most underpowered class in game?

[cd288]

Jboots/sow pots, root nets, sow pots, DPS is actually decent, scepter of forlon, cobalt greaves/indicolate BP/ring of shadows/invis pots, slow clicky hammer....

Oh wow, it's like a ranger but better.

Oh wow having to basically rebuild an entire class out of clickies and expensive gear in order for it to be somewhat functional

[Jimjam]

Not so different to casters which only start with a shield buff and a damage or heal spell…

Collecting utility items is fun.

[Nycon43]

Going to agree with warrior being busted from a design standpoint. Thank god there are people out there who enjoy playing a broken, but needed class.

[PlsNoBan]

Reminder: If you said anything other than druid you answered incorrectly

Hope this helps

[cd288]

Reminder: If you said anything other than druid you answered incorrectly

Hope this helps

I guess for Druid depends on what level range. Until like the mid to late 30s they're totally fine as main healers so in that sense they're not underpowered for a group. And even in the late levels in some of the dicey dungeons I'll take a Druid with the ability to evac us out and adding their buffs and spot healing etc. over a wizard who can also evac but casts one nuke every several minutes. So yeah I'm still going with wizard as most underpowered in a group context.

[Worry]

I've played every class except Wiz to 60, and i would say Warrior honestly.

He definitely felt the weakest to me, at least. I know top end Warriors wreck shop though.

[TripSin]

Putting 50% weight on soloability makes no sense, the game is made to be played with other people and that's how you will accomplish the most.

Are you and I playing the same P99? Yeah, I totally agree with you that soloing was NOT classic for the most part. But P99 isn't classic :(

[Zuranthium]

Caster classes soloing was definitely classic but you're not going to get the best gear or experience the best content like that, and even for leveling purposes it's often best to duo anyway, so I don't see the point in rating soloing as such a hugely important thing.

[cd288]

Caster classes soloing was definitely classic but you're not going to get the best gear or experience the best content like that, and even for leveling purposes it's often best to duo anyway, so I don't see the point in rating soloing as such a hugely important thing.

Generally yeah but depends on the level. Up to like the 50s it can definitely be more efficient to solo because the mobs are easier and you can shred through them relatively quickly with little issue. Once you hit the 50s though for sure it gets more efficient to duo except in a few instances with specific classes in specific zones.

[TripSin]

Caster classes soloing was definitely classic but you're not going to get the best gear or experience the best content like that, and even for leveling purposes it's often best to duo anyway, so I don't see the point in rating soloing as such a hugely important thing.

I'm talking about the degree to which it is done. I'm not saying it wasn't possible to solo, I'm saying it's far more prevalent for people to be soloing in P99 (and also just duo/trio instead of full group) than it was in classic. I played enchanter also in classic and you could not solo nearly as easily as you can today in P99. The difference in internet connectivity alone makes a huge difference for your ability to react to charm breaks. Having audio triggers and timers through programs like GINA also makes a gigantic difference. In P99, every single Enchanter is stacking as much CHA as they can from the get go, all are getting JBoots and goblin rings - this wasn't the case in live. And it's just completely different cultures and game knowledge between classic and P99 today.

[cd288]

I'm talking about the degree to which it is done. I'm not saying it wasn't possible to solo, I'm saying it's far more prevalent for people to be soloing in P99 (and also just duo/trio instead of full group) than it was in classic. I played enchanter also in classic and you could not solo nearly as easily as you can today in P99. The difference in internet connectivity alone makes a huge difference for your ability to react to charm breaks. Having audio triggers and timers through programs like GINA also makes a gigantic difference. In P99, every single Enchanter is stacking as much CHA as they can from the get go, all are getting JBoots and goblin rings - this wasn't the case in live. And it's just completely different cultures and game knowledge between classic and P99 today.

Also the charm killing meta wasn’t fully the way it is today. I mean, damn you can find posts on the forums here from 2013 where people are discussing whether you need to memblur the mobs after the break to get full exp for both, you’ve got people saying you need to kill your pet mob first after breaking charm in order to clear the aggro/damage table to get full exp, etc.

People just didn’t know stuff

[Allishia]

Going to agree with warrior being busted from a design standpoint. Thank god there are people out there who enjoy playing a broken, but needed class.

Wars are crazy fun, y'all crazy /nod :)

[Castle2.0]

Oh wow having to basically rebuild an entire class out of clickies and expensive gear in order for it to be somewhat functional

Don't hate on batman. Everyone wants to be batman.

Raid gear on = Batman
Normal gear on = Bruce Wayne

[Zuranthium]

We need a poll for Paladin/Ranger/Wizard as the weakest.

The poor souls who said Mage or Rogue (!!) are automatically discounted.

Druid is understandable to say when looking at them when they can't Charm, but there are plenty of good places to animal charm, so it's not right to say a character that can do massive DPS, heal, teleport, sow/wolf, snare/root/harmony, tracking, and provide a stackable mana buff (at 60) deserves to be in the very bottom.

Warrior is understandable when looking at them outside of raids and without good gear, but even then consider a fresh classic era server for example. They have the benefit of berserk mode, which means they are better DPS than a similarly geared Pally/Ranger, and they have an exp bonus, whereas those other two have a huge exp penalty. So the Warrior is going to level faster and be in better position to get the gear upgrades, which puts them ahead. Pre-Kunark era without disciplines Warriors are still relevant for raiding too, because they have an inherent magic resist boost (very important for stopping as many Fears as possible from Dragons/Gods) and having the highest HP is obviously beneficial.

---

It's easiest to narrow the battle down to Ranger and Paladin:

pre-Kunark: Ranger has a bit better itemization on the whole. Paladin during the mid levels with Ghoulbane is better and at the end of this era with the first epic they get a boost, otherwise Rangers are doing much better DPS by dual wielding SSOY or raid drops. Skillset it's basically Snare, Harmony, Tracking vs Lull and some better healing. Snare was especially useful in actual classic because targets would often run away full speed, so I give Ranger the edge.

Kunark: Paladin gains the edge here because of being able to tank significantly better, allowing them to fulfill a more worthwhile function than the Ranger, who as a DPS class are weak during this era. Gaining 90% rez is also a real toolkit boost for the Pally, whereas Rangers don't get anything new here (unless we are counting their Epic having a slow proc).

Velious: I give Ranger the advantage until the Two-hander weapon bonus gets modified, as they can provide much better DPS + also have Weaponshield, which are more valuable things than the Pally HP buff. After the Two-hander damage gets changed, then I would put them pretty much equal overall, Pally being better for general groups, but Ranger being a bit more of an asset overall for raiding. Ranger wins the era as a whole since the two-hander damage change isn't until late Velious.

So overall, Paladin is the weakest!

If we are talking end of Velious era though (aka, where Blue server lives forever), then Wizard is my vote for the worst class, especially since you can't meditate while casting on Blue. Just...ugh. Pathetic DPS for a class that should at the very least be able to burn a target down fast, but they are also incapable of that in this era.

[Fammaden]

You're taking raiding into account without weighing LoH, soulfires, and Divine Strength?

By all your metrics you should be ranking Shadow Knight lower than ranger and paladin by a long shot.

[Ghost of Starman]

You're taking raiding into account without weighing LoH, soulfires, and Divine Strength?

By all your metrics you should be ranking Shadow Knight lower than ranger and paladin by a long shot.

Yup, SK has to be the biggest loser here as they bring nothing unique to a raid, Paladins are just as good raid tanks (if not better due to emergency LOH / self heals / Soulfire charges, etc). When properly geared out and with high CHA for lulls pallys can do just about everything a SK can with added benefits, even in groups.

[eqravenprince]

We need a poll for Paladin/Ranger/Wizard as the weakest.

The poor souls who said Mage or Rogue (!!) are automatically discounted.

Druid is understandable to say when looking at them when they can't Charm, but there are plenty of good places to animal charm, so it's not right to say a character that can do massive DPS, heal, teleport, sow/wolf, snare/root/harmony, tracking, and provide a stackable mana buff (at 60) deserves to be in the very bottom.

Warrior is understandable when looking at them outside of raids and without good gear, but even then consider a fresh classic era server for example. They have the benefit of berserk mode, which means they are better DPS than a similarly geared Pally/Ranger, and they have an exp bonus, whereas those other two have a huge exp penalty. So the Warrior is going to level faster and be in better position to get the gear upgrades, which puts them ahead. Pre-Kunark era without disciplines Warriors are still relevant for raiding too, because they have an inherent magic resist boost (very important for stopping as many Fears as possible from Dragons/Gods) and having the highest HP is obviously beneficial.

---

It's easiest to narrow the battle down to Ranger and Paladin:

pre-Kunark: Ranger has a bit better itemization on the whole. Paladin during the mid levels with Ghoulbane is better and at the end of this era with the first epic they get a boost, otherwise Rangers are doing much better DPS by dual wielding SSOY or raid drops. Skillset it's basically Snare, Harmony, Tracking vs Lull and some better healing. Snare was especially useful in actual classic because targets would often run away full speed, so I give Ranger the edge.

Kunark: Paladin gains the edge here because of being able to tank significantly better, allowing them to fulfill a more worthwhile function than the Ranger, who as a DPS class are weak during this era. Gaining 90% rez is also a real toolkit boost for the Pally, whereas Rangers don't get anything new here (unless we are counting their Epic having a slow proc).

Velious: I give Ranger the advantage until the Two-hander weapon bonus gets modified, as they can provide much better DPS + also have Weaponshield, which are more valuable things than the Pally HP buff. After the Two-hander damage gets changed, then I would put them pretty much equal overall, Pally being better for general groups, but Ranger being a bit more of an asset overall for raiding. Ranger wins the era as a whole since the two-hander damage change isn't until late Velious.

So overall, Paladin is the weakest!

If we are talking end of Velious era though (aka, where Blue server lives forever), then Wizard is my vote for the worst class, especially since you can't meditate while casting on Blue. Just...ugh. Pathetic DPS for a class that should at the very least be able to burn a target down fast, but they are also incapable of that in this era.

Well if you are going to make it a poll based on your choices, then put zero emphasis on soloing, barely any emphasis on grouping 1-50 game. Warrior and Rogue are bottom of soloing and most groups. I'd take a Paladin or Ranger over Warrior and Rogue for any group 1-50. Obviously Paladin and Ranger are better soloers than Warrior and Rogue. Wizard, yeah, they are the worst group class.

[Nibblewitz]

I can confirm that wizards are the worst

[Castle2.0]

We need a poll for Paladin/Ranger/Wizard as the weakest.

The poor souls who said Mage or Rogue (!!) are automatically discounted.

Druid is understandable to say when looking at them when they can't Charm, but there are plenty of good places to animal charm, so it's not right to say a character that can do massive DPS, heal, teleport, sow/wolf, snare/root/harmony, tracking, and provide a stackable mana buff (at 60) deserves to be in the very bottom.

Warrior is understandable when looking at them outside of raids and without good gear, but even then consider a fresh classic era server for example. They have the benefit of berserk mode, which means they are better DPS than a similarly geared Pally/Ranger, and they have an exp bonus, whereas those other two have a huge exp penalty. So the Warrior is going to level faster and be in better position to get the gear upgrades, which puts them ahead. Pre-Kunark era without disciplines Warriors are still relevant for raiding too, because they have an inherent magic resist boost (very important for stopping as many Fears as possible from Dragons/Gods) and having the highest HP is obviously beneficial.

---

It's easiest to narrow the battle down to Ranger and Paladin:

pre-Kunark: Ranger has a bit better itemization on the whole. Paladin during the mid levels with Ghoulbane is better and at the end of this era with the first epic they get a boost, otherwise Rangers are doing much better DPS by dual wielding SSOY or raid drops. Skillset it's basically Snare, Harmony, Tracking vs Lull and some better healing. Snare was especially useful in actual classic because targets would often run away full speed, so I give Ranger the edge.

Kunark: Paladin gains the edge here because of being able to tank significantly better, allowing them to fulfill a more worthwhile function than the Ranger, who as a DPS class are weak during this era. Gaining 90% rez is also a real toolkit boost for the Pally, whereas Rangers don't get anything new here (unless we are counting their Epic having a slow proc).

Velious: I give Ranger the advantage until the Two-hander weapon bonus gets modified, as they can provide much better DPS + also have Weaponshield, which are more valuable things than the Pally HP buff. After the Two-hander damage gets changed, then I would put them pretty much equal overall, Pally being better for general groups, but Ranger being a bit more of an asset overall for raiding. Ranger wins the era as a whole since the two-hander damage change isn't until late Velious.

So overall, Paladin is the weakest!

If we are talking end of Velious era though (aka, where Blue server lives forever), then Wizard is my vote for the worst class, especially since you can't meditate while casting on Blue. Just...ugh. Pathetic DPS for a class that should at the very least be able to burn a target down fast, but they are also incapable of that in this era.

Wizard can gate to Rivervale, manadance to full quickly, then port out to keep killing. This makes them incredibly powerful.

Manadance! (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=359987)

[cd288]

Yup, SK has to be the biggest loser here as they bring nothing unique to a raid, Paladins are just as good raid tanks (if not better due to emergency LOH / self heals / Soulfire charges, etc). When properly geared out and with high CHA for lulls pallys can do just about everything a SK can with added benefits, even in groups.

In what world have you never had an SK on your pull team?

[Fammaden]

FD pulling isn't unique to SK. He's right, they have no niche that another class can't fill in raiding as well or better. We know they CAN be used on raids, and ARE used on raids, but they bring nothing unique to the table. Rangers and Paladins most certainly do.

[Jimjam]

FD pulling isn't unique to SK. He's right, they have no niche that another class can't fill in raiding as well or better. We know they CAN be used on raids, and ARE used on raids, but they bring nothing unique to the table. Rangers and Paladins most certainly do.

SKs do combo fd and snare though, which is a pretty big deal. Necros however, do that and also don't rely on charges to do root FDs.

[Fammaden]

Snare in Velious raid context isn't necessarily as relevant though.

[Castle2.0]

Rogue is the most powerful class. They are the only ones that can make and apply poison =)

Sorry, this question is too broad so you have a bunch of goofs speaking past each other.

[Fragged]

You can't spell "suck" without SK.

[NPC]

Mage is still the worst there too.

Hope this helps.

The wizard is a mage, only with no pets and less utility.
My mage is more powerful than my wizard. The wizard can damage till their mana bar is empty, then at their best with regular mana regen 21, you get 210 mana per min, they can cast one DD for 730 dmg a minute. Their only purpose is DPS and they get 730 per min at 60th level after they pump maybe 8k dmg. Who is the worst? In high level groups where mobs consistently have 5k-12k hps, the wizard is the biggest drag on a group. At least Ranger, Rogue, mage, paladin can average better than 730 dmg per min, plus have other utility on top of that. And that wizard damage could be resisted making damage even worse. Druids get better mana regen with PotG so even they can average more damage, plus have all the utility of powerful buffs to add and assists significantly to infinite melee damage that is only a complete heal away.

[Castle2.0]

The wizard is a mage, only with no pets and less utility.
My mage is more powerful than my wizard. The wizard can damage till their mana bar is empty, then at their best with regular mana regen 21, you get 210 mana per min, they can cast one DD for 730 dmg a minute. Their only purpose is DPS and they get 730 per min at 60th level after they pump maybe 8k dmg. Who is the worst? In high level groups where mobs consistently have 5k-12k hps, the wizard is the biggest drag on a group. At least Ranger, Rogue, mage can average better than 730 dmg per min. And that wizard damage could be resisted on top of that. Druids get better mana regen with PotG so even they can average more damage, plus have all the utility of powerful buffs to add and assists significantly to infinite melee damage that is only a complete heal away.

My wizard gets from OOM to FM in a few minutes. For most people, it's like 15 minutes at 60 with full gear.

[Zeboim]

Yeah but then you only last 5 seconds after the boss tells you to get to work so it evens out.

[Castle2.0]

Yeah but then you only last 5 seconds after the boss tells you to get to work so it evens out.

Please keep that between you and your wife/husband, and don't project onto me, kthx

[sajbert]

The wizard is a mage, only with no pets and less utility.
My mage is more powerful than my wizard. The wizard can damage till their mana bar is empty, then at their best with regular mana regen 21, you get 210 mana per min, they can cast one DD for 730 dmg a minute. Their only purpose is DPS and they get 730 per min at 60th level after they pump maybe 8k dmg. Who is the worst? In high level groups where mobs consistently have 5k-12k hps, the wizard is the biggest drag on a group. At least Ranger, Rogue, mage, paladin can average better than 730 dmg per min, plus have other utility on top of that. And that wizard damage could be resisted making damage even worse. Druids get better mana regen with PotG so even they can average more damage, plus have all the utility of powerful buffs to add and assists significantly to infinite melee damage that is only a complete heal away.
Wizards aren’t great in sustained DPS groups. A Rend Robe will help with this however. Just gotta hit 60 and get VP keyed…

Wizards can regen rather fast with C2 and manna robe. Manastone is not really realistic in most group locations. But yeah your sustained DPs will still be garbage witout that Clicky Robe.

I stress that wizzies provide more than the best burst in the game and bad sustained DPS. Stuns, root, evac (planning for failure is not a bad thing in random groups).

In raids wizards like druids provide critical logistics support and you simply need them for PoH and PoS ans druids don’t get translocate. Dragonbane is also crucial for some fights. Flux staff pulls are hard to beat in some places. VP clicky staff helps with long Velious fights where wizards otherwise are purely dead weight once ports are done.

Simply put, wizards are not a great grouping class and only at late game they become passable at it. In raids they’re crucial and probably offers the best raiding QoL together with Druids. And unlike most classes, they can solo no problem all the way to 60.

I don’t recommend making a wizard because they are on the boring side but if you want afk-leveling, want to be cool and want QoL raiding… the wizard is a strong choice.

[Fammaden]

The real end game of P99 is having a big stable of various classes anyway. They all have something to offer at the raid level, just that SK doesn't offer very much and is the most expendable in the raid scene.

[plzrelax]

In classic/early green, wizards seemed quite powerful. Compared to my bare handed monk they were blasting mobs away in solA bar groups for example. Once melee characters get more access to better weapons and thinks become more common wizards start to really lose out

[PatChapp]

Yup, SK has to be the biggest loser here as they bring nothing unique to a raid, Paladins are just as good raid tanks (if not better due to emergency LOH / self heals / Soulfire charges, etc). When properly geared out and with high CHA for lulls pallys can do just about everything a SK can with added benefits, even in groups.

Sk's are the best pet wranglers for a few encounters.
Tunare for instance, less dead enchanters with a quality pet wrangler.

Wizards are great at anything but group xp content.

[Zeboim]

Good thing they don't actually need group content then considering they're also one of the fastest solo levelers in the game.

[Zuranthium]

Wizard can gate to Rivervale, manadance to full quickly, then port out to keep killing. This makes them incredibly powerful.

Not practical. That's a bad bind spot and it's generally going to take too long to port back and run to the spot where you were hunting.

Wizards are great at anything but group xp content.

No. They are inferior to melee DPS for Velious raiding (very inferior against targets that Banes don't work on), they generally can't solo farm any good items and are a bad duo partner, and for group farming where it's all about churning through NPC's they have the exact same problem as xp groups.

With the nerf to cash drops given by Seafuries, Wizards are especially weak at doing any kind of relevant farming. And this whole game basically just comes down to farming.

You're taking raiding into account without weighing LoH, soulfires, and Divine Strength?

Call of the Predator to buff all the melees on the raid is more valuable than the Pally HP buff and LoH combined. Killing faster means taking less damage. Ranger additionally has Weaponshield discipline on top of that. Soulfire is not something that has lasting value. It's not classic to be using that item as frequently as it saw play on p99. It's supposed to just be a rare case usage, maybe for one encounter the Pally can save the fight, but the expectation should be that it will be awhile before they pick up another Soulfire to use again.

SK has to be the biggest loser here as they bring nothing unique to a raid

AC debuff = DPS increase for the raid. Doesn't work on all targets, and I don't know the exact math on this (it also largely depends on how many melee you have in total), but possibly an SK for those targets could edge out the amount of DPS that you would get from having another Rogue on the raid instead.

I'd take a Paladin or Ranger over Warrior and Rogue for any group 1-50.

Then you will likely be leveling slower.

[TripSin]

And this whole game basically just comes down to farming.



For you, sure, but that isn't true for everyone. Some people actual take their time with the game and enjoy the experience rather than just trying to min max and optimize everything and rushing XP gain as fast as they can. Some people, as hard as it might be for you to imagine, don't care much about pixels that give them BIS stats or whatever because that's not important to them.

[Zuranthium]

Some people actual take their time with the game and enjoy the experience rather than just trying to min max and optimize everything and rushing XP gain as fast as they can. Some people, as hard as it might be for you to imagine, don't care much about pixels that give them BIS stats or whatever because that's not important to them.

Sure, but that's not relevant to a discussion about power level of classes.

[Bockscar]

It's between the following classes:

Ranger
Paladin
Shadowknight
Wizard
Druid

So let's look at what they each bring to the table.

Ranger has its reputation, but as far as raiding goes, the class does provide a very useful atk buff, top-tier tracking, weaponshield, and the unique ability to do respectable non-magic damage from range (for a limited time). In groups, rangers are very versatile, able to tank just fine in anything short of the very hardest group content. Their DPS is reasonable as well; not great by any means, but good enough that it's fine to have a ranger as one of the DPS, and it's surprisingly useful to have a DPS who can fill in as a tank if the current tank leaves or dies. Having both snare and root is pretty useful, too, and moreso on a melee class than on a caster who will find it impractical to cover snares in particular due to aggro and the mana cost of casting snare on every single mob throughout a grind session.

Paladin lacks a well-defined role in raids as early Everquest just doesn't feature a lot of adds that need to be off-tanked during boss fights. Almost all raid bosses pre-Luclin just have the boss by itself, so snap aggro tanking doesn't have a whole lot of limelight on raids. LoH/SoulFire is useful in emergencies but tends not to have a huge impact on a raid as a whole. It's not like it's something that shapes the overall strategy of a ToV clear. Divine Strength is an alright buff, but again, +200 HP doesn't have a massive impact really. In groups, paladins are excellent tanks but suffer from the fact that their stun spells come too late in the leveling process. They have long cooldowns and you get the first one at level 30, then the next at 49, and it's not until you have two stuns that it feels comfortable. Flash of Light is horrible to tank with because blinded mobs act as if feared if the #1 aggro-holder isn't in melee range. Paladins are kind of unwieldy before level 49 for this reason, and if there isn't Clarity available to the group, using stuns for aggro means you will run out of mana in a chain-pulling group.

Shadowknight doesn't bring much to the raid in terms of actual abilities and shares the paladin's problem of not having much to do during the fights, but there are potential situations where it's very useful to have at least one puller who can a) feign multiple times in a row and b) summon a pet. In hardcore guilds where monks have elder beads, this is somewhat less of an asset, but it definitely has its place if that luxury is not available. In groups, shadowknights are better tanks than paladins during the leveling process as the main aggro spell is available basically from the start and spammable. At higher levels, this advantage wanes as stuns have a useful purpose beyond the aggro they generate. However, the tradeable gear available to shadowknights is much, much better than what paladins can get from EC. Better weapons, better armor. Also, having both types of invis (including insta-click invis) as well as FD makes it far easier for a shadowknight to actually get to a group deep down in a dungeon whereas a paladin will often have to be escorted.

Wizard is a viable damage dealer on raids, especially ones where bane spells are applicable or where resists are so high that other casters can't really land anything. While they don't compete with rogues in general, there's some strategic value in being able to concentrate your damage output on specific parts of the fight instead of just dealing a flat sustained amount from start to finish. With epic and Manna Robe, wizard DPS can be genuinely respectable across the board. Wizards are also required for classic raiding, you're not getting to PoH/PoS without one (or several, realistically). However, wizards suffer terribly in groups as they just can't keep up. Without a pet, the class simply sucks at dealing steady damage throughout a grind session. If measured on a scale of hours, wizard DPS is so low that it's frankly pathetic. A tanking paladin will have dealt more total damage after three hours in Sebilis. This is one of the very worst classes outside of raids. Truly worthless for XP grinding.

Druid doesn't have a well-defined role anywhere in the game. They bring PotG which is okay but not enough on its own to make the class fit in well in raids. Their healing is very poor, the worst by far of the three priest classes, and there's just no good reason to ever have more druids in the raid than absolutely necessary to provide PotG and circles (which provide a whopping +5 more FR/CR than the generic resist buffs, but are at least group spells). In a group setting, druid is at least a little bit better situated but still suffers heavily from the fact that it's very tough for a druid to single-handedly heal a group, and basically impossible without Clarity. A druid alone isn't enough, and if you have a cleric, you don't really want the druid on top. Thorns is kind of nice up to about level 40 when it stops being a significant amount of damage, and while the ability to port is briefly convenient in getting the group to the desired camp, it has no impact after arriving.

So I think druid takes the cake as the most underpowered class overall. If we specified whether it's for raiding or for grouping, the answer would be different; but all other classes are good at at least one of those things whereas druids simply aren't useful anywhere except for PLing 1-30ish and working at DaP for pocket money.

[Castle2.0]

Not practical. That's a bad bind spot and it's generally going to take too long to port back and run to the spot where you were hunting.

I am talking about XPing here.

If you can go from OOM to FM in just a few minutes, you intentionally hunt near a port in an outdoor zone quad kiting.

[Vivitron]

blinded mobs act as if feared if the #1 aggro-holder isn't in melee range

That's how I remember it from live (possibly with some threshold, where the ranged person had to be #1 by some amount, although I thought there was some threshold for any chasing at all), but afaict on Green a blind mob won't "blind run" if there is an enemy in melee range, even if something outside of melee range has massively more aggro.

[Fammaden]

Paladin lacks a well-defined role in raids as early Everquest just doesn't feature a lot of adds that need to be off-tanked during boss fights. Almost all raid bosses pre-Luclin just have the boss by itself, so snap aggro tanking doesn't have a whole lot of limelight on raids. LoH/SoulFire is useful in emergencies but tends not to have a huge impact on a raid as a whole. It's not like it's something that shapes the overall strategy of a ToV clear. Divine Strength is an alright buff, but again, +200 HP doesn't have a massive impact really. In groups, paladins are excellent tanks but suffer from the fact that their stun spells come too late in the leveling process. They have long cooldowns and you get the first one at level 30, then the next at 49, and it's not until you have two stuns that it feels comfortable. Flash of Light is horrible to tank with because blinded mobs act as if feared if the #1 aggro-holder isn't in melee range. Paladins are kind of unwieldy before level 49 for this reason, and if there isn't Clarity available to the group, using stuns for aggro means you will run out of mana in a chain-pulling group.



This entire section is almost completely misinformed. DS is an amazing buff that everyone wants, doesn't block worts like SoN, and is two velious BiS items worth of HP packed into one convenient buff. Soulfires are absolutely amazing in P99 raiding where quite often a minimal razor's edge engage is the norm, and even more pronounced now that reapers have been broken for almost a year.

In pre-Kunark and for much of Kunark (especially VP), pallies were the tank of choice on green, and continue to be for many of the fast dying 32hp Kunark dragons on both servers. Sanctification disc can be incredibly helpful for fast FTE engages on AE mobs as well.

All the benefits of paladins are also multiplied due to the fact that most raiding guilds can never find enough people willing to main one.

[Toxigen]

The wizard is a mage, only with no pets and less utility.
My mage is more powerful than my wizard. The wizard can damage till their mana bar is empty, then at their best with regular mana regen 21, you get 210 mana per min, they can cast one DD for 730 dmg a minute. Their only purpose is DPS and they get 730 per min at 60th level after they pump maybe 8k dmg. Who is the worst? In high level groups where mobs consistently have 5k-12k hps, the wizard is the biggest drag on a group. At least Ranger, Rogue, mage, paladin can average better than 730 dmg per min, plus have other utility on top of that. And that wizard damage could be resisted making damage even worse. Druids get better mana regen with PotG so even they can average more damage, plus have all the utility of powerful buffs to add and assists significantly to infinite melee damage that is only a complete heal away.

All of these words and all you had to do was say "I've never raided competitively so I don't understand." Mages aren't much more than coth bots at level 55+, hope this helps.

Ever seen 6+ wizards kite all of Vulak's guards? How does your guild train around nToV without TL boxes? Did you know VP dragons only have 32k hp? And of course....Porlos power!

oFVDtDY1xlQ

The answer to the original question is still SK. Mages coth (essential), paladoods bring DS / soulfires (way underrated in this thread), and rangers can speedbump / cotp.

[Castle2.0]

This entire section is almost completely misinformed. DS is an amazing buff that everyone wants, doesn't block worts like SoN, and is two velious BiS items worth of HP packed into one convenient buff. Soulfires are absolutely amazing in P99 raiding where quite often a minimal razor's edge engage is the norm, and even more pronounced now that reapers have been broken for almost a year.

In pre-Kunark and for much of Kunark (especially VP), pallies were the tank of choice on green, and continue to be for many of the fast dying 32hp Kunark dragons on both servers. Sanctification disc can be incredibly helpful for fast FTE engages on AE mobs as well.

All the benefits of paladins are also multiplied due to the fact that most raiding guilds can never find enough people willing to main one.

Wait, what happened to reapers?

[Jibartik]

fpTmPQpzguQ

[Zuranthium]

Soulfires are absolutely amazing in P99 raiding

Not classic for it to be so prevalent. And even besides that, when the spawn for an item is monopolized, then it's not an ability every Paladin can use anyway. "FTE" raiding is not classic either.

There is no reason to want a Pally tank vs bosses for optimized raid composition in classic. They take more damage (even disregarding disciplines) and have less HP and magic resist than a Warrior. Pally's don't have any needed aggro benefit over Warriors with appropriate clicky usage and they do less damage. This was especially true pre-Velious, when spellcasting could reset the timer of melee attacks (and many hybrid spells also had longer cast times until several months into Velious). p99 has entirely ignored this classic mechanic, to the benefit of all spellcasters in fact. It was only the hybrid classes that received the ability in Velious to not have their attack timer reset by a spell that was still going when the next auto attack is timed. Note: before Velious you could cancel auto attack and then cast the spell and then turn attack back on, but the input delay still results in a lower effective attack speed.

[PatChapp]

Wait, what happened to reapers?

Quest has been broken since October or november

[TomisFeline]

excellent summary and conclusion by Bockscar. Heavily weighing importance of raids if druid indeed is the pick, but perhaps that's relevant to enough ppl playing P99.

It's between the following classes:

Ranger
Paladin
Shadowknight
Wizard
Druid

So let's look at what they each bring to the table.

Ranger has its reputation, but as far as raiding goes, the class does provide a very useful atk buff, top-tier tracking, weaponshield, and the unique ability to do respectable non-magic damage from range (for a limited time). In groups, rangers are very versatile, able to tank just fine in anything short of the very hardest group content. Their DPS is reasonable as well; not great by any means, but good enough that it's fine to have a ranger as one of the DPS, and it's surprisingly useful to have a DPS who can fill in as a tank if the current tank leaves or dies. Having both snare and root is pretty useful, too, and moreso on a melee class than on a caster who will find it impractical to cover snares in particular due to aggro and the mana cost of casting snare on every single mob throughout a grind session.

Paladin lacks a well-defined role in raids as early Everquest just doesn't feature a lot of adds that need to be off-tanked during boss fights. Almost all raid bosses pre-Luclin just have the boss by itself, so snap aggro tanking doesn't have a whole lot of limelight on raids. LoH/SoulFire is useful in emergencies but tends not to have a huge impact on a raid as a whole. It's not like it's something that shapes the overall strategy of a ToV clear. Divine Strength is an alright buff, but again, +200 HP doesn't have a massive impact really. In groups, paladins are excellent tanks but suffer from the fact that their stun spells come too late in the leveling process. They have long cooldowns and you get the first one at level 30, then the next at 49, and it's not until you have two stuns that it feels comfortable. Flash of Light is horrible to tank with because blinded mobs act as if feared if the #1 aggro-holder isn't in melee range. Paladins are kind of unwieldy before level 49 for this reason, and if there isn't Clarity available to the group, using stuns for aggro means you will run out of mana in a chain-pulling group.

Shadowknight doesn't bring much to the raid in terms of actual abilities and shares the paladin's problem of not having much to do during the fights, but there are potential situations where it's very useful to have at least one puller who can a) feign multiple times in a row and b) summon a pet. In hardcore guilds where monks have elder beads, this is somewhat less of an asset, but it definitely has its place if that luxury is not available. In groups, shadowknights are better tanks than paladins during the leveling process as the main aggro spell is available basically from the start and spammable. At higher levels, this advantage wanes as stuns have a useful purpose beyond the aggro they generate. However, the tradeable gear available to shadowknights is much, much better than what paladins can get from EC. Better weapons, better armor. Also, having both types of invis (including insta-click invis) as well as FD makes it far easier for a shadowknight to actually get to a group deep down in a dungeon whereas a paladin will often have to be escorted.

Wizard is a viable damage dealer on raids, especially ones where bane spells are applicable or where resists are so high that other casters can't really land anything. While they don't compete with rogues in general, there's some strategic value in being able to concentrate your damage output on specific parts of the fight instead of just dealing a flat sustained amount from start to finish. With epic and Manna Robe, wizard DPS can be genuinely respectable across the board. Wizards are also required for classic raiding, you're not getting to PoH/PoS without one (or several, realistically). However, wizards suffer terribly in groups as they just can't keep up. Without a pet, the class simply sucks at dealing steady damage throughout a grind session. If measured on a scale of hours, wizard DPS is so low that it's frankly pathetic. A tanking paladin will have dealt more total damage after three hours in Sebilis. This is one of the very worst classes outside of raids. Truly worthless for XP grinding.

Druid doesn't have a well-defined role anywhere in the game. They bring PotG which is okay but not enough on its own to make the class fit in well in raids. Their healing is very poor, the worst by far of the three priest classes, and there's just no good reason to ever have more druids in the raid than absolutely necessary to provide PotG and circles (which provide a whopping +5 more FR/CR than the generic resist buffs, but are at least group spells). In a group setting, druid is at least a little bit better situated but still suffers heavily from the fact that it's very tough for a druid to single-handedly heal a group, and basically impossible without Clarity. A druid alone isn't enough, and if you have a cleric, you don't really want the druid on top. Thorns is kind of nice up to about level 40 when it stops being a significant amount of damage, and while the ability to port is briefly convenient in getting the group to the desired camp, it has no impact after arriving.

So I think druid takes the cake as the most underpowered class overall. If we specified whether it's for raiding or for grouping, the answer would be different; but all other classes are good at at least one of those things whereas druids simply aren't useful anywhere except for PLing 1-30ish and working at DaP for pocket money.

[Ghost of Starman]

excellent summary and conclusion by Bockscar. Heavily weighing importance of raids if druid indeed is the pick, but perhaps that's relevant to enough ppl playing P99.

Nah its a horrible take.

If you're putting heavy weight on raiding Druids bring unique buffs to raids, including a stacking mana regen buff (POTG), circles for highest specific resistances group buffs, and are absolutely vital to raid mobility by porting people in and out of raids and being able to SoW them. They also have the ability to charm in places like PoH and PoF.

SKs bring... nothing unique to raiding that another class doesn't do better. No stackable worthwhile buff (CotP and Divine Strength) or ability (weaponshield) like Rangers and Paladins, nor the ability to even heal themselves given the majority of p99 raid targets are immune to LTs. Their OTing role is better filled by a Pally that brings extra abilities to the table including an amazing 5 instant click charges of CH that have saved untold numbers of raid encounters over the years, and self heals.

Druids are also strong soloers and can do a surprising amount of farming and soloing in high end zones with animals, which includes end game zones with valuable drops like PoM / Chardok.

Honestly, the only place SKs have an edge over them is in group content, I'd say low level group content is the only place SKs really shine, since they have a better early snap aggro ability in disease cloud, until Pally stuns/root/lull put them ahead in that regard too.

[PlsNoBan]

It's between the following classes:

Ranger
Paladin
Shadowknight
Wizard
Druid

So let's look at what they each bring to the table.

Ranger has its reputation, but as far as raiding goes, the class does provide a very useful atk buff, top-tier tracking, weaponshield, and the unique ability to do respectable non-magic damage from range (for a limited time). In groups, rangers are very versatile, able to tank just fine in anything short of the very hardest group content. Their DPS is reasonable as well; not great by any means, but good enough that it's fine to have a ranger as one of the DPS, and it's surprisingly useful to have a DPS who can fill in as a tank if the current tank leaves or dies. Having both snare and root is pretty useful, too, and moreso on a melee class than on a caster who will find it impractical to cover snares in particular due to aggro and the mana cost of casting snare on every single mob throughout a grind session.

Paladin lacks a well-defined role in raids as early Everquest just doesn't feature a lot of adds that need to be off-tanked during boss fights. Almost all raid bosses pre-Luclin just have the boss by itself, so snap aggro tanking doesn't have a whole lot of limelight on raids. LoH/SoulFire is useful in emergencies but tends not to have a huge impact on a raid as a whole. It's not like it's something that shapes the overall strategy of a ToV clear. Divine Strength is an alright buff, but again, +200 HP doesn't have a massive impact really. In groups, paladins are excellent tanks but suffer from the fact that their stun spells come too late in the leveling process. They have long cooldowns and you get the first one at level 30, then the next at 49, and it's not until you have two stuns that it feels comfortable. Flash of Light is horrible to tank with because blinded mobs act as if feared if the #1 aggro-holder isn't in melee range. Paladins are kind of unwieldy before level 49 for this reason, and if there isn't Clarity available to the group, using stuns for aggro means you will run out of mana in a chain-pulling group.

Shadowknight doesn't bring much to the raid in terms of actual abilities and shares the paladin's problem of not having much to do during the fights, but there are potential situations where it's very useful to have at least one puller who can a) feign multiple times in a row and b) summon a pet. In hardcore guilds where monks have elder beads, this is somewhat less of an asset, but it definitely has its place if that luxury is not available. In groups, shadowknights are better tanks than paladins during the leveling process as the main aggro spell is available basically from the start and spammable. At higher levels, this advantage wanes as stuns have a useful purpose beyond the aggro they generate. However, the tradeable gear available to shadowknights is much, much better than what paladins can get from EC. Better weapons, better armor. Also, having both types of invis (including insta-click invis) as well as FD makes it far easier for a shadowknight to actually get to a group deep down in a dungeon whereas a paladin will often have to be escorted.

Wizard is a viable damage dealer on raids, especially ones where bane spells are applicable or where resists are so high that other casters can't really land anything. While they don't compete with rogues in general, there's some strategic value in being able to concentrate your damage output on specific parts of the fight instead of just dealing a flat sustained amount from start to finish. With epic and Manna Robe, wizard DPS can be genuinely respectable across the board. Wizards are also required for classic raiding, you're not getting to PoH/PoS without one (or several, realistically). However, wizards suffer terribly in groups as they just can't keep up. Without a pet, the class simply sucks at dealing steady damage throughout a grind session. If measured on a scale of hours, wizard DPS is so low that it's frankly pathetic. A tanking paladin will have dealt more total damage after three hours in Sebilis. This is one of the very worst classes outside of raids. Truly worthless for XP grinding.

Druid doesn't have a well-defined role anywhere in the game. They bring PotG which is okay but not enough on its own to make the class fit in well in raids. Their healing is very poor, the worst by far of the three priest classes, and there's just no good reason to ever have more druids in the raid than absolutely necessary to provide PotG and circles (which provide a whopping +5 more FR/CR than the generic resist buffs, but are at least group spells). In a group setting, druid is at least a little bit better situated but still suffers heavily from the fact that it's very tough for a druid to single-handedly heal a group, and basically impossible without Clarity. A druid alone isn't enough, and if you have a cleric, you don't really want the druid on top. Thorns is kind of nice up to about level 40 when it stops being a significant amount of damage, and while the ability to port is briefly convenient in getting the group to the desired camp, it has no impact after arriving.

So I think druid takes the cake as the most underpowered class overall. If we specified whether it's for raiding or for grouping, the answer would be different; but all other classes are good at at least one of those things whereas druids simply aren't useful anywhere except for PLing 1-30ish and working at DaP for pocket money.

/thread

Druids are ass and I'm convinced anyone arguing otherwise is a druid main on copium

[GuidedbyLazers]

If you took ports away from Druids they would easily be the most worthless, but as it stands I would have to vote Bard. Problem with Bard is its a very high effort class to play and the vast majority of P99ers are lazy as fuck so most Bards are completely worthless. Its either thinking playing mana song afk is a great contribution to the group, or they charm unnecessarily making kill time go up, or they break enchanter mez, or they are constantly taking damage by doing more of the above bull shit, or they have no idea how to group because they have swarm kited for 50 levels...and are just overall a pain in the ass to be around in-game honestly.

Yr smoking crack, just because yr experience with Bards is poor on p99 doesn't mean they are shitty. Bards are 100% broken. Rangers are seriously underpowered and the fact that Bards get plate and Rangers don't is stupid design. Ranger's saving grace is that they are the best pullers in the game as long as you are outdoors by a long shot, no pun intended. Ranger's are just lucky that so many prevalent outdoor dungeons ARE outdoor when they shouldn't be.

[Zuranthium]

Druids are ass and I'm convinced anyone arguing otherwise is a druid main on copium

Nah, Charm is powerful, and about 75% of the relevant zones in the game have a very good animal to charm, and another 10% at least have Shaman pets or something of this power level to still generate some extra DPS.

Yeah, they are shit in ToV, Veeshan's Peak, and Plane of Sky (but still worth having 1 around for PotG). I suppose it's also unlucky that The Hole became the level 50+ exp-grind place on p99, which is devoid of animals. But at least Manastone can be used there, allowing a Druid to function better as the healer for a party.

[PatChapp]

Nah, Charm is powerful, and about 75% of the relevant zones in the game have a very good animal to charm, and another 10% at least have Shaman pets or something of this power level to still generate some extra DPS.

Yeah, they are shit in ToV, Veeshan's Peak, and Plane of Sky (but still worth having 1 around for PotG). I suppose it's also unlucky that The Hole became the level 50+ exp-grind place on p99, which is devoid of animals. But at least Manastone can be used there, allowing a Druid to function better as the healer for a party.

Druids can charm in sky. The flying horses are handy pets vs bees

[Zoolander]

charming outdoors is like winning in the special olympics.

[Keebz]

SKs are pretty great everywhere but ToV, though, even there they can do train-aways, tank trash and tag etc. It's kind of a high skill gap just to be useful though. So I agree they're definitely up there if we're talking ToV. Druids are also pretty bad in this context as are Paladins.

However, it really depends on the context what is the most underpowered. In classic and leveling 1-50 Warriors and Rogues are hot garbage, for example. In Kunark Rangers are very weak. Grouping vs Raiding, ToV vs VP vs Planes, etc. Trying to define 1 most underpowered class across all contexts isn't very useful imho.

[Zuranthium]

Druids can charm in sky. The flying horses are handy pets vs bees

I've not personally experienced a guild doing this (people have wanted to farm those for the loot, it's necessary even, if you don't have the keys for next island yet), but yeah that's possible! Another spot to add to the list. Something that annoys me is the Velk's spiders can't be animal charmed. Like...why not, ugh.

[DallasNChains]

Heh. I feel like the only DRU main on P99 that would agree that we bring very little of anything special to a group.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Most people in this thread do not seem to understand that underpowered is NOT equal to bad or unplayable.

Magician is the most underpowered simply because the majority of their kit is dependant on a lack of game knowledge to be useful. Once you know everything about the server a Mage really only has CoTH, Muzzle, dispel staff, Mod Rods, and DA pulling. A necro can do everything else a Mage can do but better. This means Mages are just a niche raid class, and most people are not hardcore raiders.

By my estimation that makes them the most underpowered. That doesn't mean bad, it just means their design wasn't really built for a 20 year old server where summoning items is used to a much smaller degree due to game knowledge.

[Zuranthium]

Mage does very high DPS. They are absolutely not one of the most underpowered classes. Necro is lower DPS in typical groups. Mage also has resist debuff, which you left out. It helps a lot with charming.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Mage does very high DPS. They are absolutely not one of the most underpowered classes. Necro is lower DPS in typical groups. Mage also has resist debuff, which you left out. It helps a lot with charming.

Unfortunately in most solo/group situations utility is greater than DPS. It doesn't make mages any better. I'd take a Necro's utility over a Mage's DPS any day of the week. There is a reason why groups do not gear check members. DPS really isn't that important most of the time. If it was, you would get screened out of a group if your gear was bad while you were playing Rogue, Monk, etc.

As for the resist debuff, you will often have a Shaman or Enchanter in a group situation. Mage doesn't have a monopoly on resist debuffs, and it is worse than a Shaman's.

[Zuranthium]

Unfortunately in most solo/group situations utility is greater than DPS.

Nah, DPS is king. Churning through as many MOBs as possible to get exp or item drops or faction is the name of the game. The only utility that's needed most of the time is Root.

As for the resist debuff, you will often have a Shaman or Enchanter in a group situation. Mage doesn't have a monopoly on resist debuffs, and it is worse than a Shaman's.

What does Enchanter resist debuff have to do with anything? The Shaman/Mage debuff stacks with the Enchanter's and is exactly wanted by Enchanters for less Charm breaks. And no the Shaman debuff is not better. Mages get the exact same line, aside from the unresistible one at 60, which is used for raid targets, not for charming.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Nah, DPS is king. Churning through as many MOBs as possible to get exp or item drops or faction is the name of the game. The only utility that's needed most of the time is Root.



What does Enchanter resist debuff have to do with anything? The Shaman/Mage debuff stacks with the Enchanter's and is exactly wanted by Enchanters for less Charm breaks. And no the Shaman debuff is not better. Mages get the exact same line, aside from the unresistible one at 60, which is used for raid targets, not for charming.

Nah. If DPS was king Mages and Rogues could solo better than other classes. They cant. If it was king groups would gear screen. They don't.

Thats what i was talkng about for debuffs. The most important one (the unresistable one) is worse. Most groups do not get Mages for debuffing anyway.

If you think Malo/Mala is only useful in raids, you are sorely mistaken.

Sorry, but Mages aren't very good in this timeline.

[Zuranthium]

Soloing is different than grouping, especially for Rogues, what a retarded argument. Mages can definitely solo a lot of content better than many classes anyway, you've made yet another fallacious statement.

Some groups DO gear screen. If they don't it's because of etiquette or not caring that much. Either way, this game is about killing as much shit as possible. To do that you need DPS. A group with low(er) DPS is inherently a group that won't be able to achieve as much as a higher DPS group in most situations, assuming the higher DPS group has the basic amount of survivability needed to do their DPS and the basic ability to get to the area they want to hunt in.

And no, the "most important" resist debuff for Charming is not the unresistible one. It's the one that gives the highest debuff, which Mages have.

[Toxigen]

Nah, DPS is king. Churning through as many MOBs as possible to get exp or item drops or faction is the name of the game. The only utility that's needed most of the time is Root.


Sorry but you're dead wrong on this.

[Zuranthium]

Sorry but you're dead wrong on this.

I'm not, but you should actually write argumentation and examples, otherwise you're saying nothing.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I'm not, but you should actually write argumentation and examples, otherwise you're saying nothing.

It's really simple, and I've already said it twice. If DPS was king, you would see gear checks to get into groups. Anybody with noob gear would never be able to get an XP group, because their DPS would be too low. I have never seen a gear check on P99 for any group. The only requirements for gear typically come from raiding guilds, for resistances and clickies, not DPS gear.

The honest truth is the vast majority of content in P99 doesn't have a lot of HP. Just having group members generally makes your group a charnel house.

DPS matters more in raids, but that is because mobs have a TON of HP, and the stakes are higher because you could lose the mob to an opposing guild. But we are not talking about raiding, since everybody knows Mages are useful in raids. We are talking about the rest of the game.

Unless you are a hardcore raider, most of your time spent in game is going to be solo/group content, where DPS doesn't really matter that much.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

And no, the "most important" resist debuff for Charming is not the unresistible one. It's the one that gives the highest debuff, which Mages have.

You clearly don't play this game a lot if you think that. The normal debuff line (spells like Malosini) have the same chance of being resisted as any other normal spell. If you can consistently land Malosini, you don't need a debuff in the first place. Your other spells will land just as often, unless the mob specifically has a high resistance to Fire/Cold/Poison. From my experience as a Shaman, I didn't need to cast Malo that often on most normal mobs, because most normal mobs just don't have high resistances.

Malo/Mala is the most important debuff spell because it is how you land something like Malosini on higher resistance mobs. These kinds of mobs are not restricted to raid mobs either.

[cd288]

It's really simple, and I've already said it twice. If DPS was king, you would see gear checks to get into groups. Anybody with noob gear would never be able to get an XP group, because their DPS would be too low. I have never seen a gear check on P99 for any group. The only requirements for gear typically come from raiding guilds, for resistances and clickies, not DPS gear.

The honest truth is the vast majority of content in P99 doesn't have a lot of HP. Just having group members generally makes your group a charnel house.

DPS matters more in raids, but that is because mobs have a TON of HP, and the stakes are higher because you could lose the mob to an opposing guild. But we are not talking about raiding, since everybody knows Mages are useful in raids. We are talking about the rest of the game.

Unless you are a hardcore raider, most of your time spent in game is going to be solo/group content, where DPS doesn't really matter that much.

This is the dumbest take lol

[Jibartik]

Did we figure it out yet? Which one is it?

[Zuranthium]

The normal debuff line (spells like Malosini) have the same chance of being resisted as any other normal spell. If you can consistently land Malosini, you don't need a debuff in the first place.

Making charm break far less often, pretty much never breaking at all (before the duration ends on its own) when you're stacking the max resist debuff, is definitely a very helpful thing.

Your opinions in this thread have all been moronic. Very Ogre.

[cd288]

Try doing Velks and Seb with low DPS and see how well your group does. Definitely going to be a highly efficient EXP group!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

This is the dumbest take lol

Try doing Velks and Seb with low DPS and see how well your group does. Definitely going to be a highly efficient EXP group!


I have played on this server for years and have never seen a gear check outside of raid requirement gear, which isn't DPS related. If it mattered, a lot of people wouldn't be getting groups at all due to gear.

I have been in plenty of groups (including Velks) with bad DPS and we did fine. Most people on P99 are not Min/Maxing EXP groups precisely because DPS doesn't matter that much. Honestly most mobs in this game have pretty low HP.

Making charm break far less often, pretty much never breaking at all (before the duration ends on its own) when you're stacking the max resist debuff, is definitely a very helpful thing.

Your opinions in this thread have all been moronic. Very Ogre.

You seem to think Enchanters don't solo. Enchanters do not NEED the Malo line of spells for the most part to successfully charm. Enchanters can also give -MR gear to their pets. If an Enchanter wants a duo partner, they are going to pick other classes over a Mage, such as a Cleric. For the majority of encounters it really isn't necessary, and again Mages do not have a monopoly on resist debuffs. It isn't like every group is clamoring for a Shaman/Mage specifically because of Malo. In some cases it is required, but not for the majority of encounters.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Honestly you should be glad groups aren't Min/Maxing. If they were, Mages would never be in groups lol. Min/Maxed groups are never going to be running 6 people, so you need to consolidate roles by getting classes that can do multiple things.

Classes like Enchanters and Necromancers would always be picked over Mages because they can DPS and they have good utility. If a group needs a dedicated DPS class you would pick Monk over Mage because Monks can also pull and off-tank.

[TripSin]

I have played on this server for years and have never seen a gear check outside of raid requirement gear, which isn't DPS related. If it mattered, a lot of people wouldn't be getting groups at all due to gear.

I have been in plenty of groups (including Velks) with bad DPS and we did fine. Most people on P99 are not Min/Maxing EXP groups precisely because DPS doesn't matter that much. Honestly most mobs in this game have pretty low HP.



You seem to think Enchanters don't solo. Enchanters do not NEED the Malo line of spells for the most part to successfully charm. Enchanters can also give -MR gear to their pets. If an Enchanter wants a duo partner, they are going to pick other classes over a Mage, such as a Cleric. For the majority of encounters it really isn't necessary, and again Mages do not have a monopoly on resist debuffs. It isn't like every group is clamoring for a Shaman/Mage specifically because of Malo. In some cases it is required, but not for the majority of encounters.

Just because most people aren't ridiculously anal people who are going to do gear checks before letting you into a group doesn't mean that DPS doesn't matter.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Just because most people aren't ridiculously anal people who are going to do gear checks before letting you into a group doesn't mean that DPS doesn't matter.

It does, because if DPS was a huge deal then most groups wouldn't be able to clear content in a manner most people are comfortable with. Most people would be anal if you literally could not clear most content without a well formed group both in terms of gear and composition.

But on P99 most groups can be successful with most content, regardless of gear and composition. This is simply fact.

[Kich867]

I think I agree that across the board, looking at the game as a whole, warriors are the most underpowered class. They lack the tools to do their job, period. Even at a raid level, warriors have to abuse farmed up high threat clickies in order to hold aggro. The only thing they're good at is taking damage but they have no intrinsically good way to do that themselves.

Every other class in the game inherently does what it is they're intended to do except for warriors.

If warriors had an ability that generated threat, then it's a lot more difficult. I'd probably go with Wizard? I really love playing one, I have a ton of fun because I enjoy the slow playstyle, but from a raw numbers perspective their damage is abysmal in groups. Your mana can't keep up with a good group and the way threat functions in the game necessitates that they do less damage than other classes.

[cd288]

It does, because if DPS was a huge deal then most groups wouldn't be able to clear content in a manner most people are comfortable with. Most people would be anal if you literally could not clear most content without a well formed group both in terms of gear and composition.

But on P99 most groups can be successful with most content, regardless of gear and composition. This is simply fact.

Imagine thinking that DPS doesn't matter because people aren't assholes who gatekeep people based on gear.

Your argument is also pointless because you're applying it to P99 as though it's an MMO with a full, healthy population. I.e., it's not like you always have 10 people sitting there clamoring to get into your group. You take who is available because otherwise you might not have anyone to fill that spot. Unless you're in KC it's not like you have a wealth of players to choose from. So your argument is pointless.

[Castle2.0]

For 4-50 a mage is always welcome to a group, especially in Vanilla because melee gear sucks.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

For 4-50 a mage is always welcome to a group, especially in Vanilla because melee gear sucks.

But for the majority of that level range mobs have a really low HP pool, so gear suckage is irrelevant. You can burn through mobs in a group with bronze armor and mino axes lol.

[Fammaden]

What is the most underpowered shaman race?

[Castle2.0]

But for the majority of that level range mobs have a really low HP pool, so gear suckage is irrelevant. You can burn through mobs in a group with bronze armor and mino axes lol.

Mage pet DPS is clearly better than an equivalent level melee with mino axes. Also, pet will never get aggro from tank and even if a pet gets some "oops" damage on them they regen much faster than players so no need to waste mana healing.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Mage pet DPS is clearly better than an equivalent level melee with mino axes. Also, pet will never get aggro from tank and even if a pet gets some "oops" damage on them they regen much faster than players so no need to waste mana healing.

But it doesn't really matter that it's better. Most groups aren't going to kick all non-mages, and low level groups still clear content fast enough to where people like the XP rate. That's the point. Just because it's better on paper, doesn't mean it has any practical use. Killing maybe 10 more mobs an hour due to the slight DPS increase isn't going to be noticed by most players.

If you want to Min/Max an XP group, you just need to run a static group.

[cd288]

But it doesn't really matter that it's better. Most groups aren't going to kick all non-mages, and low level groups still clear content fast enough to where people like the XP rate. That's the point. Just because it's better on paper, doesn't mean it has any practical use. Killing maybe 10 more mobs an hour due to the slight DPS increase isn't going to be noticed by most players.

If you want to Min/Max an XP group, you just need to run a static group.

I like when you post because I've honestly never seen someone take such odd/incorrect stances on things and then defend them to like the death. It's so strange but it's also fascinating and amusing to watch

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I like when you post because I've honestly never seen someone take such odd/incorrect stances on things and then defend them to like the death. It's so strange but it's also fascinating and amusing to watch

Sorry you haven't played the game apparently lol. I have never seen a low level group have trouble clearing content. Most people aren't Min/Maxing their XP groups. If they were, they wouldn't play in public groups.

How the majority of players play on P99 matters. Just because something is better, doesn't mean the P99 player base takes advantage of it.

The problem with having 6 mages in a group is everybody is leveling a mage lol, and most people don't want to level a mage.

You could also contribute to the thread, instead of just making yourself look like an asshole lol. Nobody cares about your hot take on what you think of my posts.

[loramin]

I like when you post because I've honestly never seen someone take such odd/incorrect stances on things and then defend them to like the death. It's so strange but it's also fascinating and amusing to watch

Nobody cares about your hot take on what you think of my posts.

I care: cd288 summed up your shtick eloquently.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Same with Loramin, posting nonsense instead of contributing.

You could also contribute to the thread, instead of just making yourself look like an asshole lol. Nobody cares about your hot take on what you think of my posts.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I care. cd288 summed you up eloquently.

He didn't. Just saying so doesn't make it true:)

[Allishia]

I think I agree that across the board, looking at the game as a whole, warriors are the most underpowered class. They lack the tools to do their job, period. Even at a raid level, warriors have to abuse farmed up high threat clickies in order to hold aggro. The only thing they're good at is taking damage but they have no intrinsically good way to do that themselves.

Every other class in the game inherently does what it is they're intended to do except for warriors.

If warriors had an ability that generated threat, then it's a lot more difficult. I'd probably go with Wizard? I really love playing one, I have a ton of fun because I enjoy the slow playstyle, but from a raw numbers perspective their damage is abysmal in groups. Your mana can't keep up with a good group and the way threat functions in the game necessitates that they do less damage than other classes.

Not true, in group content my war wrecks everything, raid warriors are way different and not even comparable to group geared wars /nod :)

And raid content if using the right weps there are zero agro issues. Feverblade primary is solid agro whether or not it procs.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Imagine thinking that DPS doesn't matter because people aren't assholes who gatekeep people based on gear.

Your argument is also pointless because you're applying it to P99 as though it's an MMO with a full, healthy population. I.e., it's not like you always have 10 people sitting there clamoring to get into your group. You take who is available because otherwise you might not have anyone to fill that spot. Unless you're in KC it's not like you have a wealth of players to choose from. So your argument is pointless.

The flaw with this argument is you don't seem to understand that a lot of games DO have DPS checks. In those games, if you don't meet the DPS check, you don't get to do the content. Period.

P99 doesn't work this way. Gear checks don't happen, because it doesn't really matter. If DPS mattered, group compositions and gear requirements would be much stricter across the board when doing public groups. That is just what happens in games with actual DPS checks. People have to be strict out of necessity for clearing the content in an acceptable manner for the game.

[magnetaress]

The should make a server were u can only be wizards warriors and rogues

[cd288]

Sorry you haven't played the game apparently lol. I have never seen a low level group have trouble clearing content. Most people aren't Min/Maxing their XP groups. If they were, they wouldn't play in public groups.

How the majority of players play on P99 matters. Just because something is better, doesn't mean the P99 player base takes advantage of it.

The problem with having 6 mages in a group is everybody is leveling a mage lol, and most people don't want to level a mage.

You could also contribute to the thread, instead of just making yourself look like an asshole lol. Nobody cares about your hot take on what you think of my posts.

Ok man go do a group without any DPS, it will be SUPER fun and efficient. So no pet classes, no charming pets allowed either. No Rogues, no Monks.

Just like a Paladin, a healer, and like an enchanter (only class allowed to DPS is the Paladin). See how that goes. Yeah DPS is irrelevant in this game. Super big brain stuff bro.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Ok man go do a group without any DPS, it will be SUPER fun and efficient. So no pet classes, no charming pets allowed either. No Rogues, no Monks.

Just like a Paladin, a healer, and like an enchanter (only class allowed to DPS is the Paladin). See how that goes. Yeah DPS is irrelevant in this game. Super big brain stuff bro.

I have been in groups like that, and they were great. Sorry you suck.

[cd288]

I have been in groups like that, and they were great. Sorry you suck.

See now you're just dying on the illogical hill you've created for yourself

[DeathsSilkyMist]

See now you're just dying on the illogical hill you've created for yourself

nah, you just dont have enough play experience.

[Nycon43]

Yeah, sorry but saying dps doesn't matter is dumb. People may not be asking for your raider.io score or some shit like they do in WoW but that doesn't make it irrelevant.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Yeah, sorry but saying dps doesn't matter is dumb. People may not be asking for your raider.io score or some shit like they do in WoW but that doesn't make it irrelevant.

Which non raid encounters would you say high DPS is essential to a successful group?

[Nycon43]

Never said anything about "essential". But dps 100% matters.

[Ghost of Starman]

I thought Shamwowi had some decent logical takes on things in previous threads I've read, but this "DPS doesn't matter and isn't important in groups because people don't gear check" take is really dumb and low IQ, to put it bluntly.

What's the purpose of a non-farming group under *ideal* conditions? It would be to maximize XP per hour given time is our constraint. How do you maximize XP flow? by killing faster and minimizing deaths and downtime.

Increased DPS leads to faster killing, and also minimizes deaths by reducing the amount of time the group is taking damage per mob by eliminating them faster, especially if you're fighting casting mobs and can burn through them, for example, before they land an Ice Comet on your tank. The only time DPS is redundant is if you're killing so fast you're able to completely clear whatever area your camping and are forced to wait for repops.

The only support you need is the minimum amount necessary to prevent wipes and death, having too much redundant support / utility can actually lead to more death due to slow kill time combined with mob pops / patrols / etc.

The fact that (most) P99 players aren't complete assholes like many modern gen MMO players and gatekeep based on gear checks is due to a combination of factors, including the lower population leading to higher reputational costs of being a jerk (you can't just random queue for a raid/group like in WoW, you're going to be seeing the same people over and over and they'll remember if you were an ass), less choice of groupmates due to the smaller pop, the average age of players being much higher than a modern game, and the fact that the game isn't *AS* punishing for non-optimal groups as some modern MMOs are.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I thought Shamwowi had some decent logical takes on things in previous threads I've read, but this "DPS doesn't matter and isn't important in groups because people don't gear check" take is really dumb and low IQ, to put it bluntly.

What's the purpose of a non-farming group under *ideal* conditions? It would be to maximize XP per hour given time is our constraint. How do you maximize XP flow? by killing faster and minimizing deaths and downtime.

Increased DPS leads to faster killing, and also minimizes deaths by reducing the amount of time the group is taking damage per mob by eliminating them faster, especially if you're fighting casting mobs and can burn through them, for example, before they land an Ice Comet on your tank. The only time DPS is redundant is if you're killing so fast you're able to completely clear whatever area your camping and are forced to wait for repops.

The only support you need is the minimum amount necessary to prevent wipes and death, having too much redundant support / utility can actually lead to more death due to slow kill time combined with mob pops / patrols / etc.

The fact that (most) P99 players aren't complete assholes like many modern gen MMO players and gatekeep based on gear checks is due to a combination of factors, including the lower population leading to higher reputational costs of being a jerk (you can't just random queue for a raid/group like in WoW, you're going to be seeing the same people over and over and they'll remember if you were an ass), less choice of groupmates due to the smaller pop, the average age of players being much higher than a modern game, and the fact that the game isn't *AS* punishing for non-optimal groups as some modern MMOs are.

Irrelevant nonsense. The only thing that matters is how people actually play the game. Not how you think it plays on paper. Factually speaking most groups have suboptimal DPS due to class composition and gear. This does not stop players from leveling up efficently. If you don't know this, you don't play the game.

[Allishia]

I still try to stack groups, tank/clr/enc/ my alt I'm lvling :p

Keep at 4 max when I'm really trying to ding /nod.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I still try to stack groups, tank/clr/enc/ my alt I'm lvling :p

Keep at 4 max when I'm really trying to ding /nod.

Oh yeah, if you run a static or have a group of friends its a lot easier to min/max a group. But most people don't do that for xp groups, at least not in my experience.

Most pickup groups just get what they can. As long as you have a healer, tank, and puller, the group can operate just fine. No gear checks happen, and most mobs have low enough HP for any tank to chew through. A DPS class increases kill speed, but more players in group also reduces XP.

The biggest increase to your kill speed is generally more players, not some hypercarry DPS class. This is because more players means any class can DPS more due to having support. They have less DPS downtime.

That is what I am saying, the increased DPS a mage brings to the table does not generally make up for their lack of utility. A well tuned xp group is not going to bring a pure DPS with no utility. That is a waste of a group slot.

[Fammaden]

The statement "DPS is unimportant" is obviously vastly overstated and nonsensical on its face, but as usual Shamwowi's actual point is better than his ability to deliver it.

His point being more that "optimized dps is not important" and that's more true. A suboptimal but reasonably balanced group can do probably 80% of the efficiency of a perfect composition for the given era, and that's really good enough for grinding xp when it comes to doing pick up groups.

However, I'd stand by what I said at the beginning of the thread, pre-Kunark rogues are VERY sub-optimal to the degree that it definitely does make a difference and I don't blame anyone for not really wanting them in groups if they had the choice on green.

Lacking the wider range of haste items, higher haste percentages, improved ratio weapons, and the massive boost of double backstab at 55+, I'm sticking with the rogue class as most underpowered in the classic/vanilla era.

A nearly completely group dependent class that generally slows groups down versus most other DPS options in the pre-expansion game, and needs a tank in group to function at all so all those pet-centric xp groups in sub-50 classic timeline don't have any use for you at all.

[Allishia]

All you need for dps is a good enc/nec with pet gear who knows what they doing /nod

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The statement "DPS is unimportant" is obviously vastly overstated and nonsensical on its face, but as usual Shamwowi's actual point is better than his ability to deliver it.

His point being more that "optimized dps is not important" and that's more true. A suboptimal but reasonably balanced group can do probably 80% of the efficiency of a perfect composition for the given era, and that's really good enough for grinding xp when it comes to doing pick up groups.

However, I'd stand by what I said at the beginning of the thread, pre-Kunark rogues are VERY sub-optimal to the degree that it definitely does make a difference and I don't blame anyone for not really wanting them in groups if they had the choice on green.

Lacking the wider range of haste items, higher haste percentages, improved ratio weapons, and the massive boost of double backstab at 55+, I'm sticking with the rogue class as most underpowered in the classic/vanilla era.

A nearly completely group dependent class that generally slows groups down versus most other DPS options in the pre-expansion game, and needs a tank in group to function at all so all those pet-centric xp groups in sub-50 classic timeline don't have any use for you at all.

The problem isn't the delivery of my point in most cases (not all, I do misspeak at times, and admit it when I do). The general problem is people on this forum prefer "gotcha" moments over real discussion. I never said "DPS is unimportant". You can check the post history. This is an oversimplification of my argument either due to lack of reading, or "gotcha".

This latest discussion about DPS started on page 31, where Zuranthium attempted to claim that Mages have high DPS, therefore they are much better than my previous assessment of the class. To which I responded:


Unfortunately in most solo/group situations utility is greater than DPS. It doesn't make mages any better. I'd take a Necro's utility over a Mage's DPS any day of the week. There is a reason why groups do not gear check members. DPS really isn't that important most of the time. If it was, you would get screened out of a group if your gear was bad while you were playing Rogue, Monk, etc.

When I say "DPS really isn't that important most of the time", that isn't me saying "DPS is unimportant and you can kill mobs without damage". There is a reason why I say "Isn't that important most of the time". In English that means it matters, but it isn't the primary factor. I don't believe I ever said "DPS is unimportant" flat out. I am sorry if people do not understand the difference between the two statements, or if they speed read through my posts.

I basically re-iterate this point multiple times in between page 31 and now.

[7thGate]

Well, it is true people don't gear check you. I leveled Jayya with ALS gear in probably 40% public/60% guild groups, and noone ever kicked me or even mentioned that I was swinging a Burning Rapier and Iksar Berserker Club around in my 30's.

That being said, its not just DPS that you don't need for a group. There's no real absolutely required role at all, though healing is close. I've been in plenty of groups that don't have tanks or don't have healers, and the ones with no tanks are fine but the ones with no healers tend to slow a lot.

Noone is going to gear check a tank for a group and one of the best groups I was ever in was just 5 rogues and a shaman aggro bouncing and slaughtering stuff over and over. One of the most fun events I've ever run was just an all-rogue group in Siren's Grotto whacking sirens one by one with a pocket factioned enchanter/cleric pair to patch up between kills and keep us buffed.

In any case, I would have to vote Shadow Knight. I think they have the least unique, useful niches out of all the classes. Mage might be a contender except for CotH, which by itself is incredible for getting people to a group/raid and pulling. Mages also get a boost for being really good at soloing.

Shadow Knight can still do cool stuff though, its just they kind of get overshadowed by Necros, Warriors or Paladins depending on what it is and don't really have a lot of truly unique things other than 1 or 2 AC debuffs.

[Zuranthium]

But for the majority of that level range mobs have a really low HP pool, so gear suckage is irrelevant. You can burn through mobs in a group with bronze armor and mino axes lol.

This is completely wrong. You will kill VERY slowly with mino axes only.

A group of 5 Mages and 1 Healer will get at least 4x more kills than a group of 5 melee and 1 healer with that kind of gear. Or even just slotting 1 Mage into said melee group (which you could argue as being the more realistic scenario), you will see a big increase in kill rate.

I have been in groups like that, and they were great. Sorry you suck.

In terms of gaining exp/farming, they were not "great". Maybe you liked the people you were playing with, maybe you had fun, but you factually were achieving far less gains. What everyone finds fun will vary, but I definitely do not find it fun to be extremely inefficient in a game like this that is already a big timesink.

When I started EQ in 1999 and was a Shaman and would group with 5 Warriors out in the Everfrost tundra, that was actually some of the most fun I've had, because of how new and dangerous it all was, and how it was a normal thing to be doing at the time (and also because the group was totally dependent on me for heals). But now? Pretty much everyone knows how to level faster and where to farm and how to avoid danger better. At the higher levels where it becomes increasingly difficult to make progress, it is INCREDIBLY boring to play this game without aiming for good efficiency, trying to pull as much as possible and get as many kills as possible, which also re-invites a chance of danger if the group overextends on its resources.

The flaw with this argument is you don't seem to understand that a lot of games DO have DPS checks. In those games, if you don't meet the DPS check, you don't get to do the content. Period.

P99 doesn't work this way. Gear checks don't happen, because it doesn't really matter. If DPS mattered, group compositions and gear requirements would be much stricter across the board when doing public groups.

Again, gear checks do happen. It's not the norm, but I usually asked melee what weapon they have when forming a group. If they had a shit weapon I would look for someone else, because DPS is ultimately what matters. The point of forming an exp/farm group is to get better exp. If the person joining the group is not going to create a "gain" in some way, then there is no point in bringing them.

If p99 had some kind of standardized prize that's only given to groups that can clear a certain area or kill a certain number of MOBs within a specified time limit, then you would definitely see people caring more. This does actually exist already, but only informally, for the people who want to spend their time as efficiently as possible, which for a new server is incredibly relevant for getting to a certain level and claiming a certain item camp faster than others. And for a non-new server it's still relevant for getting more alts and/or better gear to put your guild in a better position over another guild.

Min/Maxed groups are never going to be running 6 people, so you need to consolidate roles by getting classes that can do multiple things.

Not true with a proper exp bonus in place for grouping, like the one that exists on Red server. Plus on Red server you inherently might want extra people to help defend against possible PvP. Funny how PvP Everquest has FAR more interesting PvE. ;)

Also, you do often want 6 people for a min/maxed guild group anyway, as it directly benefits the guild for everyone to level up.

But on P99 most groups can be successful with most content, regardless of gear and composition. This is simply fact.

That is not a fact whatsoever. Especially since the definition of "successful" is personal. For many people, playing the game like a grandpa who just discovered the internet is not a successful or fun way to play.

A well tuned xp group is not going to bring a pure DPS with no utility. That is a waste of a group slot.

You don't understand how to create a "well tuned" xp group, it would seem.

-----

I'd stand by what I said at the beginning of the thread, pre-Kunark rogues are VERY sub-optimal to the degree that it definitely does make a difference and I don't blame anyone for not really wanting them in groups if they had the choice on green.

If we were talking actual 1999 era Everquest, then yeah I'd say Rogue was the overall worst class. Backstab did less damage back then, "evade" didn't exist, and sneak/hide were no different than normal invis. Poisons also didn't work back then. But all of those things have been ignored in the timeline on p99, AFAIK. Rogues on p99 Green started in their 2000-era form.

That said, even with pre-buff Backstab, a Rogue could do a bit higher DPS than most other melee. So if you just use root properly for proximity aggro (which tons of people didn't understand back then), then you don't need Evade and can get your DPS in. There was also the month in 1999 where "Whirl Til You Hurl" was broken, which Rogues were able to benefit from.

Another quirk is that stealing was much more powerful back then, Rogues could get way more items from NPCs. I recall Fires of Heaven saying their Rogues were getting shit off Nagafen before they were able to kill him for the 1st time. So, when looked at that way, Rogues were secretly good? But that got changed pretty quickly too.

[eqravenprince]

Again, gear checks do happen. It's not the norm, but I usually asked melee what weapon they have when forming a group. If they had a shit weapon I would look for someone else, because DPS is ultimately what matters. The point of forming an exp/farm group is to get better exp. If the person joining the group is not going to create a "gain" in some way, then there is no point in bringing them.


"It's not the norm" is the only thing you got right. It is not the only thing that matters. It's not the point. The point is the to have fun, obviously the way you have fun is not the norm.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

This is completely wrong. You will kill VERY slowly with mino axes only.

A group of 5 Mages and 1 Healer will get at least 4x more kills than a group of 5 melee and 1 healer with that kind of gear. Or even just slotting 1 Mage into said melee group (which you could argue as being the more realistic scenario), you will see a big increase in kill rate.


Mino axe wielding lowbies will still chew through content. I am not sure what game you are playing, but it isn't P99. If your definition of "slow" is any group that isn't running 5 mages, then I guess you are right. But most people don't want to level Mages, which is why you don't see this group composition that often. The point of XP groups is to level a character you want to play, not theory craft the highest DPS group possible.


In terms of gaining exp/farming, they were not "great". Maybe you liked the people you were playing with, maybe you had fun, but you factually were achieving far less gains. What everyone finds fun will vary, but I definitely do not find it fun to be extremely inefficient in a game like this that is already a big timesink.

When I started EQ in 1999 and was a Shaman and would group with 5 Warriors out in the Everfrost tundra, that was actually some of the most fun I've had, because of how new and dangerous it all was, and how it was a normal thing to be doing at the time (and also because the group was totally dependent on me for heals). But now? Pretty much everyone knows how to level faster and where to farm and how to avoid danger better. At the higher levels where it becomes increasingly difficult to make progress, it is INCREDIBLY boring to play this game without aiming for good efficiency, trying to pull as much as possible and get as many kills as possible, which also re-invites a chance of danger if the group overextends on its resources.


P99 isn't that hard, and you can XP just fine in a lot of situations, including the silly group situation you concocted. It seems like you are someone who prefers to speed through the leveling process faster than normal via static groups. That is perfectly fine, but not what most people do.



Again, gear checks do happen. It's not the norm, but I usually asked melee what weapon they have when forming a group. If they had a shit weapon I would look for someone else, because DPS is ultimately what matters. The point of forming an exp/farm group is to get better exp. If the person joining the group is not going to create a "gain" in some way, then there is no point in bringing them.


No, gear checks do not happen. You are the only person I have ever heard of who does it lol. Just because you do it, doesn't mean it is normal or necessary. Usually the only checks are class checks, because a group normally needs a healer, tank, puller, and CC to function properly. Most of the benefit that group is getting is from utility, not raw DPS.


If p99 had some kind of standardized prize that's only given to groups that can clear a certain area or kill a certain number of MOBs within a specified time limit, then you would definitely see people caring more. This does actually exist already, but only informally, for the people who want to spend their time as efficiently as possible, which for a new server is incredibly relevant for getting to a certain level and claiming a certain item camp faster than others. And for a non-new server it's still relevant for getting more alts and/or better gear to put your guild in a better position over another guild.


But it doesn't, so this point is irrelevant. People play the majority of the game without needing to worry about DPS checks. Raiding is really the only place where high DPS is important.



Not true with a proper exp bonus in place for grouping, like the one that exists on Red server. Plus on Red server you inherently might want extra people to help defend against possible PvP. Funny how PvP Everquest has FAR more interesting PvE. ;)

Also, you do often want 6 people for a min/maxed guild group anyway, as it directly benefits the guild for everyone to level up.


I am talking about the real P99 servers. Red is dead, so the XP bonus is irrelevant. And no, a min/maxed group is not going to be running 6 people due to the xp penalty. It would be better to run multiple groups of 3 or 4 players and level in different areas if a guild is trying to fast level characters.




That is not a fact whatsoever. Especially since the definition of "successful" is personal. For many people, playing the game like a grandpa who just discovered the internet is not a successful or fun way to play.


It is a fact. The majority of P99 isn't difficult. We are not talking about your definition of successful. We are talking about the normal definition of successful, which is a group that can clear content without dying.


You don't understand how to create a "well tuned" xp group, it would seem.


You are the one who thinks a group of 6 is well tuned. I think this applies to you more than me:)

[Toxigen]

Well, it is true people don't gear check you. I leveled Jayya with ALS gear in probably 40% public/60% guild groups, and noone ever kicked me or even mentioned that I was swinging a Burning Rapier and Iksar Berserker Club around in my 30's.

That being said, its not just DPS that you don't need for a group. There's no real absolutely required role at all, though healing is close. I've been in plenty of groups that don't have tanks or don't have healers, and the ones with no tanks are fine but the ones with no healers tend to slow a lot.

Noone is going to gear check a tank for a group and one of the best groups I was ever in was just 5 rogues and a shaman aggro bouncing and slaughtering stuff over and over. One of the most fun events I've ever run was just an all-rogue group in Siren's Grotto whacking sirens one by one with a pocket factioned enchanter/cleric pair to patch up between kills and keep us buffed.

In any case, I would have to vote Shadow Knight. I think they have the least unique, useful niches out of all the classes. Mage might be a contender except for CotH, which by itself is incredible for getting people to a group/raid and pulling. Mages also get a boost for being really good at soloing.

Shadow Knight can still do cool stuff though, its just they kind of get overshadowed by Necros, Warriors or Paladins depending on what it is and don't really have a lot of truly unique things other than 1 or 2 AC debuffs.


I'll play devil's advocate and argue the case for gear:

True Story Time

The best XP I ever bore witness to was on my 58/59 (epic, fungi) rogue soon after they changed the Hole ZEM (the original mega boost, not current iteration). Found myself in a trio with a fungi / epic monk (pretty sure he was rocking sap encrusted branch and wurmscale fistwraps) and an epic (fungi too?) bard...all of us were 58 or 59. The monk had beads to boot. You can bet your sweet elf ass they gear-checked me before I got the invite...they were doing just fine without me.

No dedicated healer but the pulls were so insanely smooth I literally did not stop attacking on my rogue for over 4 hours. There was never a single moment where there was not at least 1 mob in camp with more on the way. Now, that was complete dirty-diaper-nerd-zone levels of commitment from all 3 of us but it utterly destroyed any XP I ever made leveling my enchanter, necro etc.

This never would have been accomplished if the bard/monk were trash tier players, but I doubt it would have been possible or even remotely efficient if their gear sucked. They were basically playing at the skill cap/ceiling and in godlike gear. They didn't "need" me to keep going, per se, but I was providing far more than enough dmg to make up for them going from 50/50 to 33% split.


All that being said, its still SK as the most underpowered class when you consider all aspects of the game. This is primarily because the paladin basically does what the SK can do but it brings Soulfire and DS. Mages are required to raid for any guild going after contested targets because of CotH. You could have literally zero SKs and be the #1 raid guild on p99. You cannot ignore raiding just because you're a SK main and don't got guild. Hope this helps.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I'll play devil's advocate and argue the case for gear:

True Story Time

The best XP I ever bore witness to was on my 58/59 (epic, fungi) rogue soon after they changed the Hole ZEM (the original mega boost, not current iteration). Found myself in a trio with a fungi / epic monk (pretty sure he was rocking sap encrusted branch and wurmscale fistwraps) and an epic (fungi too?) bard...all of us were 58 or 59. The monk had beads to boot. You can bet your sweet elf ass they gear-checked me before I got the invite...they were doing just fine without me.

No dedicated healer but the pulls were so insanely smooth I literally did not stop attacking on my rogue for over 4 hours. There was never a single moment where there was not at least 1 mob in camp with more on the way. Now, that was complete dirty-diaper-nerd-zone levels of commitment from all 3 of us but it utterly destroyed any XP I ever made leveling my enchanter, necro etc.

This never would have been accomplished if the bard/monk were trash tier players, but I doubt it would have been possible or even remotely efficient if their gear sucked. They were basically playing at the skill cap/ceiling and in godlike gear. They didn't "need" me to keep going, per se, but I was providing far more than enough dmg to make up for them going from 50/50 to 33% split.


All that being said, its still SK as the most underpowered class when you consider all aspects of the game. This is primarily because the paladin basically does what the SK can do but it brings Soulfire and DS. Mages are required to raid for any guild going after contested targets because of CotH. You could have literally zero SKs and be the #1 raid guild on p99. You cannot ignore raiding just because you're a SK main and don't got guild. Hope this helps.

Don't get me wrong, if you have great gear it makes the game smoother. I don't think anybody (including myself) has argued against that point. The point is simply that most content does not need players to be geared in god-like gear to achieve good results when XPing. Will it be as good as god-tier players in god-tier gear? Of course not, but sadly that is not the average pickup group, and luckily the game doesn't need this for your group to be successful. And I have been in this kind of group you are mentioning, so I do appreciate how awesome a group like this can be.

I disagree with the SK point when considering all aspects of the game. Factually speaking most players on P99 are not hardcore raiders. In my estimation that makes raiding a smaller part of the consideration when determining "most underpowered overall", which is what this thread was asking. The vast majority of content is solo/group content, and SK's are generally better at that than Mages, due to a Mage having basically no role outside of DPS in Solo/Group content. They are similar to Rogues in that sense, where they are limited to what they can kill without CC, or must resort to using a lot of clickies.

If this discussion was "most underpowered raid class in the game", I would 100% agree. SK's are the worst raiding class on P99, and Mages are great.

[Zeboim]

Just gonna say that if you tell a melee character they can't join your EXP group because of what weapon they have, you are an ENORMOUS tool.

[eqravenprince]

Just gonna say that if you tell a melee character they can't join your EXP group because of what weapon they have, you are an ENORMOUS tool.

Exactly

[Zuranthium]

Mino axe wielding lowbies will still chew through content.

No they won't. Unless your definition of "chew" is extremely slow.

P99 isn't that hard

Correct. But it's definitely a timesink. And all we have in life is the little time we're given. So I prefer to not be excessively wasteful with it. Sitting around watching idiots slowly, inefficiently autoattack retarded MOBs with zero danger is extremely boring.

People play the majority of the game without needing to worry about DPS checks.

If you don't want to worry about DPS that is your own problem. Plenty of people do care about playing the game more intelligently and those people will be hitting Level 30 on a new server and claiming the item camps while you are level 15 and farting around in Oasis or wherever. These people will have multiple Level 60's (50's for pre-Kunark) for their guild to use while you have only 1.

And factually in 1999, DPS mattered even more than now, as there was no Play Nice Policy. Everything was a total free-for-all, whoever did the most damage to an NPC got the exp and loot. THAT is actual classic Everquest (even if the majority of people played the game casually).

I am talking about the real P99 servers. Red is dead, so the XP bonus is irrelevant. And no, a min/maxed group is not going to be running 6 people due to the xp penalty. It would be better to run multiple groups of 3 or 4 players and level in different areas if a guild is trying to fast level characters.

Red isn't dead, anyone can go there and play if they want. The exp bonus on that server could also be ported over to other servers if the management wants to.

You don't seem to understand the exp bonus, there is a significant increase given for each member added, such that adding a 6th player means your group is getting the same exp per kill as if you had 5 people in the group, but now with the benefit of a 6th person being there.

It's generally not more efficient to split the group into two 3-person groups, as you likely won't have exactly the correct composition for separate perfectly tuned 3-person groups. Plus the aspect of wanting a stronger group of people together anyway to be safer in PvP. Or for a PvE server in actual 1999 EQ, wanting to fill the group to 6 so that you have the best chance of outdamaging another group in a hotly contested area (which was extremely common right from the low levels in Blackburrow or Crushbone).

We are not talking about your definition of successful. We are talking about the normal definition of successful, which is a group that can clear content without dying.

That is not the normal definition. Leveling faster and getting better gear is pretty universally considered more successful.

And there are absolutely MANY practical scenarios where a group composition with bad DPS is not going to be able to "clear the content". If you get a group of people together and want to dungeon crawl down to some camp and people only have 2 hours before they need to log off, then you might not even get there at all if your group is killing too slowly.

Just gonna say that if you tell a melee character they can't join your EXP group because of what weapon they have, you are an ENORMOUS tool.

No, it means you don't want to waste time.

People are allowed to play the game more competitively if they want. In any actual Team-based competitive game, you take the people who are able to play at your level. Top ranked League of Legends players aren't sitting around trying to recruit Bronze level players to their teams for tournaments.

EQ can definitely be played more casually if desired. It can be fun to just hang out with people in a group and do some stuff and not worry about being super efficient. But for plenty of people, you don't want to be doing that all the time. You don't want to be spending 2x as long to do something for no reason.

And regardless, going back to discussing the power level of classes, it's absolutely idiotic either way to say DPS is irrelevant. If your group doesn't care about "Power Level", then whatever, they don't care. But a class like a Mage will FACTUALLY give a typical group the ability to kill more things. Which is exactly more powerful.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Red isn't dead

You are playing a different game if you really think this hehe. All I can do is share how most people play P99. If you only play with static groups and screen all your public groups, you can certainly play that way. But it isn't how most people play, and it doesn't suddenly make high DPS more necessary than it actually is. I have been in plenty of "low DPS" groups, and we got good XP rates. Again, most people aren't Min/Maxing XP groups, so your definition of "slow" doesn't match how most people play.

This doesn't magically make Mages way better in this timeline. Their slight increase in DPS compared to something like a Necromancer does not make up for their severe lack of utility, and general uselessness of summoned items.

[Toxigen]

Just gonna say that if you tell a melee character they can't join your EXP group because of what weapon they have, you are an ENORMOUS tool.

sorry you dont got geared melee alt(s)

hope this helps

[Zuranthium]

I have been in plenty of "low DPS" groups, and we got good XP rates.

You are not getting "good" XP if you have low DPS. It's basic math. Killing things = exp gain. And to kill things you need DPS. If you are doing 1/2 as much DPS as another equal sized team, then you are getting 1/2 as much exp (assuming shit is being pulled sufficiently fast and the defense is sufficient).

most people aren't Min/Maxing XP groups, so your definition of "slow" doesn't match how most people play.

It doesn't matter how plebs play, in the end it's about an objective analysis of power level. That's what's being discussed in the thread. If you are killing slowly, then you are playing the game at less powerful level. Some people might be fine playing at a lower level, but they are factually doing far less than what's possible in the game (even for a "standard group", not some kind of 5 Enchanter and 1 Healer charm group).

This doesn't magically make Mages way better in this timeline. Their slight increase in DPS compared to something like a Necromancer does not make up for their severe lack of utility

If the goal is to maximize exp gain or other farming (and basically everyone in this game is either trying to level or get an item when they play), then yes a Mage might be better than Necro in a given group. You don't need much "utility" generally. All you really need is Root and an adequate level of defense (heals/slows/kiting). That part can be covered by 2 party members or even just 1. The remainder of the equation pretty much just comes down to how fast you can kill.

The question wasn't what is the overall better class between Necro/Mage though. I would say Necro. But that doesn't mean Mage is one of the most underpowered classes. If you were arguing strictly for PvP server then you would actually have a case, because the Mage's lack of defense, and pets not zoning with their casters, and direct damage spells being generally worthless vs well geared players, makes Mages weak indeed for that setting. Although even still, CotH alone is a better tool for a guild than what a Paladin provides, so...

[DeathsSilkyMist]

It doesn't matter how plebs play

It matters more than how you play, because that is not the norm. Sorry you don't understand this game.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The problem is you honestly don't understand that you can level fairly quickly in a non-optimized group. Your standard is just too far into the extreme, because you are used to it. That doesn't mean most people are willing to go to that level, or that it is fun for most people. This isn't Diablo 2, where you are trying to max out as soon as possible. Everquest is long enough to where you can actually enjoy the journey to 60.

[Danth]

You cannot ignore raiding just because you're a SK main and don't got guild. Hope this helps.

I sure can. I ignore raiding all the time. I don't care what's going on in temple veeshan this week. I am not alone. I give different advice to folks who want to raid and folks who do not. My shadow knight gives satisfactory service throughout the portions of the game I actually care about. I would not recommend it to someone who wanted to raid 5 nights a week.

------------------------------------------

Ok man go do a group without any DPS, it will be SUPER fun and efficient. So no pet classes, no charming pets allowed either. No Rogues, no Monks.

The wife and I have a shaman/shadowknight duo. Most our friends tend to be stuff like druids, paladins, etc. Below-average damage output is a fact of life. We do fine. The game would feel so small and limited if we were always trying to optimize everything instead of logging on and doing whatever we felt like with whoever we felt like doing it with. If life lets us start playing regularly again you're welcome to come hang out with us sometime.

Danth

[Zuranthium]

It matters more than how you play, because that is not the norm. Sorry you don't understand this game.

LOL, you are hopeless. Nothing but idiotic fallacies. It's absolutely the norm for a significant amount of players to actively level faster and/or farm as much as they can in this game. And it's meaningless to argue about "norms", because that has nothing to do with the objective power level of what a class brings to the game. If an entire server decided not to use Charm, that wouldn't mean charm isn't a busted mechanic. It still would be.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

LOL, you are hopeless. Nothing but idiotic fallacies. It's absolutely the norm for a significant amount of players to actively level faster and/or farm as much as they can in this game. And it's meaningless to argue about "norms", because that has nothing to do with the objective power level of what a class brings to the game. If an entire server decided not to use Charm, that wouldn't mean charm isn't a busted mechanic. It still would be.

It's not a fallacy. It is fact. You can play this game pretty fast without optimizing your group. The only reason why you don't know this is because you have never played the game that way. That doesn't mean it isn't true, it just means you have little experience playing the game.

You basically just don't understand how DPS works in this game, so you overvalue it.

[Zuranthium]

It's not a fallacy. It is fact. You can play this game pretty fast without optimizing your group. The only reason why you don't know this is because you have never played the game that way. That doesn't mean it isn't true, it just means you have little experience playing the game.

You basically just don't understand how DPS works in this game, so you overvalue it.

Literally everything you say is wrong. I have more experience playing EQ than you do. You are currently showing yourself to be incapable of reading, incapable of basic math, and incapable of understanding game mechanics, between your hilariously ignorant take on DPS and the speed of leveling, and your asinine assertions about how people play the game.

Again, playing the game as you propose, you'll be sitting around at Level 15 and getting no good items on a new server, while other people are twice your level and holding down the best camps. And that same pattern will constantly repeat itself, since this game as a whole is very much about about farming. Need to grind in Kael to get faction? It's gonna take you 2x as long to get the necessary amount, only playing the game as you state. If you want to waste your own time in life, that's your decision. It has no bearing on the power level of classes.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Literally everything you say is wrong. I have more experience playing EQ than you do. You are currently showing yourself to be incapable of reading, incapable of basic math, and incapable of understanding game mechanics, between your hilariously ignorant take on DPS and the speed of leveling, and your asinine assertions about how people play the game.

Again, playing the game as you propose, you'll be sitting around at Level 15 and getting no good items on a new server, while other people are twice your level and holding down the best camps. And that same pattern will constantly repeat itself, since this game as a whole is very much about about farming. Need to grind in Kael to get faction? It's gonna take you 2x as long to get the necessary amount, only playing the game as you state. If you want to waste your own time in life, that's your decision. It has no bearing on the power level of classes.

You are showng your lack of understanding yet again.

Lets do a simple math exercise. Lets say you have a group that does 2000 damage per minute. They are killing mobs with 1000 HP. If it takes them 2 minutes per pull, they are killing one mob per two minutes.

Another group does 1000 damage per minute, but they can pull every one minute. That group is killing 1 mob per minute. Even though this group has half the DPS, they are getting double the kills per hour.

This is why raw DPS often doesn't matter. You are basically making the assumption that every group is working perfectly, which is rarely the case in real life application.

Some groups have high DPS and bad pullers, some groups have low DPS but good pullers. Some groups have both. You are projecting your fantasy that most people play with perfect groups all the time. Its a silly fantasy.

And obviously things get more complex when you account for how good your CCer is, how good your healer is, how much damage your tank can soak and taunt, etc. All of these factors change how quickly a group can kill content, even if their DPS on paper is high or low.

You have an oversimplified view that more DPS always equates to more kills per hour. That just isn't true.

[Zuranthium]

There is virtually no real situation where a solid group can only pull 1 mob per 2 minutes, instead of every minute, when they have 2x as much DPS as a group who can pull every minute. Yet another fallacy from you.

You don't need a "good puller" most of the time. You just fucking pull shit, root the extras, and kill them 1 at a time. Anyone with a brain these days that has Root should be capable of doing this function.

Someone being a "bad puller" or "bad healer" in terms of what the player is doing is irrelevant to the discussion about class power level. You assess a class under the condition of what any solid player should be capable of doing, not what some braindead moron is doing. And if your group has half as much DPS, then you are simply going to be in a far worse position anyway if you have a bad CC'er or some healer who is asleep and incapable of pressing their heal button. More DPS means faster kills, which means you take less damage.

A magician is essentially an off-tank in a group situation like that anyway, because the pet can take one of the adds. Their ability to do compacted DPS with spells also becomes a benefit for a situation like that, being able to take down the first target quicker and thus reduce the amount of damage that would be taken from a pull where adds aren't being rooted properly.

The amount of DPS dictates how frequently you can pull more than anything else. Obviously you need heals as well in situations were you aren't using a kiting method, but the healer slot in a party is the same regardless in this comparison. Having half as much DPS doesn't suddenly make your healing situation better. It just means you are capable of far less and, again, are going to be taking more damage since you kill the pulls slower.

[Jimjam]

Just gonna say that if you tell a melee character they can't join your EXP group because of what weapon they have, you are an ENORMOUS tool.

I remember wearing crystalline silk on my monk, which looks like cloth and getting gear checked by someone (and to be fair it is trash - light weight leather ac with magic resist)…. So I switch to bristle silk (cloth ac but with velious leather appearance that i kept bagged for fashion) and they let me in.

It was quite funny getting gearchecked into worse gear because optics is king.

I also got gearchecked in crushbone on a rogue for using a tarnished spear.

[Toxigen]

You are showng your lack of understanding yet again.

Lets do a simple math exercise. Lets say you have a group that does 2000 damage per minute. They are killing mobs with 1000 HP. If it takes them 2 minutes per pull, they are killing one mob per two minutes.

Another group does 1000 damage per minute, but they can pull every one minute. That group is killing 1 mob per minute. Even though this group has half the DPS, they are getting double the kills per hour.

This is why raw DPS often doesn't matter. You are basically making the assumption that every group is working perfectly, which is rarely the case in real life application.

Some groups have high DPS and bad pullers, some groups have low DPS but good pullers. Some groups have both. You are projecting your fantasy that most people play with perfect groups all the time. Its a silly fantasy.

And obviously things get more complex when you account for how good your CCer is, how good your healer is, how much damage your tank can soak and taunt, etc. All of these factors change how quickly a group can kill content, even if their DPS on paper is high or low.

You have an oversimplified view that more DPS always equates to more kills per hour. That just isn't true.

This is the worst take on eq leveling I've ever read.

Cmon, DSM, I know you like to argue points into oblivion but just step down man. Holy fucking cringe.

[eqravenprince]

DPS isn't the end all be all to everyone. EQ isn't a race to me. Maybe it use to be, but my god man it's 23 years old, I've played hundreds of characters. You get to 60, then you go to a raid now and again if that's your thing. You buff newbies. You go around to different dungeons farm items with a 20+ min spawn timer. Play a rare race/class combo cause it's fun. Play 1-60 untwinked cause you can even though you could twink the crap out of him. The nerd rage on these forums amazes me.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

This is the worst take on eq leveling I've ever read.

Cmon, DSM, I know you like to argue points into oblivion but just step down man. Holy fucking cringe.

I am not sure why you are saying that. This is how DPS actually works. You could have raid geared rogues in your party, but if you keep pulling too many mobs and those rogues keep dying, then their amazing DPS is irrelevant.

You can't just look at DPS and say 2x DPS = 2x kill speed. That is factually incorrect unless you have perfect control of the situation. I am not saying it is always difficult to control a lot of situations, but this is why utility often plays a huge role in a group, not just DPS. You can have low DPS and good kill speed if you have good players and know the dungeon well.

[Fammaden]

Pulling is the biggest potential bottleneck for most full six man PUG's. There's a lot of shit monks out there who have no concept of pacing, timing, or their group's limitations and strengths, who think training as much shit as possible and flopping it is all there is to pulling well. There's also lots of people pulling of any class who just don't know the zone/camp/spawns all that well and fail to secure a steady stream of mobs without overwhelming or underfeeding their group.

A knowledgeable puller can turn a mediocre PUG into the best group any of them have had in days, and then it turns right into a slog again when he leaves for someone less experienced or conscientious.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

There is virtually no real situation where a solid group can only pull 1 mob per 2 minutes, instead of every minute, when they have 2x as much DPS as a group who can pull every minute. Yet another fallacy from you.

You don't need a "good puller" most of the time. You just fucking pull shit, root the extras, and kill them 1 at a time. Anyone with a brain these days that has Root should be capable of doing this function.

Someone being a "bad puller" or "bad healer" in terms of what the player is doing is irrelevant to the discussion about class power level. You assess a class under the condition of what any solid player should be capable of doing, not what some braindead moron is doing. And if your group has half as much DPS, then you are simply going to be in a far worse position anyway if you have a bad CC'er or some healer who is asleep and incapable of pressing their heal button. More DPS means faster kills, which means you take less damage.

A magician is essentially an off-tank in a group situation like that anyway, because the pet can take one of the adds. Their ability to do compacted DPS with spells also becomes a benefit for a situation like that, being able to take down the first target quicker and thus reduce the amount of damage that would be taken from a pull where adds aren't being rooted properly.

The amount of DPS dictates how frequently you can pull more than anything else. Obviously you need heals as well in situations were you aren't using a kiting method, but the healer slot in a party is the same regardless in this comparison. Having half as much DPS doesn't suddenly make your healing situation better. It just means you are capable of far less and, again, are going to be taking more damage since you kill the pulls slower.

An example is not a fallacy. I never claimed it was a realistic example. It's a simple example. Please learn what fallacies are.

Again, your assumption of perfect conditions is just silly, and it blinds you to understanding that a high DPS group can kill less than a lower DPS group.

Mages probably are the most underpowered class on P99, I am sorry. Their extra DPS doesn't make up for that, even assuming perfect conditons.

[Jimjam]

I am not sure why you are saying that. This is how DPS actually works. You could have raid geared rogues in your party, but if you keep pulling too many mobs and those rogues keep dying, then their amazing DPS is irrelevant.

You can't just look at DPS and say 2x DPS = 2x kill speed. That is factually incorrect unless you have perfect control of the situation. I am not saying it is always difficult to control a lot of situations, but this is why utility often plays a huge role in a group, not just DPS. You can have low DPS and good kill speed if you have good players and know the dungeon well.

Rogues are really tough if they haven’t neglected their defence skill / worn ac. They won’t get aggro on a bunch of mobs unless they want to. They can survive a fair while being hit by a mob or two if they’ve chosen to off tank while things get rooted. Raid geared even more so.

Killing stuff quickly is the best cc anyway.

[DJTucker]

Discussion on the most OP or the most under OP class has always been under discussion. Everquest was not designed for individuals to solo play. Each class brings their own skill set to a group, which makes groups the OP entity of the game.
Thankyou Project 99 for keeping the game as close to original as possible.

[Zuranthium]

An example is not a fallacy. I never claimed it was a realistic example.

You literally said "it's rarely the case in real life application that DPS matters." So indeed you are claiming that your idiotic example is something like the norm. When it isn't. That is a fallacy.

Again, your assumption of perfect conditions is just silly, and it blinds you to understanding that a high DPS group can kill less than a lower DPS group.

Nobody assumed "perfect conditions". Nowhere close to perfect conditions is needed to do exp/faction/item grinding in a way that utilizes most/all of the DPS in a team.

The majority of places in the game where people want to grind, the MOBs are just sitting there like a fucking buffet. It is incredibly easy to control them with Root alone, and the decider on how much you will kill simply comes down to a basic mathematical question of how much damage you are capable of doing and if your group has a sufficient amount of defense to sustain the pace. Being able to potentially kill X amount of MOBs in a given timeframe will result in them doing Y amount of damage, does the team have the heals/slows/regen to match?

And if you aren't in a situation where there are essentially unlimited things to pull, then you still want as much DPS as possible. Higher DPS = faster kills = faster respawn = more progression.

Mages are the most underpowered class on P99, I am sorry.

Two things are apparent from what you write:

1.) You've never been a high ranked player in any competitive game.

2.) Your understanding of EQ is lagging far behind and/or a Mage killed your family.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

You literally said "it's rarely the case in real life application that DPS matters." So indeed you are claiming that your idiotic example is something like the norm. When it isn't. That is a fallacy.



Nobody assumed "perfect conditions". Nowhere close to perfect conditions is needed to do exp/faction/item grinding in a way that utilizes most/all of the DPS in a team.

The majority of places in the game where people want to grind, the MOBs are just sitting there like a fucking buffet. It is incredibly easy to control them with Root alone, and the decider on how much you will kill simply comes down to a basic mathematical question of how much damage you are capable of doing and if your group has a sufficient amount of defense to sustain the pace. Being able to potentially kill X amount of MOBs in a given timeframe will result in them doing Y amount of damage, does the team have the heals/slows/regen to match?

And if you aren't in a situation where there are essentially unlimited things to pull, then you still want as much DPS as possible. Higher DPS = faster kills = faster respawn = more progression.



Two things are apparent from what you write:

1.) You've never been a high ranked player in any competitive game.

2.) Your understanding of EQ is lagging far behind and/or a Mage killed your family.

No. I love mages. Underpowered does not mean bad, or you shouldn't play them. You are simply overvaluing them because of your misconceptions of DPS, and I assume you play one yourself. You are letting your emotions get the better of you.

What you fail to realize is most mobs have such low HP to begin with you don't need amazing DPS to clear content quickly. Average geared players can do it just fine, and at a fast rate. Just because you have a high expectation of xp per hour doesn't mean your xp rate is normal, or what everybody is aiming for. That has been my point, and anybody who plays this game would know that.

[Zuranthium]

What you fail to realize is most mobs have such low HP to begin with you don't need amazing DPS to clear content quickly.

An incorrect statement, especially with Velious content. But also going back to your statement about Mino axes being enough DPS at the mid levels. Trying doing Splitpaw with just melee geared with Mino axe's. It will be very slow, and boring.

Your entire line of thinking is a fallacy anyway though. It doesn't matter if you personally consider a certain slower xp rate to be "fast". That is not the objective most powerful way to play the game. If you are discussing the power level of classes, then you must look at what they bring to the game when people try to maximize their ability. Which doesn't mean only looking at their ability in a perfect scenario, like a Druid when charming, but rather the approximate average of what they contribute in a variety of scenarios (which for EQ can include various group compositions), when playing the game near-optimally in those scenarios.

The way you try to talk, it's like arguing that some Tier 3 deck in a Magic the Gathering meta is perfectly competitive because of the winrate you're getting with it at whatever mid-rank you happen to be. That doesn't mean the deck is actually one of the most powerful. The most powerful decks are defined by winrate in high ranked play.

Which is exactly why ad populum arguments are often terrible. In order for opinions to be equally valid on a subject, the must have roughly equal levels of expertise. Most people never become a Chess Grandmaster. The 95% of people who play an inferior line in chess are not correct just because they hold a 95% majority. They are simply not at the same level.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The problem is you think I am using an ad populum argument. The reality is I am talking about game balance. Everquest monster HP isn't balanced around players having high teir gear. Its balanced around low to mid tier gear. This is why you don't need highly geared (high DPS) players to clear content quickly.

I have no idea why you think Everquest is comparable to Chess lol. You have a strange idea that you need to powergame a 20 year old elf sim basically balanced to easy mode. Remember that the game balance was designed around expansions coming out quickly, so they can't expect players to be decked out with raid gear when a new expansion releases.

[PatChapp]

For real,years of velious farming really trivializes

[Zuranthium]

Everquest monster HP isn't balanced around players having high teir gear. Its balanced around low to mid tier gear. This is why you don't need highly geared (high DPS) players to clear content quickly.

You absolutely do need high DPS to clear content "quickly". Do you want to spend 6 hours trying to fight through Plane of Fear, or 3? Is that extra 3 hours of your life not valuable? How about getting to Level 60, want to spend 800 hours or 400? 400 hours of life not worthwhile either?

Everything is measured in time. The faster you can do things in EQ, the more powerful you are. Ultimately the entire game and metric of what is "powerful" simply comes down to how efficiently something can be done. The game can be "beaten" no matter what, if you simply spend enough time and throw enough characters at something. A raid of 500 people doesn't need Clerics to "clear" the content. You can just hack down the Dragon eventually while taking tons of deaths. But obviously it's much more efficient to use Clerics, hence why they are powerful.

Imagine if raids were capped at 30 people. What is most powerful would inherently be whittled down first to what 30-character composition is even capable of killing the boss MOB, and then what group composition can kill it the quickest and/or kill it with less than 30 people. The less people you need to do something, the less the loot needs to be shared. And the faster you can do something, the more time you have to move onto the next thing.

In EQ, those factors of how to do something most efficiently (least amount of characters needed and/or fastest) revolves around whatever allows you to do the most DPS while not dying, or at least not dying too much. Unless you are exploiting the duel or drowning mechanics from certain periods of EQ, wherein you could constantly refill your mana bar by dying. In which case, die frequently, it's quicker than medding. ;)

[Crede]

I’d take a well played mage over pretty much any other dps in a 4-6 man group setting besides an enchanter. The good ones who are actually playing their class correctly(max pet, Keeping DS on the tank, debuffing, mod rodding) bring a lot to the table assuming you have a tank, cc, and healer. So I see them as more of a 4-6 addition, and raiding.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Loraen%27s_Class_Selection_Guide

Loraens guide has a nice class breakdown looking at all aspects of the game rating each one. I’d change a few things but overall I think it’s pretty accurate I put mages somewhere in the middle. Worst classes are Ranger/pally for sure and the numbers you see online reflect that

[DeathsSilkyMist]

You absolutely do need high DPS to clear content "quickly". Do you want to spend 6 hours trying to fight through Plane of Fear, or 3? Is that extra 3 hours of your life not valuable? How about getting to Level 60, want to spend 800 hours or 400? 400 hours of life not worthwhile either?

Everything is measured in time. The faster you can do things in EQ, the more powerful you are. Ultimately the entire game and metric of what is "powerful" simply comes down to how efficiently something can be done. The game can be "beaten" no matter what, if you simply spend enough time and throw enough characters at something. A raid of 500 people doesn't need Clerics to "clear" the content. You can just hack down the Dragon eventually while taking tons of deaths. But obviously it's much more efficient to use Clerics, hence why they are powerful.

Imagine if raids were capped at 30 people. What is most powerful would inherently be whittled down first to what 30-character composition is even capable of killing the boss MOB, and then what group composition can kill it the quickest and/or kill it with less than 30 people. The less people you need to do something, the less the loot needs to be shared. And the faster you can do something, the more time you have to move onto the next thing.

In EQ, those factors of how to do something most efficiently (least amount of characters needed and/or fastest) revolves around whatever allows you to do the most DPS while not dying, or at least not dying too much. Unless you are exploiting the duel or drowning mechanics from certain periods of EQ, wherein you could constantly refill your mana bar by dying. In which case, die frequently, it's quicker than medding. ;)

Thank you for responding in a calm manner. I really appreciate it.

I also apologize for not being 100% clear. When I try to type in shorter sentences (as requested by users on these forums), there ends up being misunderstandings (not your fault). This is one reason why I normally type more, because it reduces this problem. When I say "DPS not that important", I am not saying DPS is never useful, shouldn't be sought after, or cannot improve your gameplay. I will explain more below.

In raiding I have already said (and agree) that DPS is more important. You want to clear Fear as fast as possible because another competing guild could try and take your raid mobs.

In soloing DPS is also a bit more important. You can only improve your kill speeds via more utility (HP/Mana regen, clickies, etc.), or more DPS. I myself am tooling my SK to have higher DPS in soloing, because he is already tanky enough. Adding more HP or defensive stats will not help his chances of survival, so I can focus on improving clear speeds.

Grouping is where DPS tends not to matter as much. The reason for this is because in my experience the biggest DPS boost you get in grouping is simply having other group members. This is assuming a reasonable group composition, the players at least know how to play their class, and they aren't AFKing a lot. I have been in groups where we have had highly geared players (high DPS on paper), and had poor clear speeds. Conversely, I have had groups with average geared players that have had high clear speeds.

The reason for this is simple: Everquest monster stats are generally balanced around low to average geared players. This is because the rate at which expansions were released (and the difficulty in obtaining gear) meant the developers couldn't expect most players to be geared to the teeth. If this wasn't the case, soloing for XP wouldn't really be a thing. Monsters would just take so long to kill that soloing would only really be worth it when you were camping items of value.

The true challenge of Everquest came from people not knowing a lot about the game. On P99, where everybody basically knows everything, a lot of the challenge is removed. It gets stripped down to mostly monster stats, which again are actually not that high for the most part. This is why you can get away with having great clear speeds with groups that don't have high DPS on paper.

I understand you like to play efficiently, so you probably play in groups that are even more optimized, both in composition and DPS. This means your standard for XP gains is simply higher than normal. This is not a problem, but I believe it skews your idea a bit of what an acceptable XP rate is for the game when it comes to the game's balance. I am not saying most players would not enjoy your standard of XP rates. I am saying that most players are not hyper optimizing their XP groups via gear checks, running static groups, being really strict about classes and levels, etc. Not that I have seen anyway. Usually class and general level range are the things that get checked in groups, and even then it is more class type (healer, puller, etc.) rather than the absolute best class for the situation.

The reason why I say a Mage's extra DPS doesn't really save the class on P99 is because of their lack of CC. Not having CC means you are still more limited on what you can solo, even with the increase in DPS. In a group their extra DPS is nice, but as I said before, extra DPS isn't always going to increase your group's kill speed. Typically speaking it's better to get a class that has both good DPS and good utility (like a Necromancer), to get the most bang for your buck. In a raid Mages are obviously amazing, but not for their DPS hehe, it's for their utility.

The thing about Mages is their toolkit REALLY shines when players know little about the game. This is because their ability to summon items is very important when players don't know where all the merchants are to buy food/drink/bandages for their respective faction levels. When everybody was new to the game, summoned weapons were also actually pretty good. Since most people were running around with Fine Steel weapons, Summoned weapons were better than what they had. On P99, this isn't the case. Everybody knows where the merchants are, or can quickly change their factions. They also have better weapons, so summoned weapons aren't very useful, except for a few situations.

This is why I think Mages are the most underpowered when looking at all aspects of the game. Again, this doesn't mean I hate them, they are bad, or you shouldn't play them. In solo situations they are gimped by lack of CC, in group situations they aren't really that special, and in raids they are only used for a few spells. In all situations pet AI can gimp them. Under the assumption an average player will not be heavily raiding, this means their huge advantage in raids isn't worth as much consideration. We mostly need to look at their solo/group capabilities. Again, this isn't to say Mages are bad, they just unfortunately aren't designed for people playing Everquest when they know everything. This is why the class got a bunch of changes in later expansions to try and address these issue.

Now to play devils advocate, you could say Rogues are even worse than Mages, because they have a similar problem. Not great when soloing, but much better in groups and raids. Don't misunderstand the "not great" part for soloing with Mages. I am not saying Mages can't solo quickly. They are simply more limited than a lot of other classes due to lack of CC. What they can solo they solo very well. Also casters usually have a leg up over non-casters. The only reason why I disagree with this is because rogues are designed to work this way. Their kit isn't gimped by P99 knowledge, but improved by it. They also have higher DPS than a Mage, which is the main consideration for Rogue vs. Mage when in a group situation. While Rogues obviously lose out in solo situations, my assumption is most rogue players understand they should be heavily grouping anyway, so for Rogues specifically you shouldn't be weighing solo capabilities as much to begin with.

[Crede]

I tried to see your mage opinion, but the more you talk about it I'm convinced that you're actually just making things up now to support your mage claim, lol. Which isn't surprising, we all know you like to spin your opinions as facts, and will defend them to the death. I can respect that in certain scenarios, but I'm not really sure who are you trying to convince here, other than yourself.

The thing about Mages is their toolkit REALLY shines when players know little about the game. This is because their ability to summon items is very important when players don't know where all the merchants are to buy food/drink/bandages for their respective faction levels. When everybody was new to the game, summoned weapons were also actually pretty good. Since most people were running around with Fine Steel weapons, Summoned weapons were better than what they had. On P99, this isn't the case. Everybody knows where the merchants are, or can quickly change their factions. They also have better weapons, so summoned weapons aren't very useful, except for a few situations.

This entire paragraph is completely inaccurate, lol. Mages have a toolkit that actually shines the more you know about the game. Getting a max pet & positioning it, Cothing a puller to clear aggro when needed, keeping DS on the tank, providing muzzles to increase dps, debuffing to help charmers maintain charm for more dps/safety, mod rods to assist the healer in getting more mana. A well played mage is really a nice thing to see in the group scene. Nobody cares about their summoned weapons, lol, nor should that be a factor in considering their overall utility.

The reason why I say a Mage's extra DPS doesn't really save the class on P99 is because of their lack of CC. Not having CC means you are still more limited on what you can solo, even with the increase in DPS. In a group their extra DPS is nice, but as I said before, extra DPS isn't always going to increase your group's kill speed. Typically speaking it's better to get a class that has both good DPS and good utility (like a Necromancer), to get the most bang for your buck. In a raid Mages are obviously amazing, but not for their DPS hehe, it's for their utility.

As others have mentioned, you are putting way too much value on utility/CC when it comes to solo/grouping. You don't need all that to get to lvl 60 quickly solo. You need to just know the right camps, and be efficient at killing quickly. Mages can do this very efficiently, unlike a rogue. Utility comes into play more for experiencing different camps & solo artist stuff, which is really niche and outside the scope of this discussion. And as for grouping, Necros are an amazing class, but honestly nobody really cares about their utility when forming a group. Other classes will cover that utility. They would take a mage 99% of the times for superior DPS. Necros are kinda like paladins in the group atmosphere, they can make up for a lot of deficiencies, but overall not really needed. The formula for forming groups is pretty simple here on p99: get a tank, healer, cc, and fill the rest with the best dps you can find.

The only reason why I disagree with this is because rogues are designed to work this way. Their kit isn't gimped by P99 knowledge, but improved by it. They also have higher DPS than a Mage, which is the main consideration for Rogue vs. Mage when in a group situation. While Rogues obviously lose out in solo situations, my assumption is most rogue players understand they should be heavily grouping anyway, so for Rogues specifically you shouldn't be weighing solo capabilities as much to begin with.

This whole section is a stretch and I think you're just making up things to support your mage claim at this point :). You are claiming that the Rogue toolkit isn't gimped by p99 knowledge, but improved by it. This makes no sense. Rogue's have no toolkit, everyone knows how to /attack and backstab. Sneak/hide & pick lock have extremely limited use in the group setting. Being a knowledgeable rogue doesn't really make a group better, you might just annoy the tank/healer slightly less when you start using your evade hotkey. :)

Mage's are certainly not the most underpowered class in the game when looking at all aspects of it. It's more like a close tie between Rangers, Paladins, and Wizards, with Rogues not too far behind that. Ranger's are a perfect example of how worthless utility can be. It doesn't make them good soloers, nor does does it really make them well liked in groups, despite the fact that they can also dps. Same with Wizards, they have a ton of utility, but I have no doubt I could out level one on a mage as knowledge/efficiency/minimizing downtime is the most important thing when leveling up solo. Wizards also are despised in groups, despite having a ton of useful tools.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I tried to see your mage opinion, but the more you talk about it I'm convinced that you're actually just making things up now to support your mage claim, lol. Which isn't surprising, we all know you like to spin your opinions as facts, and will defend them to the death. I can respect that in certain scenarios, but I'm not really sure who are you trying to convince here, other than yourself.



This entire paragraph is completely inaccurate, lol. Mages have a toolkit that actually shines the more you know about the game. Getting a max pet & positioning it, Cothing a puller to clear aggro when needed, keeping DS on the tank, providing muzzles to increase dps, debuffing to help charmers maintain charm for more dps/safety, mod rods to assist the healer in getting more mana. A well played mage is really a nice thing to see in the group scene. Nobody cares about their summoned weapons, lol, nor should that be a factor in considering their overall utility.



As others have mentioned, you are putting way too much value on utility/CC when it comes to solo/grouping. You don't need all that to get to lvl 60 quickly solo. You need to just know the right camps, and be efficient at killing quickly. Mages can do this very efficiently, unlike a rogue. Utility comes into play more for experiencing different camps & solo artist stuff, which is really niche and outside the scope of this discussion. And as for grouping, Necros are an amazing class, but honestly nobody really cares about their utility when forming a group. Other classes will cover that utility. They would take a mage 99% of the times for superior DPS. Necros are kinda like paladins in the group atmosphere, they can make up for a lot of deficiencies, but overall not really needed. The formula for forming groups is pretty simple here on p99: get a tank, healer, cc, and fill the rest with the best dps you can find.



This whole section is a stretch and I think you're just making up things to support your mage claim at this point :). You are claiming that the Rogue toolkit isn't gimped by p99 knowledge, but improved by it. This makes no sense. Rogue's have no toolkit, everyone knows how to /attack and backstab. Sneak/hide & pick lock have extremely limited use in the group setting. Being a knowledgeable rogue doesn't really make a group better, you might just annoy the tank/healer slightly less when you start using your evade hotkey. :)

Mage's are certainly not the most underpowered class in the game when looking at all aspects of it. It's more like a close tie between Rangers, Paladins, and Wizards, with Rogues not too far behind that. Ranger's are a perfect example of how worthless utility can be. It doesn't make them good soloers, nor does does it really make them well liked in groups, despite the fact that they can also dps. Same with Wizards, they have a ton of utility, but I have no doubt I could out level one on a mage as knowledge/efficiency/minimizing downtime is the most important thing when leveling up solo. Wizards also are despised in groups, despite having a ton of useful tools.

I don't spin my opinions as facts. People just think everything that they disagree with are opinions, even when something like math, videos, etc. can objectively prove it. There have been many times where I have been accused of this, even when the math or a video objectively proves otherwise lol. I am sorry people think Everquest is magical somehow, and they can make their opinions work, even though the game is based on an objective set of rules.

Cothing a puller to clear agro is rarely done or necessary in group situations. I don't think I have ever seen a group actively seek a mage for this purpose, unless there are some very specific camps that need it. I am not saying Mages can't do things other than DPS in a group, but generally speaking that's how most groups handle having a Mage. As for muzzles, they are a nice increase in DPS for sure, but this again assumes your group actually needs it. Same with DS, Mages do not have a monopoly on DS, so it isn't like groups often seek them out for that purpose. Mages do not have a monopoly on resist debuffs either.

You are correct that you could level to 60 without CC or utility. But having it allows you to do more camps and also gain more money/items along the journey. Just because you can level to 60 a bit faster doesn't mean you end up in the same place as someone who had better access to camps in terms of having equal money/gear. If you level up to 60 faster and then have to spend more time farming, you end up at the same place in terms of total time spent.

I would take a Necro over a Mage 99% of the time. They still have good DPS and have a lot of utility to help increase kill speed, pull when the puller needs to AFK, etc. You really don't need mega DPS to have a great group.

I think you misunderstood my rogue point. Their toolkit is very simple, and improved by knowledge because you can get the best DPS possible by knowing which items to get and which haste breakpoints will help increase the amount of times you can backstab. Conversely, summoning items get less and less useful as knowledge increases.

Rangers, Paladins, SK, Rogues, and Wizards are lower on the totem pole for sure. I don't think I have ever claimed otherwise. But again, Mages are lower because they don't have good utility overall. Rangers, Paladins, SK's, and Wizards can solo more camps than a Mage could, and they are still great in groups. Rogues are the only ones who can't do this, but again Mages are mostly used for DPS in groups, so you need to compare rogue DPS to Mage DPS to see which one wins out. I wouldn't put as much emphasis on soloing for a rogue as a Mage, because everybody should know that they need to group more for a Rogue. Since Mages can solo much better, soloing becomes a bigger part to consider.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

When I am considering "most underpowered overall", I have to look at it in more general terms, such as what can the class do given it's options. There is no way to objectively come to a conclusion on a single class if you start including specific details such as preferred leveling paths, unless you can compile a vast amount of data, which nobody is going to do.

For example, if you are someone who loves killing in Droga to level/gain money, Mage is no longer going to be the most underpowered, because they do well in that zone. But I can't assume people are going for this leveling/farming path.

You need to consider that Mages have many different paths they can take, and not everyone chooses the most optimal. Because of this, having more limited options in terms of what camps they can do due to lack of CC affects their score negatively in my estimation.

Even if you try and think in terms of "assuming a class plays optimally, who is most underpowered", it is difficult to decide, because I am not sure how you would split solo/group preferences. Rogues and Mages basically fill a DPS slot in a group, so if the player is only grouping, you are basically comparing DPS between the two classes. But it is probably difficult to determine at which points in the game soloing is more optimal than groups, and vice versa. You would need a lot of data.

[greatdane]

It's really simple, and I've already said it twice. If DPS was king, you would see gear checks to get into groups. Anybody with noob gear would never be able to get an XP group, because their DPS would be too low. I have never seen a gear check on P99 for any group. The only requirements for gear typically come from raiding guilds, for resistances and clickies, not DPS gear.

The only things that have any meaningful impact on melee DPS is weapon(s) and haste item. Gear doesn't really affect caster DPS at all, mana pool size is irrelevant in a grinding environment. The reason people don't screen players for gear before inviting them into group is not that DPS is irrelevant, it's because it's a piece of shit thing to do and also most players have good enough gear to where there isn't significant room for improvements. Nobody's gonna look at an epic rogue or t-staff monk and go "pfff, no Vulak weapon? GTFO!"

As long as the basic necessities are covered regarding heals/tank/CC, DPS is the most important thing in a group. It's just that on the whole, class has far, far more impact on DPS than gear does. Gear is irrelevant for casters, monks will often be out pulling half the time anyway, and rogues can get their epic from a vending machine. There's no real reason to screen for gear. There is a reason to screen for class, which people very much do, because DPS matters an incredible amount. This is why nobody is happy to take a druid or wizard along as DPS.

It's way too impractical to check someone's gear. What are you gonna do, send them a tell asking them to link their magelo? Have them show up and inspect them, then tell them to leave if they don't meet the standards? But you very much do mind what class they are, you do that yourself 100%, and that's because you know that if you don't have good DPS in the group, it's gonna be a dogshit group and a waste of your time.

Utility isn't that important. People know the game like the back of their hand and are vastly overgeared on average. Ask anyone whether they would prefer to fill their DPS spot with an epic rogue/mage, or a druid/wizard for the sake of having evac. A group needs enough healing and CC to not die, and then all that matters besides is DPS because that's what determines how well your time is spent.

[PatChapp]

Coth to clear agro is very useful if your trying to small group royals and such
The enchanter can aetash,mage coths them out and it is much less painful to paci the room.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The only things that have any meaningful impact on melee DPS is weapon(s) and haste item. The reason people don't screen players for gear before inviting them into group is not that DPS is irrelevant, it's because it's a piece of shit thing to do and also most players have good enough gear to where there isn't significant room for improvements. Nobody's gonna look at an epic rogue and go "pfff, no Vulak dagger? GTFO!"

As long as the basic necessities are covered, DPS is the most important thing in a group. It's just that on the whole, class has far, far more impact on DPS than gear does. Gear has literally no impact on DPS for casters, monks will often be out pulling half the time anyway, and rogues can get their epic from a vending machine. There's no real reason to screen for gear. There is a reason to screen for class, which people very much do, because DPS matters an incredible amount. This is why nobody is happy to take a druid or wizard along as DPS.

It's way too impractical to check someone's gear. What are you gonna do, send them a tell asking them to link their magelo? Have them show up and inspect them, then tell them to leave if they don't meet the standards? But you very much do mind what class they are, you do that yourself 100%, and that's because you know that if you don't have good DPS in the group, it's gonna be a dogshit group and a waste of your time.

There is a small problem with your assertion that "DPS is the most important thing in a group". If it was, then you would screen gear. That is my point. Gear does significantly impact a melee character's DPS. For all you know, the rogue coming into your group doesn't have a haste item. If DPS was really that important, you would by necessity have to screen for gear on melee DPS characters. Otherwise, they just wouldn't be able to perform to your standards. You cannot simultaneously assume DPS is extremely important while also not caring about how much DPS someone does by not performing gear checks. It just doesn't make sense.

Having group members who know how to play the game and a decent group composition is all you really need to run most successful groups. Typically speaking a decent group composition has good utility, which is why utility is generally more important. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, as some camps are harder than usual, and need more specific compositions to be successful, but most normal camps do not need this.

I agree doing gear checks is a shitty thing to do, but luckily you don't actually have to do them, because DPS isn't as important as you claim:)

EDIT: You are also incorrect about gear having no effect on caster DPS. Max mana can very much effect how much DPS a caster is doing. More med time = less casting = less DPS. And to be clear, I include CC and Healing in the "utility" category.

[Zuranthium]

Now to play devils advocate, you could say Rogues are even worse than Mages, because they have a similar problem. Not great when soloing, but much better in groups and raids. Don't misunderstand the "not great" part for soloing with Mages. I am not saying Mages can't solo quickly. They are simply more limited than a lot of other classes due to lack of CC. What they can solo they solo very well. The only reason why I disagree with this is because rogues are designed to work this way. Their kit isn't gimped by P99 knowledge, but improved by it. They also have higher DPS than a Mage, which is the main consideration for Rogue vs. Mage when in a group situation.

Mage is the #1 DPS in the game for classic group composition (no Charming, no Velious endgame weapons). Especially before Level 55 and pre-Epic, Mage beats Rogue by a lot. The pet alone is more DPS at that gear level, and then you add in their damage shield and nukes on top of it.

Mages are great at soloing, the comparison to Rogue there is very nonsensical. Not having traditional CC on Mage can definitely be very annoying, but for grouping someone else will have Root anyway, and for soloing you just have to plan properly. Your pet is the CC, you can break many camps solo by chain petting. After broken the Water Pet has crazy regen, allowing you to maximize your DPS by not having to keep casting new pets and instead use the mana on damage spells. In the period of the game before melee gear gets really good, a Mage on their own could grind through more MOBs than a trio of Warrior + Cleric + Wizard. The pet is better DPS than a Warrior and its regen is like having a dedicated healer already, and Mage damage shield + nuke together is more efficient than Wizard nuke.

Rangers, Paladins, SK's, and Wizards can solo more camps than a Mage could

This is NOT true, lol. Although it depends on exact era and context. The hybrids improve a lot in Velious. And in general SK can get to some camps faster because of Feign Death. But for actual ability to kill the most stuff solo, Mage beats all of those classes. By a lot. Paladin especially is very slow to kill stuff solo. Yikes!

I remember soloing places like Mistmoore graveyard as a Mage, while whole groups sat by, mad that I was able to take it all on my own. :D

[Cen]

It's sometimes hard for me to decide what class is worst across the board, but I can always name something every class is bad at :p Some are less bad at their worst than others as well.

[Crede]

When I am considering "most underpowered overall", I have to look at it in more general terms, such as what can the class do given it's options. There is no way to objectively come to a conclusion on a single class if you start including specific details such as preferred leveling paths, unless you can compile a vast amount of data, which nobody is going to do.

For example, if you are someone who loves killing in Droga to level/gain money, Mage is no longer going to be the most underpowered, because they do well in that zone. But I can't assume people are going for this leveling/farming path.

You need to consider that Mages have many different paths they can take, and not everyone chooses the most optimal. Because of this, having more limited options in terms of what camps they can do due to lack of CC affects their score negatively in my estimation.

Even if you try and think in terms of "assuming a class plays optimally, who is most underpowered", it is difficult to decide, because I am not sure how you would split solo/group preferences. Rogues and Mages basically fill a DPS slot in a group, so if the player is only grouping, you are basically comparing DPS between the two classes. But it is probably difficult to determine at which points in the game soloing is more optimal than groups, and vice versa. You would need a lot of data.

Why can't you imagine people are going for this leveling/farming path? People will generally find the path of least resistance in this game. What's going to get you the quickest xp possible(we aren't all teenagers anymore who can play for hours on end), and what will get you the best pp gains. A mage doing droga can out farm a lot of these weaker classes per hour(ranger, paladin, wizard). You might get bored of doing it, but that doesn't necessarily make them a weak class.

This thread was about the most underPOWERed class. What a mage can do, they do it extremely well, and they are very powerful at doing it. You're pretty much equating utility to power, which I don't really see going back to point about rangers. They have a lot of utility but I don't think anyone really considers them powerful, and they are very limited in what they can actually take head on. While a wizard might be able get around easier with root/IVU & maybe nuke down a random mob or 2 that a mage can't get to as easily, that doesn't make them powerful, because now the wizard has to sit for 20+ min to get that mana back, lol.

It is not hard to determine at which points in the game soloing is more optimal than groups. I've leveled many, many alts on this server, and I've explored tons of different leveling paths. Solo is almost always more optimal than grouping if the class can do it efficiently, like a mage, and you know where to hunt and what mobs to kill. Duos/trios can help speed things up in certain situations 55+, but rogues are really not great at doing this. I consider a rogue more of a 4-6 man group class, where xp per hour starts to take a significant dive.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Why can't you imagine people are going for this leveling/farming path? People will generally find the path of least resistance in this game. What's going to get you the quickest xp possible(we aren't all teenagers anymore who can play for hours on end), and what will get you the best pp gains. A mage doing droga can out farm a lot of these weaker classes per hour(ranger, paladin, wizard). You might get bored of doing it, but that doesn't necessarily make them a weak class.

This thread was about the most underPOWERed class. What a mage can do, they do it extremely well, and they are very powerful at doing it. You're pretty much equating utility to power, which I don't really see going back to point about rangers. They have a lot of utility but I don't think anyone really considers them powerful, and they are very limited in what they can actually take head on. While a wizard might be able get around easier with root/IVU & maybe nuke down a random mob or 2 that a mage can't get to as easily, that doesn't make them powerful, because now the wizard has to sit for 20+ min to get that mana back, lol.

It is not hard to determine at which points in the game soloing is more optimal than groups. I've leveled many, many alts on this server, and I've explored tons of different leveling paths. Solo is almost always more optimal than grouping if the class can do it efficiently, like a mage, and you know where to hunt and what mobs to kill. Duos/trios can help speed things up in certain situations 55+, but rogues are really not great at doing this. I consider a rogue more of a 4-6 man group class, where xp per hour starts to take a significant dive.

I can imagine it:) The question of "most underpowered in general" breaks down if you allow all paths, because no one is going to generate that much data. There are too many assumptions about which path you can take and at what point. There is almost certainly a leveling path where a Ranger would outperform a Mage, for example. In that particular case, Ranger would be better than Mage. You would basically need to figure out all paths and see which classes get the most and best paths to determine an objective best and worst. Nobody is going to do that.

So you have to look at what each class can do, and what people end up using them for. Mages can solo and group well, and they are highly prized in raids. But remember that most Mages level to 55 and then just become a CoTH bot, where most Rogues level to 60 and play outside of Raids. This is one clear indicator of why Mages are low on the Totem pole. They have one good thing people care about, but their other abilities aren't special enough for people to care about them. That is why Rogues are better than Mages.

Mage is the #1 DPS in the game for classic group composition (no Charming, no Velious endgame weapons). Especially before Level 55 and pre-Epic, Mage beats Rogue by a lot. The pet alone is more DPS at that gear level, and then you add in their damage shield and nukes on top of it.

Mages are great at soloing, the comparison to Rogue there is very nonsensical. Not having traditional CC on Mage can definitely be very annoying, but for grouping someone else will have Root anyway, and for soloing you just have to plan properly. Your pet is the CC, you can break many camps solo by chain petting. After broken the Water Pet has crazy regen, allowing you to maximize your DPS by not having to keep casting new pets and instead use the mana on damage spells. In the period of the game before melee gear gets really good, a Mage on their own could grind through more MOBs than a trio of Warrior + Cleric + Wizard. The pet is better DPS than a Warrior and its regen is like having a dedicated healer already, and Mage damage shield + nuke together is more efficient than Wizard nuke.



This is NOT true, lol. Although it depends on exact era and context. The hybrids improve a lot in Velious. And in general SK can get to some camps faster because of Feign Death. But for actual ability to kill the most stuff solo, Mage beats all of those classes. By a lot. Paladin especially is very slow to kill stuff solo. Yikes!

I remember soloing places like Mistmoore graveyard as a Mage, while whole groups sat by, mad that I was able to take it all on my own. :D

I don't doubt Mages are best DPS in classic. But with this kind of question I assume Velious, because that is where this server always ends. OP did not ask "most underpowered in classic".

You misunderstood my point about Rogues. I am not saying Rogues and Mages are equal or comparable to soloing. I never said that. I am saying Mages aren't as good at soloing as other classes due to their lack of CC, which is true. Rogues are mostly group classes, so you weigh soloing lightly on them. Mages can solo better, so you weigh soloing more when considering most underpowered.

And I think SK's, Paladins, Rangers, Druids, and Wizards are better than Mages at soloing because they can do more camps via utility. Who cares how good a Mage can be at specific camps if you can't get into them, for example? Having a larger pool of camps to choose from allows more consistency when leveling. This is again assuming Velious, because that is where this server always ends.

I also would love to see video proof of your claim that a single mage could out grind a Warrior + Cleric + Wizard. I don't think this is true. And even if it was true in Classic, lets say, that is irrelevant to the question, because the question isn't "most underpowered in classic".

[Crede]

And I think SK's, Paladins, Rangers, Druids, and Wizards are better than Mages at soloing because they can do more camps via utility. Who cares how good a Mage can be at specific camps if you can't get into them, for example? Having a larger pool of camps to choose from allows more consistency when leveling.


I can see your inexperience starting to show leveling different classes here on p99, hehe.

Mages do not struggle with getting into effective camps, lol. The population is quite low here, it is not hard to find stuff to keep them occupied.

Again you think utility = power. Wizards/Rangers specifically do not have this insane amount of options over a mage to effectively level just because they have more utility than a mage. I'd actually argue that they have less. There are very, very few spots a wizard can actually utilize and out perform what a mage could do. I can think of sents as a particular example in WL, but sents are really bad xp/hour. And a ranger loses a ton of options once you hit the 40s and mobs just wreck you. Fear kiting animals is extremely limited on options.

I can imagine it:) The question of "most underpowered in general" breaks down if you allow all paths, because no one is going to generate that much data. There are too many assumptions about which path you can take and at what point. There is almost certainly a leveling path where a Ranger would outperform a Mage, for example. In that particular case, Ranger would be better than Mage. You would basically need to figure out all paths and see which classes get the most and best paths to determine an objective best and worst. Nobody is going to do that.

So you have to look at what each class can do, and what people end up using them for. Mages can solo and group well, and they are highly prized in raids. But remember that most Mages level to 55 and then just become a CoTH bot, where most Rogues level to 60 and play outside of Raids. This is one clear indicator of why Mages are low on the Totem pole. They have one good thing people care about, but their other abilities aren't special enough for people to care about them. That is why Rogues are better than Mages.


Echoing my previous post, I can confidently say a Ranger has less leveling paths than a mage. I know this, because I've spent many hours here leveling alts and gathering that data. Utility might help getting to a camp quicker, but once you are there and set up, and understand how it works, a mage can churn through mobs where a Ranger will either kill mobs very slowly or suffer from a lot of downtime after they do kill one.

There are plenty of mages that like to play beyond 55 and outside, coth bots are more like robots specifically created for that reason. Rogues can't solo for shit, they contribute highly to groups, but so does a mage, and they contribute highly to raids, but so does a mage. So given that mages are much, much better soloers, rogues are definitely more underpowered than them.

[greatdane]

There is a small problem with your assertion that "DPS is the most important thing in a group". If it was, then you would screen gear. That is my point. Gear does significantly impact a melee character's DPS. For all you know, the rogue coming into your group doesn't have a haste item. If DPS was really that important, you would by necessity have to screen for gear on melee DPS characters. Otherwise, they just wouldn't be able to perform to your standards. You cannot simultaneously assume DPS is extremely important while also not caring about how much DPS someone does by not performing gear checks. It just doesn't make sense.

Having group members who know how to play the game and a decent group composition is all you really need to run most successful groups. Typically speaking a decent group composition has good utility, which is why utility is generally more important. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, as some camps are harder than usual, and need more specific compositions to be successful, but most normal camps do not need this.

I agree doing gear checks is a shitty thing to do, but luckily you don't actually have to do them, because DPS isn't as important as you claim:)

EDIT: You are also incorrect about gear having no effect on caster DPS. Max mana can very much effect how much DPS a caster is doing. More med time = less casting = less DPS. And to be clear, I include CC and Healing in the "utility" category.

Nope. People don't screen gear because gear matters very little for DPS. Weapons and haste item for melees, and that's all. Since there's only two melee DPS classes and one of them can buy a pretty good weapon in EC for a modest sum and the other can pick its epic up from the gutter, there's no real need to screen them for gear. Casters don't rely on gear at all, the only thing that matters for caster DPS is mana regen and there isn't really any of that on gear in the P99 era. Doesn't matter in the slightest whether your mana pool is 3k or 4k if you're in a chain-pulling group where you're never dumping a full mana pool into one mob anyway. Besides, it's pretty trivial to reach the 200 int softcap, and nobody in the history of this server has ever scoffed at a mage who shows up wearing SMR, stein of moggok, runed cowl, etc. just because their mana pool is less than that of a raid-geared mage. It's irrelevant. They'll be sitting at ~50% mana the entire time anyway and the depth of their mana pool had no bearing on anything. Mana pool matters for quad-kiters and raiding clerics, and that's about it.

DPS matters an incredible amount, but DPS is mostly down to class, not gear. How often do you willingly choose a wizard over a rogue, or a druid over a magician, when filling a DPS spot? Probably never, unless you're favoring a friend over a stranger. That's because DPS matters more than anything when grinding, provided that you're not literally dying to XP mobs, which is very easy to prevent with just the very basics covered. Nobody puts together a group consisting of a cleric, druid, bard, enchanter, paladin and ranger, because while that group would have all the utility in the world, it wouldn't maintain an acceptable rate of kills/hour. Meanwhile, people will happily go with three or even four top-tier DPS classes and just a single healer and a tank.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I can see your inexperience starting to show leveling different classes here on p99, hehe.

Mages do not struggle with getting into effective camps, lol. The population is quite low here, it is not hard to find stuff to keep them occupied.

Again you think utility = power. Wizards/Rangers specifically do not have this insane amount of options over a mage to effectively level just because they have more utility than a mage. I'd actually argue that they have less. There are very, very few spots a wizard can actually utilize and out perform what a mage could do. I can think of sents as a particular example in WL, but sents are really bad xp/hour. And a ranger loses a ton of options once you hit the 40s and mobs just wreck you. Fear kiting animals is extremely limited on options.



Echoing my previous post, I can confidently say a Ranger has less leveling paths than a mage. I know this, because I've spent many hours here leveling alts and gathering that data. Utility might help getting to a camp quicker, but once you are there and set up, and understand how it works, a mage can churn through mobs where a Ranger will either kill mobs very slowly or suffer from a lot of downtime after they do kill one.

There are plenty of mages that like to play beyond 55 and outside, coth bots are more like robots specifically created for that reason. Rogues can't solo for shit, they contribute highly to groups, but so does a mage, and they contribute highly to raids, but so does a mage. So given that mages are much, much better soloers, rogues are definitely more underpowered than them.

It's not inexperience. There have been plenty of times where I haven't been able to get into camps I should have just due to bad luck in terms of who was there at the time. The problem is you care way too much about leveling 1-60. Who cares if you can level a bit faster to level 60 if you stop playing the character at 60?:) People stop playing Mages at 60 because they are a very bottom heavy class. They are great in the beginning and get worse every level, with the exception of CoTH. Utility helps more than DPS when a fight actually matters, and you aren't just clearing XP chaff, which any class can do honestly, with the exception of Rogues unless they are well twinked.

Please share the leveling path data!

EDIT: Also, you can't weigh soloing heavily for rogues, because they are a grouping class. Otherwise you would end up rating something like a Cleric lower, even though they shouldn't be rated lower because of that.

Nope. People don't screen gear because gear matters very little for DPS. Weapons and haste item for melees, and that's all. Since there's only two melee DPS classes and one of them can buy a pretty good weapon in EC for a modest sum and the other can pick its epic up from the gutter, there's no real need to screen them for gear. Casters don't rely on gear at all, the only thing that matters for caster DPS is mana regen and there isn't really any of that on gear in the P99 era. Doesn't matter in the slightest whether your mana pool is 3k or 4k if you're in a chain-pulling group where you're never dumping a full mana pool into one mob anyway. Besides, it's pretty trivial to reach the 200 int softcap, and nobody in the history of this server has ever scoffed at a mage who shows up wearing SMR, stein of moggok, runed cowl, etc. just because their mana pool is less than that of a raid-geared mage. It's irrelevant. They'll be sitting at ~50% mana the entire time anyway and the depth of their mana pool had no bearing on anything. Mana pool matters for quad-kiters and raiding clerics, and that's about it.

DPS matters an incredible amount, but DPS is mostly down to class, not gear. How often do you willingly choose a wizard over a rogue, or a druid over a magician, when filling a DPS spot? Probably never, unless you're favoring a friend over a stranger. That's because DPS matters more than anything when grinding, provided that you're not literally dying to XP mobs, which is very easy to prevent with just the very basics covered. Nobody puts together a group consisting of a cleric, druid, bard, enchanter, paladin and ranger, because while that group would have all the utility in the world, it wouldn't maintain an acceptable rate of kills/hour. Meanwhile, people will happily go with three or even four top-tier DPS classes and just a single healer and a tank.

I am sorry, but you are incorrect.

Melee DPS is heavily dependent on gear. As you say, Weapons and a Haste item. But plenty of people have bad weapons and haste items:) If you don't gear screen, you could get a Rouge with an FBSS and a 0.33 ratio weapon or a Rogue with his Epic and a 0.6 ratio weapon. You probably don't notice the difference, even though the increase in DPS between those two would be considerable. Again, this is easy proof that DPS doesn't matter as much as you say.

The reason why people don't pick Wizards is mostly due to stigma. A good wizard (especially with clickies) can DPS fine.

Druids aren't really DPS classes in groups, so that isn't really a good analogy (unless they are charming, in which case they are better DPS than a Mage).

[Danth]

I also want to know where all these non-COTH-parked magicians at 60 are at, because I don't see 'em around very often at all in the parts of the game I hang out in. What are they doing? Besides raiding, that is. I see them doing something like 4-way in Kael Drakkel once in awhile but on balance it's a rather uncommon 60 to see out and about.

Danth

[Fammaden]

That's because they are underpowered outside of raiding in Kunark/Velious. There's a better choice for just about any activity.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

That's because they are underpowered outside of raiding in Kunark/Velious. There's a better choice for just about any activity.

I also want to know where all these non-COTH-parked magicians at 60 are at, because I don't see 'em around very often at all in the parts of the game I hang out in. What are they doing? Besides raiding, that is. I see them doing something like 4-way in Kael Drakkel once in awhile but on balance it's a rather uncommon 60 to see out and about.

Danth

Both of these are 100% true. If you have played the game for a while, you tend to notice a lack of level 60 mages out in the wild. I rarely see one doing something other than raiding.

[Crede]

EDIT: Also, you can't weigh soloing heavily for rogues, because they are a grouping class. Otherwise you would end up rating something like a Cleric lower, even though they shouldn't be rated lower because of that.


I disagree, you can specifically rate clerics lower for that reason. Any class is capable of soloing given the right conditions(rogues have solod to 60), so that needs to be factored in the overall equation.

When talking about overall power, no class is excluded from any one area and you need to consider every aspect of the game. Solo, duo, trio, 4, 5, 6 man groups, and raids. Clerics will take a hit because of solo, but they are a much better duo/trio class than rogues, so they get more points for that.

When you evaluate every aspect, mages do pretty well. Rogues do great in bigger groups & raids, but overall they fall pretty far down there with rangers & wizards.

If you think that OP/UP means giving rogues an exclusion in the solo scene since they weren't necessarily intended to be solo classes, then we are having 2 entirely different discussions :)

Edit:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Loraen%27s_Class_Selection_Guide

I think Loraen did a pretty good job at rating each class overall. I'd probably tweak a few things since he made this in Kunark era, like SK/pal can solo a lot better than he gives them credit for, but overall I think it's pretty good, and as you can see, magicians are pretty high up, because they shine in almost any situation.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I disagree, you can specifically rate clerics lower for that reason. Any class is capable of soloing given the right conditions(rogues have solod to 60), so that needs to be factored in the overall equation.

When talking about overall power, no class is excluded from any one area and you need to consider every aspect of the game. Solo, duo, trio, 4, 5, 6 man groups, and raids. Clerics will take a hit because of solo, but they are a much better duo/trio class than rogues, so they get more points for that.

When you evaluate every aspect, mages do pretty well. Rogues do great in bigger groups & raids, but overall they fall pretty far down there with rangers & wizards.

If you think that OP/UP means giving rogues an exclusion in the solo scene since they weren't necessarily intended to be solo classes, then we are having 2 entirely different discussions :)

Edit:
https://wiki.project1999.com/Loraen%27s_Class_Selection_Guide

I think Loraen did a pretty good job at rating each class overall. I'd probably tweak a few things since he made this in Kunark era, like SK/pal can solo a lot better than he gives them credit for, but overall I think it's pretty good, and as you can see, magicians are pretty high up, because they shine in almost any situation.

I am not giving rogues exclusion, I am evaluating each class based on what they are supposed to do. It is silly to highly evaluate rogues based on soloing when they are specifically designed not to solo.

Mages are designed to solo, group, and raid. Rogues are designed to group and raid. The only reason why raiding typically has a lower consideration in this type of evaluation is because a "normal" player is only casually raiding, REGARDLESS of class. So you can include such a consideration because it isn't class specific.

[Crede]

I am not giving rogues exclusion, I am evaluating each class based on what they are supposed to do. It is silly to highly evaluate rogues based on soloing when they are specifically designed not to solo.

Mages are designed to solo, group, and raid. Rogues are designed to group and raid. The only reason why raiding typically has a lower consideration in this type of evaluation is because a "normal" player is only casually raiding, REGARDLESS of class. So you can include such a consideration because it isn't class specific.

But you did give rogues an exclusion. You're choosing to leave out/ignore their main weakness in a thread that talks about OP/UP in your evaluation. Since it doesn't specify which area of power, we have to assume it applies to all aspects of the game. And it's really not just solo, group, and raid. You have to look at group compositions too, and a mage simply is a much better duo/trio class overall than a rogue is.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

But you did give rogues an exclusion. You're choosing to leave out/ignore their main weakness in a thread that talks about OP/UP in your evaluation. Since it doesn't specify which area of power, we have to assume it applies to all aspects of the game. And it's really not just solo, group, and raid. You have to look at group compositions too, and a mage simply is a much better duo/trio class overall than a rogue is.

The only reason why it seems that way is because the argument has been "Mages are better due to their DPS", so I am comparing a DPS class to a Mage. If we were talking about healing, I would do the same with Clerics and not highly rate their solo ability, since that isn't what they are designed to do.

And your evaluation of when a rogue is better depends on level. At level 60 most people would take rogues because they out DPS a Mage. At lower levels you are correct, but a class shouldn't simply be evaluated on how well they can level, especially if they basically stop being played at high levels due to their lack of ability (which is true). That is why Mages all end up as CoTH bots. Other classes are just better at everything a Mage can do besides CoTH.

[Crede]

The only reason why it seems that way is because the argument has been "Mages are better due to their DPS", so I am comparing a DPS class to a Mage. If we were talking about healing, I would do the same with Clerics and not highly rate their solo ability, since that isn't what they are designed to do.

And your evaluation of when a rogue is better depends on level. At level 60 most people would take rogues because they out DPS a Mage. At lower levels you are correct, but a class shouldn't simply be evaluated on how well they can level, especially if they basically stop being played at high levels due to their lack of ability (which is true). That is why Mages all end up as CoTH bots. Other classes are just better at everything a Mage can do besides CoTH.

I've never claimed that mage dps is preferred over rogue dps. But being 60 doesn't really change the evaluation of a mage vs rogue in terms of overall power. Mage will still be a better soloer, a more versatile duo/trio companion, a similarly effective big group dps as a rogue. And yes, in the raid scene, you will see more rogues because you can pile on the DPS whereas you only need a few coth bots & magicians can't really nuke or pet much. But raiding/level 60 are only specific aspects of the game. There's still 59 levels before that, and all of the other scenarios which I've already described, which simply make magicians a more powerful class overall than a rogue.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I've never claimed that mage dps is preferred over rogue dps. But being 60 doesn't really change the evaluation of a mage vs rogue in terms of overall power. Mage will still be a better soloer, a more versatile duo/trio companion, a similarly effective big group dps as a rogue. And yes, in the raid scene, you will see more rogues because you can pile on the DPS whereas you only need a few coth bots & magicians can't really nuke or pet much. But raiding/level 60 are only specific aspects of the game. There's still 59 levels before that, and all of the other scenarios which I've already described, which simply make magicians a more powerful class overall than a rogue.

If OP was asking which class is the most underpowered for leveling you would be correct, Rogue would be it. But OP didn't ask that. How the character plays at 60 is big part of the consideration, because you can play for a long time at 60, whether you raid or not.

As far as I know OP isn't asking about which class is the best for leveling and then quitting at 60.

[Jimjam]

Did some velks upper dogs xp recently (58-59 enc,cleric,war,mag) and honestly mag was no slouch. Wouldn’t have replaced it with another class if I had a choice.

I find it hard to place mage as most underpowered cos it slaps 4-39 on a new server, has a decent epic and a clear intractable raid role.

I don’t think I can pick out a most underpowered class. The ones which seem a bit bum often have a huge trump card to bring them back in the running.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Did some velks upper dogs xp recently (58-59 enc,cleric,war,mag) and honestly mag was no slouch. Wouldn’t have replaced it with another class if I had a choice.

I find it hard to place mage as most underpowered cos it slaps 4-39 on a new server, has a decent epic and a clear intractable raid role.

In most cases you would rate a class based on something more specific (solo, group, raid). OP is asking about most underpowered overall, which is a much bigger thought process to consider.

And again, "underpowered" in Everquest does not mean bad, or you shouldn't play them. Luckily there are no bad or broken classes.

[Vivitron]

Rogues are mostly group classes, so you weigh soloing lightly on them.

This depends very much on the player's progression in the game.

When you're leveling your first and so-far only character? Having better solo / duo / trio options absolutely has weight because sometimes you can't find a group or don't have the time and attention to dedicate to one.

The resources to just swap to a better character for the situation come later.

[Crede]

If OP was asking which class is the most underpowered for leveling you would be correct, Rogue would be it. But OP didn't ask that. How the character plays at 60 is big part of the consideration, because you can play for a long time at 60, whether you raid or not.

As far as I know OP isn't asking about which class is the best for leveling and then quitting at 60.

Again, playing at 60 doesn't really change anything in terms of mage vs rogue overall power. Just because there are more of them at 60 doesn't make them an overall more powerful class, it just caters to the raid centric people whereas non raiders probably moved onto other projects. A mage will still win out due to their superior solo, duo/trio capabilities, and pretty similar group effectiveness, all of which can still be done at 60.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Again, playing at 60 doesn't really change anything in terms of mage vs rogue overall power. Just because there are more of them at 60 doesn't make them an overall more powerful class, it just caters to the raid centric people whereas non raiders probably moved onto other projects. A mage will still win out due to their superior solo, duo/trio capabilities, and pretty similar group effectiveness, all of which can still be done at 60.

You yourself admitted that Rogues out DPS Mages at 60, which is the primary role a Mage would be filling at 60. The reason why there are more level 60 Rogues is because of how little Mages can do at 60 realistically speaking. There are much better solo artist classes, and Rogues are better DPS classes in groups. That is the problem with Mages, they kinda get screwed in both scenarios. You level up your Mage and then run out of things to do.

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good solo character, Mage is not the best choice, because their options for solo camps get more limited as they level due to lack of CC and utility.

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good grouping character, Mage is not the best choice either, because Monk/Rogue will out DPS them, and DPS is the role they generally fill.

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good raiding character, both are good, they just have different roles.

So I just don't see a reason to realistically level a Mage unless you simply like the class or want a CoTH bot. There is nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make them good.

[PatChapp]

I have a lvl 60 mage on green that I basically don't play. They are kinda trash at lvl60, but pretty fun to get there. Very strong,but boring class at raids. Running rip sticks or mod rods is about the depth of them once coths are done.
I don't think their hugely underpowered, more one dimensional. Mages don't have alot of options

[Crede]

You yourself admitted that Rogues out DPS Mages at 60, which is the primary role a Mage would be filling at 60. The reason why there are more level 60 Rogues is because of how little Mages can do at 60 realistically speaking. There are much better solo artist classes, and Rogues are better DPS classes in groups. That is the problem with Mages, they kinda get screwed in both scenarios. You level up your Mage and then run out of things to do.

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good solo character, Mage is not the best choice, because their options for solo camps get more limited as they level due to lack of CC and utility.

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good grouping character, Mage is not the best choice either, because Monk/Rogue will out DPS them, and DPS is the role they generally fill.

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good raiding character, both are good, they just have different roles.

So I just don't see a reason to realistically level a Mage unless you simply like the class or want a CoTH bot. There is nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't make them good.

I'm not denying there aren't better solo classes, nor am I denying that rogues are better dps classes. But the problem here is we are talking about one class overall in this discussion, and now you're bringing multiple classes and multiple scenarios into the picture. That is all irrelevant. All you've done here is confirmed why we like to roll multiple alts, lol.

Mages overall have a pretty respectable rating due to the number of different areas they can contribute to. I'm not claiming they are the most powerful class, but they certainly aren't the most underpowered one, as most people in this thread have agreed to besides you :) Rogues are pretty much just one trick ponies, while this makes them amazing raiders, they still are extremely underpowered when looking at the full scope.

[Vivitron]

If you only have time to level one character, and you want a good grouping character, Mage is not the best choice either, because Monk/Rogue will out DPS them, and DPS is the role they generally fill.

My experience with xp groups is that they look to fill roles and take a class that is sufficient for it, e.g. "docks seeks <Healer|Tank|DPS|CC|Puller>," and that mages are perfectly welcome in the DPS role.

I post the above because you have kind of gone full circle from roughly arguing that groups not gear checking implies they don't consider dps to be a significant role to arguing that because rogues outdamage mages, mages are a significantly worse grouping class. In my experience neither extreme is true: xp groups seek dps, but they're not so tight about it that they reject mages while waiting for rogues.

[Zuranthium]

And I think SK's, Paladins, Rangers, Druids, and Wizards are better than Mages at soloing because they can do more camps via utility. Who cares how good a Mage can be at specific camps if you can't get into them, for example? Having a larger pool of camps to choose from allows more consistency when leveling. This is again assuming Velious, because that is where this server always ends.

Exactly what camps are you trying to do solo with those classes that you can't with Mage?

Mages farm better and level faster than all of the classes you named (MUCH, MUCH faster than the Hybrid classes, especially Paladin, and especially before Velious). There can be some camps they are worse at, but those other classes are very likely going to earn less plat per hour by doing them. How is it better to be able to choose from more shitty camps, rather than spending your time leveling faster and getting more money? Rangers doing Quillmane is pretty much the only relevant thing I can think of where one of those classes could actually generate more "gains" solo than a Mage.

Also, "assuming Velious" is silly. If p99 has a proper recycle server, then Green would only be in Velious 40% of the time (or less). And within that timeline, it's only at the very end where Pally/SK reach their best state. Even in Velious regardless, Mage is still a better solo class than any of these others you listed.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I have a lvl 60 mage on green that I basically don't play. They are kinda trash at lvl60, but pretty fun to get there. Very strong,but boring class at raids. Running rip sticks or mod rods is about the depth of them once coths are done.
I don't think their hugely underpowered, more one dimensional. Mages don't have alot of options

Precicely.

For the other posters, you keep shifting out of "most underpowered overall", to things like " most underpowered soloing", "most underpowered in classic", etc.

This is why we are talking past each other.

Most underpowerd class (on P99) must take into account the full timeline because your character will be in all expansions. It must take into account how the class plays before level 60, and at level 60. It must take into account the average server's raid time, which is casual. It must take into account the role of the class. It must take into account how useful their toolkit is.

Mage is the class I see the least often at level 60 outside of raids. The reason for this is simple: their decent solo capabilities do not outweigh how poorly they scale as they level, and how their toolkit just doesn't mesh too well with the timeline and the player bases knowledge.

If this wasn't true we would see more Mages.

[Zuranthium]

The things you write are so frustrating. You continually bounce between arguing only Velious matters and "all eras matter", and your overall assessment still ignores the superior ways to progress in the game (aka what is most powerful), and the impact of what a Mage brings.

Mage is played less in this era outside of raids because Enchanter/Necro are more powerful overall and other casters have either big heals or teleports to fill heavily requested game functions. Mage in Velious era is also psychologically underwhelming because the only thing they gain compared to Kunark is the ability to make their pet unfearable and teleport it to their location, rather than the more tangible upgrades other classes get. But regardless they are still strong and can contribute more to a typical group than a Wizard or a melee player who doesn't have great gear. And can definitely solo better overall than those people.

I don’t think I can pick out a most underpowered class. The ones which seem a bit bum often have a huge trump card to bring them back in the running.

Paladin being deleted from the game would basically change nothing. Their +200 HP buff in Velious gives them *something* desirable, but it's not necessary, and if we are talking about someone only having 1 character to play, rather than just logging on the Pally to buff before getting on a better character, then I'd rather have another Cleric anyway (or another Rogue for DPS, or another Bard for manaboost, or another Warrior for tanking).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The things you write are so frustrating. You continually bounce between arguing only Velious matters and "all eras matter", and your overall assessment still ignores the superior ways to progress in the game (aka what is most powerful), and the impact of what a Mage brings.


Since we are looking at the overall usefulness of the class, you cannot simply look at a single era. Otherwise the question becomes "most underpowered in Classic", "most underpowered in Kunark", etc. So you look at the whole timeline, which includes understanding how your character will end up (i.e. in Velious on P99).

I am not ignoring the superior ways to progress in the game. The problem is progressing a Mage is pointless because they end up sucking at 60, except for being a CoTH bot. This is the irony of a Mage. They have good progression and nothing to show for it in the end. The question isn't "which class can progress to 60 fastest".


Mage is played less in this era outside of raids because Enchanter/Necro are more powerful overall and other casters have either big heals or teleports to fill heavily requested game functions. Mage in Velious era is also psychologically underwhelming because the only thing they gain compared to Kunark is the ability to make their pet unfearable and teleport it to their location, rather than the more tangible upgrades other classes get.


Now you are getting it.


Paladin being deleted from the game would basically change nothing. Their +200 HP buff in Velious gives them *something* desirable, but it's not necessary, and if we are talking about someone only having 1 character to play, rather than just logging on the Pally to buff before getting on a better character, then I'd rather have another Cleric anyway (or another Rogue for DPS, or another Bard for manaboost, or another Warrior for tanking).


We aren't talking about deleting classes, so this point is irrelevant. In a discussion about deleting classes, deleting a Mage wouldn't really change anything either. It would just slow down the raiding meta a bit. You don't need CoTH to do any raid content.

[Zuranthium]

I am not ignoring the superior ways to progress in the game. The problem is progressing a Mage is pointless because they end up sucking at 60, except for being a CoTH bot.

This isn't true at all. Mages contribute plenty at 60 and can farm well, thus gaining the money to gear out other characters. It's faster to start out as a Mage on a server and get gear for a melee character that way, than it is to start as a naked melee and try to level with trash gear and try to do camps like that. That is, assuming people don't powerlevel you for free and give you free gear.

We aren't talking about deleting classes, so this point is irrelevant. In a discussion about deleting classes, deleting a Mage wouldn't really change anything either. It would just slow down the raiding meta a bit. You don't need CoTH to do any raid content.

OMFG, your comprehension level is so low.

When looking at what each class contributes to the game, there are clearly varying degrees of "necessities". And as already talked about, power is direct measurement of how quickly and efficiently you can do things in this game. No class is "needed" if you simply have enough players and spend enough time, but different abilities create different amounts of benefit.

Mage contributes more to raids (and the majority of groups) than a Paladin. CoTH is not the only thing they do, a Mage being present is also an increase to the amount of mana your casters have, thanks to mod rods. Mages can also do big DPS when clearing to the "boss" on a raid and are capable of contributing DPS to the end fight as well, even though it's lesser at that point since their nukes will hardly land.

Shadowknight is arguably the least "helpful" class for raids and overall if they were the deleted class in theory, then also nothing in the game would really change. But they have strengths outside of raids that are significantly better to me than what a Paladin can do, on average.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

This isn't true at all. Mages contribute plenty at 60 and can farm well, thus gaining the money to gear out other characters. It's faster to start out as a Mage on a server and get gear for a melee character that way, than it is to start as a naked melee and try to level with trash gear and try to do camps like that. That is, assuming people don't powerlevel you for free and give you free gear.



OMFG, your comprehension level is so low.

When looking at what each class contributes to the game, there are clearly varying degrees of "necessities". And as already talked about, power is direct measurement of how quickly and efficiently you can do things in this game. No class is "needed" if you simply have enough players and spend enough time, but different abilities create different amounts of benefit.

Mage contributes more to raids (and the majority of groups) than a Paladin. CoTH is not the only thing they do, a Mage being present is also an increase to the amount of mana your casters have, thanks to mod rods. Mages can also do big DPS when clearing to the "boss" on a raid and are capable of contributing DPS to the end fight as well, even though it's lesser at that point since their nukes will hardly land.

Shadowknight is arguably the least "helpful" class for raids and overall if they were the deleted class in theory, then also nothing in the game would really change. But they have strengths outside of raids that are significantly better to me than what a Paladin can do, on average.

Yes, Mages lose efficacy as they level due to lack of CC and Utility. Why do you think Shamans and Enchanters are such good solo artists? They have CC, Utility, and DPS all rolled into one. This is how you excel later in the game. Mages can't increase their Pet's DPS with gear, so their advantage wanes as they get higher level.

No, you just keep switching out of the topic "most underpowered overall". Last time I checked, we weren't on the topic "most underpowered raid class". This is why this conversation isn't going anywhere. You can't stay on topic because the only way you can have a mage not be "most underpowered" is when you switch to a different topic. Of course Mages are not the most underpowered in a raid, as I have said repeatedly.

Twitch is better than Mod Rods, so mages could be deleted and no one would really care, it would just slow down raiding a bit due to no more CoTH. Having both is nice, but Twitch would be better if you had to pick one.

If a raid had to pick one class to get rid of, Rogue or Mage, they would pick Mage every time. You don't need CoTH or mod rods to kill AoW, but you do need DPS, and Mages don't use their pets in raids.

[Zuranthium]

Twitch is not better than Mod Rods. The rods are something you can stockpile, twitch is only active once the fight starts. The mod rod spell itself is also FAR more mana efficient than Necro twitch. Necro twitching on a raid is worse than having another Cleric instead. It doesn't add any optimized power level to raiding, whereas a Mage does.

Mages don't use their pets in raids.

They should, and smart teams do. It's DPS.

you just keep switching out of the topic "most underpowered overall".

I don't LOL, you are so confused. You simply fail to understand, over and over, how wrong you are. Despite everyone spelling it out in 100 different ways. There is no metric in which Mage is the most underpowered class overall on a PvE server.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Twitch is not better than Mod Rods. The rods are something you can stockpile, twitch is only active once the fight starts. The mod rod spell itself is also FAR more mana efficient than Necro twitch. Necro twitching on a raid is worse than having another Cleric instead. It doesn't add any optimized power level to raiding, whereas a Mage does.



They should, and smart teams do. It's DPS.



I don't LOL, you are so confused. You simply fail to understand, over and over, how wrong you are. Despite everyone spelling it out in 100 different ways. There is no metric in which Mage is the most underpowered class overall on a PvE server.

Wrong. Rods are harder to use and hard to stockpile due to them being lore. Tiwtch is superior. Try getting 50 raiders to pick up and drop rods every 6 mins.

They don't use pets because of things like AI issues.

You do. You just don't understand the question, which is why you keep changing topics.

[Zeboim]

Dunno about that one chief. I remember our main grading system of the quality of a Mage back on live was the complexity of the patterns he could draw with rods in the shortest time period.

[Toxigen]

Wrong. Rods are harder to use and hard to stockpile due to them being lore. Tiwtch is superior. Try getting 50 raiders to pick up and drop rods every 6 mins.

They don't use pets because of things like AI issues.

You do. You just don't understand the question, which is why you keep changing topics.

What? You've never cycled rods before?

Your lack of raid experience is shining through yet again.

[magnetaress]

bUTt guOis

dPS m3TERz r ToXoiC!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

What? You've never cycled rods before?

Your lack of raid experience is shining through yet again.

I have plenty of times lol. I didn't say you can't do it, or raids don't. Not sure how you read my post. It's simply harder than using twitch. This isn't rocket science. Pressing 1 button (Twitch) is easier than pressing 1 button (Summon Rod), dropping a rod, picking up a rod, hoping people don't sit on top of the rods, coordinating the raid to pick up all the rods, etc. The only lack of experience here seems to be yourself if you have never seen problems with rods.

As just one example, I have had people block my ability to pick up rods while I was in a CH chain for AoW. Stuff like this does happen, even in the top guilds. It's not always easy to control 100+ people just by guild and voice chat hehe.

You also can't use or pick up mod rods while casting spells, which is another reason why Twitch is better. You can get mana at any time. Complete Heal has a long cast time, so you have long periods where you can't use mod rods, and some CH chains are quite fast (like AoW).

[Toxigen]

Either way, you can have both rods and twitch. Pretty silly to argue that mod rods aren't worth it because wall-lickers can't mouse over and click pixels.

The only place SK really shines over other classes on p99 raids is pulling off the bard kite in PoG (Fear too I suppose) and yo-yo aggro on enchanter pets for tunare. Trash clears and tunare can/has been done without SKs just fine, but they certainly do a great job there.

Rangers can bump, mages coth, and paladins bring DS / soulfire. The answer is still SK for most underpowered. Sorry you play a SK and can't lay an argument to rest. The fact of the matter is a top-tier raid guild could have zero SKs and wouldn't be at any disadvantage, ever. The same cannot be said for any other class.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Either way, you can have both rods and twitch. Pretty silly to argue that mod rods aren't worth it because wall-lickers can't mouse over and click pixels.

The only place SK really shines over other classes on p99 raids is pulling off the bard kite in PoG (Fear too I suppose) and yo-yo aggro on enchanter pets for tunare. Trash clears and tunare can/has been done without SKs just fine, but they certainly do a great job there.

Rangers can bump, mages coth, and paladins bring DS / soulfire. The answer is still SK for most underpowered. Sorry you play a SK and can't lay an argument to rest. The fact of the matter is a top-tier raid guild could have zero SKs and wouldn't be at any disadvantage, ever. The same cannot be said for any other class.

I am not arguing SK's are good in raids lol. I have said many times on this forum SK's are the worst raiding class, and have never said otherwise.

Again, you are off topic. The question is not "most underpowered raiding class".

I also never said you can't have both Rods and Twitch lol, or that Mod Rods aren't worth it. Not sure what you are reading. Literally nothing you have said is on topic, or in response to what I have been saying.

Z was off topic discussing which classes could be deleted. You can delete a Mage and raiding would still work fine, it would just be a bit slower without CoTH and Mod Rods. There is no raid content that needs either. You can kill AoW without Mod Rods and CoTH. I have seen this.

[Crede]

Here's my synopsis of this thread:

DeathsSilkyMist is notorious for instigating long, drawn out threads typically from a subjective claim that he will say was solved by "math". He will gladly go 500+ pages in a thread to attempt to "win" to get his point across, despite the overwhelming majority disagreeing with him. His presentation is what annoys most people, due to the arrogant connotation that usually comes along with it, even if doesn't specifically mean to do so(or he could be the most well disguised troll on these forums).

His claim to mages being the most underpowered class is basically the reason we all have many alts. There's a better raiding class, there's a better grouping class, there are better solo classes. But when you look at the full scope of the game, a mage is quite good, despite their lack of cc/utility/etc. They can blow through content that can take "utility" classes much longer to do, because of their superior pets, nukes, DS, etc. Sure, you see more rogues in the raid scene, but that doesn't make them a more powerful class. A Mage overall simply has more areas where they can exert their power. And to me that's what being overpowered/underpowered is all about. How much power does your toolkit give you in every area of the game?

There's no right answer to this thread, it's all subjective, I think most would generally agree it's not a mage though. I think Loraen's class selection guide is a pretty accurate description of average class rating, since he actually considers all aspects of the game, and mage actually falls in the top 5, despite them been supposedly useless at 60 and not caring about what the class was intended for. That's the thing about being overpowered/underpowered. It wasn't necessarily an intention, but it happened anyway.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Here's my synopsis of this thread:

DeathsSilkyMist is notorious for instigating long, drawn out threads typically from a subjective claim that he will say was solved by "math". He will gladly go 500+ pages in a thread to attempt to "win" to get his point across, despite the overwhelming majority disagreeing with him. His presentation is what annoys most people, due to the arrogant connotation that usually comes along with it, even if doesn't specifically mean to do so(or he could be the most well disguised troll on these forums).

His claim to mages being the most underpowered class is basically the reason we all have many alts. There's a better raiding class, there's a better grouping class, there are better solo classes. But when you look at the full scope of the game, a mage is quite good, despite their lack of cc. They can blow through content that can take "utility" classes much longer to do, because of their superior pets, nukes, DS, etc. Sure, you see more rogues in the raid scene, but they were designed for this. That doesn't make them a more powerful class. A Mage overall simply has more areas where they can exert their power. And to me that's what being overpowered/underpowered is all about. How much power does your toolkit give you in every area of the game?

There's no right answer to this thread, it's all subjective, I think most would generally agree it's not a mage though. I think Loraen's class selection guide is a pretty accurate description of average class rating, since he actually considers all aspects of the game, and mage actually falls in the top 5, despite them been supposedly useless at 60 and not caring about what the class was intended for. That's the thing about being overpowered/underpowered. It wasn't necessarily an intention, but it happened anyway.

Untrue. I never claimed it was objective fact either, since nobody has the data:) The problem is simply people do not stay on topic, and don't like admitting classes they enjoy aren't as good as they think. They also falsely assume "underpowered" = bad. This is wrong.

I know it is an easy excuse to blame things on some imaginary personality flaw of another person, but it simply isn't true. I am sorry you can't make good arguments without attacking people's character.

A Mage's toolkit is limited due to lack of CC. Period. They become worse and worse as you gain higher levels because of this. There is a reason why Shamans and Enchanters are so good at soloing. Utility and CC are a critical part of this game, more-so than DPS. If this wasn't the case, you could power through WW Dragons with pure DPS while soloing. This is why you don't see level 60 Mages that often in the wild. Their lack of CC and Utility catches up to them at high levels, when you can't just power through with DPS (especially since Mage Pet DPS isn't top tier). OP isn't asking "which class can level quickly?". Not everybody simply levels a class and then quits them immediately.

And just because the "majority" disagrees with someone, doesn't mean they are wrong, this is a fallacy.

People getting annoyed is irrelevant. We are here to give people the best information we can so they can play the game properly. If you are providing bad information, that needs to be stopped, so people can get the correct information. Nobody cares if your feelings are hurt because of a discussion on a 22 year old Elf Sim.

EDIT: I'll take back the math part. While I don't believe I invoked it yet in this discussion, you obviously could math this out with the data and statistics on how people play. Every computer application is based on math too. But we don't have the data, so there isn't much we can do on that front.

[zelld52]

This thread is 44 pages long. Lmfao.

I think underpowered is warrior. They have the least amount of utility. I Love warrior too, but warrior requires a whole bunch of support from other classes in order to get anything done.

Rogue is in the same category, needs a group (tank) to be effective. But hide / sneak and pick locks put them above warrior in their abilities levelling, questing, exploring, etc.

[Allishia]

This thread is 44 pages long. Lmfao.

I think underpowered is warrior. They have the least amount of utility. I Love warrior too, but warrior requires a whole bunch of support from other classes in order to get anything done.

Rogue is in the same category, needs a group (tank) to be effective. But hide / sneak and pick locks put them above warrior in their abilities levelling, questing, exploring, etc.

War is not under powered at all, rogue maybe but not war :p

[zelld52]

War is not under powered at all, rogue maybe but not war :p

are we assuming every class were talking about is level 60 with NToV gear? because then youre right, warrior is a beast.

but levelling, questing, exploring -- warrior falls far below just about any other class. even cleric is more powerful than warrior (if you dont have to kill the mob and just need to not die). for me, warrior coming in as most underpwoered comes down to what a class can do solo, because p99 is a low population with scarce numbers across the levelling zones 1-50

warrior cant crawl through a dungeon killing stuff as effectively as a monk, sk, paladin, enchanter, mage, necro, shaman.

warrior cant get aggro in groups as good as a ranger, paladin, sk.

warrior cant travel with the ease of a druid, shaman, ranger, bard, wizard.

warrior cant provide any support in a group like a cleric, shaman, druid, bard, enchanter, paladin, ranger.

warrior cant sneak into KoS zones like a monk, rogue, ranger, druid, SK, necro, shaman, enchanter, wizard, bard., mage

warrior cant do the DPS of a rogue, monk, enchanter, wizard, mage

warrior can tank raid mobs without dying to quad attacks and rampage.

i mained a warrior from 2001-2005, its one of my favorite classes. but on a low pop server like p99, its really underpowered.

[zelld52]

i do think though, warrior is more able to survive than rogue, so maybe rogue the paper tiger is the most underpowered.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I do agree Warriors are lower on the totem pole. I myself mained a Warrior on live in the Classic to Velious timeline and beyond. But they are so necessary in this timeline due to their discs that I believe that pulls them ahead of Rogues and Mages. You could get rid of Rogues and Mages and still clear all content on P99. You probably couldn't do all content on P99 without Warriors, unless maybe you have an insane zerg like 200+ people.

[zelld52]

I do agree Warriors are lower on the totem pole. I myself mained a Warrior on live in the Classic to Velious timeline and beyond. But they are so necessary in this timeline due to their discs that I believe that pulls them ahead of Rogues and Mages. You could get rid of Rogues and Mages and still clear all content on P99. You probably couldn't do all content on P99 without Warriors, unless maybe you have an insane zerg like 200+ people.


can be said about most of the classes for a raid. my guild cleared NToV with between 40-50 players back in 2002 with no paladins, mages, necros, or druids.

just a whole bunch of rogues, bards, clerics, -- plus a few shaman, few wizards, few monks, few tanks, and a couple enchanters and 1 SK

that was with upgraded gear from Luclin though... hrm

i guess its harder to determine the underpowered classes.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

can be said about most of the classes. my guild cleared NToV with between 40-50 players back in 2002 with no paladins, mages, necros, druids.

just a whole bunch of rogues, bards, clerics, -- plus a few shaman, few wizards, few monks, few tanks, and a couple enchanters and 1 SK

Oh I agree. Most classes could be deleted. I'd say you probably only need Cleric, Warrior, Enchanter, Monk, and maybe Shamans for resist debuffing to clear all content in this timeline. Everything else is just nice to have. This assumes you could remove the porting requirement of Wizards being able to take you to PoS and PoH.

This is one thing that makes Warriors special, you couldn't really delete them and clear a lot of content without a considerable increase in players and coordination.

[zelld52]

yah -- but for the rest of the game (not raiding) its gotta be warrior / rogue as the bottom two underpowered

what about most middling class? definitely druid, right?

also whats funny is i completely forgot about rangers. not even trying to be funny, just forgot they are a class that also occasionally raids (sorry arrow bois and girls)

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I would put Mage below them, simply because on P99 most people know that Warriors and Rogues are group heavy classes. You don't see a lot of people trying to solo Warriors and Rogues, so you need to consider that less when thinking about it.

The sad thing about Mages is they are really the only class that gets worse as they level. Warriors and Rogues can improve themselves via gear and levels, where a Mage can never gain a good amount of Utility and CC. Their damage is capped by their spells and how their pet scales, so they have a much lower ceiling for clearing content late game. That is why they end up as CoTH bots, because they are fun to level, but there isn't much to do at the end.

[Fammaden]

So its settled. The most underpowered class is mage.

[Troxx]

I’m seeing mages get a lot of hate in this thread. For raids, yeah understandable. No pets allowed so you’re basically just a mod-rod bitch and a coth whore. For groups? Mages represent some of the highest dps potential of any class outside of a charm pet.

I parse most every group I’m in and I’ll say that with a max summon pet + nukes (not even factoring in damage shield) nothing was out damaging me other than a charmed pet when I was playing my mage. Even rogues couldn’t compete. The pet alone would outdps or hold steady with most competently geared melee. Add an extra 1-2 nukes per fight and it’s not even close.

Granted … mage pets did get dialed back since the last time I dusted off my mage.

Mages make an excellent … excellent grouping class. Anyone who says otherwise hasn’t run a real-time parsing program.

With regards to mage vs necro … it’s messy. I have played both extensively to 60. Mage will put out a fair bit more damage in a group unless the necro is charming … but necros are frankly just overpowered in all of the *other* they can do (to include pretty impressive healing potential).

If I really only wanted or needed raw dps I’d take the mage. In general though … I’ll take the necro unless it’s a mouth-breather who doesn’t know how to use the full skill set of the class.

[Jimjam]

The best metric for underpowered is how difficult the class finds getting fully epiced.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I’m seeing mages get a lot of hate in this thread. For raids, yeah understandable. No pets allowed so you’re basically just a mod-rod bitch and a coth whore. For groups? Mages represent some of the highest dps potential of any class outside of a charm pet.

I parse most every group I’m in and I’ll say that with a max summon pet + nukes (not even factoring in damage shield) nothing was out damaging me other than a charmed pet when I was playing my mage. Even rogues couldn’t compete. The pet alone would outdps or hold steady with most competently geared melee. Add an extra 1-2 nukes per fight and it’s not even close.

Granted … mage pets did get dialed back since the last time I dusted off my mage.

Mages make an excellent … excellent grouping class. Anyone who says otherwise hasn’t run a real-time parsing program.

With regards to mage vs necro … it’s messy. I have played both extensively to 60. Mage will put out a fair bit more damage in a group unless the necro is charming … but necros are frankly just overpowered in all of the *other* they can do (to include pretty impressive healing potential).

If I really only wanted or needed raw dps I’d take the mage. In general though … I’ll take the necro unless it’s a mouth-breather who doesn’t know how to use the full skill set of the class.

There is no Mage hate here. I love Mages, they are a really fun class and important in raids. I really don't understand why people equate underpowered to bad, or you don't like them. There is simply an objective best class and an objective worst class, even if all classes are great. This is true on P99, no class is so bad that they are unplayable.

Everything you said about Mages I agree with, except for probably Rogue DPS at high levels. Rogues can out DPS Mages due to their greater ability to scale, they don't need to worry about spell resists, and any mob that can be slowed isn't taking heavy damage from a DS. There are also plenty of areas where pets are more risky than a Player due to pathing issues and whatnot.

The crux of the issue is how much you weigh leveling when considering "most underpowered class". I do not believe a Mage's great leveling ability saves them, because they are quite underpowered at 60 besides CoTH. So sadly you have a great leveling experience and then have little to do at the end. Mages are the only class I can think of where this is true.

[Fammaden]

Now that we answered the question (magician is the answer) what is the most OVERpowered class?

[Jimjam]

Now that we answered the question (magician is the answer) what is the most OVERpowered class?

Also magician.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Now that we answered the question (magician is the answer) what is the most OVERpowered class?

Enchanter hands down. Their toolkit makes them amazing at Soloing, Grouping, and Raiding.

[zelld52]

Now that we answered the question (magician is the answer) what is the most OVERpowered class?

The OP Triumverate is Enchanter, Shaman, Monk.

Enchanter is #1 though. Charm and Mez are crazy OP. Especially Mesmerize level 4 that costs only 20 mana. When I played enc I used level 4 mez as a mez, mem blur, root, pacify, etc all in one.

Torpor and cannibalize = infinite mana, infinite HP. Add a 70% slow AND an unresistable -50 all resists debuff. *chefs kiss*

Favorite is definitely monk though. Feign Death, Sneak and Elder beads along with mend and triple attack is also OP AF. Monk can get anywhere, by only moving for 3s at a time. Monks can also do Rogue-like DPS with 2hb and swapping out for epic h2h between swings. I have done 8 attacks in a single round of combat before on a monk. Monk at 60 with 2hb weapon swap can theoretically hit 3 attacks with 2hb, then an additional 6 attacks with h2h, and an additonal riposte for a total of 10 attacks. And since epic haste stacks with worn, an epic T staff monk with 34% worn haste gets 35 rounds of combat per minute, for a potential 9 hits per round.

[loramin]

The thing about Enchanter is, while it's 100% correct, it's also a very P99-specific answer.

The class was far more balanced back in classic: if you could take a time machine back to 2001, and ask this same question of EverQuest players, they would have said Druid or Necromancer, or maybe Mage or Shaman; if you told them "the answer is Enchanter", they would look at you like you're crazy ("You mean the class that mezzes and gives clarity? How are they powerful?").

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The thing about Enchanter is, while it's 100% correct, it's also a very P99-specific answer.

The class was far more balanced back in classic: if you could take a time machine back to 2001, and ask this same question of EverQuest players, they would have said Druid or Necromancer, or maybe Mage or Shaman; if you told them "the answer is Enchanter", they would look at you like you're crazy ("You mean the class that mezzes and gives clarity? How are they powerful?").

Agreed, on live in 2001 people wouldn't have said Enchanter. But a lot of that came down to lack of game knowledge and what people played. Necromancers and Druids were considered to be much stronger because you weren't playing the same expansion for years at a time, so the flashy soloing and grouping characters were considered to be OP. They could get through an expansion faster, and therefore get more prepared for the next one.

[Troxx]

Yeah nah … I never ran across a rogue in a group that beat out my mage in sustained damage output (mage pet + mage personal dps combined). I parse everything. A high end velious raid geared rogue at level 60? Sure, but you don’t find too many max xp raid geared folks slumming around in xp groups.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Yeah nah … I never ran across a rogue in a group that beat out my mage in sustained damage output (mage pet + mage personal dps combined). I parse everything. A high end velious raid geared rogue at level 60? Sure, but you don’t find too many max xp raid geared folks slumming around in xp groups.

That's my point. Rogues can eventually beat out a Mage, and this does vary based on mob resistances and if the mob is slowed. You basically have 0 personal DPS if your DD's can't land and the mob is slowed, taking less damage from a DS.

I would be interested to see these parses and what the Rogues gear was, if you have it.

[Jimjam]

Mage pet still slaps compared to well geared players in xp groups. I think they just struggle in velious raids cos of the level difference.

Pet vs 45-55 mobs = fine. Pet vs 65-70 mobs = not so pretty

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Mage pet still slaps compared to well geared players in xp groups. I think they just struggle in velious raids cos of the level difference.

Pet vs 45-55 mobs = fine. Pet vs 65-70 mobs = not so pretty

Oh yeah, their Pet does great DPS. No disagreement there. It just can't scale as well as a player, and their damage isn't amazing enough to make up for a Mage's lack of CC and Utility in solo situations at higher levels. Plus pet bugs make them risky to use in more situations than an actual player. This applies to all pets obviously, but Mages are the most dependent on theirs, so it hurts them the most.

[Troxx]

That's my point. Rogues can eventually beat out a Mage, and this does vary based on mob resistances and if the mob is slowed. You basically have 0 personal DPS if your DD's can't land and the mob is slowed, taking less damage from a DS.

I would be interested to see these parses and what the Rogues gear was, if you have it.

We’re talking your standard 50s xp group rogue with epic and a decent 1hander to pair it with. Even 55+ with double backstab.

Mage pets alone will outdamage a lot of melee classes if you take the time to get a max summon and buff it appropriately. Nuke push the mage over the top and we’re talking a lazily tossed 1-2 nukes per fight … not a full out burn. In burn mode mages are ludicrous in xp groups … but that’s not sustainable. This still ignores the mage dmg shield which isn’t insignificant.

Remember we’re talking groups here. Mages get the shaft in the raid scene.

Full disclosure: I haven’t dusted off my mage since the higher end pets were dialed back a bit.

[Troxx]

So yeah no … with the exception of raids mages are nowhere near the most underpowered class … not by a long shot. For levels 1-60 count they are incredibly powerful … both in groups and for solo potential.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

We’re talking your standard 50s xp group rogue with epic and a decent 1hander to pair it with. Even 55+ with double backstab.

Mage pets alone will outdamage a lot of melee classes if you take the time to get a max summon and buff it appropriately. Nukes so push the mage over the top and we’re talking a lazily tossed 1-2 nukes per fight. This still ignores the mage dmg shield which isn’t insignificant.

Remember we’re talking groups here. Mages get the shaft in the raid scene.

I honestly don't think that matters too much. All classes can fill roles just fine in a 50's XP group. You don't see groups heavily screening out other classes in favor of Mages for a slight edge in DPS. It's the same reason why groups don't screen for gear. You really don't need to go that crazy on DPS in a leveling group most of the time.

As I have stated before, Mages can level just fine. I just don't think that makes up for how much they fall off at 60 compared to other classes.

[Troxx]

We will have to agree to disagree. You won’t be changing my mind and I doubt I can change yours :p

[DeathsSilkyMist]

We will have to agree to disagree. You won’t be changing my mind and I doubt I can change yours :p

Agreed!

[Crede]

So yeah no … with the exception of raids mages are nowhere near the most underpowered class … not by a long shot. For levels 1-60 count they are incredibly powerful … both in groups and for solo potential.

Here's my synopsis of this thread:

DeathsSilkyMist is notorious for instigating long, drawn out threads typically from a subjective claim that he will say was solved by "math". He will gladly go 500+ pages in a thread to attempt to "win" to get his point across, despite the overwhelming majority disagreeing with him. His presentation is what annoys most people, due to the arrogant connotation that usually comes along with it, even if doesn't specifically mean to do so(or he could be the most well disguised troll on these forums).

His claim to mages being the most underpowered class is basically the reason we all have many alts. There's a better raiding class, there's a better grouping class, there are better solo classes. But when you look at the full scope of the game, a mage is quite good, despite their lack of cc/utility/etc. They can blow through content that can take "utility" classes much longer to do, because of their superior pets, nukes, DS, etc. Sure, you see more rogues in the raid scene, but that doesn't make them a more powerful class. A Mage overall simply has more areas where they can exert their power. And to me that's what being overpowered/underpowered is all about. How much power does your toolkit give you in every area of the game?

There's no right answer to this thread, it's all subjective, I think most would generally agree it's not a mage though. I think Loraen's class selection guide is a pretty accurate description of average class rating, since he actually considers all aspects of the game, and mage actually falls in the top 5, despite them been supposedly useless at 60 and not caring about what the class was intended for. That's the thing about being overpowered/underpowered. It wasn't necessarily an intention, but it happened anyway.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Yes Crede, we all know that attacking people's character with your imaginary fantasies isn't an argument. Reposting nonsense isn't convincing anyone:)

You are also incorrect that it is subjective. There is an objective answer. There simply isn't any individual or group of individuals willing to compile the data necessary to prove which one is most underpowered without a doubt. All computer applications are based on math. Statistically there is a best and worst class in every game ever created.

If you have been playing the game for years, you will see patterns of class usage throughout the leveling process, and at level 60. Mages tend to peter out in the later levels due to how much they fall off. I can't think of any other class that does this, and this is why Mages end up as CoTH Bots. To me, that pattern of behavior is pretty good data to show that Mages are underpowered. You can accurately say that Rogues suck at leveling, but at the end of the day more people play them than Mages.

[Troxx]

I can’t think of a single class that doesn’t have an area where it shines when you factor in the sum total of the experience in playing EverQuest. Low level… high level … and everything in between in the world of Norrath.

So no, objectively there is no best or worst class globally.

If you focus on specific areas of this game and at certain tiers of gameplay, yeah some of them are undeniably horrible (like druid on high end velious raids … where you’re a potg buff bot and a patch healer who is the worst at healing).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I can’t think of a single class that doesn’t have an area where it shines when you factor in the sum total of the experience in playing EverQuest. Low level… high level … and everything in between in the world of Norrath.

So no, objectively there is no best or worst class globally.

If you focus on specific areas of this game and at certain tiers of gameplay, yeah some of them are undeniably horrible (like druid on high end velious raids … where you’re a potg buff bot and a patch healer who is the worst at healing).

Yes, objectively there is a best and worst class. This is true in all games, because all games are based on math. The differences may be minor, but that doesn't change the fact that it is true. Again, there simply isn't anyone willing to compile the data to find it.

I agree that every class has strengths and weaknesses. But it's pretty unfortunate that Mages fall off quite a bit at the end game, which plenty of people like to play in.

I agree that Druids and Wizards also fall off quite a bit at 60, but because they have CC (and charm with Druids), they can still end up doing more higher level content than Mages.

Mages also don't have a monopoly on good DPS in groups, so they aren't at the front of the line when people are checking for which classes to select when building a group. I haven't really seen any groups decline a Rogue for a Mage.

[loramin]

For anyone who is curious about classic, I did a ton of searching for some sort of survey, or discussion of what was the best class ... and came up with nothing. People in classic really seemed to believe "every class has a purpose" more than "X class is better than Y".

But I did find this discussion of which class to pick that I found interesting: https://web.archive.org/web/20020124185525/http://www.gameznet.com/eq/pickingbestclass.html

For instance, Enchanters:

Enchanters are the masters of illusion and confusion spells. They are not a great solo class but are highly sought after in a group. They are also one of the more interesting classes in the game as they can do so many unique things. Charm is also a useful(albeit dangerous) tool. Weaknesses are their low damage DD spells, the fact that their spells are resisted more than other classes, and the fact that they are most effective in a group.


So different from P99!

[Vivitron]

Enchanter hands down. Their toolkit makes them amazing at Soloing, Grouping, and Raiding.

Enchanters are a bit hit and miss raiding imo. Great for several encounters e.g. Tunare, but go into most of ToV or VP or Sleepers golems and suddenly you're best off if 3/4ths of the enchanter's you had at Tunare swap to a different class. I bet our enchanters have a significantly higher than average rate of playing guild bots.

When the encounter doesn't allow for any mez/lull/charm/stun/root I feel a kinship with those magicians who can't summon a pet or land a nuke, too. The role reduction really changes the game even though the raid still needs a few of you.

I agree about soloing and grouping, though. Great class for either.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Enchanters are a bit hit and miss raiding imo. Great for several encounters e.g. Tunare, but go into most of ToV or VP or Sleepers golems and suddenly you're best off if 3/4ths of the enchanter's you had at Tunare swap to a different class. I bet our enchanters have a significantly higher than average rate of playing guild bots.

When the encounter doesn't allow for any mez/lull/charm/stun/root I feel a kinship with those magicians who can't summon a pet or land a nuke, too. The role reduction really changes the game even though the raid still needs a few of you.

I agree about soloing and grouping, though. Great class for either.

True, they aren't as useful in certain raid situations.

But I am not sure if any other class is so good in all three categories overall as an Enchanter. There are certainly situations in which other classes are better than Enchanters in a raid, especially when you can't Charm and you can't CC.

Shamans could come close, but they require a lot more money to get going, and they have the same issue as Enchanters, where quite a few Raid situations do not require more than a few Shamans.

When not talking about Shamans or Enchanters, usually the other classes start to drag on the solo/group categories.

[PatChapp]

are we assuming every class were talking about is level 60 with NToV gear? because then youre right, warrior is a beast.

but levelling, questing, exploring -- warrior falls far below just about any other class. even cleric is more powerful than warrior (if you dont have to kill the mob and just need to not die). for me, warrior coming in as most underpwoered comes down to what a class can do solo, because p99 is a low population with scarce numbers across the levelling zones 1-50

warrior cant crawl through a dungeon killing stuff as effectively as a monk, sk, paladin, enchanter, mage, necro, shaman.

warrior cant get aggro in groups as good as a ranger, paladin, sk.

warrior cant travel with the ease of a druid, shaman, ranger, bard, wizard.

warrior cant provide any support in a group like a cleric, shaman, druid, bard, enchanter, paladin, ranger.

warrior cant sneak into KoS zones like a monk, rogue, ranger, druid, SK, necro, shaman, enchanter, wizard, bard., mage

warrior cant do the DPS of a rogue, monk, enchanter, wizard, mage

warrior can tank raid mobs without dying to quad attacks and rampage.

i mained a warrior from 2001-2005, its one of my favorite classes. but on a low pop server like p99, its really underpowered.

Recently leveled a warrior to 40, exclusively grouping from lvl 10 or so. At least on green,lots of lvling groups.
I found a pickup group at runnyeye sporalis one day. Lots of fun

[zelld52]

True, they aren't as useful in certain raid situations.

But I am not sure if any other class is so good in all three categories overall as an Enchanter. There are certainly situations in which other classes are better than Enchanters in a raid, especially when you can't Charm and you can't CC.

Shamans could come close, but they require a lot more money to get going, and they have the same issue as Enchanters, where quite a few Raid situations do not require more than a few Shamans.

When not talking about Shamans or Enchanters, usually the other classes start to drag on the solo/group categories.

Monk. Or bard. Powerful solo, grouped and lots to do on raids. Monk Moreso than bard on raids

[Zuranthium]

Z was off topic discussing which classes could be deleted.

*sigh*, you are so obtuse. Looking at how much harder the game would be if a certain class was deleted is completely relevant to assessing the power level of a class. The missing class that would slow things down the least, that people would miss the least, is a clear indicator of them being one of the less powerful classes (although this isn't quite the sole determiner of gauging THE least powerful class in the game overall).

This scenario is not just a "what if" either, but an actual thing that happens ingame: aka, your guild doesn't have a certain class log on a particular day, or you can't find any of a certain class to group with. If we were to scientifically analyze how much slower each raid/group is in each instance, then we would have a very good idea of what the least powerful class in the game is. This very thorough data doesn't completely exist though, so we have to estimate it for ourselves.

The thing about Enchanter is, while it's 100% most OP, it's also a very P99-specific answer.

The class was far more balanced back in classic: if you could take a time machine back to 2001, and ask this same question of EverQuest players, they would have said Druid or Necromancer, or maybe Mage or Shaman; if you told them "the answer is Enchanter", they would look at you like you're crazy ("You mean the class that mezzes and gives clarity? How are they powerful?").

Nah, the power of Enchanter was being widely realized in 2000. During Kunark era Warrior-Cleric-Enchanter were named the "Holy Trinity" of the game. Everyone desperately wanted Clarity/Haste, and Tash/Slow/Mesmerize were highly valued too. Even without Charm usage, people were understanding the huge impact an Enchanter brought to a group.

If you asked in 2001, when Charming was also becoming more common (although definitely FAR less prevalent and understood compared to now), I think Enchanter would have won the poll. At least among decently seasoned players.

[cd288]

*sigh*, you are so obtuse. Looking at how much harder the game would be if a certain class was deleted is completely relevant to assessing the power level of a class. The missing class that would slow things down the least, that people would miss the least, is a clear indicator of them being one of the less powerful classes (although this isn't quite the sole determiner of gauging THE least powerful class in the game overall).

This scenario is not just a "what if" either, but an actual thing that happens ingame: aka, your guild doesn't have a certain class log on a particular day, or you can't find any of a certain class to group with. If we were to scientifically analyze how much slower each raid/group is in each instance, then we would have a very good idea of what the least powerful class in the game is. This very thorough data doesn't completely exist though, so we have to estimate it for ourselves.

Yeah like second half of 2000 Enchanter was creeping up there in importance. The game was becoming less about exploring and the journey and starting to shift more toward the min/maxing exp mentality because people were trying to level up their second chars etc. It wasn't what it is today with min/maxing of course, but people were really figuring out how ideal it was to have the mana regen, haste, slow, and CC all in one package.

Nah, the power of Enchanter was being widely realized in 2000. During Kunark era Warrior-Cleric-Enchanter were named the "Holy Trinity" of the game. Everyone desperately wanted Clarity/Haste, and Tash/Slow/Mesmerize were highly valued too. Even without Charm usage, people were understanding the huge impact an Enchanter brought to a group.

If you asked in 2001, when Charming was also becoming more common (although definitely FAR less prevalent and understood compared to now), I think Enchanter would have won the poll. At least among decently seasoned players.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

*sigh*, you are so obtuse. Looking at how much harder the game would be if a certain class was deleted is completely relevant to assessing the power level of a class. The missing class that would slow things down the least, that people would miss the least, is a clear indicator of them being one of the less powerful classes (although this isn't quite the sole determiner of gauging THE least powerful class in the game overall).

This scenario is not just a "what if" either, but an actual thing that happens ingame: aka, your guild doesn't have a certain class log on a particular day, or you can't find any of a certain class to group with. If we were to scientifically analyze how much slower each raid/group is in each instance, then we would have a very good idea of what the least powerful class in the game is. This very thorough data doesn't completely exist though, so we have to estimate it for ourselves.

You are going back to the "most underpowered class in raiding" topic. If Mages were deleted, the game wouldn't be slower/harder for anybody but hardcore raiders, which is a minority on both servers. Please note that you could still do all raid content just fine. You don't need Mages to level fast in a grouping scenario. Nobody here is arguing that Mage's are the most underpowered in raids.

[Toxigen]

Enchanters are a bit hit and miss raiding imo. Great for several encounters e.g. Tunare, but go into most of ToV or VP or Sleepers golems and suddenly you're best off if 3/4ths of the enchanter's you had at Tunare swap to a different class. I bet our enchanters have a significantly higher than average rate of playing guild bots.

When the encounter doesn't allow for any mez/lull/charm/stun/root I feel a kinship with those magicians who can't summon a pet or land a nuke, too. The role reduction really changes the game even though the raid still needs a few of you.

I agree about soloing and grouping, though. Great class for either.

The only one I agree with you on is VP...and am appalled you included ToV in that list.

ToV
- Join a wizard group. Get a TL box. Tash mobs as they're being pulled in, hit your TL box, zone back in, get coth'd back up. This is one of the most important things enchanters can do during a contested pop or quake. Super critical on all competitive engages in which the target is slowable (doze, vulak, aary, koi, lady M, lady N, triples, etc) and any flurries that need to be killed. It makes raids go so much smoother when your shaman are landing slows on their first 1-2 casts.

- You need to sieve all shimmers / glimmers / blue drakes.

- Goalie duty on HoT minis, Ikki, LTK, Vulak guard wizard kites...hell if an enc has a TL box, SoW, and a DA earring they can help trainouts. Big, raid-saving blurs may be rare but you'll be Captain Clutch when you do pull it off.

- Hatchlings can be charmed, especially nice for Eashen and Vyemm.

Kael
- Charm a trooper / bvellos / korakaz. If that doesn't pucker yer butthole you are geared to the tits.

Fear + Hate
- Pets galore, Irak hits like a godamn truck.

Sleepers
- I did some charming there. It was scary....but you can make a small numbers prismatic scale farm crew with a couple enchanters charming. dolla dolla bills yallll

Trak
- Dictate a jugg, clutch for those low number / fast engages.

I could go on, but you get the idea. There are a lot of bad / lazy enchanters out there just licking walls and answering buff tells. Don't be one of them. And yes, I definitely logged on cleric bots plenty of times when the raid was running really heavy on enchanters.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

The only one I agree with you on is VP...and am appalled you included ToV in that list.

ToV
- Join a wizard group. Get a TL box. Tash mobs as they're being pulled in, hit your TL box, zone back in, get coth'd back up. This is one of the most important things enchanters can do during a contested pop or quake. Super critical on all competitive engages in which the target is slowable (doze, vulak, aary, koi, lady M, lady N, triples, etc) and any flurries that need to be killed. It makes raids go so much smoother when your shaman are landing slows on their first 1-2 casts.

- You need to sieve all shimmers / glimmers / blue drakes.

- Goalie duty on HoT minis, Ikki, LTK, Vulak guard wizard kites...hell if an enc has a TL box, SoW, and a DA earring they can help trainouts. Big, raid-saving blurs may be rare but you'll be Captain Clutch when you do pull it off.

- Hatchlings can be charmed, especially nice for Eashen and Vyemm.

Kael
- Charm a trooper / bvellos / korakaz. If that doesn't pucker yer butthole you are geared to the tits.

Fear + Hate
- Pets galore, Irak hits like a godamn truck.

Sleepers
- I did some charming there. It was scary....but you can make a small numbers prismatic scale farm crew with a couple enchanters charming. dolla dolla bills yallll

Trak
- Dictate a jugg, clutch for those low number / fast engages.

I could go on, but you get the idea. There are a lot of bad / lazy enchanters out there just licking walls and answering buff tells. Don't be one of them. And yes, I definitely logged on cleric bots plenty of times when the raid was running really heavy on enchanters.

I agree with all of this.

[zelld52]

Recently leveled a warrior to 40, exclusively grouping from lvl 10 or so. At least on green,lots of lvling groups.
I found a pickup group at runnyeye sporalis one day. Lots of fun


Love to hear it. I get sad thinking about green not having the constant waves of new players like it did for the first 2 years of its existence.

Also love that it was in Runnyeye and not Unrest.

[loramin]

Nah, the power of Enchanter was being widely realized in 2000. During Kunark era Warrior-Cleric-Enchanter were named the "Holy Trinity" of the game. Everyone desperately wanted Clarity/Haste, and Tash/Slow/Mesmerize were highly valued too. Even without Charm usage, people were understanding the huge impact an Enchanter brought to a group.

If you asked in 2001, when Charming was also becoming more common (although definitely FAR less prevalent and understood compared to now), I think Enchanter would have won the poll. At least among decently seasoned players.

Their power in groups was absolutely recognized in groups ... and not because of their charming (Enchanters mostly didn't charm in groups in classic; their job in that "trinity" you mentioned was to mez and give Clarity, not add DPS).

They were not at all recognized for their soloing. Here most would argue they are the #1 soloing class (maybe #2 after Shaman). In classic Necromancer, Druid, and Mage would have all been ranked higher.

Our charm is simply not classic: live charm was far riskier, and that's why Enchanters opted to group rather than charm solo, by vast margins ... whereas here it's exactly the opposite.

[Vivitron]

The only one I agree with you on is VP...and am appalled you included ToV in that list.

ToV
- Join a wizard group. Get a TL box. Tash mobs as they're being pulled in, hit your TL box, zone back in, get coth'd back up. This is one of the most important things enchanters can do during a contested pop or quake. Super critical on all competitive engages in which the target is slowable (doze, vulak, aary, koi, lady M, lady N, triples, etc) and any flurries that need to be killed. It makes raids go so much smoother when your shaman are landing slows on their first 1-2 casts.

- You need to sieve all shimmers / glimmers / blue drakes.

- Goalie duty on HoT minis, Ikki, LTK, Vulak guard wizard kites...hell if an enc has a TL box, SoW, and a DA earring they can help trainouts. Big, raid-saving blurs may be rare but you'll be Captain Clutch when you do pull it off.

- Hatchlings can be charmed, especially nice for Eashen and Vyemm.

Kael
- Charm a trooper / bvellos / korakaz. If that doesn't pucker yer butthole you are geared to the tits.

Fear + Hate
- Pets galore, Irak hits like a godamn truck.

Sleepers
- I did some charming there. It was scary....but you can make a small numbers prismatic scale farm crew with a couple enchanters charming. dolla dolla bills yallll

Trak
- Dictate a jugg, clutch for those low number / fast engages.

I could go on, but you get the idea. There are a lot of bad / lazy enchanters out there just licking walls and answering buff tells. Don't be one of them. And yes, I definitely logged on cleric bots plenty of times when the raid was running really heavy on enchanters.

Seems like some good advice. Next ToV I'll make it a point to get in a wizard/mage group, maybe that's the part of the formula I'm missing there; regular tash+box would let me keep sow up to help kite/train/goaltend, too. I'll see if I can get away with more hatchling charming; some of the guild is pretty convinced that pets aren't worth the train risk in most of ToV and I'm not sure whether they would welcome hatchlings at Vyemm.

We make those Fear/Kael/Trak charms; I'm largely happy with my enchanter there. My enchanter isn't my sleeper's keyed character, but the scale farm does sound like a nice benefit if I do key him. I did see one of our enchanters tag himself a pet for Prog once, but it seemed like a novelty.

[Toxigen]

Seems like some good advice. Next ToV I'll make it a point to get in a wizard/mage group, maybe that's the part of the formula I'm missing there; regular tash+box would let me keep sow up to help kite/train/goaltend, too. I'll see if I can get away with more hatchling charming; some of the guild is pretty convinced that pets aren't worth the train risk in most of ToV and I'm not sure whether they would welcome hatchlings at Vyemm.

We make those Fear/Kael/Trak charms; I'm largely happy with my enchanter there. My enchanter isn't my sleeper's keyed character, but the scale farm does sound like a nice benefit if I do key him. I did see one of our enchanters tag himself a pet for Prog once, but it seemed like a novelty.

Yeah ST is really just more about getting the golem slowed ASAP. After that the clerics should be mana neutral / positive.

I really only ever charmed hatchlings for Eashen and Vyemm...may have yolo'd one up to Koi and Lady M on a quake or two and about a dozen beers deep, but its not necessary on slowable mobs.

Eashen is a no brainer...they're often running around the raid anyway.

Healing is always tight on Vyemm since its remedy / natures touch spam. Unless your guild has 20+ Porlos wizards nuking their brains out from up top, your healers will thank you as they furiously chew through all the rods.
oFVDtDY1xlQ
I never had an issue with pathing / trains when charm broke in Vyemm pit...and you have tons of time to react as it runs up the ramp back towards you.

[Zuranthium]

You are going back to the "most underpowered class in raiding" topic. If Mages were deleted, the game wouldn't be slower/harder for anybody but hardcore raiders, which is a minority on both servers.

It's ridiculous to act like raiders are some tiny minority of EQ and I'm not "going back" to that topic, it's just part of the entire discussion. Even outside of raids though, the game would indeed be slower for some people, because Mages are one of the best classes to have for leveling, whether in a group or solo. They are especially great when among people who find charming to be too difficult or annoying. Or even regardless for a new server, where charming isn't great anyway until you get to at least mid level, a group like 5 Mages and 1 Enchanter is probably the fastest way to level, and thus the best way to win the race to control the priority camps in the game.

Their power in groups was absolutely recognized in groups ... and not because of their charming (Enchanters mostly didn't charm in groups in classic; their job in that "trinity" you mentioned was to mez and give Clarity, not add DPS).

They were not at all recognized for their soloing. Here most would argue they are the #1 soloing class (maybe #2 after Shaman). In classic Necromancer, Druid, and Mage would have all been ranked higher.

Enchanters did add a lot of DPS to a group without Charm though - via Haste. Which people were widely realizing in 2000. Enchanters were always a fine solo class too, the animation pet was solid enough and could be given low delay weapons for huge DPS in 1999 (also could be used in group), and at higher levels people were using Charm to solo in 1999, most notably by camping town guards and throwing them into each other.

The Enchanter class was just severely underplayed at first, was the main thing. So even if you did start to understand how great they were, there often wouldn't be one around to play with. They quickly rose in popularity though.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

It's ridiculous to act like raiders are some tiny minority of EQ and I'm not "going back" to that topic, it's just part of the entire discussion. Even outside of raids though, the game would indeed be slower for some people, because Mages are one of the best classes to have for leveling, whether in a group or solo. They are especially great when among people who find charming to be too difficult or annoying. Or even regardless for a new server, where charming isn't great anyway until you get to at least mid level, a group like 5 Mages and 1 Enchanter is probably the fastest way to level, and thus the best way to win the race to control the priority camps in the game.


Yes, you are overvaluing raiding in this discussion to make Mages better, which is why its exiting the topic. Most players statistically only casually raid, so it isn't a huge part of the "most underpowered overall" discussion. The only real exception to this is when looking at Warriors, because a large chunk of Warriors on the servers were created for raiding. The same can be said for Mages (CoTH Bots), but based on your arguments and the arguments of others, it is clear people place high value on soloing and grouping too, so the sliders change.

No, you don't see a 5 Mage 1 Ench leveling group that often, except for maybe when a new server spins up. The reason for this is because the group composition has one fatal flaw: Most of the group members are leveling Mages lol. XP groups are created by people who want to level the classes they want to play. They don't make Mages simply to maximize group DPS at the expense of not actually leveling the class they want to play. Just because that group composition may level fast on paper doesn't mean everybody wants to level a Mage.

Grouping would see no significant slowdown of XP if Mages were deleted.

[Zuranthium]

Obviously people don't want to only level Mages. But again, even a single Mage in a party is a significant boost to how quickly a typical group can kill. Deleting Mage from the game is inherently is going to slow down the grouping landscape a bit as compared to deleting Paladin. At least, assuming an even redistribution of classes in the "delete X class from the game" idea.

Paladin is worse at soloing than Mage, worse at duoing, worse for full groups the majority of the time, and generally less impactful for raids. They have a huge EXP penalty the first 22 months of the game. They do not have any unique ability that's especially impactful to the landscape of the game. By every metric they are the weaker class.

And seriously, you need to stop with these dumb "a lot of people don't play that way" arguments. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY DON'T. THEY ARE PLAYING AT A LOWER POWER LEVEL. WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND.

[Jimjam]

Hmm good points… and paladins’ divine strength is only +125hp as in it’s absence you can get +75 from Strength of Nature …

[PatChapp]

I would rather a paladin in most XP groups honestly.
Pacify pulls, root for some cc, stuns for charm breaks and backup heals on top of solid tanking. Very useful class to have around.
Mage is straight dps with malo for charm pets as a perk. Mage/paladin/enchanter actually a solid XP trio though.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Obviously people don't want to only level Mages. But again, even a single Mage in a party is a significant boost to how quickly a typical group can kill. Deleting Mage from the game is inherently is going to slow down the grouping landscape a bit as compared to deleting Paladin. At least, assuming an even redistribution of classes in the "delete X class from the game" idea.

Paladin is worse at soloing than Mage, worse at duoing, worse for full groups the majority of the time, and generally less impactful for raids. They have a huge EXP penalty the first 22 months of the game. They do not have any unique ability that's especially impactful to the landscape of the game. By every metric they are the weaker class.

And seriously, you need to stop with these dumb "a lot of people don't play that way" arguments. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY DON'T. THEY ARE PLAYING AT A LOWER POWER LEVEL. WHAT DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND.

I do understand. You are skewing the data by injecting your personal preference of how you play, rather than how the average player plays. When thinking about "most underpowered class", you have to use the averages, not your preferred data set. On P99 people generally play the game correctly. It isn't like we are dealing with a server where everybody is playing solo Warriors lol.

Again, this is why the conversation isn't going anywhere. You are off topic. Your topic is "most underpowered class assuming you are attempting to play at Zuranthium's definition of efficiency".

[Danth]

When thinking about "most underpowered class", you have to use the averages, not your preferred data set.

I think some folks want to reassure themselves they picked "right" and don't want to tell themselves they picked something "bad." So in this type of thread folks have a tendency to become what amounts to salesmen for their own favored characters, with similar levels of stretching the truth.

My own favored character (shadowknight) illustrates this: Overall its a weaker class than monk is. Does that mean I picked wrong in making it? Nope! The monk happens to do better in parts of the game I don't care about--raising its overall average--but they're pretty equal in the parts of the game I *do* care about, and I like being a plate tank type. Being worse in areas I ain't hanging out in anyway is irrelevant to me...but it might bother some folks intensely.

Danth

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I think some folks want to reassure themselves they picked "right" and don't want to tell themselves they picked something "bad." So in this type of thread folks have a tendency to become what amounts to salesmen for their own favored characters, with similar levels of stretching the truth.

My own favored character (shadowknight) illustrates this: Overall its a weaker class than monk is. Does that mean I picked wrong in making it? Nope! The monk happens to do better in parts of the game I don't care about--raising its overall average--but they're pretty equal in the parts of the game I *do* care about, and I like being a plate tank type. Being worse in areas I ain't hanging out in anyway is irrelevant to me...but it might bother some folks intensely.

Danth

Agreed, it is difficult to get bias out of the mix when doing these discussions. Z obviously loves Mages. As I have said many times, Underpowered does not mean bad in Everquest. No class is unplayable or broken.

[Toxigen]

I would rather a paladin in most XP groups honestly.
Pacify pulls, root for some cc, stuns for charm breaks and backup heals on top of solid tanking. Very useful class to have around.
Mage is straight dps with malo for charm pets as a perk. Mage/paladin/enchanter actually a solid XP trio though.

Just cut the mage out honestly. Paladin + enc is sleeper strong duo.

[loramin]

The Enchanter class was just severely underplayed at first, was the main thing. So even if you did start to understand how great they were, there often wouldn't be one around to play with. They quickly rose in popularity though.

I just don't buy that only one class was "underplayed" on live (which had an order of magnitude more players than P99), and therefore only that one class is played completely differently here (solo-dominant vs. group-dominant) ... while every other class in the game is fundamentally played the same way.

It seems far more likely our emulator isn't emulating properly (and charm is to safe here) than that 10x the number of Enchanters didn't know how to cast their spells on live.

[enjchanter]

Everything in me wants to say paladin but I think i have to go with bard

[cd288]

I just don't buy that only one class was "underplayed" on live (which had an order of magnitude more players than P99), and therefore only that one class is played completely differently here (solo-dominant vs. group-dominant) ... while every other class in the game is fundamentally played the same way.

It seems far more likely our emulator isn't emulating properly (and charm is to safe here) than that 10x the number of Enchanters didn't know how to cast their spells on live.

Lol it’s always funny watching you say this. Because I’ve lost count of how many people have come here and been like yeah no enchanters just weren’t discovered as a truly OP class until a bit into classic and you always just like stick your fingers in your ears and claim that you’re the only one who is right lol

[Zeboim]

To be fair to Loramin, those are often Enchanter players.

There may just happen to be an ulterior motive there.

[Zuranthium]

Hmm good points… and paladins’ divine strength is only +125hp as in it’s absence you can get +75 from Strength of Nature …

Yeah, Divine Strength is not that special. Strength of Nature is better on Rogues and some other melee DPS people anyway. Paladin confirmed weakest class.

You are skewing the data by injecting your personal preference of how you play, rather than how the average player plays.

Magician is very good in "average" group setting.

I just don't buy that only one class was "underplayed" on live (which had an order of magnitude more players than P99), and therefore only that one class is played completely differently here (solo-dominant vs. group-dominant) ... while every other class in the game is fundamentally played the same way.

It seems far more likely our emulator isn't emulating properly (and charm is to safe here) than that 10x the number of Enchanters didn't know how to cast their spells on live.

I think it's likely that something is a bit wrong with p99 charm. However, there's a lot of things with game mechanics that weren't understood to the degree they are now, which makes an even bigger difference. Internet lag and field of view also make a big difference with this. Wider screens and being able to maximize the clipping plane creates a wayyyyy different experience than playing the game like it was in 1999.

[branamil]

Charming was not a thing on live at least in Kunark. People just wanted enchanters to be mez bots and didn't want to have to worry about the chanter dying. Healers were not as good and everyone had lag.

Because if they died it was probably a group wipe and long CR, it's not like people had a legion of rogues and clerics for corpse recovery.

It was honestly way more chill, even if less XP.

But that's off topic, the shittest class up to velious is Mage.

[Keebz]

But that's off topic, the shittest class up to velious is Mage.

In classic, they are relatively under powered before the pets get fixed for sure, but they are pretty OP otherwise. Best group DPS (w/o charm), can solo for hours (including Frenzy). They cheese through sky and phinny. In Kunark they can cheese Tola/Prot, DA train raids through seb, etc, are an excellent third for ench/cleric for farming groups, etc. etc.

[Jibartik]

It wasnt until well into P99's lifespan that enchanters became so widely used by the community the way they are now.

[Mateo]

Mage most underpowered? Have we played the same game? The chain petting, high group dps, COTH, mod rodding character? Hard no.

It's one of the melee hybrids: paladin, sk, or ranger.

[Troxx]

I think the fact that the community can’t agree is pretty strong evidence that no class is underpowered when you look at the whole scope of the game that Norrath has to offer.

There are clearly underpowered classes when you focus on any single aspect … but not when you look at the sum total.