Mangler 3 box?

[Viricg]

Starting on mangler and wanted to know what an ideal 3 box setup is for playing awhile. I have a 51 bard i'd like to keep in the box group but the other 2 spots are open just want to be able to do the most content as 3 man with OOW and epics on the incoming.

 

[Avian]

Tank and healer of choice +existing bard is really the only option if you want to be self sufficient. That era was still ruled by the holy trinity of Everquest. And maybe not even healer of choice. Honestly, I don't really remember if shaman/druid heals were enough in that era for group content. It may be tank of choice, cleric, existing bard.

 

[Viricg]

Tank and healer of choice +existing bard is really the only option if you want to be self sufficient. That era was still ruled by the holy trinity of Everquest. And maybe not even healer of choice. Honestly, I don't really remember if shaman/druid heals were enough in that era for group content. It may be tank of choice, cleric, existing bard.

Does choice of tank matter much? I dont have much experience tanking

 

[Avian]

Some of what I'm about to say you surely already know, but it's there for the sake of comparison. - For raiding purposes, Warrior defensive disc is irreplaceable. In the group game, that defensive disc is just as godly. That said, there's a general belief (not held by everyone) that knights are just better tanks in the group game. In terms of raw ability to take a hit, warriors are better, but they offer basically no other utility.

Paladin heals are pretty significant throughout EQ and the ability to stun mobs to reduce incoming damage (or buy time for a heal) is nice, and stun aggro on a single target is really high. They can also root mobs off which shouldn't be ignored. (Plus by that point they get a 90% rez). And of course their undead specific stuff. - If they chain stuns, they take less total damage on a single target than a warrior... Assuming, of course, they can stun the mob. Shiftie use to do really crazy impressive solo kills with paladin.

Shadowknights can stack dots and spears for more damage, but lifetaps are what makes them shine for tanking purposes. They can continue to damage while healing themselves. SK's are widely considered better AoE aggro generators, but I'm honestly not sure how good they are at it in that specific era (not that you'll want to have tons of mobs on you at once). They can also snare and feign. This allows them to safely tag mobs from the pack if you're having issues with a pull on bard. Plus their pets can be used either as a really long duration dot, or as a pulling tool. Generally they can survive just long enough for you to get distance between the mobs you want split. SK's 1.5/2.0 is really powerful in the years to come after OoW

That was a very long winded way to say.... Yes and no. All 3 of the traditional tank classes are sufficient tanks, so in terms of straight ability to do their job, no.. It doesn't matter. How you want to achieve that is where picking a specific class will matter. Shadowknights are my personal favorite tank, but you may find warriors 'set it and forget it' style much more appealing. Or love the idea of a clutch heal at just the right moment from a paladin. Given the botting nature of these forums, I'm guessing you won't be playing them all by hand, which makes how many buttons they need to press less of a factor. To that I would say, SK's utility is more straightforward, Paladins can be much more situational, Warriors ... Stand there and look good doing it (warriors do have nuances, but in this era while 3 boxing non-aggro intense boxes, they basically won't matter to you).

 

[Viricg]

Some of what I'm about to say you surely already know, but it's there for the sake of comparison. - For raiding purposes, Warrior defensive disc is irreplaceable. In the group game, that defensive disc is just as godly. That said, there's a general belief (not held by everyone) that knights are just better tanks in the group game. In terms of raw ability to take a hit, warriors are better, but they offer basically no other utility.

Paladin heals are pretty significant throughout EQ and the ability to stun mobs to reduce incoming damage (or buy time for a heal) is nice, and stun aggro on a single target is really high. They can also root mobs off which shouldn't be ignored. (Plus by that point they get a 90% rez). And of course their undead specific stuff. - If they chain stuns, they take less total damage on a single target than a warrior... Assuming, of course, they can stun the mob. Shiftie use to do really crazy impressive solo kills with paladin.

Shadowknights can stack dots and spears for more damage, but lifetaps are what makes them shine for tanking purposes. They can continue to damage while healing themselves. SK's are widely considered better AoE aggro generators, but I'm honestly not sure how good they are at it in that specific era (not that you'll want to have tons of mobs on you at once). They can also snare and feign. This allows them to safely tag mobs from the pack if you're having issues with a pull on bard. Plus their pets can be used either as a really long duration dot, or as a pulling tool. Generally they can survive just long enough for you to get distance between the mobs you want split. SK's 1.5/2.0 is really powerful in the years to come after OoW

That was a very long winded way to say.... Yes and no. All 3 of the traditional tank classes are sufficient tanks, so in terms of straight ability to do their job, no.. It doesn't matter. How you want to achieve that is where picking a specific class will matter. Shadowknights are my personal favorite tank, but you may find warriors 'set it and forget it' style much more appealing. Or love the idea of a clutch heal at just the right moment from a paladin. Given the botting nature of these forums, I'm guessing you won't be playing them all by hand, which makes how many buttons they need to press less of a factor. To that I would say, SK's utility is more straightforward, Paladins can be much more situational, Warriors ... Stand there and look good doing it (warriors do have nuances, but in this era while 3 boxing non-aggro intense boxes, they basically won't matter to you).

Is a real tank better then a caster Necro/Mage/Beast?

 

[InvisigothMT]

Is a real tank better then a caster Necro/Mage/Beast?

Real tanks are much better, more difficult to gear up but you're not going to see many serious multi-boxers using a pet as a group main tank

 

[nezstor]

I would go with Warrior and Cleric.
SK would be good too, but you wont need the SK for snare and fd when pulling thanks to the bard can snare and pull better.
Could go with Shaman instead of cleric, but would get worse heals and no ress for awhile but would get better slow the bards and could add some dps that you will lack with no real dps class in group.

 

[nezstor]

But if I would 3 box I would skip the bard and go with:
SK - Tank, snare and good puller
Shaman - Heals, slow, buffs and haste for melee
Berserker (dont know if they are unlocked yet on mangler?) - Best dps

Instead of berserker you could add a mage for COTH or Wizard for ports but without mana regen I think a 3rd melee would be better.

My 6 box team in rizlona will be when all classes are unlocked:
Warrior - Tank
Cleric - Healer, buffs
Beastlord - Slow, buffs, melee haste and dps
Bard - Good melee buffs, mez, mana regen and overhaste
Berserker - DPS
Ranger (mostly because i love them) - DPS and snare

 

[Kasino7]

Mangler does have zerker - they start to rock in upcoming expanisons