A tour of norrath, need some advice - Page 5

Slave · #41 10-02-2012, 03:21 PM

Enchanter slower + Druid healer = LESS THAN the slow/heal power of a Shaman. The Shaman heals better, and he also slows better. You'd be using twice the manpower for the same job.

THAT is why a Druid is bad for groups. THAT is why a Wizard is bad for groups. They simply cannot do the roles that they are nominally used for. You are getting literally half the effectiveness per user.

SCB · #42 10-02-2012, 03:25 PM

Quote:

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

Enchanter slower + Druid healer = LESS THAN the slow/heal power of a Shaman. The Shaman heals better, and he also slows better. You'd be using twice the manpower for the same job.

THAT is why a Druid is bad for groups. THAT is why a Wizard is bad for groups. They simply cannot do the roles that they are nominally used for. You are getting literally half the effectiveness per user.

This isn't the topic of conversation at all. In fact, I even point out several times that they will not be nearly as effective as if they switch roles, but that if the guy doesn't want to he doesn't need to because a druid can feasibly heal it. Every single post I've made has contained some variation of the qualifier "someone else can do this better, but".

I'm starting to think you're argumentative just to have someone to argue with. Is it really bothering you that much that you're being shown that your math is bad in the enchanter thread?

eqravenprince · #43 10-02-2012, 03:36 PM

Sounds like a lot of fun, I'm jealous and wish I could be a part of it. You could go to Permafrost much earlier than 45, mobs start out at level 15. Splitpaw (level 26+), Runnyeye (7-30+), Qeynos Aqueducts (1-15), Highpass Hold (12-22), Highpass Keep (18-35), Kerra Island (15-35), Kedge Keep (35-50), Upper Guk (4-25).

As far as what others are saying about needing certain classes, they may be right. But rule #1 in my book is play what you enjoy. I don't know the end game well enough to say you need this class or that class, but levels 1-50 you will be just fine.

Slave · #44 10-02-2012, 03:45 PM

Quote:

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

This isn't the topic of conversation at all. In fact, I even point out several times that they will not be nearly as effective as if they switch roles, but that if the guy doesn't want to he doesn't need to because a druid can feasibly heal it. Every single post I've made has contained some variation of the qualifier "someone else can do this better, but".

I'm starting to think you're argumentative just to have someone to argue with. Is it really bothering you that much that you're being shown that your math is bad in the enchanter thread?

Yes, it is the topic of conversation. Their group would end up with them not being able to take their tour of Norrath, which is the point of this thread. They would be locked out of all content 50+ in the opinion of most people in this thread, and be severely weakened to the point of futility at 40+. They will not get to take their tour. They will be tourless.

As for the Enchanter thread, keep reading! My information and analysis is for everyone, even those who fallaciously argue against it at first. You're very welcome!

Tecmos Deception · #45 10-02-2012, 03:54 PM

Quote:

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

You min/max'ers want to ruin everything. It's comical that you cannot even comprehend why somebody would chose something that isn't the mathematically optimal choice.

I say run with the odd ball group, much more fun when you may have to strategist how do an encounters/camps then usual dull tank/cleric/slows/blah that make up most people's EQ grouping experiences.

You dumb players want to ruin everything. It's comical that you cannot even comprehend why someone would prefer something that is the mathematically optimal choice.

I say run with an ideal group, much more fun when you are able to handle killing stuff that's tougher than orc1 than trying to kite your way to 60 with a dru/rang/sk/pal/bard/wiz group.

I'm really just trying to be the devil's advocate here. I'm not against oddball groups or casual play, I just despise people who think that a minmaxer who suggests a more effective option is "ruining" things.

fadetree · #46 10-02-2012, 03:55 PM

I think people who generally only play in optimal groups eventually think that it's impossible to do otherwise. People who go ahead and play in non-optimal groups usually know that anything is possible, though it may take some extra effort. It's not an optimal group he's constructing, but I doubt it would render a 'tour of norrath' actually impossible.

Picked · #47 10-02-2012, 03:59 PM

Quote:

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

I think people who generally only play in optimal groups eventually think that it's impossible to do otherwise. People who go ahead and play in non-optimal groups usually know that anything is possible, though it may take some extra effort. It's not an optimal group he's constructing, but I doubt it would render a 'tour of norrath' actually impossible.

I agree with this. While other setups would be far better as far as efficiency, I have grouped with a Druid in BnB camp in Solb and they did just fine. Had to stop pulling once in a great while but we had Enchanter and there was constantly two in camp at all times. Not to mention the Enchanters pet and the Druid himself had a bat charmed.

Was actually the best group I have ever had at BnB. Mobs died so fast with two epic rogues and two charmed bats and a Monk.

Not saying it will be this way everywhere, but if you got competent players you can make almost anything work.

Furniture · #48 10-02-2012, 04:01 PM

dieing in everquest and making the tedious exp grind even worse is not fun, whooping ass and playing with a good group and staying alive is fun however

Slave · #49 10-02-2012, 04:01 PM

Quote:

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

but we had Enchanter... Not to mention the Enchanters pet

fadetree · #50 10-02-2012, 04:05 PM

Quote:

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

dieing in everquest and making the tedious exp grind even worse is not fun, whooping ass and playing with a good group and staying alive is fun however

Man, if you aren't into tedious exp grinding you are playing the wrong game. And anyways, it's all relative, what you find unacceptable doesn't have any relation to how this group might feel about it.

And its interesting about dying...of course actually dying is no fun, but neither is never being in danger. What I enjoy most is almost dying. Sitting in a totally safe camp in a perfect group methodically pulling grind mobs for hours is boring as hell. Having to work hard and think smart is a lot more entertaining to me.