[Triumph]

It kinda ticks me off when people say Archers are (practically or not) useless. If it was so useless it should've never been implemented.

And if everyone could somehow heal themselves without stones and potions, would they call a cleric useless? Of course.

The use of the word was not intended to be offensive. It was used, in context, to define the archer's handicap. I'll use an example to be more specific.

I was in a party with two level 67s, at the time of this post: Falcomist and hyoree, fighter and mage respectively. Now, all Falcomist had to do was round up about 10-15 Navar, use Mock and Devastate, and that's all he needed. hyoree would cast Frost Nova, then Inferno, then clean up anything left. Only took about 10 seconds to eliminate all. Not bad exp at all.

After a request, we added Shadow_Shot, a level 63 archer at the time of this post. hyoree went afk to deal with a phone call. It took us about half a minute to kill the Navar. My conclusion was such:

Due to the lack of archer skills, archers cannot compete with mages when it comes to grinding. People want to get as much exp as they can, and with mages able to kill faster, mages are preferred. I mean, be reasonable. A mage with Frost Nova and Inferno will decimate just about any mob.