Grouping... - Page 5

Tecmos Deception · #1 02-23-2013, 05:15 PM

This thread has turned 100% stupid.

Tecmos Deception · #2 02-23-2013, 02:21 PM

Lemme know how your xp group of 3 rangers and 3 wizards in HS west works out for you.

SCB · #3 02-23-2013, 02:32 PM

Quote:

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

Lemme know how your xp group of 3 rangers and 3 wizards in HS west works out for you.

Because insanely non-conventional groups in arguably the "hardest" groupable area of the game is at all the discussion point here.

I'll be happy to let you know how a SK, Ranger, Wizard, Necro, Cleric, Druid group did though, because that group can clear it despite being 80% full of classes that are "terrible for grouping".

HeallunRumblebelly · #4 02-23-2013, 03:38 PM

Quote:

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

Lemme know how your xp group of 3 rangers and 3 wizards in HS west works out for you.

eh, 3 rangers 2 wizards 1 donals cleric. works fine :3

also: rangers / sk's are pure titties for VP. Shit just does not work in there w/o em [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Splorf22 · #5 02-23-2013, 03:45 PM

There are times when I wish I had made Sakuragi a shadowknight. I figured warriors were more useful for raiding though.

khanable · #6 02-23-2013, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There are times when I wish I had made Sakuragi a shadowknight. I figured warriors were more useful for raiding though.

I bite my thumb at thee! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Kevynne · #7 02-23-2013, 02:47 PM

I've met shit rangers and good rangers

Good rangers CAN tank. Just gotta play the class right. Would tak a paladin over anything for a tank thou tbh

Ephirith · #8 02-23-2013, 07:10 PM

There are very few situations where I'd prefer a shadowknight tank over a monk or warrior. Tbh, a decently proccing warrior or a monk can provide more than enough agro for a stable, functional group in the majority of situations.

Yes, rangers are mana sponges... but at least they can put out some dps. Even in sebilis etc, a slowed mob with a ranger tanking xp content isn't going to bankrupt the cleric, and if it does, your group probably has deep-seated issues beyond the presence of a ranger.

People overstate the usefulness of knight snap agro when capable monks and warriors are involved. I find it disputable whether knight agro is worth the loss of dps. As for rangers, everyone knows they are turds with some ability to shine in certain uncommon situations... but still just shiny turds. Hell, I was able to tell OP was a ranger because groups were rejecting him. Who gives a shit? I had fun playing mine, and people were usually pretty impressed with my root CC and outdoor pulling.

Swish · #9 02-23-2013, 07:16 PM

Warriors have an easier time now than they used to. I remember going through MM as a cleric a good while back and every greater heal was guaranteed to draw aggro with a couple of poorly geared warriors.

It's probably still the case that the majority of people don't roll a warrior as their first character on P99 unless they know someone that can gear them up a bit first.

A good SK (or paladin) in an everyday group was always my preference as a cleric. Having to root mobs for warriors to hold aggro was just embarrassing. Things have improved since then I'm sure.

SK with Ebon Mace (or similar), not much loss of DPS... and its not the tank's job to put out uber DPS anyway [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ephirith · #10 02-23-2013, 08:59 PM

Quote:

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

SK with Ebon Mace (or similar), not much loss of DPS... and its not the tank's job to put out uber DPS anyway [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I parsed this stuff a ton on both my sk and ranger, and knight dps is just pathetic even with nice weapons (epics). A monk and warrior mitigate equal or better, and they bring twice to three times as much dps, with satisfactory agro when geared/handled properly.

Which is more conducive to the efficiency of a group: a tank who holds agro and provides 60 dps, or a tank who holds agro and provides 30?

I still like having knights around, and I'm not constantly trying to min/max until my balls are swollen with efficiency, it just bothers me when people don't bash sk's and paladin's as much as they bash rangers when, imo, they are equally bad for most content.