I am currently boxing a Warrior, Cleric, Bard, Enchanter, Rogue. I've always boxed a beastlord with this crew as well, but have recently leveled up a ranger to 75; haven't really boxed him because he was always behind in gear compared to my raid geared beastlord. Now with a pretty much full gear reset with SoF, i was just looking for opinions which class would be best going forward to continue with my box crew? The downside right now with the beastlord, is that boxing 4 melee (warrior, rogue, bard, bl) is tough; so was thinking it may be better to just use autofire on the ranger. But I know I lose a lot of utility if I switch. I'm not super familiar with SoF and beyond, expansion wise. Which class is typically best in the later expansions for a group crew?
Would think the question for your crew, if picking only between Ranger and Beastlord, is which character is easier to macro during a fight. You get decent damage from a Ranger at higher levels with autofire and spell macros. Also get some useful Ranja skills. I can't talk to the Beastlord side of this, but would imagine handling a 4th melee in a box crew would suck. Not sure what Beastlord "utility" you lose. . . .
Beast is going to take more and more attention to get the most out of it going forward. Given your makeup you already have all utility covered. Of the two, I'd pick ranger just for sanity. IMHO, in a box crew, beast shines best when they're either filling in as a tank with their pet and/or when you're running a smaller (2-3) team. If they're a sixth box you're likely mostly using them as a DPS which they are not great for until much later.
Awesome, Thanks for the tips all Was kinda leaning ranger, but wanted to make sure I wasn't making a huge mistake. But you guys are right, the beastlord is tough to DPS on, especially since i'm already doing the warrior and rogue manually.
Ranger, for sure, is easier to box. Even though it's sometimes irritating ... you know, this dead zone, when you're too far to hit with your wepons, and too close to range attack with your bow . And if you want to add your kicks in the rotation (/autoskill kick), you can use it from range, but the positionning is a bit tricky, too far and it doesn't kick, too close, and ... your bow skills won't work. It can be macroed pretty well (at least with ISB, I don't use any other 3rd party software), adds a good bunch of buffs and burst AAs (Auspice, Group Guardian of the Forest, etc), can even tank a bit (weaponshield) if some crap hits the fan on your war. On headshotable mobs, it's a killing machine btw. Main downside : if you want to play it somewhat actively and correctly, it's a mana sponge. The rotation is not limited to shoot arrows. And if you use dots (Ice burrower Swarm mainly in ToV) and spam fire nukes (Summer's sleet in ToV) when arrows spells are on cooldown, your mana bar will melt pretty fast, and you don't have any mana recovery spell/AA. (I recommend the use of Crystal Mana tonic potions. Edit: this tonic line do not exist in SoF. You'll have to wait till TDS and the Distilled Mana Tonic I guess ) The beastlord is great too, but if you already play 3 melee characters (well, 2 + the tank), and if you don't use the macaroni quest software that will automate all the melee toons movements, it can be a pita to get a correct positionning of all your melee characters at the same time (you can also use some /follow technique, but well, the follow on EQ1 is ... hmmm ... funky sometimes ) Long story short : Both classes are great at high level, but if you want an (somewhat) easy to box character, and if you don't use the «macaroni farfalle fettuccine» quest sofware, ranger will be easier.
Ranger is great with both bard and enchanter in group. That will help a lot with the ranger's mana regen.
Ranger will be easier to box. My ENC main with CLR box would have benefitted more from a plate tank, but the ease of boxing a mage, with automation of a pet tank and a CoH, plus I like to pickup PCs, the mage was the better choice. Point being, I'm giving the advice I myself choose to follow. Ease of play is worth more than a bit of synergy, which would be lost due to the inefficiency of 6-boxing (I only 3 box). Now, the upside of the beastlord, like my mage, is that the beast pet is an autotank. If you warrior goes down, you can have pet taunt and pet tank AA on hotkey and let the pet take over while you recover on your tank. Also agree the best choice is mage, because CoH, and pet backup tank, and synergy with ENC, plus mage is both melee and spell damage, but that wasn't an option, so ranger, unless you want a backup pet tank or like the beast better.
i would go insane with your crew lol, i hate "pure" classes myself. not the ppl that play them but i much prefer flexibility, so the bard is the the only one of your current crew i would, and do, use. ranger is another i use. i like my tanks to also have other abilities , and spells to cast. i like my healers to also do damage or ..something (mines a druid bc i played with shm a lot at the time, but i think shm are more useful unless you really really hate running...like me) so i have a healer, a porter, cc, slows if i actually care to want them, multiple pullers, multple means of dps (i also hate silkies bc i like to hit stuff lol) with and without being in melee range (very rarely do i get in a mode where i melee with rgr AND bard bc im meleeing etc etc with SK, but in a solid camp, especially a corner or a wall, its not hard to consistently place the mobs to do so (i do not use any such boxing software as has been mentioned, just different computers, and the tools existing within the game) i also hate pet classes eve nthough i play one..its a crappy petclass and i spent YEARS between summoning pets, muchless remembering to tel lthe pet to do something once summoned lol. i like being in control, i like being flexible, and i like being hands on, and not dying instantly. that all said, ranger is of course my recommendation for my reasons and all the reasons others have put forth: it can range or melee or both and it can cast, it can tank briefly if needed, it can buff, it can heal a little if desperate(more later in the game) and headshot ca nbe quite fun in current content beyond that, with that crew, id have a wiz or druid for ports. campfires notwithstanding: you gotta go everywehre the first time with at least 3 to set said fire. grab your ranger, bard, and porter, get them there most efficiently, then campfire the rest. much easier when you find zones you can bind in then just group port. maybe in the futureu youl lthink about other swaps: bard and chanter synergy work best with other caster dmg, bard and melees do better with shm for synergy, maybe swapping chanter for druid (just as teh squishy one and for the space) cleric with a shm (giving 2 healers that both have utility, synergy with the bard and melees, and replacing slows (better than bard at least) while offering the addition of lighter dot and pet dps, light nukes, a spare healer (though neither will be AS strong for a few more expansions) ports and a lot of previously unavailable buffs (like Unity, which i think came about in SoF, or maybe they made it retro, but it defintiely will exist in SoD if it doesnt in SoF) That would leave you your war/rog you seem to like the best, your bard for adps and ease of use+ travel speed and crowd control, a shm for slows, buffs, dots, synergy adps with bard/melees, heals, etc., dru for ports, minimukes, more buffs and more heals, and the ranger can be played close or far, add more adps for melee groups (auspice, group guardian, attack buffs) and some more nukes, dots, and crowd control(yay vinelash and future iterations, then fluster/bluster bolts etc)
