Iksar > barb for fashion. Prove me wrong.
|
Quote:
That philosophy of spending time is silly. People play games to relax, which is not a waste of time at all. Human beings are not machines, and cannot be productive for every waking second. Nor should they be. Nobody said Everquest was a way of life, or a religion. The simple truth is all video games are based on concrete rules and maths. The races and classes were made asymmetrically, which means there is an objective best race/class combination for each class. Knowledge is power. It is good to know what the best is, and by how much. This is because Everquest is the type of game where most people only make one character per class. It takes too much time, money, and effort to make multiple levels 60s of the same class for specific purposes. There is no religious fervor here when I say Ogres are objectively the best. I am simply analyzing the facts and coming to a conclusion. I would be happy to be proven wrong if you can bring something to the table:) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
EDIT: Your argument falls flat when you claim Iksar Monks are objectively the best, because there are fringe cases where Human Monks are superior. Human monks have the best fist ratio, a smaller experience penalty, and better faction, for example. But Iksars are the "best" because they are better most of the time:) |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
This obviously isn't your real stance either, because you seem to claim it is obvious an iksar monk is the best, when there are obvious cases where Human monks are superior. Human monks have better starting faction, a smaller xp penalty, and the best fist damage ratio. How can you claim Iksar Monks are obviously the best with these oustanding scenarios?:) |
Quote:
|
You do gloss over duo/group content at level 60 somewhat, though perhaps not unfairly. How do I mean? Let's put it this way: If some shaman with a partner kills a named as a duo within the ~6 minute duration of Turgur's then you're looking at a maximum of maybe 500 HP of extra healing from racial regeneration that the shaman wouldn't otherwise have, and in real world practice rather less than that. Troll or iksar is inarguably "better" in such a case than an ogre who isn't being hit but the victory rings rather hollow. Sure you could add those types of disclaimers to your guide but why would you want to do that when it's long enough already? After all it's a wiki article, not a book.
I still regard troll as the min-max choice for general use, but not because I disagree with any of your data. I rather like the data, actually. Rather I weigh some factors differently. For example I place more emphasis on the reality that the majority of characters created on P1999 never make it to level 60 at all. That is a difference of priority, not of fact. I see your side of it too, hence why I've said several times in this thread that I like your guide regardless of that type of differing opinion. Danth |
Quote:
Quote:
If your definition of "scenarios" is end game Velious content, you are shooting yourself in the foot. All racial bonuses become "quality of life" features when you are in a group or a raid dealing with end game Velious content. Again your argument goes back to the extreme position of "there is no best race", which is false. Any asymmetrical game has a best. I have never claimed the "best" is far ahead, but that doesn't mean it does not exist. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:50 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.