Ranger Paths

Archer:

Ability to create own weapons (I see this as useful right after a pdeath or if you can't find yourself a good rare).

Ability to create own ammo (invaluable, especially since you can make specialty ones like sleep)

Skills that can boost range and RoF (obviously useful)

Tracker:

Throw (awesome for damage, especially when tossing vuln stuff, can lag)

Track (not particularly necessary if you are already good at running, but if they give you the slip, it can have its uses)

Group Camo skill (great for hiding and lying in wait to ambush unsuspecting prey)

Beastmaster:

3 Level 51 beasts (slightly stronger wyvern bite, slightly more damage, perpetual raven [i suppose this is good if you like scouting w/ravens...])

Group Herb (decent, but has limited use from what I can tell, as I see people target individual beasts alot, or area spells that drop them like flies)

Pack call (nice, let's you recall and run then collect pets later, not terribly useful)

Now...about the only reason I can see to choose beastmaster is if you are playing a werebeast (for the masteries) ranger, and you plan to be in wereform...alot. Is this how everyone else sees it? Is beastmaster even worth it as a choice?

only ranger to ever get leader in WM after the ranger changes was Senrail. Feral beastmaster ranger.

Oh I know that Senrail made WM Leader, I was around at the time. But I've seen people reference the fact that he could've been stronger with a different path choice.

I've also played Beast and Tracker rangers, never picked Archer because I thought they were too powerful. Of course with the new changes, and the fact that missile shield now works...I might give one a go.

I was just curious about people's opinions regarding the strengths/weaknesses of the paths.

Ah in usefulness beast master is definately the worst.

The raven can be made up by any charmie...

The use of arrows is invaluable as is the use of throw and track.

Shrug beastmaster is a bit on the lacking side of things.

Well I think you are as strong as how you play. I have seen archers get demolished. I have seen trackers completely unable to operate effectively. Basically it is on the player to do well, not the skill set.

only ranger to ever get leader in WM after the ranger changes was Senrail. Feral beastmaster ranger.

What about killalou (sp) ranger?

Psh... Killalou has never played a ranger. Especially not one that was in warmaster for freaking ever.

Ah, I remember now, the name was Valadis

Played beastmaster with an ogre on Halloween. Fun stuff.

only ranger to ever get leader in WM after the ranger changes was Senrail. Feral beastmaster ranger.

Dude there were plenty of rangers after the changes, what about Orlick, he was an archer. Don't believe go to the Kyantok vs Orlick pk log. That bastard was hard to kill.

Dude there were plenty of rangers after the changes' date=' what about Orlick, he was an archer. Don't believe go to the Kyantok vs Orlick pk log. That bastard was hard to kill.[/quote']

But ofcourse, after all Orlick was played by the same person who played Trix

Oh, wait I don't think orlick ever got leader.

do half my posts just go invis? I said LEADER lol. I know about Orlick, and countless other rangers, including mine, who went WM after changes.

Valadis point still stands.

do half my posts just go invis? I said LEADER lol. I know about Orlick' date=' and countless other rangers, including mine, who went WM after changes.[/quote']

Yeam my bad Emp, I corrected myself though.

I would agree that beastmaster is lacking when compared to the other two choices. However that is not because beastmaster is weak. Is it because the others are too strong in their usefulness.

Like weapon lock. Best Warrior lore. Is the problem that others are too weak? No, the problem is that weapon lock is too good.

Like weapon lock. Best Warrior lore. Is the problem that others are too weak? No' date=' the problem is that weapon lock is too good. [/quote']

Highly debatable, but that's another thread entirely.