Cant Decide! (Bard or Ranger)

[Jimjam]

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

What do you do for the 70 minutes while Trueshot is on CD?

Have you never played a ranger?! Send tells to clerics for rezzes of course!

[Superranger]

Ranger best class, Bard 2nd best class but playing well in group and twisting non stop will drive a man mad and kill your hand

[Ravenlok]

Originally Posted by Stonewallx39 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Ranger is less strenuous. It's pretty weak early on power wise, he basically just a melee with a few useful spells. Ranger really becomes fun around 30+. Heavy gear dependency.

Just to piggy back on this thread, I've seen this on the forum a lot i.e. bard is a steady and strong rise in power as they level but with ranger it really amps up quickly but NOT until you start getting to higher levels. Is there a particular spell or set of spells that make that the case? Is there ONE piece of gear that is particularly important for Rangers (especially to solo)?

[Troxx]

Excluding aoe kiting,

Grouping:
Bards are actually a powerhouse class very early in the game. Hymn of restoration at level 6 and modified by lute at 8 makes bards the best healer class in the early game. Lull at 8 establishes bards as a pulling class very early in the game with first haste at 10. Though melee dps comparatively sucks at the high end, in the early game they hold their own well. As melee dps declines with levels, bards acquire the more complete toolset that sustains the powerhouse status in the late game. Unlike traditional 'powerhouse' classes, bards are a lot more ill-defined. The only role they do undeniably best is mana regen potential, but they can pull off crazy stuff in ways no other class can. With the monk fd/sneak changes, bards in many cases make more capable pullers in a lot of areas. Mostly, bards excel by sliding neatly into almost any duo/trio/group improving everyone else's performance and efficiency while being able to fill almost any role. They can even function as the primary source of heals allowing a group to get by with a non-cleric priest just for backup healing. High dps isn't something the bard can pull off but if the group needs literally nothing else from the bard it's possible to stack up to and maintain 70+ Dps in dots between single target chants and aoe dots. The last few dots in this stack aren't available until the last few levels with the longest dot available at 60.

Solo:
Bards just own. Again, excluding aoe kiting - charm killing paired with dots makes for killing speeds faster than necro/chanter/druid. Low level charm takes no mana until you're hunting over level 37 mobs. Higher level charm carries you to 60. Alternately, fear kiting with dots/melee ... lots of options. Class is ridiculously mobile - escape and travel is always easy.

Most bards are/were rolled with AoE kiting and powerleveling in mind - which is a shame. Most bards are pretty bad and don't understand their toolset.



As for rangers ... they're never a powerhouse class. They are capable in good hands and have a good set of tools. Gear twinking notwithstanding, they always lag behind the real dps classes, handily owned by rogues, monks, mages, and necros. Warriors generally put out as much or more dps. Tanking is decent but mitigation woes make lots of other classes (including bard) better choices. At the high end things are not any better.

Rangers are always decent. Sometimes they're excellent (harmony is amazing). They synergize well with other classes, but rarely in the most ideal of ways. Rangers aren't and never will be on this server a powerhouse class. On live servers AM3 and endless quiver made them premier dps in Luclin and lower PoP. The niche of archery then slowly declined in following expansions.

[Jimjam]

Troxx, it is interesting you mention mitigation woes. It is commonly cited against rangers.

Looking at parses against XP mobs, I have found that rangers actually can mitigate pretty similarly to any other tanking class until you are fighting 50+ mobs. I suppose this is due to the fact that every class rolls at level 1 with a full set of thurgadin quest armor (hyperbole), which lessens the importance of the defence skill.

However, rangers' low hp gives the impression they are taking bigger hits than they are (and reduces cheal effectiveness). Where rangers really struggle is actually avoidance: their defence skill of 200 means they avoid significantly worse than any other tank options.

On top of this, are we familiar with the knight defence red skill bug? Where knight defence is a few point lower than it should be? Rangers suffer something similar with their dodge/parry kills being in the red at low 100s instead of 200ish. Rangers are missing a large chunk of their ability to avoid hits to the front.

I always try to work with the positives though. The fact is, rangers are a sufficient tank for most group content. With velious it is easy to stack AC, and generally groups will have someone slowing and someone providing AC buffs. Any deficit rangers suffer in avoidance (whether low defence skill or bugged dodge/parry) is not devastating to a group, really all it achieves is improve the dps done by the rangers damage shield!

[Troxx]

It's not just an illusion of their health dropping fast due to low hp totals. They take more damage in terms of mitigation (low defense capped at 200 + chain armor archetype) and avoidance (melee defensive skills not yet improved). Bards also suffer low relative hp totals but have high defense caps and wear plate armor. Ranger defense and parry get improvements soon to 220/185 respectively but bard defensive skills also get a nice bump. Bard aggro is unparalleled and mobs hit camp preslowed to 35%.

Point is - not an illusion.

Rangers make perfectly adequate tanks and perfectly adequate dps. Snap aggro allows for immediate slow and no aggro bounce, both of which are a lot more important than differences in damage intake. Having 1-2k less hp and worse mitigation matters in very few locations.

Back to the OPs question - it really boils down to how you want to play. Bards are stupidly busy. Rangers are a lot more laid back. Both are a blast to play.

[Jimjam]

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

It's not just an illusion of their health dropping fast due to low hp totals. They take more damage in terms of mitigation (low defense capped at 200 + chain armor archetype) and avoidance (melee defensive skills not yet improved). Bards also suffer low relative hp totals but have high defense caps and wear plate armor. Ranger defense and parry get improvements soon to 220/185 respectively but bard defensive skills also get a nice bump. Bard aggro is unparalleled and mobs hit camp preslowed to 35%.

Point is - not an illusion.

Rangers make perfectly adequate tanks and perfectly adequate dps. Snap aggro allows for immediate slow and no aggro bounce, both of which are a lot more important than differences in damage intake. Having 1-2k less hp and worse mitigation matters in very few locations.

Back to the OPs question - it really boils down to how you want to play. Bards are stupidly busy. Rangers are a lot more laid back. Both are a blast to play.

I'm aware of the difference in defence skill and equipment archetype.

From my personal experience (parsed) in group content there is not much difference in average hit between my ranger and the other melees.

Perhaps my ranger is overgeared for the content he does. Perhaps I'm more conscientious about getting my ac buffed than other players? Perhaps it is easy to reach the level of diminishing returns for AC on the content I am doing. I don't know; this is what my parses have told me; average hit is broadly the same, avoidance is a hell of a lot worse.

In fairness, I think there may be a sectional bias here on my part. I'd be happy to tank seb King groups with a mediocrely geared mid 50s warrior, but wouldn't want to do so on my ranger with much better equipment. Based on this moment of insight, I guess I may be getting the results I see because I ensure I only tank stuff which I know is trivial for a ranger to tank?

For reference, my ranger has about 210 AC at 58, which is still quite far from the 'cap' for the level.

[Jimjam]

Sorry to double post, but pulling up some numbers from a pervious thread where I mentioned mitigation:

I took a look at my logs for 20k+ of damage to my ranger and a few paladins tanking some of the tougher mobs in KC (Spectral Protectors, Spectral Knights, Skeletal Warlord, Skeletal Scryer, Skeletal Protectors, Skeletal Captain, Skeletal Berserker, Knight of Sathir, Hangnail, Decayed Prisoners, Caller of Sathir, A Drolvarg Warlord, a drolvarg captain, a drolvarg bodyguard, a cursed hand, a construct).

Paladin 1 (level 51)
Average hit 70,
Real hits 53%

Ranger (lvl 52-53)
Average hit 64
Real hits 51%

Paladin 2 (level 55)
Average hit 66
Real hits 43%

Paladin3 (level 56)
Average hit 66
Real hits 46%

[Troxx]

My 60 bard in full visible thurg and some crappy non-visibles is sitting at 200; admittedly I could pretty cheaply add another 30 raw AC without too much difficulty and use a shield if I needed. I just haven't found the need as a bard - mobs are always slowed at least 35% by the time they're engaged. I also learned a long time ago to carry a stack of dots. On tougher content I make sure I've got symbol to help with the 1-2k hp I have less than a knight or warrior.

210ac raw worn AC is quite good for a 58 ranger - higher than most for sure. At that level and that AC tanking all of KC, most of seb, and most of velks is trivial. Comparably geared and leveled knights, warriors, and monks will still do better - but at that point you've passed the functional.

An ranger of average gear and low to mid 50s will have a much harder time than an average geared/leveled knight/war/monk/bard.

[Troxx]

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

Sorry to double post, but pulling up some numbers from a pervious thread where I mentioned mitigation:

I took a look at my logs for 20k+ of damage to my ranger and a few paladins tanking some of the tougher mobs in KC (Spectral Protectors, Spectral Knights, Skeletal Warlord, Skeletal Scryer, Skeletal Protectors, Skeletal Captain, Skeletal Berserker, Knight of Sathir, Hangnail, Decayed Prisoners, Caller of Sathir, A Drolvarg Warlord, a drolvarg captain, a drolvarg bodyguard, a cursed hand, a construct).

Paladin 1 (level 51)
Average hit 70,
Real hits 53%

Ranger (lvl 52-53)
Average hit 64
Real hits 51%

Paladin 2 (level 55)
Average hit 66
Real hits 43%

Paladin3 (level 56)
Average hit 66
Real hits 46%

Numbers are always good but those don't tell a whole lot. Best way to get a better idea would be to pull a single mob unslowed and with sufficient healing to get as little as a 7-10 minute parse on the exact same mob (same everything). This would let you compare two tanks much more accurately as all other factors would be equal. If you're interested in doing this I can always bring my shaman. With torpor heals are limitless in a place like KC. Can always root a mob so a warrior or knight can just stand there and get hit.

Important things to look at:

Avoidance rate
Demage interval spread
Average dps
Average hit

Can repeat this process across multiple zones.