![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
Quote:
Astuce | |||
|
|
||||
|
#2
|
|||
|
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
^ they get some massive agro songs and wear plate. From my experience they typically start to run in circles when a hard hitting mob gets on them... =)
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
I think Rangers are a really great class. Its like a melee blender version of a bard, where the bard focuses more on casting. Harmony, flame lick, decent armor options and respectable damage.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
|
||||
|
Quote:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Ranger#Combat_Skills https://wiki.project1999.com/Warrior#Combat_Skills Warrior's seem to get more of everything defensively, mitigation tables aside. Even double attack is higher than a Rangers. I don't see much of anything the Ranger excels at over a Warrior, but for leveling purposes the snap-agro class always wins. I seriously may try Ranger tanking. I think it will bother me not taking this opportunity to know. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#6
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#7
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#9
|
|||
|
In classic Ranger will suffer a bit due to chain mitigation vs plate, but realistically, all tank classes will be complete balls next to mage/necro pets, so whatever.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
|
|||
|
I can see warriors being DPS in groups leveling up. It won't be bad to have both a knight AND a warrior in the group, especially since the warrior will be taking less xp than anyone else in the party.
I can see the knights pulling and bringing mobs to the camp, the warrior jumps on it and as soon as agro is transfered the knight goes back out for another mob. This leaves the much higher DPS (ranger/monk/warrior) in the party doing that DPS. People really need to play what they want, good players will make things work. Will groups of mages have a advantage? yes, but I bet you they will be killing the same amount of mobs in Lguk as the melee heavy group down the hallway because it will be so crowded there won't be excess amounts of mobs to take. | ||
|
|
|||
![]() |
|
|