Could a BG archer have a valid role in a competative RVR group??

[censi]

Basically was thinking...

if an archer went battle master for body guard.... hung back with the mages and support... Focused on RF/SS interuption, criting the mages, defensive grappeling, option of joining assist train...

with like 0 stealth prolly low PF and high bow and melee...

det, purge 3, ip2, PD, TS, some mop and fe.

Could the archer be like a competative and usefull member of the group... Would like a hardcore RVR group ever consider grouping with it???

 

[Manisch Depressiv]

No.

 

[Bubble]

Well... tbh a Hero would do such a better job and also have a much higher survivbility (With 2 High rr mercs on you, you'd not last long would you, well compaired to a Hero/Chump/Warden..well maybe same as warden but warden offers more)

 

[occy]

Basically was thinking...

if an archer went battle master for body guard.... hung back with the mages and support... Focused on RF/SS interuption, criting the mages, defensive grappeling, option of joining assist train...

with like 0 stealth prolly low PF and high bow and melee...

det, purge 3, ip2, PD, TS, some mop and fe.

Could the archer be like a competative and usefull member of the group... Would like a hardcore RVR group ever consider grouping with it???

u cry about ml 9 pets brittles etc then u ask if an archer can fit in a visible grp who has healers etc. what do u think ?

 

[Galid]

well id say no aswell. beeing a ranger myself and having tryed it quite a few times. rangers are nice for bg and interupts but. rangers do fall pretty fast compared too a hero/warden therefor making a bad bg'er. offensive rangers can be great in an assist train (melee spec) but then ur going too have to pick another offensive tank off either Bm Champ Hero or VW wich also means worse ML abils. a ranger can do a nice melee spec for grps if high rr and a ranger can often hit harder than bms if using piercers. but ppl arent willing too trade a bm for a ranger hence no banelord. it works but isent optimal.

Galid

 

[Chronictank]

No, in short:
-they cant do as much dmg as a caster when using bow (both can be interupted etc)
-they cant do as much dmg as a melee char due to lower WS
-they cant take as much dmg as a real tank, lower hp tables and armour types

 

[censi]

u cry about ml 9 pets brittles etc then u ask if an archer can fit in a visible grp who has healers etc. what do u think ?

such negativity I was just interested in other people opinions in a nice friendly post. no need for agro mode...

 

[censi]

-they cant do as much dmg as a caster when using bow (both can be interupted etc)
-they cant do as much dmg as a melee char due to lower WS
-they cant take as much dmg as a real tank, lower hp tables and armour types

this is good stuff but....

Ranger can switch to sure shot RF if getting interupted, this has to be very effective in terms of interupt....

Ranger could be canny like at the start, you hit the mage with TS, then switch to crit... mage could find himself insta dead. or very low on hits... this could be a good thing not sure havent tested enough...

well I would have full melee spec, wont do as much damage but can deal good damage i think....

you cant take as much damage as a tank but the roll is different.... and you can take ok damage... I think the ranger would be enough of a pest to get targetted which is kind of what you want to achieve... dunno

 

[occy]

such negativity I was just interested in other people opinions in a nice friendly post. no need for agro mode...

wasnt angry mode, and no i dont think theres room for archers in a visible grp.

/hug

 

[Bubble]

this is good stuff but....

Ranger can switch to sure shot RF if getting interupted, this has to be very effective in terms of interupt....

Ranger could be canny like at the start, you hit the mage with TS, then switch to crit... mage could find himself insta dead. or very low on hits... this could be a good thing not sure havent tested enough...

well I would have full melee spec, wont do as much damage but can deal good damage i think....

you cant take as much damage as a tank but the roll is different.... and you can take ok damage... I think the ranger would be enough of a pest to get targetted which is kind of what you want to achieve... dunno

I think your find if your BGing a Target, tanks will not mind spending 2 Swings killing you rather than moving to a different target, the BG roll would not be fit for a Ranger (or Hunter)

 

[noaim]

People make it sound like most grps run with tanks as main damageoutput. Few albgrps and prolly no midgrps do that, you need bg on casters because they die so easy, but keeping a strafing ranger alive vs 2 zerkers or 2 mercs shouldnt be much harder than keeping a strafing warden alive. If the ranger plays well, there should be room for him I think, but would need a good ranger, if you invite a random its better with a chaingrappling warden so you gain the resists aswell.

 

[Stallion]

its verry viable to have hunter or ranger in a group. aslong as the group plays around it well enough.. just few good examples out there ( none today)..

 

[Ilienwyn]

Personally I think it would work with any of the 3 archers. Might need a little training/practice first of course. And each of the 3 archers has different goodies that could also add to a group like their rr5 ras, pet for hunter. And people thinking they will have less defence may need to get reminded that archers can also get PD

What I reallywonder is howcome people haven't tried it yet

 

[Lejemorder]

People make it sound like most grps run with tanks as main damageoutput. Few albgrps and prolly no midgrps do that.

you do know that mid tanks excist?

 

[noaim]

you do know that mid tanks excist?

No, I had no idea of this. Is it true? Link please.

 

[Raven]

so why not reply to the thread instead of looking for things to complain about like some 50 year old morale bitch?)

because everything else you said was true, and its been pretty much covered in the thread, there is little point taking a ranger in a group for obvious reasons, lower dps than a caster/normal tank, lower defence than a tank/warden.

 

[Eleasias]

yeah grp my ranger! xD

 

[AngelHeal]

I've seen groups running: mincer mincer infil infil scout scout scout scout... (OF with toa).

they seemed to kill actually pretty high rr groups.... u allways have the jump... and assisting scouts and infils on druids/healers ... auch auch..


It's hard.. u'll die allot.... but you play the game for fun don't you?

 

[koxi]

Been asked before..

https://forums.freddyshouse.com/showthread.php?t=177208

.. btw, wru Gus.. havn't seen u a few weeks!

 

[Tilda]

I think it could.

FC ran with an archer for a bit and it was nice, although this was before BG, so things may be different now.
People say "ohh a caster can do better damage" but this is effectivley a "caster"with BG and grapple.
I'd try it if I was on hib and running a gg

 

[crispy]

For the BG argument. If the archer has got two tanks on him he just grapples one of them and then it should be possible to keep him alive. A minimum of three tanks on the ranger is needed to kill him.

 

[Bubble]

People are kinda forgetting that a RR5 Warrior or a Hero have a much much better surviability, but by all means try

 

[Eleasias]

every class that can get bg can build a template around tanking and make himself damn effective when trained, with malice, winged helm, som, spec af charges, pd, evade, battler, 100 con 400 hp a ranger is tough to take down. would be funny to try xD

 

[noaim]

People are kinda forgetting that a RR5 Warrior or a Hero have a much much better surviability, but by all means try

And you are kinda forgetting that a ranger would get access to things that a hero or warrior dont, such as uninterruptable ranged attack, or high damage range attack on for example a healing healer, if noone is there to interrupt. Do you think warden is first choice of bg because of their superior survivability compared to a hero?

 

[Bubble]

And you are kinda forgetting that a ranger would get access to things that a hero or warrior dont, such as uninterruptable ranged attack, or high damage range attack on for example a healing healer, if noone is there to interrupt. Do you think warden is first choice of bg because of their superior survivability compared to a hero?

Because Warden 24% Body resists are very nice and outweight the lack of defence, not get me wrong as an alb i'm all for you trying a leather user as a BG.

 

[Manisch Depressiv]

Yes, use those Rangers and Hunters and start a new trend. Spend 34 RA points just on PD5 so you can last 2 swings longer against one Merc. Warden is the only class afair that can utilize all Battlemaster styles fully due to endurance issues so he is quite good.

The heavy tanks are best BG'ers as with 1.81, next to follow Paladin and Warden, everything else including Friar is supplementary BG in my opinion.

 

[Eleasias]

The heavy tanks are best BG'ers as with 1.81, next to follow Paladin and Warden, everything else including Friar is supplementary BG in my opinion.

Best BG'rs? Why would _anyone_ take a hero over a warden for bg job when you can make a warden almost unkillable by melee anyway? Same goes for friar really, why would you lose resists, extra buffer, extra healing for more survivability for the bg'er when you can build a template for both friar and warden that makes them so strong already that in the rare case that they actually die, the enemy spent so much time on doing it they basicly lost the fight by that?

 

[noaim]

Because Warden 24% Body resists are very nice and outweight the lack of defence, not get me wrong as an alb i'm all for you trying a leather user as a BG.

So you can chose between getting better interrupts and damage, or better resists. The question was "are rangers (or archers) valid in fg rvr as bg´er" and the answer is yes.

 

[Manisch Depressiv]

Best BG'rs? Why would _anyone_ take a hero over a warden for bg job when you can make a warden almost unkillable by melee anyway? Same goes for friar really, why would you lose resists, extra buffer, extra healing for more survivability for the bg'er when you can build a template for both friar and warden that makes them so strong already that in the rare case that they actually die, the enemy spent so much time on doing it they basicly lost the fight by that?

I didn't exclude a Friar or Warden from a group by saying heavy tanks are better BG'ers. You did that.

 

[Eleasias]

I didn't exclude a Friar or Warden from a group by saying heavy tanks are better BG'ers. You did that.

Why waste a spot and take both?