What makes Rangers worse tanks than Shadow Knights or Paladins?

[webrunner5]

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

I dunno if any1 has written this, or if the server admins have done something funky with the AC algorithms, but the way AC worked for the longest time is based on the type and class.
You take total ac, and then depending on your class only a certain percentage of it actually counts.
Warriors get 90% effectiveness
other plate is 75% or 80%
chain 50%
leather 25%
cloth 10%

so a warrior with 1000 AC effectively has 900 AC, where a wizard with 1000 AC effectively has 100, and a Ranger's 1000 AC would only be 500

the only thing that is counted as "Hard AC" meaning it has 100% effectiveness are certain buffs and shields. This allows Pallies and SK's to have a nice boost because they use shields, and most priest classes can as well to help if they are bad at dealing with heal agro.

Like I said in the beginning tho, this was how Sony did AC for the first years, leading up well past PoP. It has been changed at some point on live servers as avoidance tanking is almost more important then AC, and I'm not positive when they made the swap - whether before or after titanium.

Very interesting observation, and a correct one also. But there is a lot of other factors in classes, like damage mitigation, dodge, parry, skill caps etc., that effect how good a class is or not taking damage toe to toe. A Warrior is just hands down the best to just get beat on. And a Ogre one at that. There is a reason there is Tanks and why others are not.

The original Devs really did a sort of scary good job of figuring out a lot of crazy things in this game at the start. Some smart people for sure. They got some things wrong, but a hell of a lot of it right.

But I think, on here, that AC is sort of broken until you get past 43, 44ish and I think then it does matter. Pretty big time. But maybe Nilbog, Rogean know more than we remember, and I am sure of that, at least for me. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Good post.

[Trosh]

Yeah, I read the first couple pages, and they were oozing with the skill comparisons, so I figured I would address the AC question in original post. AC is huge, because rangers will get hit 2x harder then warriors, but so are skills because they will also get hit like ~20% more frequently.

[webrunner5]

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

Yeah, I read the first couple pages, and they were oozing with the skill comparisons, so I figured I would address the AC question in original post. AC is huge, because rangers will get hit 2x harder then warriors, but so are skills because they will also get hit like ~20% more frequently.

That is part of the problem that I have no clue why in the original game, was that Rangers have and can keep agro like hell. And they have Taunt, WHY do they need that clicky skill?? But they are a bitch to heal as a healer because they are squishy, and they are taking agro off the Tank who needs to keep it to keep the group alive. But your numbers will change you have stated in Velious. They are closer to a Warrior DPS wise and stats wise, and will put out more damage. But as you said they wear chain at best and Warriors wear plate. And in reality a Warrior is just something to beat on, not a DPS champion. Same way with a Paladin. But a Warrior in Zerker mode is just plain scary DPS wise, but risky stuff for him and the group. As a healer like I was, I, at times, to save the group, you had to let the Warrior stay in Zerker mode to save the group. But is was some heart pounding stuff as the healer trust me. I NEVER wanted to let anyone die in a group. It was my job to keep them safe.

I guess the original Devs, like I have said, wanted them to be a solo class, and that is what they should be. Who knows? This is a interesting crazy game. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[iruinedyourday]

Originally Posted by webrunner5 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I guess the original Devs, like I have said, wanted them to be a solo class, and that is what they should be. Who knows? This is a interesting crazy game. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Im sure I'm not the only one but i wish they made them be able to turn into a wizzard class with archery. That woulda been fun, if they came up with like a bard/wizard mechanic for archery.

[koros]

Originally Posted by webrunner5 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That is part of the problem that I have no clue why in the original game, was that Rangers have and can keep agro like hell. And they have Taunt, WHY do they need that clicky skill?? But they are a bitch to heal as a healer because they are squishy, and they are taking agro off the Tank who needs to keep it to keep the group alive. But your numbers will change you have stated in Velious. They are closer to a Warrior DPS wise and stats wise, and will put out more damage. But as you said they wear chain at best and Warriors wear plate. And in reality a Warrior is just something to beat on, not a DPS champion. Same way with a Paladin. But a Warrior in Zerker mode is just plain scary DPS wise, but risky stuff for him and the group. As a healer like I was, I, at times, to save the group, you had to let the Warrior stay in Zerker mode to save the group. But is was some heart pounding stuff as the healer trust me. I NEVER wanted to let anyone die in a group. It was my job to keep them safe.

I guess the original Devs, like I have said, wanted them to be a solo class, and that is what they should be. Who knows? This is a interesting crazy game. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Rangers weren't that squishy in classic. The main issue was skillcap misalignment from 50-60 vs pure melee mixed with a ridiculous exp penalty. Also, as casting time on higher level spells increased, they became more ineffective vs just meleeing while in combat.