most underpowered class in game?

[Fammaden]

I hear you can kill the Sleeper if you corpse enough magician epics at Yeli's lair, and no other guilds play on the same server as you do.

[Keebz]

If you look at raw population numbers, it's usually Paladin or Ranger at the bottom. Wizard is usually pretty close as well. So it got me thinking about adding together the raiding AND non-raiding (e.g. leveling, farming) power levels. With this mindset, I think it might be Ranger.

Logic:

Leveling the Paladin is a better as a MT 50-60. For farming, a Paladin can tank well enough and with DW BP and Soulfire solo some nasty stuff. They also pair reasonably well with Ench. On the Ranger, your farming options are more using tracking and farming greens. 55+ you get kind of wrecked face tanking without some serious gear, and no one is inviting you to their HS group.

Raiding: Rangers get WS, COTP, solid DPS, and track is occasionally useful. Paladins get DA, DS, Soulfire/LoH and can tank trash better. However, WS is soo good that it's close. I think it's advantage Ranger, but not enough to offset the non-raiding aspect.

I still think Warrior/Rogue are pretty bad, but their required status for raiding and their unoffensive 50-60 grouping story gives them a leg up, imho. I can also see a case for SK/Wiz if someone wants to make the argument.

[Jimjam]

I just checked /who all counts and equating unpopularity to underpowedness the players have voted paladin.

[Fammaden]

I think that is more of a poll on which classes players find the most boring.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Just take a look at this thread: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...96#post3491696

To see how little Zuranthium actually knows about the game. He doesn't understand pulling, push, pet positioning, how mana effects DPS, etc.

Even when I provide video evidence he refuses to admit he is wrong. Be cautious when taking his advise (at least for now, he can always change). At this moment he seems hell bent on trying to be right, regardless of how wrong he is.

He doesn't understand that spells other that DPS spells (CC, Heals, Buffs, FD, etc.) have an effect on how to play the game correctly and efficiently. Enchanters are the best class in the game because of how much utility they have other than raw DPS. But he doesn't know this apparently. However, he will gladly split hairs on what we call non-DPS spells, since that is an easy win for him, which he is desperate for.

[Zuranthium]

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

Just take a look at this thread: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...96#post3491696

Indeed look at that thread, and your gameplay videos, for further proof of how suboptimally you play the game.

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

In raiding, tracking is useful in the planes for getting mob counts, but when looking for specific targets, pet tracking is the norm since it can be done from zone in or other safe spot.

I feel like pet tracking had a smaller range in classic, I remember very clearly knowing the mechanic to have the pet attack something even when you couldn't see the target (Hermit in South Karana for example) and trying to test how far I could use this from; at a certain distance from MOBs I seem to remember the pet not responding at all, which runs counter to p99 where it gives an emote. Logically there should be documentation of guilds using this back then if it worked, because plenty of people knew the command to do it; has anyone actually found evidence? I certainly don't remember guilds on my servers doing it.

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

My main issue with Rangers is the lack of power 50+ non-raiding. Yea, you can track and do questing and what not, but in a dungeon you're very blah. Paladins at least lull, root their way around, face tank, stun casters, etc.

Do you mean solo? Because for me that just goes back to the point of how a Paladin isn't going to make better "gains" solo in a dungeon than a Ranger can elsewhere.

If you mean for groups, well yeah a Paladin can do some things better, but they become weaker if the group already has a tank. Ranger can add a good amount of damage to a melee-heavy group and they also have Root, plus Snare. I wouldn't say a Paladin necessarily duos better with Enchanter all the time, being able to Snare everything is the safer option when charming sometimes, and Ranger's healing is often sufficient to fill the gaps an Enchanter might need.

I don't rate Lull super highly tbh, because if you are depending on it to move past a deadly spot in a closed-off area, then a crit resist simply means you die. I'm pretty sure Lull got crit resisted more frequently in actual classic than it does here. I remember an Enchanter friend complaining about how much that happened and how frustrating it was to watch Rangers be able to Harmony with no danger in a bunch of zones as compared to Lull (and I remember similar things playing an Enchanter for myself starting in late 2000). In safer areas with targets that aren't resisting at all, then Root can be nearly the same as Lull anyway, you just run past them after rooting and /camp before moving on.

[Danth]

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

. I'm pretty sure Lull got crit resisted more frequently in actual classic than it does here. I remember an Enchanter friend complaining about how much that happened and how frustrating it was to watch Rangers be able to Harmony with no danger in a bunch of zones as compared to Lull

I'm with you there, I played a paladin throughout that era and the lull spell line sucked no matter how much charisma you stacked.

Verant massively nerfed lull, utterly crippled the spell, a few months after EQ opened. They gave it a greatly increased, hugely inflatwed resist rate. It rendered the entire line practically useless except for use against very low blues and greens. Later on, during I think Luclin era, that nerf was reverted and the spell line was revamped; P1999, being based off PoP-era EQ-EMU, to my knowledge never truly implemented lull spells with their classic resist rates. The classic lull nerf was done host-side so it never showed up in the spelldata files that P99 tends to use as primary evidence.

Danth

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I don't rate Lull super highly tbh.

You keep revealing your lack of game knowledge. You don't even know how lull works on P99. That is why you prefer root.

You need to actually start playing P99 and learning it before you give advice. It doesn't matter how you think P99 works, it only matters how it actually works.

Regardless of how lull might have worked on live in 1999, it does not get resisted nearly that much on P99. Until that changes, there is no point in worrying about how you think it should work. Use lull and be happy[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Zuranthium]

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

You keep revealing your lack of game knowledge. You don't even know how lull works on P99. That is why you prefer root.

No, you just reveal your lack of intelligence, once again missing the point. That point being, Lull can not simply be depended upon to move through an area freely or pull for free. It will sometimes be crit resisted, thus getting you nowhere. In areas where Lull is completely dependable, Root can often serve the same function. For example, 3 MOBs are standing next to each other. You pull by rooting one of them and then run back and root one of the others. Now they are completely separated, the same as Lull would have done.

Your fallacy here is idiotic on multiple levels, seeing as Root has other functions that Lull doesn't. Root is crowd control, lull does nothing on already aggroed mobs. Root is aggro management, forcing the MOB to hit the nearest melee player. Root prevents wanderers from pathing away, saving time from not having to chase them down.

And for the typical grouping situations we've been talking about in this thread, Lull is almost never needed over Root to begin with. The best ways and places to level don't require Lull, nor for grinding faction, nor for the majority of item/cash farming.

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

Regardless of how lull might have worked on live in 1999, it does not get resisted nearly that much on P99. Until that changes, there is no point in worrying about how you think it should work.

p99 is trying to recreate classic EQ. Thus, discussions about "the game" on p99 are often about Classic, and about reminiscing.

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

I'm with you there, I played a paladin throughout that era and the lull spell line sucked no matter how much charisma you stacked.

Verant massively nerfed lull, utterly crippled the spell, a few months after EQ opened. They gave it a greatly increased, hugely inflatwed resist rate. It rendered the entire line practically useless except for use against very low blues and greens. Later on, during I think Luclin era, that nerf was reverted and the spell line was revamped; P1999, being based off PoP-era EQ-EMU, to my knowledge never truly implemented lull spells with their classic resist rates. The classic lull nerf was done host-side so it never showed up in the spelldata files that P99 tends to use as primary evidence.

Yeah that makes total sense. What you say about it only being reliable on low blues also matches up with my memory. Harmony was WAY, WAY better than Lull (in outdoor tagged zones, of course). Lull was very risky in the places you actually needed it most, and not worth using to pull with over Root the majority of the time.

[PatChapp]

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

No, you just reveal your lack of intelligence, once again missing the point. That point being, Lull can not simply be depended upon to move through an area freely or pull for free. It will sometimes be crit resisted, thus getting you nowhere. In areas where Lull is completely dependable, Root can often serve the same function. For example, 3 MOBs are standing next to each other. You pull by rooting one of them and then run back and root one of the others. Now they are completely separated, the same as Lull would have done.

Your fallacy here is idiotic on multiple levels, seeing as Root has other functions that Lull doesn't. Root is crowd control, lull does nothing on already aggroed mobs. Root is aggro management, forcing the MOB to hit the nearest melee player. Root prevents wanderers from pathing away, saving time from not having to chase them down.

And for the typical grouping situations we've been talking about in this thread, Lull is almost never needed over Root to begin with. The best ways and places to level don't require Lull, nor for grinding faction, nor for the majority of item/cash farming.



p99 is trying to recreate classic EQ. Thus, discussions about "the game" on p99 are often about Classic, and about reminiscing.



Yeah that makes total sense. What you say about it only being reliable on low blues also matches up with my memory. Harmony was WAY, WAY better than Lull (in outdoor tagged zones, of course). Lull was very risky in the places you actually needed it most, and not worth using to pull with over Root the majority of the time.

Lull is amazing,there is no better way to pull in indoor zones. With high cha 200+ critical resists don't happen to often,if you have a dwarf paladin with 50cha you can expect a lot of them. A couple simple item swaps can make a big difference.
Paladins are fun,if you ever want to try this game I recommend them.