Classes to avoid playing in the p99 meta?

[cannobeers3]

Not focusing on raiding is the healthy choice. Sure, raiding can be fun. But it certainly is not necessary.

[fortior]

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

I was perusing the forum and came across the following quote:

‘the secret to playing a good paladin is not playing one - and rolling a warrior instead. after you get proc'ing weapons and other classes understand how to mitigate aggro - youll be happy you forgot about Paladin which is completely pointless in this era. nobody plays paladins or rangers or wizards on P99 for a very good reason.’

I was wondering why this is the case, specifically with Wizards as it’s my favorite class

whoever said this doesn't know anything about eq and is just parroting what they heard people on reddit say. it's all wrong, the actual worst class (SK) isnt even listed. Disregard literally everything that person says, they're clueless

[Videri]

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

I was perusing the forum and came across the following quote:

‘the secret to playing a good paladin is not playing one - and rolling a warrior instead. after you get proc'ing weapons and other classes understand how to mitigate aggro - youll be happy you forgot about Paladin which is completely pointless in this era. nobody plays paladins or rangers or wizards on P99 for a very good reason.’

I was wondering why this is the case, specifically with Wizards as it’s my favorite class

Wizard is great in the P99 meta, as long as you are willing to solo a lot (quadding), you don't take it personally that wizards are less in demand for most groups, and you are interested in raiding. Some of the players in <Castle> Green leveled something else up to 60, then made wizard, and they now mostly play the wizard for raids. It sure feels powerful when we batphone Gorenaire and we have 6 or 8 or 10 players on wizards and I just know we've got her.

Plus, the Wizard epic is viable if you raid some. Be smart with your DKP until you have your "must-haves."

[Trelaboon]

Eh, at least one Pally is needed for DS. They also have the added benefit of saving raids with Soulfires, which in previous years was not exclusive to them. They’re able to tank some smaller raid targets as well as trash in ToV. That’s become more useful with the rooted dragon meta.

Each of those classes has a purpose to some degree. Wizards have really good raid DPS potential on certain targets, as well as being important for TL’s as well as teaming with a. Druid for raid mobilization. Rangers of course are used for some good weaponshield saves and they do decent DPS. In a game where raiding isn’t locked to X number of players, everyone has a spot and can serve a purpose

[Tethler]

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

everyone has a spot and can serve a purpose

Pretty much this

[Tunabros]

everyone class is useful in certain parts

but if you bring an SK to a yelinak fight, you don't deserve to play EQ

[Gustoo]

You should play the class you really want to be. Unless you want to pharm like a day job, then play an enchanter, followed by necromancer.

It’s best when you role play a little bit. If you don’t want to be big and meaty, don’t play an ogre.

[greatdane]

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

I was perusing the forum and came across the following quote:

‘the secret to playing a good paladin is not playing one - and rolling a warrior instead. after you get proc'ing weapons and other classes understand how to mitigate aggro - youll be happy you forgot about Paladin which is completely pointless in this era. nobody plays paladins or rangers or wizards on P99 for a very good reason.’

I was wondering why this is the case, specifically with Wizards as it’s my favorite class

Whoever wrote that should be taken with a grain of salt. That quote is a severe misrepresentation of reality. The reason to consider warrior over paladin is because warriors are important for raiding while paladins aren't, so investing your time in a character that has very little place in the endgame is unappealing to most players. For general gameplay (grouping), warrior is by no means better. Way worse, really.

There's no such thing as people just "understanding how to mitigate aggro." That doesn't make the warrior problem go away. It means other group members have to do less DPS than they could, or debuff later and less efficiently. It means rogues taking aggro on every other mob because no amount of "understanding aggro" will help when their evade just happens to fail several times in a row, and this costs the healer more mana than what miniscule amount they save due to the tank having a warrior's marginally better mitigation and HP than a knight's.

As a rogue, warriors (even with proper proccing weapons) in group content don't have a hope in hell of holding aggro reliably unless they get a proc right off the bat and my evades don't fail. And that's just with an epic and a Winters Fury, which is pretty much the bottom standard for 50+ rogues. Imagine if I had a Vyemm or Vulak dagger. Assuming average rates of procs for the warrior and evasion success for the rogue, it is mathematically impossible for the warrior to hold steady aggro unless the rogue just doesn't DPS until 10-20 seconds into the fight, in which case having a warrior tank is terrible for XP/hour. That's fine on a raid boss that takes minutes to kill, but not in a chain-pulling group. The warrior only holds aggro if he procs more than statistically expected, or the rogue has no evasion fails during the fight. And it fails like 40% of the time, so...

On the other hand, when the tank is a paladin, people can just go all in from the moment the mob arrives in the camp. Debuff instantly, DPS 100% from the first second of the fight, break mezzes without concern, etc. On top of that, the paladin brings situationally useful buffs, root/stun control, emergency heals, saves a life every 72 minutes, even has the ability to help with pulling if necessary. And he's, what, 5% less tanky than the warrior outside of defensive disc? It's laughable to suggest that you're better off with a warrior tank in any content that doesn't require defensive. It's a ridiculous, nonsensical view spread by warrior mains who don't like the idea.

There's a number of elitist warrior players on P99 who work very hard to convince people that it's the ideal tank class for all aspects of the game. It's not. It's obviously the ideal tank class for raid bosses, but for literally anything else you can do in Everquest, it's the worst. Under no conceivable circumstances is being marginally tankier more important than having the ability to actually perform your job 100% of the time, i.e. holding aggro and letting other people perform to the full extent that their classes are capable. Warriors simply cannot do that unless the other players intentionally reduce their performance to the point where the warrior is a handicap, not an asset.

However, everyone thinks they're gonna be a bigshot raider on P99, so even though almost none of them actually end up in a serious raid guild, they feel weird about maining a paladin because what if some day! That's why it's one of the least played classes. For anyone who knows that they're never gonna be a raider, it's by far the best tank class to choose, especially now that shadowknights have been nerfed and it costs tons of mana for them to hold aggro, making it awkward in a chain-pulling group.

[Lampolo]

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

Whoever wrote that should be taken with a grain of salt. That quote is a severe misrepresentation of reality. The reason to consider warrior over paladin is because warriors are important for raiding while paladins aren't, so investing your time in a character that has very little place in the endgame is unappealing to most players. For general gameplay (grouping), warrior is by no means better. Way worse, really.

There's no such thing as people just "understanding how to mitigate aggro." That doesn't make the warrior problem go away. It means other group members have to do less DPS than they could, or debuff later and less efficiently. It means rogues taking aggro on every other mob because no amount of "understanding aggro" will help when their evade just happens to fail several times in a row, and this costs the healer more mana than what miniscule amount they save due to the tank having a warrior's marginally better mitigation and HP than a knight's.

As a rogue, warriors (even with proper proccing weapons) in group content don't have a hope in hell of holding aggro reliably unless they get a proc right off the bat and my evades don't fail. And that's just with an epic and a Winters Fury, which is pretty much the bottom standard for 50+ rogues. Imagine if I had a Vyemm or Vulak dagger. Assuming average rates of procs for the warrior and evasion success for the rogue, it is mathematically impossible for the warrior to hold steady aggro unless the rogue just doesn't DPS until 10-20 seconds into the fight, in which case having a warrior tank is terrible for XP/hour. That's fine on a raid boss that takes minutes to kill, but not in a chain-pulling group. The warrior only holds aggro if he procs more than statistically expected, or the rogue has no evasion fails during the fight. And it fails like 40% of the time, so...

On the other hand, when the tank is a paladin, people can just go all in from the moment the mob arrives in the camp. Debuff instantly, DPS 100% from the first second of the fight, break mezzes without concern, etc. On top of that, the paladin brings situationally useful buffs, root/stun control, emergency heals, saves a life every 72 minutes, even has the ability to help with pulling if necessary. And he's, what, 5% less tanky than the warrior outside of defensive disc? It's laughable to suggest that you're better off with a warrior tank in any content that doesn't require defensive. It's a ridiculous, nonsensical view spread by warrior mains who don't like the idea.

There's a number of elitist warrior players on P99 who work very hard to convince people that it's the ideal tank class for all aspects of the game. It's not. It's obviously the ideal tank class for raid bosses, but for literally anything else you can do in Everquest, it's the worst. Under no conceivable circumstances is being marginally tankier more important than having the ability to actually perform your job 100% of the time, i.e. holding aggro and letting other people perform to the full extent that their classes are capable. Warriors simply cannot do that unless the other players intentionally reduce their performance to the point where the warrior is a handicap, not an asset.

However, everyone thinks they're gonna be a bigshot raider on P99, so even though almost none of them actually end up in a serious raid guild, they feel weird about maining a paladin because what if some day! That's why it's one of the least played classes. For anyone who knows that they're never gonna be a raider, it's by far the best tank class to choose, especially now that shadowknights have been nerfed and it costs tons of mana for them to hold aggro, making it awkward in a chain-pulling group.

That's all you have to say?

Somebody trying real hard to justify their non-warrior tank. Lol this reads like a desperate plea to feel better about dropping 1000's hours into shit class. Just reroll alrdy man. You couldv got a lvl 60 war in the timenit took you to write that delusional wall.

[ChairmanMauzer]

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

That's all you have to say?

Somebody trying real hard to justify their non-warrior tank. Lol this reads like a desperate plea to feel better about dropping 1000's hours into shit class. Just reroll alrdy man. You couldv got a lvl 60 war in the timenit took you to write that delusional wall.

That's your counter argument? LOL