I started leveling a hunter just for fun, although many people told me he kinda sucks on Uthgard and that I won't have much fun playing it. I'm still kinda noob in PvP, and besides my zerker, I want to have a solo character. The other day I had a conversation with a guy who grouped with me often from 45-50 and he told me a nice hunter build he considers to be good for an all-around character(which I want to play), but I haven't written it down, so I need to wait until he shows up online . I was wondering if any of you have a high level hunter and could give me some advice and tell me your experiences with playing this character. I rolled a Valkyn, simply cause I wanted something different from Norseman. Anyway, if any of you have a good recommendation for my final spec, I would appreciate it very much. My main question what level should beastcraft be and where can I get nice pets to charm around lvl 20.

Now to my Zerker question...I really want to play a sword Zerker, but everyone keeps telling me that it's bad. If any of you plays sword Zerker, it would be nice if you could link me some templates for that spec. That's about it, I hope some of you can tell me what I want to know

I just started a hunter last week. I started leveling spear/BC and it was slow. The pet hits like a wet noodle and there was almost never a charm-able pet around. I asked around a bit and started adding points into bow. It made a world of difference in leveling. I solo most times so it works for me. At 20 I'll spec out of BC and toss enough points in for the first dex/qui, AF and speed boost. Be sure to carry both slash and thrust spear. Oh and I picked dwarf cuz we're sexeh.

Hopefully Seyha decides to help you with your questions. Although everyone would tell you that valkyn is a gimp race, stick with it if you don't like norse. Sword won't be a real option then but well ... who cares. Seyha is valkyn too and he actually does PvP

I'm not too sure about the guy you met but hunters aren't considered too strong here on Uthgard. And I'm being euphemistic Still, be one of the few to play something different than switching to Hibernia for playing another ranger..

The advice I can give: Specc high enough BC in order to charm an arachite priest (heal pet near Spindel) and from there on you can melee (!!!) down pretty much all to 40-45 on your own with endu DT only.. Not too sure about how the hunter charm performs on Uthgard atm but normally you should be alright with 9 BC in order to charm a level 15 arachite priest. For level 16 one you would need 15 BC.

A classic Hunter spec is 39 spear, 35 bow, 40 BC. This spec gives you everything: the fastest Crit Shot, Rapid Fire, capped skills, yellow buffs, a blue con pet (lol), and of course the world famous Hunter back-stun which is so powerful most enemies will choose to /sit rather than delay their inevitable defeat.

The Hunter has a (completely misguided on Uthgard) reputation for being "the melee archer," but the truth is that the class loves to hybrid. It wants to hybrid. This spec is a good introduction to the Hunter class. You can always respec to melee or bow specialist later, or even the crazy NO BC CHARGES/POTS ONLY spec.

About Hunter races: the norse has an advantage in HP (~90 points), but the valkyn is better in every other way. The valk has better resists (for the stealth war), more dex which helps the hunter in so many ways, and more quickness (which benefits the Hunter more than any other Mid class). Sword is definitely not an option for a valk, but spear damage will be equal to--or better than--a norse or kobold. Because of the dex bias a valkyn Hunter isn't penalized as much by str/con debuff poison as a norse. IMO for the best Hunter race its a toss-up between kobold or valkyn with norse a very close second.

Kirillow wrote:Hopefully Seyha decides to help you with your questions.

awww shucks

I agree that Seyha would be the person you want to talk to about this, but coming from a ranger who one day plans on making a hunter I will tell you what spec I am looking at. I would like to go 42 BC, 35 stealth, 35 bow, and 39 spear. I might lower BC down to 40 and raise stealth and bow to 36 between 4L and 5L0 just so I'm at 50 composite on both. When I got high enought RR (at 8L0) I would drop stealth down and raise mele or bow depending on which i liked more. It would probably go with 40 BC, 32 stealth, 35 bow, and 44 weapon (spear or sword). However that would only be viable at 8L0 or higher and that will take a LONG time to achieve.

That's my spec.

I must have good taste then

Well guys, thnx for all the responses...I think I will try the classic hybrid spec and see how it works. Btw, just started a Ranger out of curiosity...it's really funny how he has AT bow and 4 really great buffs, and Hunters are really gimped XD. But ok, gonna try my Hunter out and see . Thnx again all.

I might get chewed out for defending the auto train on bow for ranger. The main reason being is that we have our main weapon line, celtic duel line, bow, stealth, AND pathfinding to spec (5 things) compared to hunter who only has 4 things to spec in bow, stealth, main weapon, and BC. We both get the same spec points (not counting the auto train wich equates to like 70+ spec points) and we got 1 more line to put stuff into. Not saying its fair, but it is alot easier to spec true hybrid on hunter at lower RR then it is on ranger. For a ranger to be truly hybrid spec he needs full auto train and to be at least a decent RR (5L+) or you will be lacking in some areas.

The Hunter has the same number of trainable skills as a Scout. The Scout can AT bow. The Hunter cannot.

The AT system is senseless. Mythic admitted it was a bad idea, and that it was never meant to balance the classes. No need to justify it.

I thought scouts couldnt autotrain either. If they can then I would agree since they have the same lines as a hunter for spec'ing. My post was just comparing ranger/hunter.

Agreed on ranger/hunter comparison )...still, ranger really gets better buffs and pet ain't that useful

A Hunter/Ranger spec comparison is not exactly apples and apples. I hate to nitpick, but since this is a question thread I think it will be helpful for newbies.

It is true that Rangers receive the same number of spec points but have one more skill to train than Hunters (this extra skill being Celtic Dual). First, we should note that while the Ranger has to effectively spec 2 skill lines for melee (weapon and CD), he only needs to cap his composite weapon spec at his level. Where as a Ranger only needs ~35 weapon spec to cap the skill at 50, a Hunter must spec his weapon line as high as possible to maximize the 2hand bonus for spec.

Compare the cost in spec points between the two classes:

39 spear = 779 spec points
35 weapon/18 CD = 799 spec points

Both of these specs have a medium duration positional stun. I'd bet the Hunter has a small advantage in raw DPS (depending on resists), but the Ranger is blocked and evaded only half as much as the Hunter (thanks to Celtic Dual) which is just a phenomenal advantage on this server.

Not only that, but as the Ranger gains RR he can spec lower and lower in his weapon line. As long as his composite skill spec is capped at 51 he can shift points from weapon spec and stealth to CD and maximize his melee power. The Hunter benefits less from higher RR because he must increase his weapon spec, not lower it, and is subject to diminishing returns from DAoC's weird skill system.

Seyha wrote: but the Ranger is blocked and evaded only half as much as the Hunter (thanks to Celtic Dual) which is just a phenomenal advantage on this server.

but i think the amount of attackers also reduce the chance to evade or? two attackers reduce evade chance by 1/2 ?
so if a hunter summons his pet = 2 attackers = half amount?
or are my thoughts old n wrong^^?

Multiple attackers do not reduce evade. We tested this on live.

If the pet reduced evade, you would never see me on this forum.