party rogue's role found explained and resolved, finally

[Mirosuke]

Yeah \thread since you ran out of arguments to support your 'daggers are damage dealers in a pt' theory.

Yeah, and to stop your non-retarded comments.
not
And Daggers are Damage Dealers on party, not lurers (even is their main rol).

[dutchleader]

Actually Rogue's are better when hunting raid bosses. They kill them alot faster then WIzards.

Btw: 1 rogue might lure better, but if you have 1 rogue you have 1 tank. And 2 tanks lure better then 1 rogue. They lure different but warriors lure fine. If they take fast shot they are even better lurers.

[Truie]

I play on ksro ,made account on this forum just to reply on your post(gotta love 24h waiting period before you can post here).

Well thank you then:))

First of ,it depends about what kind of party you are talking.If you mean nublet isro partys ,where few ppl run from 1 party mob to another than ya ,you can do dmg with daggers there.
In real good party thers nothing you can do with daggers.Imagine 2 lurers preferably str china chars ,can be pimped xbow rogue also(first role of rogue in pt),pulling 10-20 mobs each near str cleric (second and last role rogue/cleric can have in pt).Than str cleric uses group heals taking all agro.Thats when wizards kill all the mobs that cleric is tanking.Lets say that you are in such pt and ur using daggers.Thers 30 mobs around cleric and you hit 1 of them.At same time wiz hits 5 mobs doing more dmg to every one of them ,than you did to that 1 mob.Like i said ,daggers don't have any role in that party.Now i understand that on isro spots are crowded,so random idiots or army of bots would not let anyone gather so many mobs in 1 place.Because of that in isro daggers might have some use,but killing 1 pt mob with few ppl would be insane imo..Only thing warriors do in ksro partys is giving buffs to cleric/wizards and standing still.When cleric is good enough warriors arent even needed.

I've been in great parties but only up to mujigis. That was more than a year ago. Since the legits have left the venus server there are no such parties anymore.
In my 30's I was very useful but at 40 i started to suck because if i had DD on the cleric couldnt keep me healed up yet if i didnt have it I couldn't keep the aggro from the INTs.

We can play without too many bots around in Isro, we can lure a shitload of party mobs if we have a good lurer. If there are many mobs on the party I'll focus on the party mobs. 30 mobs at once is very much, I have never seen that:)

I can jump to party mobs to make them aggro me instead of the INTs and run around to other party mobs... it used to work well in my 30's but later on it's not as easy.
I used to be able to hit a mob a few times, wait for the INT-guy to get out of close range of that mob and thus be sure that the mob would follow me around while i jumped to another one.
Now it doesnt work anymore : if i go away from a mob and a wizard nukes it hard it will run to the wiz.
So in practice i have to kill the mobs i aggro unless there is something to tank it and hold it there (a warrior, sometimes my wolf).

That's my problem as a rogue who doesnt want nor know how to lure.
I've adapted and switched to damage dealer, assisting the tank by killing the mob(s) it is holding and running to the INT's if they get attacked by party mobs.
It works ok because there are no more good parties at my level range on my server. As you said, a good party lures tons of mobs and in that situation i'm overwhelmed as a damage & aggro rogue.

Your 30-mobs pull seems extreme, dispensing of the warriors because the STR-cleric holds all the aggro... alright I believe you that it works, but it takes things beyond the game's design by turning the warriors into idle buffers or dispensing of them entirely.

This means that STR-cleric eats up the warrior's tanking role, making the cleric still more central and important than it already is when it is played well.
A well played cleric is the center of the party. In fact what you're describing i've seen it done by an INT cleric, the one who gave us the extraordinary parties i was refering to in this thread.
Constant lures, constantly many party mobs on the party, the cleric keeping us healed while the tank-warrior and I were protecting the INTs and the bard was mana cycling. My issue with that setup is that a warrior takes aggro from the INT's better than I do.

Currently i'm playing as tank and damage dealer. Switching to warlock will bring me more damage-dealing and add some crowd-control to my toolbox.
I can always switch to cleric later on.
I'm happy I've found out that the warrior can keep the aggro from the high-damage-dealing rogue (daggers with damage buff on) but you guys make me realize it's still not enough to secure a full party-role for the daggers-rogue.

It works in so-so parties though, and as that's all i have to look forward to until and if ever i get near the cap, I'm content with it.

I might even try to start luring... eesh i dont know why but for some reason this doesn't appeal to me in the least.
Luring while standing in the middle of the party alright, but running around and never seeing the action ? No no.
I guess I'm just a poser who thrives on being seen lol

(i gotta fix that sig now:)

[Truie]

Rogue's have been victim of bad design. Warriors lure just as fine as them , really there is like almost no difference in amount of mobs if you compare 2 luring warriors to 1 luring rogue+ 1 tank. A warrior with lv 10 fast shot even can lure alot better on his own if he's smart while he also can help tanking/buffing.

But 2 warriors is just safer. And furthermore rogue's, they deal good 1on1 dmg but lack splash. Basically their dps is really usefull at PTG's etc. Warlock+wizard+rogue on 1 party giant is awesome.

I would rather replace a rogue for a wizard then a rogue for a tank. At Peg's we did alot rogue/wiz/warlock+2bard+2 tank + cleric. The rogue could assist luring and assist dmg dealing. However to some extent he could assist tanking/interupting. As a rogue you need to use all your qualities. If you only stick with dmg dealing or only stick with luring your party and yourself are killing your own xp.

you summed it up very well.

1/ Warriors are safer lurers (they dont lure faster but they dont only lure : they also buff and can switch to tanking role if needed)

2/ Rogues are 1 on 1 damage only, they shine on PTGs especially with warlock debuffs which happen to help with wiz damage also.

3/ Rogues that are not assigned to a luring-role in parties are jacks of all trades and masters of none. They assist with luring, dmg-dealing and aggroing.

So in conclusion... jacks of all trades in loose parties, lurers in very efficient parties.
Sigh. It's kinda fortunate that there are no more good parties at my lvl range on my server, considering how i'm uncomfortable with luring.

[Truie]

Yeah \thread since you ran out of arguments to support your 'daggers are damage dealers in a pt' theory.

on single targets they might be able to do more damage than a wizard, or not.
so yeah, as the guy said, for uniques it might make sense.
(vital increased warrior to keep the aggro)

Actually Rogue's are better when hunting raid bosses. They kill them alot faster then WIzards.

alright that's settled then.
rogues are single-target damage-dealers.
serves mostly for uniques and PTGs.
(they're also lurers, I KNOW )

[Toasty]

95% of the people in thsi thread dont have the slightest idea how to party.

2H warrior in party = stupid.
Rogue in party = stupid IF there is a warrior available instead. Rogues arn't good enough at luring to be able to replace warrior's buffs.

Simple.

[Truie]

95% of the people in thsi thread dont have the slightest idea how to party.

2H warrior in party = stupid.
Rogue in party = stupid IF there is a warrior available instead. Rogues arn't good enough at luring to be able to replace warrior's buffs.

Simple.

95% of all people who talk big like you do, have never been in parties as extraordinary as I have.

I know the party-warrior is 1H but I thought vital increase was 2H-only that's why I made my original post on the 2H warrior.

Some people in this thread have argued that the rogue is a better lurer than the warrior, I can't pronounce myself on this point because the good parties I have been in had warriors as lurers.

If the warrior is a better lurer than the rogue then the rogue has NO party-role that another class can and will do better (wizard for damage, warrior for luring and aggroing).

So that would mean that whoever designed the euro update has come up with 5 euro classes having each an essential role in parties, and one euro class having no clear role.

A jack of all trades and a soloer.

Weird isn't it?

Rogues would be meant to be sub-to-par in parties?
I mean, can you live with that?
I mean, can you imagine that the designers of the game mechanics, who are clearly good at what they do, planned to create a jack-of-all-trades master-of-none class?
Knowing that the end result would necessarily be that efficient parties would never want a rogue?

Why would a whole class be purposefuly excluded from efficient parties?
What would be the thinking behind that?

Maybe that the rogue has very special skills that other classes don't have, skills (in jobbing and group pvp I guess?) that give an advantage over other classes which needs to be compensated by the class being crippled in parties?

Because it isn't rational to believe that the designers screwed up. They designed the euro update too well to believe that they didn't design the rogue as it is, on purpose.

[pr0klobster]

95% of the people in thsi thread dont have the slightest idea how to party.

2H warrior in party = stupid.
Rogue in party = stupid IF there is a warrior available instead. Rogues arn't good enough at luring to be able to replace warrior's buffs.

Simple.

95% of all people who talk big like you do, have never been in parties as extraordinary as I have.

I know the party-warrior is 1H but I thought vital increase was 2H-only that's why I made my original post on the 2H warrior.

Some people in this thread have argued that the rogue is a better lurer than the warrior, I can't pronounce myself on this point because the good parties I have been in had warriors as lurers.

If the warrior is a better lurer than the rogue then the rogue has NO party-role that another class can and will do better (wizard for damage, warrior for luring and aggroing).

So that would mean that whoever designed the euro update has come up with 5 euro classes having each an essential role in parties, and one euro class having no clear role.

A jack of all trades and a soloer.

Weird isn't it?

Rogues would be meant to be sub-to-par in parties?
I mean, can you live with that?
I mean, can you imagine that the designers of the game mechanics, who are clearly good at what they do, planned to create a jack-of-all-trades master-of-none class?
Knowing that the end result would necessarily be that efficient parties would never want a rogue?

Why would a whole class be purposefuly excluded from efficient parties?
What would be the thinking behind that?

Maybe that the rogue has very special skills that other classes don't have, skills (in jobbing and group pvp I guess?) that give an advantage over other classes which needs to be compensated by the class being crippled in parties?

Because it isn't rational to believe that the designers screwed up. They designed the euro update too well to believe that they didn't design the rogue as it is, on purpose.

Er, you do know that wiz(magic user)/warlock (illusionist)/bard/cleric/rogue (thief)/warrior (fighter, paladin) were character classes designed years ago with Dungeons and Dragons and repeated over and over in various MMO's? I didn't see too much "design" - maybe a little - on JM's part. They did integrate existing party play into SRO, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_ ... _&_Dragons)

[Toasty]

95% of the people in thsi thread dont have the slightest idea how to party.

2H warrior in party = stupid.
Rogue in party = stupid IF there is a warrior available instead. Rogues arn't good enough at luring to be able to replace warrior's buffs.

Simple.

95% of all people who talk big like you do, have never been in parties as extraordinary as I have.

I must be the 5%.

And dont write so much each time you post a point / question. If you asked simple questions / statements people would bother to answer them more often.

[BlitZ]

Rogue in party = stupid IF there is a warrior available instead. Rogues arn't good enough at luring to be able to replace warrior's buffs.

Simple.

True but most of the time there isn't a 2nd warrior available.
Still, i've had amazing pt's with rogues. Wizards died a couple of times but great exp.
Also if there is only one warrior in a pt make sure that he knows what he's doing.

[dutchleader]

95% of the people in thsi thread dont have the slightest idea how to party.

2H warrior in party = stupid.
Rogue in party = stupid IF there is a warrior available instead. Rogues arn't good enough at luring to be able to replace warrior's buffs.

Simple.

95% of all people who talk big like you do, have never been in parties as extraordinary as I have.

I must be the 5%.

And dont write so much each time you post a point / question. If you asked simple questions / statements people would bother to answer them more often.

Confirmed, especially the party's with JInchuuriki were awesome and he was a warrior not a rogue lol. But if I can speak for Toastie, we legit players from venus that grinded when the legits made out the majority of players havent been in a few extraordinary party's. We were in them every day. Every lv, Every moment we grinded it was in a party. And basically I have to conclude that in some situations a rogue can be helpfull. Actually at the time we did run short on warriors people even asked for them. Sometimes a rogue could even do his job better then a wiz or tank. However it was just much easier and worked always ( mobs 11 lv's higher, I even grinded at penons with toastie at lv 38) to grind with 2 warriors. IF you had 2 decent warriors+1 decent cleric the rest of your party doesnt really matter that much. So yes in some situations a rogue could be better, but overall its just much safer and easier to go with 2 warriors ( And basically they can lure allot at all mobs, at 99 mobs rogue's are a bit better). But in such a case a warrior did even a better job if he had lv 10 fast shot.

[BloodyBlade]

xbow/dagger or xbow rogue = win
dagger rogue = phail

[Mirosuke]

xbow/dagger or xbow rogue = win
dagger rogue = phail

In terms of what? Pve? Pvp? Jobbing? GW? FW?

[BlitZ]

xbow/dagger or xbow rogue = win
dagger rogue = phail

In terms of what? Pve? Pvp? Jobbing? GW? FW?

party rogue's role found explained and resolved, finally

[Toasty]

95% of all people who talk big like you do, have never been in parties as extraordinary as I have.

I must be the 5%.

And dont write so much each time you post a point / question. If you asked simple questions / statements people would bother to answer them more often.

Confirmed, especially the party's with JInchuuriki were awesome and he was a warrior not a rogue lol. But if I can speak for Toastie, we legit players from venus that grinded when the legits made out the majority of players havent been in a few extraordinary party's. We were in them every day. Every lv, Every moment we grinded it was in a party. And basically I have to conclude that in some situations a rogue can be helpfull. Actually at the time we did run short on warriors people even asked for them. Sometimes a rogue could even do his job better then a wiz or tank. However it was just much easier and worked always ( mobs 11 lv's higher, I even grinded at penons with toastie at lv 38) to grind with 2 warriors. IF you had 2 decent warriors+1 decent cleric the rest of your party doesnt really matter that much. So yes in some situations a rogue could be better, but overall its just much safer and easier to go with 2 warriors ( And basically they can lure allot at all mobs, at 99 mobs rogue's are a bit better). But in such a case a warrior did even a better job if he had lv 10 fast shot.

Great memories.

Does that mean your Jin? xD

[dutchleader]

Yep, I am dutch you know ?xD

[Guardia]

Wow guys.. Since we stop playing, more and more ppl are doing it wrong.

Fist of all, stop trying to justify rogue's usefulness in parties. They cant contribute as much as others. It's a proven, tried and tested facts. We've been there, we've done that. Seriousy. The only thing rogues can contribute is in luring side of work. That's with xbow of course.

I will give 2 videos as an example. First video was on the first week of 100 cap. The second video was on the first month or two after 100 cap opened when we lack tanks. It resulted in partying with 1 tank and the other tank spot replaced by rogue xbow for luring.

Study those videos and ask urself these questions.

Code: Select all

First video :
1. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than the 2nd tank?
- No, new cap. Farming party members. No tank buffs = meatshield.
2. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than those wizards?
- No, no AOE, way lower overall dmg to party.
3. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than those bards?
- No, no tambours (less def for all), and no dance (wiz dmg increase tremendously)
4. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than the cleric?
- Do i need to answer this?



Code: Select all

Second video :
1. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than the 2nd tank?
- There was no 2nd tank, so yes. How? See number 5 question.
2. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than those wizards?
- Hell freaking no
3. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than those bards?
- Still no
4. Can ur so called dagger rogue contribute more than the cleric?
- Duhh..
5. How can rogue contribute more to replace the 2nd tank spot?
- Luring luring luring...

Please, learn from our experience. We party from low lvl until highest lvl mobs. Dont made the same mistake ignorant ppl made for not trusting us. That's all i can contribute to u guys who're still playing.

Have fun guys.

p/s: Dagger rogues ARE NOT dmg dealers. Hitting single target while wizards hit 5 at once is not a dmg dealer role at all FFS.

[Mirosuke]

I refuse to believe they are lurers. (cept if they being Xbow)
But anyways, i think they are best for PvP

@Guardia; oh hai! I'm farming a bard
Just checking your guide (hop its up to date )

[Guardia]

@Guardia; oh hai! I'm farming a bard
Just checking your guide (hop its up to date )

It's not, but it's good enough for 100 cap since there's no new skills since 80 cap except mana orbit which is self-explained.

[Sav]

i've never once during my play on venus allowed a dagger rogue to join pt....ever

2 tanks>tank+xbow

though having that xbow is better than not having it all

tank+_____(insert extra int build here)>tank+dagger

[dutchleader]

Guardia just becuase that worked on venus doesnt mean it will work on other servers ya know? We had an active legit community with more then enough skilled euro players to party with. I mean in all those lvs I learned that you basically cant go wrong with 2 tanks. But especially at the cap there are other options, altough they require more effort for the same result. If you by chance cant get a sec ond tank and are going with a rogue the rogue shouldnt ignore the dmg aspect of the build. I know you probably dont have much experience with playing with Dagger rogue's but I had quite some experience iwth it from 50-60 and it worked fine tbh.

Not trying to justify the bad class decisions the GM's took when making the rogue class, but in some cases they can be handy.

[Guardia]

Guardia just becuase that worked on venus doesnt mean it will work on other servers ya know? We had an active legit community with more then enough skilled euro players to party with. I mean in all those lvs I learned that you basically cant go wrong with 2 tanks. But especially at the cap there are other options, altough they require more effort for the same result. If you by chance cant get a sec ond tank and are going with a rogue the rogue shouldnt ignore the dmg aspect of the build. I know you probably dont have much experience with playing with Dagger rogue's but I had quite some experience iwth it from 50-60 and it worked fine tbh.

Not trying to justify the bad class decisions the GM's took when making the rogue class, but in some cases they can be handy.

Well for sure when u dont have any other alternatives.

[dutchleader]

Guardia just becuase that worked on venus doesnt mean it will work on other servers ya know? We had an active legit community with more then enough skilled euro players to party with. I mean in all those lvs I learned that you basically cant go wrong with 2 tanks. But especially at the cap there are other options, altough they require more effort for the same result. If you by chance cant get a sec ond tank and are going with a rogue the rogue shouldnt ignore the dmg aspect of the build. I know you probably dont have much experience with playing with Dagger rogue's but I had quite some experience iwth it from 50-60 and it worked fine tbh.

Not trying to justify the bad class decisions the GM's took when making the rogue class, but in some cases they can be handy.

Well for sure when u dont have any other alternatives.

O well you have alot more experience with the 99 mobs, but didnt rogue+ tank work better then 2 warriors? At all other mobs I would agree to only take a rogue when there is no alternative.

[Guardia]

Guardia just becuase that worked on venus doesnt mean it will work on other servers ya know? We had an active legit community with more then enough skilled euro players to party with. I mean in all those lvs I learned that you basically cant go wrong with 2 tanks. But especially at the cap there are other options, altough they require more effort for the same result. If you by chance cant get a sec ond tank and are going with a rogue the rogue shouldnt ignore the dmg aspect of the build. I know you probably dont have much experience with playing with Dagger rogue's but I had quite some experience iwth it from 50-60 and it worked fine tbh.

Not trying to justify the bad class decisions the GM's took when making the rogue class, but in some cases they can be handy.

Well for sure when u dont have any other alternatives.

O well you have alot more experience with the 99 mobs, but didnt rogue+ tank work better then 2 warriors? At all other mobs I would agree to only take a rogue when there is no alternative.

We took xbow rogue before if there's no 2nd tank and there's 3 bards to stack the dances. If we had 2 tanks, there's no place for rogues.

[Truie]

well thank you guardia and others for all these replies.
sigh... i guess i'll have to reskill to cleric subclass eventually.
or worse, to warrior (sp-wise and build-wise)

[Mirosuke]

well thank you guardia and others for all these replies.
sigh... i guess i'll have to reskill to cleric subclass eventually.
or worse, to warrior (sp-wise and build-wise)

What you mean? Rogue sucks? >_>

[Dark Ashelin]

Didn't expect to see this from you Truie. Haven't you been in one of my PEGs parties?

[OrangeFeffy]

umm, so i thought a rogue was kinda defined as someone who works alone. soooo umm yeaaa.
but as far as a role in a party they have a small one. they can lure, protect cleric and other squishies (with scorn or whatever its called), and damage deal. thats basically a rogue summed up.

[Ningyotsukai-san]

It's a shame scorn only works on players

[OrangeFeffy]

It's a shame scorn only works on players

ohh yea, well then in pvp groups