Anyone have good ranger specs for Brae, Wilton ect? I want to sniper Brae and switch melee at 40 for Wilton and Thid and end game. I'm just not sure what specs are good on a ranger as I haven't played one since before the dawn of time.

Well since you will want auto training for bow, and since respecs are not free, i dont expect your willing to respec to avoid losing auto training, youl have to stick with basic auto trained bow. But my experience in Braemar, 8 + 8 bow does just fine, and allows you to have decent melee and buffs. So here is what i suggest.

Braemar at 35 =

24 stealth ( decent enough to get around )
25 pierc ( for evade stun )
8 bow (auto trained)
18 CD ( for side stun )
29 PF ( for best D/Q buff )

Wilton at 43.5 =

30 stealth ( decent enough to get around )
29 pierc
10 bow
25 CD
40 PF ( for best D/Q buff )

Thid at 49.5 =

34 stealth
34 pierc
12 bow
39 CD
42 PF

lvl 50

Up pierc or stealth to cap at 50/51 with item bonus and rr bonus
I personaly like my hybrid spec for 50

33 stealth
39 pierc
35 bow
18 cd
42 pf

Since bow damage doesnt gain as much past composite 50, i get decent bow dmg, volley 1 and rapidfire 1, and decent melee, to be able to melee and use my bow effectively. But dont expect wonders with any spec on a ranger with hybrid or full bow vs most pure melee classes. The shield will block 75% or more of your shots, making full bow nothing, and high ws/damage and alot of hp with current buffing system, will make your fights very hard, and will require outsmarting, and as much extra buffing you can get. I personaly run with str/con and con pots, 150 hp ablitive and haste, and it can still be close calls vs liquid buffed pure melee classes, after i kite a little with the bow.

If all that is too much, just be full melee, high PD, IP 2 and be ready to RA dump. Or play another class, like a BM or an assasin.

Why is it that BMs often spec 50 CD and backup with Pierce/blades, where as a Ranger you suggest to do it the other way around? I was under the understanding that the CD styles seem to be superior to the pierce styles. What am I missing folks?

Because a BM only specs weapon and CD, with some in parry and some in shield till 50 or till they spec for 42 shield. While a ranger has to spec weapon, cd, and decent PF to compete, and stealth. If you want to cut out stealth, you could prob spec more CD and spec that way more like a BM. But if you cut out PF, you will be lacking on balance , since those buffs are part of your class.

That still doesnt answer the question.

Why do you choose to spec 39 Pierce / 18 CD instead of 18 Pierce / 39 CD, and use the CD styles instead of Pierce.

I ask because it seems alot of BMs spec CD HIGHER than thier wep spec. Why is this peferrable for BMs but not Rangers?

Horace wrote:That still doesnt answer the question.

Why do you choose to spec 39 Pierce / 18 CD instead of 18 Pierce / 39 CD, and use the CD styles instead of Pierce.

I ask because it seems alot of BMs spec CD HIGHER than thier wep spec. Why is this peferrable for BMs but not Rangers?

it is preferred for rangers - atleast imo

however i would min get enough pierce to get 51 combined with items / RR / spec..

nixian wrote:

Horace wrote:That still doesnt answer the question.

Why do you choose to spec 39 Pierce / 18 CD instead of 18 Pierce / 39 CD, and use the CD styles instead of Pierce.

I ask because it seems alot of BMs spec CD HIGHER than thier wep spec. Why is this peferrable for BMs but not Rangers?

it is preferred for rangers - atleast imo

however i would min get enough pierce to get 51 combined with items / RR / spec..

So what ur saying is wep spec should be first priority for both classes, its just that BMs can get both composite 50 wep spec AND 50 CD?

What would occur if I were to spec very little weapon, and go 50 points into CD and use CD sytles exclusively. Would I still get very good style bonuses, just low base damage?

correct