most underpowered class in game?

[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.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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 must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. 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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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 must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. 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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Crede [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] 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.

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I can imagine it[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] 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.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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.