harmony for splitting, tracking. Higher dps than knights. Not as good for tanking but their kit is quite interesting. Rogues shouldn't have similar mitigation for sure but they basically backstab and CR and that's about it.