Quick Q, then I'll piss off.

XziaoSF · 08-10-2002, 12:54 AM

I'm sure you get bombarded with plenty of lame newb questions. So here's another.

I played EQ for a while, and am coming back after a years absence. Played a warrior and a mage. Liked both, but didn't love either. So I'm curious...

...I'm considering either a PvP (RZ) rogue, or a blue server SK or Ranger. Just wondering about the group viability of the ranger and SK classes (especially post 40).

Thanks.

-X

Heh · 08-10-2002, 01:21 AM

Hard to say. Below 50 groups really don't discriminate on who's tanking because pretty much anyone can. If you're grouping with twinks you may have a rough time getting groups with hybrids sub 50, though. Post 50 I would say it is very easy to get a ranger into an exp group because they provide snare, which is neccesary, and damage output that falls somewhere between warrior and rogue/monk. SK's generally have a harder time finding their way into 55+ groups than most classes though, simply because when people are building groups for exp sessions they're going to look for classes that are going to fill specific roles, and because of relatively weak damage output, most groups are going to take a warrior or even monk over an SK as a tank. If you have friends, or a guild, that know you're skilled (if you are), you shouldn't have a problem.

If you're looking at those two classes and easy of getting groups, I would definately say go ranger simply because they do more damage and their snare is more reliable than SK snare. Also, at the high end, rangers are far more desired on raids once again because of higher melee damage output, very usefull ATK buffs and insane damage output with bows once they have AM3/EQ.

As far as playing a rogue on TZ, it's a dumb idea. EQ PVP isn't something you just pick up after a year of not playing, especially if you're going to play casually. If you're looking at PVP seriously, you need to do alot of research on what server you want to play on, try them all out, and then heavily research which class will fit your playing style. I will say, though, at lower levels you will be quite frustrated playing a PVP rogue because you will get owned constantly.

XziaoSF · 08-10-2002, 11:09 AM

Thanks for the info.

Think I'm probably going to go with a ranger. Not planning on playing casually, definitely on a serious level (time finally permits it).

As far as PvP, you said pretty much what I've heard from everyone. Think I'll steer clear for a while. Thanks again.

Cheers
-X

Hikaaru Jones · 08-10-2002, 11:34 AM

Quote:

SK's generally have a harder time finding their way into 55+ groups than most classes though, simply because when people are building groups for exp sessions they're going to look for classes that are going to fill specific roles, and because of relatively weak damage output, most groups are going to take a warrior or even monk over an SK as a tank.

Monks do not make good tanks pre-uber 60 (not just 60 but WELL equipped 60). Saying a pre 60 monk can out tank a SK is pretty out there. Damage wise we are hands down far superior than a SK but I was never in a group where it was said, "We don't need a tank class, we got Hikaaru"

It just doesn't work that way, especially pre-60.

Heh · 08-10-2002, 02:08 PM

The point wasn't that they are better tanks, it's that they're more desirable for exp groups because of their much greater damage output. And, quite honestly, when was the last time you were in an exp group where the cleric/shaman ran oom from healing too much?

FuckYou · 08-21-2002, 09:24 AM

Mid 50's exp groups use monks for tanks all the time. Works fine. Better tank than SK? Maybe not. Better all around contributor? Definetly.

08-10-2002, 12:54 AM	#1 (permalink)
XziaoSF Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: 2 miles SW of shitsville Posts: 3 +0 Internets	Quick Q, then I'll piss off. I'm sure you get bombarded with plenty of lame newb questions. So here's another. I played EQ for a while, and am coming back after a years absence. Played a warrior and a mage. Liked both, but didn't love either. So I'm curious... ...I'm considering either a PvP (RZ) rogue, or a blue server SK or Ranger. Just wondering about the group viability of the ranger and SK classes (especially post 40). Thanks. -X

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

08-10-2002, 01:21 AM	#2 (permalink)
Heh Banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 414 +0 Internets	Hard to say. Below 50 groups really don't discriminate on who's tanking because pretty much anyone can. If you're grouping with twinks you may have a rough time getting groups with hybrids sub 50, though. Post 50 I would say it is very easy to get a ranger into an exp group because they provide snare, which is neccesary, and damage output that falls somewhere between warrior and rogue/monk. SK's generally have a harder time finding their way into 55+ groups than most classes though, simply because when people are building groups for exp sessions they're going to look for classes that are going to fill specific roles, and because of relatively weak damage output, most groups are going to take a warrior or even monk over an SK as a tank. If you have friends, or a guild, that know you're skilled (if you are), you shouldn't have a problem. If you're looking at those two classes and easy of getting groups, I would definately say go ranger simply because they do more damage and their snare is more reliable than SK snare. Also, at the high end, rangers are far more desired on raids once again because of higher melee damage output, very usefull ATK buffs and insane damage output with bows once they have AM3/EQ. As far as playing a rogue on TZ, it's a dumb idea. EQ PVP isn't something you just pick up after a year of not playing, especially if you're going to play casually. If you're looking at PVP seriously, you need to do alot of research on what server you want to play on, try them all out, and then heavily research which class will fit your playing style. I will say, though, at lower levels you will be quite frustrated playing a PVP rogue because you will get owned constantly.

08-10-2002, 11:09 AM	#3 (permalink)
XziaoSF Registered User Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: 2 miles SW of shitsville Posts: 3 +0 Internets	Thanks for the info. Think I'm probably going to go with a ranger. Not planning on playing casually, definitely on a serious level (time finally permits it). As far as PvP, you said pretty much what I've heard from everyone. Think I'll steer clear for a while. Thanks again. Cheers -X

08-10-2002, 02:08 PM	#5 (permalink)
Heh Banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 414 +0 Internets	The point wasn't that they are better tanks, it's that they're more desirable for exp groups because of their much greater damage output. And, quite honestly, when was the last time you were in an exp group where the cleric/shaman ran oom from healing too much?

08-21-2002, 09:24 AM	#6 (permalink)
FuckYou snape kills razorgore Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 2,702 -1 Internets	Mid 50's exp groups use monks for tanks all the time. Works fine. Better tank than SK? Maybe not. Better all around contributor? Definetly.