I didn't see that; to the contrary, I saw several people, including master researcher Dolalin, saying there were likely
multiple issues ... just not big ones.
But look, I'm curious ... did you play in classic? If so, you almost certainly read sites which explained which classes could solo and which couldn't. There were lots of such sites, but they all said the same basic thing, so I'll use Caster's Realm (as it seems to be the basis for our wiki):
"Despite the fact that Clerics are one of only two pure caster classes which can wear plate, they are not suited to prolonged tanking which makes soloing difficult. "
"Druids are perhaps the best soloing class in the game."
"Because of this [Rogues] are generally poor soloers, and forced to group. "
"Magicians can solo quite effectively"
... you get the idea.
Now of course, those sites did make mistakes sometimes, but not about basics like which classes can solo. In fact, you can pick
any class, compare what sites said about them back in '99-'01 vs. what people say on the forum today, and they will be roughly the same ....
...
except for Enchanters, the
only class that changed! If we did a poll and asked "Are Enchanters good soloers?" 90+% would respond yes ... but back then ...
"Soloing, whilst possible, is generally quite slow and as such they do not raise levels as quickly as some other classes as their experience is almost always through that of a group."
My argument is very, very simple: until our game matches the game described on countless Wayback machine sites, it's not classic.
Maybe that means we need to start randomly disconnecting people
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] But again, I think it would make more sense to fix small bugs, and tweak numbers/equations/formulas that we never had exact evidence of in the first place.