most underpowered class in game?

[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.

[Allishia]

Originally Posted by Nycon43 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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

[PlsNoBan]

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

Hope this helps

[cd288]

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

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.

[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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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

[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.