so, i'm 60 on my paladin and mid 50s on my necro: about group makeup

[karsten]

1. hehe makeup



2. since before kunark dropped, people had become increasingly focused on group makeup, specifically related to xp penalties of classes and races. As a paladin, i've of course been personally annoyed by this, and also of the firm opinion that what pals/sks/bards (sorry rangers) bring to groups far outweighs their xp penalty. the ability to hold aggro or, in the case of bards, regen/mana regen/haste makes the group more efficient, overall, not less.

3. i'm 60 on my paladin and now leveling my necro. i can say, as a non-hybrid leveling with other non-hybrids, that it's just not faster. hybrids bring added value, I speak from exensive anectodal evidence, you're welcome to draw your own conclusions.

4. stop the hybrid hate today. you math wizards are right in theory and wrong in practice.

5. also remove hybrid xp penalties please!

[Versus]

I've never minded having a Pal/SK in the group to tank. It only makes my job easier and the difference (time wise) to make up the supposed exp you lost is minuscule when compared to how much time you probably put into the game anyway.

Plus, when you group with OP, you're pretty much guaranteed to be fighting a train of 2-5 at once, which always helps that exp bar inch forward. :p

[Extunarian]

I'm a young math wizard and I don't think the penalty makes much of a difference on paper or in practice. I routinely duo with knights and rangers.

Not only is the xp comparable to soloing since we kill faster with less downtime, but with groupmates I can keep up the grind for a lot longer without getting bored, quitting, and getting no xp at all.

[Lazortag]

I've never experienced any hybrid hate. I've been told that having five clones of me in a group would be worth the exp penalties. I've done extensive parsing of exp rates in groups with Giegue in them and groups without Giegue and have found that the data suggests this is true. In fact, just looking at my character's (extremely attractive) face is enough to instantly ding 60.

[Shiftin]

warrior hate generation is so bad right now, i'd rather have a paladin or SK tank for me for sure. Anyone who has grouped with hammer or heebee knows what a massive difference in DPS having a tank that never loses aggro can make with rogues in your group. That DPS increase >>>> hybrid penalty.

[Rejuvenation]

I've never experienced any hybrid hate. I've been told that having five clones of me in a group would be worth the exp penalties.

Oh no, what have we done? We have created a monster!

[Ektar]

I overseasoned my hotdog

[etplante]

As a necro I don't group for fast xp so I don't care about hybrid penalties. If I put up lfg it's because I'm bored and want to socialize or I don't want to play on the edge of my chair watching every second for charm to break, etc. That being the case I prefer hybrid tanks because most hold much better agro and they also bring a lot of utility.

[corradojeff]

Two words: Snap agro. 'nough said.

[Kassel]

sk and pals are great tanks, its rangers that have no use =D

[Supaskillz]

I will take pally/sk tank all day, warriors cant hold aggro, just dont have much use for rangers draining xp and dpsing worse than monks and rogues

[Felwithemagi]

Keep the hybrid xp penalty. It's classic and it was there for a very good reason.

[falkun]

Keep the hybrid xp penalty. It's classic and it was there for a very good reason.

Classic yes, but please explain the very good reason that the Verant/99 Studios team put it in? I understand the "good reason" that the P99 devs put it in -- match classic.

[Ektar]

EQ was heavily based on D&D rules. Hybrids had an exp penalty. Therefore, Hybrids have an exp penalty.


As a simple explanation.

[PureLo]

Lol even with the trash of this server towards warriors within the coding, i still find it hard to believe all this warrior hate goes on. The ones that can't hold aggro are just BAD or don't know how to play the class/adjust to what this server throws at them. I can hold aggro just fine as a warrior, every single level up to MAX 60 i've never had problems.

[Harkor]

Highly gear dependent for warriors...I and guarantee if I slow at 99% I will have the mob all over my ass with ANY warrior...sk/pals dont have that issue....its simply the mechanics. Not a big deal for me....cuz I can take a few hits....poor enchanters have to deal with it tho :)

And rangers in this game.....they are forever screwed.....no aa's = no dmg for them!

[azeth]

the original devs ought to have gone the route of making Rangers group buffing machines and debuff machines. It's fine that their base damage is low, that their spells are always incomparably weaker than the true-blood classes, if they had at least started adding stuff like Call of the Predator (i think?) group spells in Classic, instead of later on. I don't mean to intrude on Bard-like group mechanics, but there's really no reason your local Ranger shouldn't be able to pump your ATK or provide a useful damage shield (other than himself lawl) etc..

Wasn't this ranger dilemma apparent in 99? I honestly can't remember if folks hated them or not.

[Nirgon]

I'm guessing there is an abudance of rogues, enchanters, clerics and SKs on this server?

[Enderenter]

There's a thread somewhere on the forums about how the hybrid xp penalty is marginal compared to the level range penalty. (lower level people get their xp cut hugely; it's much better to group with people near your level)

[Harkor]

shamans/mages/necros more like it! and plenty of wars still

[Nirgon]

Classic yes, but please explain the very good reason that the Verant/99 Studios team put it in? I understand the "good reason" that the P99 devs put it in -- match classic.

The reason its there is because despite their spells being of lesser level.. they still provide "dat utility". Again, xp penalty for aggro alone. How about a higher effective hp pool due to drains, stuns (more or less), feign death + plate... etc. Sounds like a reason to give a class a penalty. Invis and ITU... the list goes on. Think of ogre sk vs ogre warrior. Tell me again why a class with snare + fear + life taps + a pet (its a little extra..) doesn't need an xp penalty or some kind of penalty otherwise? The obvious answer in today's terms is "well buff warriors" but that's not how it was back then.

Don't warriors get triple attack in Kunark? Or is that Velious? I think rangers definitely got triple attack in Kunark... not sure on any of that.

[Dantes]

I don't mind grouping with hybrids. Honestly I can't really tell the difference because I don't watch the exp bar that closely. It's depressing to keep checking. If I'm grouped with 5 other people who are NOT assholes, then as far as I am concerned that's a win, I could care less what class they are as long as I'm alive and having fun.

[Trisun]

I can see Shadowknight and Paladins being great for tanks in groups even with the exp penalty. BUT Id much rather have a rogue or an extra monk/mage/necro as compared to a ranger/bard. I can notice a SIGNIFICANT Difference in the experience when grouping with rangers/bards. =)

[Ektar]

bard is a good substitute for an enchanter though

[azeth]

bard is a good substitute for an enchanter though

Bard's have enough upsides to totally overshadow the penalty. Conversely, I can't think of a single thing rangers bring to the group setting that *any class, who can actually perform the act (heal, root, DS, buff, DPS), cannot exponentially do better than them.

It's a shame, really. They should've been approached from the RANGE(r) perspective from the get go if their melee "advantages" boil down to triple attack and great weapon choices.

[maestrom]

it's much better to group with people near your level)

More accurately, its much better to group with people near your current EXP total.

To evenly distribute EXP, if you're grouping with a human warrior, make sure they are the highest level in the group. If you're grouping with a troll SK, make sure they're near the lowest level in the group.

[Nirgon]

If it brings more xp than having a blank spot, its a gain.

[Werlop]

Bard's have enough upsides to totally overshadow the penalty. Conversely, I can't think of a single thing rangers bring to the group setting that *any class, who can actually perform the act (heal, root, DS, buff, DPS), cannot exponentially do better than them.

Bards add haste and mana to a group. If you can't find a chanter/shaman for haste, these two abilities alone justify adding them. Even with a shaman, you want someone to cc that 5-mob pull so the group doesn't wipe.

As an enchanter, I like having hybrid tanks in the group because their greater aggro generation makes things flow more smoothly. It's not something that translates well in a parse, but if you consider how small a 40% penalty split 6 ways becomes, it's a fair trade. Yes, a very good warrior has no problems with aggro ever, but warriors have to rely on random procs to build aggro over melee. Hybrid tanks don't. I've never been in a group where the group has turned down a hybrid tank solely because they weren't a warrior. Most groups that I've been in would be glad just to not have a monk tank.

Rangers... rangers sucked in classic Kunark and they aren't any better now. I know that the rangers in my guild are awesome and would toss them an invite no matter what because they're cool people, but from a stranger's standpoint, there are few situations where it would be better to take a ranger over a monk/rogue/necro. Necros even have better heals and there are a million of them. I haven't parsed extensively, but by comparing exp in groups with and without rangers, it seems as though they just barely make up for their penalty (i.e. everyone in the group made just as much exp with the ranger as without).

Tl;dr version- Most hybrids are cool. There's a reason the least-played class on the server is ranger.

[BelenosThePagan]

I don't mind grouping with hybrids. Honestly I can't really tell the difference because I don't watch the exp bar that closely. It's depressing to keep checking. If I'm grouped with 5 other people who are NOT assholes, then as far as I am concerned that's a win, I could care less what class they are as long as I'm alive and having fun.

^^Exactly. People should make their class choice based on what they want to play. If the group is staying alive, killing efficiently, and most importantly having fun,
then it's a good group. This is an MMO...and to me that means engaging with other people and adapting those you have to the situation you're currently in, not grouping exclusively with the most mathematically superior chars. If someone came you your house to play D&D with a weaker char would you send them home?

just my opinion.

[baalzy]

It should be noted that Iksar monks have a 44% xp penalty. Which is slightly more then a hybrid penalty as long as there isn't an additional racial penalty to add.

[azeth]

noted


thanks for share

[President]

You could have summed up the whole thread with "Warriors can't hold aggro" Karsten!

[Ektar]

Karsten doesn't say anything negatively. It's kinda like how zoolander can't turn left.

[Morlaeth]

1. hehe makeup



2. since before kunark dropped, people had become increasingly focused on group makeup, specifically related to xp penalties of classes and races. As a paladin, i've of course been personally annoyed by this, and also of the firm opinion that what pals/sks/bards (sorry rangers) bring to groups far outweighs their xp penalty. the ability to hold aggro or, in the case of bards, regen/mana regen/haste makes the group more efficient, overall, not less.

3. i'm 60 on my paladin and now leveling my necro. i can say, as a non-hybrid leveling with other non-hybrids, that it's just not faster. hybrids bring added value, I speak from exensive anectodal evidence, you're welcome to draw your own conclusions.

4. stop the hybrid hate today. you math wizards are right in theory and wrong in practice.

5. also remove hybrid xp penalties please!

Regarding removal of the hybrid penalty:

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/editorial/011401_EQ_Producers_letter.html

Dated January 2001.

[karsten]

Karsten doesn't say anything negatively. It's kinda like how zoolander can't turn left.

I'm not an ambi-turner

[Motec]

shiftin has posted only worthy thing here.

A tank that allows higher sustained DPS is a good tank until such time as HPS is not sustainable. With C2 and CH, this is irrelevent.

[Harkor]

"It should be noted that Iksar monks have a 44% xp penalty. Which is slightly more then a hybrid penalty as long as there isn't an additional racial penalty to add.
__________________"

Except for the fact iksar monks are demi-gods in kunark and are completely op....from tanking to pulling to dps...

[Morlaeth]

"It should be noted that Iksar monks have a 44% xp penalty. Which is slightly more then a hybrid penalty as long as there isn't an additional racial penalty to add.
__________________"

Except for the fact iksar monks are demi-gods in kunark and are completely op....from tanking to pulling to dps...

Racial penalties are not shared with the group, so that extra 24% is theirs only.

[ammut]

Racial penalties are not shared with the group, so that extra 24% is theirs only.

Penality sharing is not working that way... what you share is the xp of the mob you killed weighted by the total xp of each player in group.

exemple: 2 players level 50 are grouped, 1st one needed 1 million xp to reach 50 and the other one needed 2 millions. You kill a NPC that yields 300 xp,
Player 1 will gain 100 xp and player 2 will gain 200 xp.

[Taryth]

I don't mind hybrids. It's playing with people who slack ass that puts a drain on xp.

I've seen oh-so-many Rogues ninja-afking constantly. I'd rather have a class in group that can't sneak and be safe in case shit goes wrong while they're afk.

[bakkily]

penalties are gonna stay till they gotta go, stay classy everquest my friends