Enchanter is #1 solo class? What is this madness

[Snaggles]

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

We've had huge revisions to how mage pets work on p99, and we know the ac/atk for NPCs (and so too pets?) is kina borked in a way that attempts to emulate classic feels, but isn't strictly classic, so who knows how classic combat between enc animation pets and xp mobs really is.

If you slow something from 50-70% and haste a summoned pet, while buffing with Boon and spotting with bedlam, it’s gonna kill most things one would grind for exp. Enchanters can even dot and nuke.

Played like a mage, it’s not even that bad of a class.

[Goregasmic]

That sounds about right for p99 too. Animation is also trash here but you can make it work if you have to, it is just a bit more work but doable when it comes to xp grind. I'd also like to point out once again that on live the player skill floor was basically below the mariana trench so one guy saying shit is hard is indicative of nothing.

That's beyond the scope of the classic discussion but on p99 the main reason to get an ench in your group/raid is charm. You don't really need ench level CC or even slow really so you'd just become a c2/haste bot and the occasional raid sieve.

If all that stuff goes through before new server hits, expect a LOT MORE shamans/necros. I know I'd be going necro as soon as kunark hits.

[loramin]

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

If we have receipts, let’s wait for the fix.

I already linked the receipts. You can wait, but Nilbog has been sitting on them for four years: I wouldn't hold my breath.

To be clear though: this is Nilbog's server. If he wants to make it 95% classic, but keep his pet class a bit more powerful ... great! That is one of the smallest forms of repayment he could possibly ask given how much he's done for everyone here.

It just drives me crazy when people say stupid stuff about Enchanters being the gods of classic EverQuest. They were far from it, yet people talk about how Verant should have given half their spells to Wizards [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If that had been anywhere close to reality, the classic EQ population would have demanded that Verant nerf Enchanters. After all, demanding that other classes be nerfed was very classic.

But, it wasn't the reality. Enchanter power comes from imperfections in our emulator ... not a flaw in the original game.

[loramin]

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

If all that stuff goes through before new server hits, expect a LOT MORE shamans/necros. I know I'd be going necro as soon as kunark hits.

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

[Goregasmic]

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

It just drives me crazy when people say stupid stuff about Enchanters being the gods of classic EverQuest. They were far from it, yet people talk about how Verant should have given half their spells to Wizards [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If that had been anywhere close to reality, the classic EQ population would have demanded that Verant nerf Enchanters. After all, demanding that other classes be nerfed was very classic.

But, it wasn't the reality. Enchanter power comes from imperfections in our emulator ... not a flaw in the original game.

It is true that p99 is skewed toward them but I feel like this is the worst argument. People had like 10+ years to git gud with enchanters on here with 15 years of prior knowledge while on live they had 3 years from scratch. And even then theres some chanter that posted a guide during classic and explained how it worked and said he was very effective with it.

I'd be extremely curious to know how many chanters knew to stack charisma, how to do the charm routine and how to deal effectively with a charm break. I would guess very little as the skill ceiling can be quite high in a game where most people weren't very good, mostly due to lack of knowledge.

I'd even argue than getting proefficient with charm takes quite a while and even then it can be mentally taxing to deal with both heavy CC and a pet at the same time so no wonder people with low experience and shit gear didn't bother back then. That and when zones were so crowded you only got a dozen mobs in camp every 20-28mins, there's no point in keeping a pet around. The increased DPS wasn't worth the liability.

[loramin]

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

I'd be extremely curious to know how many chanters knew to stack charisma, how to do the charm routine and how to deal effectively with a charm break. I would guess very little as the skill ceiling can be quite high in a game where most people weren't very good, mostly due to lack of knowledge.

They absolutely knew! This whole "live people were dumb" thing only applies to obscure knowledge; in everything else Live players were not dumb.

Charisma was even mentioned in an old post I was looking at today (although I closed the tab so I can't quote it). They were talking about how there was a soft cap at 200 Charisma, and it didn't appear to help much beyond that, but (apparently) Charisma up to 200 made a big difference for charm resists on live.

I could go find the post, but what would be even better is if you and other curious folks looked for yourself using Dolalin's incredible classic research search engine: https://search.eqarchives.org/

That way it won't be just me shouting into the wind, and the classic posts can speak for themselves.

[Goregasmic]

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

They absolutely knew! This whole "live people were dumb" thing only applies to obscure knowledge; in everything else Live players were not dumb.

Charisma was even mentioned in an old post I was looking at today (although I closed the tab so I can't quote it). They were talking about how there was a soft cap at 200 Charisma, and it didn't appear to help much beyond that, but (apparently) Charisma up to 200 made a big difference for charm resists on live.

I could go find the post, but what would be even better is if you and other curious folks looked for yourself using Dolalin's incredible classic research search engine: https://search.eqarchives.org/

That way it won't be just me shouting into the wind, and the classic posts can speak for themselves.

I looked at all the coments prior to 2002 on staple emch gear and most people seemed to recognize the importance of cha but not enough to stack it, it seemed like most people went int and if they could get cha too that was a bonus. Also there was no agreement on where the cap was, people thought it was either 120, 130, 150, 180...

And I had a monk alt back then and I can tell you most people didn't understand how DW works, the damage table on fists and the holy grail of weapons was wu stick + KD. I got an IFS for cheap because 1h was all the rage. People just didn't have 25+ years of knowledge on the game, it was impossible. Allakhazam wasn't the shadow of what the wiki is today. Hell even on P99 I see people confused about how DW works nowadays. We weren't dumb but the knowledge floor was wayyyy lower.

[Snaggles]

Loramin can’t even admit people played on dialup modems where if a family member picked up the phone your pet would kill you. These days we play on fiber ISP’s and SSD drives. That alone would certainly change the perception of charming.

Believing the average player on Live was as good as any Emulator is ridiculous. Case and point: Many of us were playing on live and are likely much better now.

[Potus]

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

So I said that people should bring evidence ... and they should. I still don't get your beef with me.

Others (like Azxten) have already brought evidence that channeling is off here: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=395675. That thread is four years old, but if it is ever fixed it will make charming significantly more challenging (ie. closer to classic).

I don't have a beef with you. You seem to have a beef with chanters and want to get *all casters* nerfed by messing with channeling for some reason. I don't understand. Ironically it'd nerf enchanters the least, as they have a 1.0 second AE stun and can time it to hit NPCs as soon as they're in melee range.

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

But look, it's all academic. We have bugs sitting for over four years that would make the server more classic, and they're just ignored. Far more significantly, we have a server that claims to emulate classic, but is obviously significantly different from live (on live Enchanters weren't even considered a soloing class, let alone the best soloing class in the game!)

Not sure what era you started playing EQ but this is false. Enchanters were always god-tier soloers. Enchanters/Shaman/Necros were the big three for soloing.

[loramin]

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

You seem to have a beef with chanters and want to get *all casters* nerfed by messing with channeling for some reason. I don't understand. Ironically it'd nerf enchanters the least, as they have a 1.0 second AE stun and can time it to hit NPCs as soon as they're in melee range.

Yeah, why have things classic when we can have unclassic easy mode ... and then talk all day about how things were easy in the original (even though they weren't)?

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

Not sure what era you started playing EQ but this is false. Enchanters were always god-tier soloers. Enchanters/Shaman/Necros were the big three for soloing.

A few examples:

Originally Posted by https://dbsanfte.github.io/eq-archives/newsgroups/alt.games.everquest-msg-12822.txt

Popular opinion is the best solo classes are necro, druid, and magician.

If you want to be different, the following classes can solo well if played
skillfully:

Ranger
Shadow Knight
Monk
Shaman
Wizard
Enchanter
Bard

Originally Posted by https://dbsanfte.github.io/eq-archives/newsgroups/alt.games.everquest-msg-70022.txt

>There are lots of classes that are good at both Soloing and grouping.
>Magicians, Druids, Warriors, Necromancers are the best solo classes.

Originally Posted by https://dbsanfte.github.io/eq-archives/newsgroups/alt.games.everquest-msg-13071.txt

Mages are excellent soloers, summoning powerful elementals and
wielding strong DD spells, but they are slow to get started, spending
time medding, summoning, and medding again before getting started.

Necromancers seem to me to be the most powerful class, whether solo or
in groups (I love what they bring to the table in a group, I wish they
were less soloable so they'd group more). However, they have issues
with merchants/faction and aren't particularly good at travel (not
that they are particularly BAD at it, just in comparison to the next
choices).

Since you mention short play times, I would suggest a Druid or Shaman.
They can both solo quite well, the edge being Druid, and both can get
into pick up groups easily, this edge being Shaman. Stat buffs may
well be a placebo for the most part, but us

Originally Posted by https://dbsanfte.github.io/eq-archives/newsgroups/alt.games.everquest-msg-528.txt

It's generally considered that the best solo classes in the game are:

Necros
Druids
and Wizards, after level 29...

Magicians are quite good as well.

But again, go use https://search.eqarchives.org and see for yourself. Dolalin really did an awesome job of the site.