Least played classes?

[Invurnus]

I'm not as knowledgeable as the other folks on this thread, but I did play a Ranger to 60 on live and have a 36 wiz on p1999, so here's my 2 cp...

- The hybrid XP penalty seems extremely punishing to me. I agree with Duckforceone that it should be a real consideration before anyone rolls a hybrid. I had a lot more time on my hands when I played the Ranger, and so I might have rolled one back then even if I knew about the penalty. But today...well, EQ is enough of a grind as it is...

- Rangers are still very fun. I love the look (especially dual-wielding), and you get track, snare, root, SoW, buffs, healing, even a fear spell come Velious. If you have extra time to level your toon, you could consider being one of those rare Rangers out there.

- I absolutely love the wizard class. Leveling is slow until quad kiting becomes viable, then it's like the only way to fly. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Some people say the class is boring, and I get that...but self ports is a game-changing power, and you can easily make up for any one-dimensional aspects of the class by leveling in different areas.

- Lorean put together a very handy matrix that might influence your decision further. I think the comments and rankings here seem very spot on, based on what I've read in the forums: http://wiki.project1999.org/Loraen%2...election_Guide

Ultimately I agree with the folks that say you should play what you want to play, but I do think the XP penalty should be a real consideration as well. I think you need to factor in how much time you want to put into the game and how much you enjoy the grind. I think for the right player Rangers, Paladins, etc. are a fine choice.

[Seredoc]

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

...- Lorean put together a very handy matrix that might influence your decision further. I think the comments and rankings here seem very spot on, based on what I've read in the forums: http://wiki.project1999.org/Loraen%2...election_Guide
...

So I am just trying to understand something from that matrix. Druids are pretty much across the board the worst pure class except for solo xp/pp and < level 50. Hard epic, only good for duo's at low levels, less desired in a raid than rangers(wtf) and the weakest class at lvl 60.

So I am taking from this that essentially, everyone plays a druid because they're fun but once a druid dings to 40 they should never look for a group ever again, if once they started quad/charm kiting they even bothered, is that about right?

Also, I don't understand why pallies aren't a few points higher on the duo list, stuns + root and deep health pool and ability to heal oneself, you'd think they'd duo well in mid levels with non kite classes.

Wizards: Quoted from wiki "Congrats, everyone knows you suck in XP groups..." Erm, this means what? Is it just the long cast times or something? I must not be understanding something about wizards.


I only have some previous experience, played on Xegony for a while and only did a few raids(max lvl before I got burned out was 55), but I did them on a druid and I'm wondering one last question: is the raiding scene here so messed up that unless I min/max with a cookie cutter race/class combo I can never hope to get in on one? It really seems, for lack of a better word (and only according to forum drama so I am fairly certain I am jumping to atleast a few conclusions xD), tyrannical.

[Ephirith]

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

So I am taking from this that essentially, everyone plays a druid because they're fun but once a druid dings to 40 they should never look for a group ever again, if once they started quad/charm kiting they even bothered, is that about right?

You'll still find druids in groups. There's always something you'd want instead of a druid, but you can't always find what you need, and not everyone is so discriminating. (Consequently, you may find yourself in a group with 2 bards, a druid, a ranger, and 2 paladins. It has happened to me in Karnors).

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

Also, I don't understand why pallies aren't a few points higher on the duo list, stuns + root and deep health pool and ability to heal oneself, you'd think they'd duo well in mid levels with non kite classes.

It's hard to be part of an effective duo when you do almost no dps. Something like a shaman makes up for this with mind-bogglingly powerful slows in addition to buffs, heals, and mana recovery. I'd say they can duo adequately with some classes, that is, win against mobs, but overall you can get the same survivability out of a monk or warrior with the added benefit of dps.

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

Wizards: Quoted from wiki "Congrats, everyone knows you suck in XP groups..." Erm, this means what? Is it just the long cast times or something? I must not be understanding something about wizards.

Wizards bring fairly low sustained dps to experience groups. They can't use their nukes frequently enough to contribute the dps other classes can. They have some usefulness burning mobs in clutch situations, CCing with root, or stunning casters, but for many those aren't very compelling reasons to want a wizard over something else.

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

is the raiding scene here so messed up that unless I min/max with a cookie cutter race/class combo I can never hope to get in on one? It really seems, for lack of a better word (and only according to forum drama so I am fairly certain I am jumping to atleast a few conclusions xD), tyrannical.

I raided with my ranger and enjoyed it. Got groups on my ranger adequately. Play what you enjoy. If you enjoy being desirable, or powerful, or leveling fast, take that into account. The paladin botb winner was an erudite. The sk botb winner was iksar (can't wear a lot of kunark gear). The shaman botb winner was a troll (arguably worse choice of race than ogre).

[Danth]

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

...everyone plays a druid because they're fun but once a druid dings to 40 they should never look for a group ever again,

Also, I don't understand why pallies aren't a few points higher on the duo list...you'd think they'd duo well in mid levels with non kite classes.

Wizards: Quoted from wiki "Congrats, everyone knows you suck in XP groups..." Erm, this means what?

As a rule, P1999 has a much higher proportion of power-gamers and min-maxers than Live had during the classic era. Such folks tend to think in absolutes and typically fall into the trap of thinking if you aren't the best at something, then you can't do it at all. Druids and Wizards have a hard time finding groups because most groups prefer to take Mages or Rogues or such. Paladins are rated as a terrible duo class because a Monk, Warrior, or even a Shadow Knight can do the same job but with better damage output. All of the hybrids--even Bards--have a somewhat tough time finding groups because many players can't accept the thought of possibly lowering their exp/hour by a few percent.

This server replicates classic Everquest, but it can't replicate the classic community. Essentially the various strengths and weaknesses of the different races and classes are magnified here in the eyes of the players.

Danth

[webrunner5]

Yeah but in almost every group you NEED DPS. Lots of it. And a Wizard or a Pally, or a Necro sure as heck doesn't fit that mold sad to say. Even a Ranger can do some pretty good DPS. People want a Monk, Rogue, SK, Warrior, Mage for DPS. You need a healer and a Enchanter and you are set.

[kenzar]

This server needs more beastlords and berserkers. I honestly never see those classes. they were the best classic dps, way better than rogues and monks.

[Sithel1988]

theres always groups no matter what class you are. if there are no groups then you are dumb

[cs616]

Bards are really common at the lower to mid levels but it seems a lot of people lose interest in them after the easy exp ride is over in the 50s. If you want to play a class to 60 that should be in pretty high demand a bard would not be a bad option. I wouldn't be surprised if there were fewer than 20 active level 60 bards on the server right now.

[Zapatos]

Druids fall far behind in healing power until luclin when they get their mini CH. The velious heal, costing 400mana for only close to 1k hp is still that awful ratio. Consider melee classes in velious start getting well over 3k hp without buffs, there's just no way to keep up on damage in ntov/ww fights even on just a couple group members.

[VincentVolaju]

So after reading through a lot of whats been said on this thread, I think I am going to go with Rogue. Id probably prefer Warrior more, but it sounds like Warrior is just an uphill battle the entire time youre playing it. Even after getting decent proc weapons, if you dont get a lucky proc, or a group member nukes too hard, the mob will just run over the group until you finally get a proc and grab aggro back, if you had it at all. Warrior would be a fun class I think if it was a little better at managing aggro in groups I think, but I am sure half the people I grouped with would be super twinked DPS classes that would just go balls to the walls, making my life miserable and making me feel like a POS tank lol. So in regards to that, Ill prob end up going Rogue.