Something to tank about

[Deathrydar]

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

Comparing the two:

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.

I really think that if someone ever wanted to start a Ranger, NOW is the time at Green's launch!

[Jimjam]

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

Comparing the two:

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.

Are we looking at the 50 or 60 caps?

[sciception]

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

Are we looking at the 50 or 60 caps?

50

[Dolalin]

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.

[Palemoon]

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.

[uygi]

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

If you're a higher level SK and you aren't using Shadow Vortex to keep up with agro buildup on mes'd mobs so that when their turn is up all that you need is a Disease Cloud to wake them up and they're stuck on you?

Well, I don't think you're playing an SK very well...

QFT, that’s the most important use for SV. Sucks when the enchanter then blurs the mob, though.

SV is the most and quickest snap aggro, even more than DC. Clinging isn’t bad, but the other two are better. All are very low mana.

In a good group the SK should either pull or tank, usually not both (unless you’ve split the spawns). I think the best crypt/emp groups I was ever in had both SK and warrior. SK is a great puller and more than good enough tank for crypt, but in a really good group the puller doesn’t stick around for the fight anyways.

Leveling up, Paladin stuns are amazing. Post 50 they peter out and in higher level camps they just straight up don’t work.

Warriors are good DPS, they have high skill caps for offensive and defensive abilities. They’ll never match a rogue because they can’t BS, but a warrior behind the mob is a good DPS contributor.

[Tenlaar]

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

People really need to play what they want, good players will make things work.

I don't think this can be stressed enough. With 20 years of knowledge about what each class can do we couldn't even come up with a group that can't work decently well if we tried. Hell, six clerics could destroy all the way to 50.