What makes Rangers worse tanks than Shadow Knights or Paladins?

[Lune]

Nothing OP, people are just a little lacking in analytical skills to draw their own conclusions other than "lul ranjur".

Rangers bring SK/Paladin snap agro and utility, with the addition of dps. There are a lot of groups out there with plenty of heals and slows to go around, and the limiting reagent in their leveling speed is DPS. Rangers are preferable to knights in those situations.

Of course this is all moot because monks are just an all around better choice than any of these classes for any role.

[Supaskillz]

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

Nothing OP, people are just a little lacking in analytical skills to draw their own conclusions other than "lul ranjur".

.

What? Sk's an pallies are far more efficient to ch than rangers. More hp, more ac, more dodge parry and riposte. Did you read any of the other posts?

I guess if fighting trivial mobs cleric mana is no concern.

Monks are sweet but as a rogue they are somewhat annoying as tanks in their ability to hold aggro. If I have a hybrid tank I have backstab everytime it pops and if evade fails it's no big deal. Monks I have to be careful or ping pong aggro.

[Lune]

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

What? Sk's an pallies are far more efficient to ch than rangers. More hp, more ac, more dodge parry and riposte. Did you read any of the other posts?

I guess if fighting trivial mobs cleric mana is no concern.

Monks are sweet but as a rogue they are somewhat annoying as tanks in their ability to hold aggro. If I have a hybrid tank I have backstab everytime it pops and if evade fails it's no big deal. Monks I have to be careful or ping pong aggro.

If you're in Sebilis, Chardok, HS, or any of the other high end group content, how often is your cleric going oom, really? The majority of groups in these places will have an enchanter or bard because they feel it's necessary, and have slows/support heals available. Put that shaman to work.

The vast majority of the group content people do with full groups on p99 is trivial content. The better groups are often the ones that kill faster. A ranger is unique in that they can provide knight-like snap agro while also providing DPS. A knight provides almost no DPS. When your cleric and shaman's mana isn't really an issue (Which is very often), a ranger is the better choice.

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

Should they tank over a knight?

Yes, usually. A knight's mitigation isn't superior enough that it justifies their near complete lack of dps. That's one of the reasons monk tanks are so awesome, too. You lose a bit of agro management, but you gain a lot of dps, and therefore a lot of efficiency.

[Brut]

Lower defense skillcap, race choices and chain equipment generally give them lower sta/hp/ac.

Can rangers battle-heal themselves that well anyway? I thought their best heal is like 180 or something lame. Sounds like same situation as SK that the 5.3second lifetap cast time isn't really worth it.

[thieros]

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

Sounds like same situation as SK that the 5.3second lifetap cast time isn't really worth it.

you crazy man! vampiric embrace(30hp procs) + lifetap weapson(khyldorn...87hp, epics...250hp) + 49 lifetap (280) every few minutes + drain spirit(226) on demand. sk self sufficient! we dont need clerics!

that being said, as a 60 cleric or a 60 torpshaman, any classes mentioned in this thread are fine: i've had rangers, sk's, pallies, monks tanking hs south/seb king & crypt. its all good man. rogues tanking crypt and hs south as well.

moral of the story, it doesnt matter, just dont be bad

[YendorLootmonkey]

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

Can rangers battle-heal themselves that well anyway? I thought their best heal is like 180 or something lame. Sounds like same situation as SK that the 5.3second lifetap cast time isn't really worth it.

The correct Ranger answer is:

You root the mob, step back to lead the Warrior to believe he finally got aggro off you, and then spam heal yourself with your shitty ranger heal while the warrior is feeling like a man for getting to tank.

[webrunner5]

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

The correct Ranger answer is: You root the mob, step back to lead the Warrior to believe he finally got aggro off you, and then spam heal yourself with your shitty ranger heal while the warrior is feeling like a man for getting to tank.

This man knows what he is talking about. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] But on paper a Ranger IS a solo class. They have all the tools to do it, and that is what they are good at. Come Velious they will be over the top. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Xer0]

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

This man knows what he is talking about. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] But on paper a Ranger IS a solo class. They have all the tools to do it, and that is what they are good at. Come Velious they will be over the top. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

over the top? maybe a bit of an exaggeration and the words you're looking for are "mildly improved upon"?

From what I've gathered ranges really didn't "grow into their bodies" until AA's were around-- the implementation of a few good bows doesn't really redeem the class.

Don't get me wrong on paper, Ranger is my favorite class... but eq had a pretty poor implementation at least at this point in the elf sim.

[Peon25]

fast dual wielding weapons + riposte = fast death

[Daldaen]

I've Druid tanked crypt before. Fear my self Superior heals and uber Flame Lick tanking skills.