he doesn't need to

Then I'd rather have a pala with endu and resist chants ^^

I'd even prefer an armsman (det5/stoi, anytime snare) than a scout

in a tank group I would agree but in a caster group I don't see why...

pala :
- lol dmg
- useless chant except resists
- no range attack

arms :
- dmg negligible compared to dmg's caster
- det/stoi might be useful

id rather have a tank with a snare than a scout

cabalists have an aoe snare, didn't you know? and this one lasts way longer than tanks one.

Why people hate so much scouts in a caster group?
Please enlight me ( with serious argues ofc ... ).

flyhunter wrote:cabalists have an aoe snare, didn't you know? and this one lasts way longer than tanks one.

Why people hate so much scouts in a caster group?
Please enlight me ( with serious argues ofc ... ).

effected by det

tank snares arent


and I don't hate scouts in grps, I just think there is better classes for the "job"

cause if i am in a group with my scout to hunt stealthers and we have to face stronger enemies i'll log caba.

you'll always have more utilities with a caster than a scout. the only good points of scout are numb, slam, hunting stealthers and maybe long range rupt but a cabby or a théu will do it better i think.

PS : caba snare is a crap and should not be used in very most of cases, to avoid to give root immune. that's one of the reason why wizard ( well played) is nice in group

nixian wrote:id rather have a tank with a snare than a scout

Tanks in caster groups are utterly useless. On live, my guild used to run a wicked caster group without any sort of tank. We had 1 sorc, 1 cabbie, 1 theurg, 1 wiz, 1 sorc/cab/theurg (depending on who wanted to play what), 1 minst and 2 clerics.
If we ran 2 sorcs, then one was debuffing fire for the wiz, DDing support, debuffing stats and doing interupts; the other was in charge of CC and assisting the cabalist on a secondary damage train; theurg was just earth petting anything that casted; the cab was NSing, diseasing and nuking; minst doing the usual minst stuff; clerics with shears/heals. The tactics were quite simple, SoS/drop SW, loop back, drop second SW/attempt CC, fight.
I'd imagine that except the SW part that way of fighting would work quite well here considering the number of tank groups around. =)

Healowner wrote:

nixian wrote:id rather have a tank with a snare than a scout

Tanks in caster groups are utterly useless. On live, my guild used to run a wicked caster group without any sort of tank. We had 1 sorc, 1 cabbie, 1 theurg, 1 wiz, 1 sorc/cab/theurg (depending on who wanted to play what), 1 minst and 2 clerics.
If we ran 2 sorcs, then one was debuffing fire for the wiz, DDing support, debuffing stats and doing interupts; the other was in charge of CC and assisting the cabalist on a secondary damage train; theurg was just earth petting anything that casted; the cab was NSing, diseasing and nuking; minst doing the usual minst stuff; clerics with shears/heals. The tactics were quite simple, SoS/drop SW, loop back, drop second SW/attempt CC, fight.
I'd imagine that except the SW part that way of fighting would work quite well here considering the number of tank groups around. =)

that doesn't provide any arguments to why it would be wise to put a scout in a grp?

I am not saying we HAVE to put a scout in caster group, but it is original and can be effective. Ofc maybe a caba might more effective, i don't know.
One sure thing : putting a tank like pala/arms is this kind of group is just a waste.

nixian wrote:

Healowner wrote:

nixian wrote:id rather have a tank with a snare than a scout

Tanks in caster groups are utterly useless. On live, my guild used to run a wicked caster group without any sort of tank. We had 1 sorc, 1 cabbie, 1 theurg, 1 wiz, 1 sorc/cab/theurg (depending on who wanted to play what), 1 minst and 2 clerics.
If we ran 2 sorcs, then one was debuffing fire for the wiz, DDing support, debuffing stats and doing interupts; the other was in charge of CC and assisting the cabalist on a secondary damage train; theurg was just earth petting anything that casted; the cab was NSing, diseasing and nuking; minst doing the usual minst stuff; clerics with shears/heals. The tactics were quite simple, SoS/drop SW, loop back, drop second SW/attempt CC, fight.
I'd imagine that except the SW part that way of fighting would work quite well here considering the number of tank groups around. =)

that doesn't provide any arguments to why it would be wise to put a scout in a grp?

Point was that both tanks and scouts just don't belong in caster groups, maybe pally would have a spot on ToA with BG, but with a classic setup it's just DPS lost.

scouts has depending on spec a snare too..so having armsi for snare is a lame argument..

level 21 slash = snare 14 sec .. posi is side
level 39 slash = snare 15 sec .. posi is back (good for guarded ppl if AT follow them)


level 29 thrust = snare 14 sec .. posi is back (good for guarded ppl if AT follow them)
level 18 + 44 thrust = crippling 30% .. anytimer combo
level 39 thrust = verlangsamung .. posi is side
level 15 thrust = crippling 19% .. after block (good for help guarded ppl)

You ideally want either 1 slam tank or a mincer in a caster setup, for reliability.

Pala has resists and endu chant, as well as being a decent guarder and has slam. You can use lw2+endu3 pots for mid fight, but your not going to spam those while roaming, so a paladin means you can run at sorc speed+sprint, faster speeds while roaming means better inc positioning and early CC. This is why a mincer can be good, but a pala still provides some speed boost and is better defensively. The pala just needs to do a basic twist while roaming so he doesn't run out of power, compared to how attentive the sorcs have to be while roaming, asking a pala to twist endu for sprint is nothing.

Mincer gives great speed, great rupt (the casters can then focus on other things more), utility RAs like sos, insta cast stun is not as prefered as slam but workable. Not as reliable as merc, partly because they are affected by NS and no det/stoic.

Merc is a possibility because they can still run off lw2+endu pots midfight, can slam, and can do reliable damage, would be enough to help finish off an enemy tank thats pushing in getting nuked by friendly casters. Not to mention that charge+slam means 15s of guaranteed blocking. Add det/stoic, the merc is a far more reliable slam/guard bot, not easily CC'd or slam'd.

Compared to...scout? The bow is nearly useless, telling me you can interrupt 3 people reliably with rapid fire is BS, the scout cannot compare to the casters in terms of damage/rupt/utility. Scouts not THAT much better at guarding than a merc or pala, easily CC'd, offers no unique utility other than finding stealthers. Thats nice but its making the group weaker in tougher fights, scout is possible but far from ideal.

On a side note, reaver could be used as well, for similar reasons to merc (also can work off lw2+endu pots). Unlike the other 3 reaver is capable of half decent rupting, and like the merc - can help finish off targets charging in. Not to mention a defensive twf placed between both groups or between the enemies support and melees is very powerful. But just as easily CC'd as the paladin, and easier to kill than merc/pala. Can depend on setup, reaver may be better in a group running an ice wiz/theurg with a 50% body sorc cold debuff.

So to summarize, merc is the most reliable - has damage, pala and mincer both offer utility - pala better stun, reaver offers utility/damage - not as reliable. They each can change the way the group works a little, so it might come down to what the other 5 classes/specs are (the clerics never change).

KXT wrote:Compared to...scout? The bow is nearly useless, telling me you can interrupt 3 people reliably with rapid fire is BS, the scout cannot compare to the casters in terms of damage/rupt/utility. Scouts not THAT much better at guarding than a merc or pala, easily CC'd, offers no unique utility other than finding stealthers. Thats nice but its making the group weaker in tougher fights, scout is possible but far from ideal.
.

well, thats your point of sight.
if you think so you never saw a good scout in action.
guard = shieldskill
shieldskill = 100% dex
scout has most dex ..
ask ppl i guarded already...they confirmed me that i am blocking better than pala..

and if you dont believe me with rupting 3 at once..
easy explained
rapid fire 2 (45 bow skill required) has a delay of 1 sec with 50% of normal damage but normal endu usage.
1 hit of me = rupt for 3 sec
in this 3 sec i shot 3 more arrows..
so rupting 3 at once is realy no problem (as long as i dont get nearsight).
rapid fire is not meant to do damage ..its an interrupting tool.

and dapending on scouts RA´s he can get Det aswell. so your ''easy to CC'' is also not viable.
sadly a good scout is relaying very much on his RA´s..he need simply so many.
Det, PD, a bit MoS, if running a lot with groups also empty mind, purge

about useless bow..well..every weapon is useless as long as the player is too silly to use it right.

I understand how shield and blocking works, and a scout is not going to block THAT much better than a merc or pala, better yes but not enough to justify running a scout. Not to mention theres a big difference between det and det+stoic.

The other 4 can all do what the scout can do but better in various ways, aside from blocking, which the scout doesn't do significantly enough to justify them over one of the other 4. The scout is completely outclassed in interruption by a mincer, has nothing on reaver/merc in terms of damage, and offers very little utility compared to pala/reaver/mincer.

If you really wanted a solid blocker, I would choose the more reliable, harder to kill (better armor, more HP, scouts are not difficult to kill) merc anyday over a scout, not to mention that aside from blocking, the merc has dirty tricks and a similar R5 ability. There are lots of bonuses to the other classes I did not mention, I can't see anything else from the scout other than whats already been noted. A merc is looking at det5 charge2 lw2 and hes ready to go.

Scout just doesn't cut it, you could win with one, but you would win with a better margin of victory with one of the other classes, and it could cost your group the victory in more difficult fights. The others are all better in many ways, and bring alot to the table, the scount brings little but blocking and questionable interrupt, as well as needing more RAs to perform as well as lower RR chars of the other 4 classes.