Class Desirability Census Poll.

[Daldolma]

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

How's that ever an optimal group? If you take two classes where half of their abilities overlap, that's half a wasted class. I never said it doesn't work, I said it'll never be the mechanically best setup. If you have an enchanter or a bard already, adding another of the opposite class means a lot of what they can do is already covered. Same thing with enchanter and shaman. Same thing if you have a cleric who doesn't run out of mana and then add a druid or shaman. You're better off adding an actual DPS class because there's no such thing as too much damage. You never need two mezzers or two slowers, you never need haste from two sources, any unstacking utility brought by more than one member of the group is generally wasted. If you already have an enchanter, a bard adds little more than mana song plus fleeting charm DPS. A shaman adds half-assed DPS and some +stat buffs. If you have a bard and a shaman, an enchanter isn't worth that much. You'd take that over a rogue or something else where every aspect of the class adds its full value to the group? You have no idea.

You're mistaken. A bard-enchanter combo is phenomenal. Between clarity and mana song, the casters are never out of mana. Further, with both an enchanter and a bard, you have double the CC power -- meaning you don't have to worry about overwhelming the enchanter or having a charm break at an inopportune moment. If the enchanter has any trouble locking things down, the bard is there in support. And it's not like a bard is useless out of mana song and CC. They're quality melee DPS and combat songs add significantly to DPS.

With a monk, a rogue, a bard, and an enchanter's charmed pet in the group, DPS is going to be off the charts. You don't need to be stressing about replacing the bard with another strictly DPS class. It's going to cut seconds off of your average fight, if that. Far more important is staying alive and eliminating downtime. With an enchanter + bard, plus a cleric, you have zero downtime, and you almost never have to worry about a death. In the long run, that's going to mean much more for your group than a little extra DPS.

[Supaskillz]

With current aggro(at least aggro before most recent patch, since I have not been on in a few days) I don't understand why paladins are the least popular tank. They snap aggro and hold aggro far better than SKs since their dc got nerfed to where it draws pretty much zero aggro and although warriors got an upgrade they cant snap aggro off of a shaman, ench, or cleric the same way a paladin can. In a group I would prefer aggro control over the slightly more efficient CHs that a warrior gives you.

My group:
Cleric
Enchanter
Paladin
Rogue
Rogue(maybe a shaman depending on where we are fighting)
Monk(or rogue if paladin can pull the zone without problem)

or 5 enchanters with charm pets and a cleric, or 1 lvl 60 shaman w/ torpor to just solo pretty much whatever you want.

[inyane]

optimal for what? grinding?

I wouldn't list a pally, ranger, shd, or bard in that case, based on the experience penalty

Not that I wouldn't group with them, but I would take a warrior or chanter if i could.

[yaeger]

Why don't more people include a wiz/druid with their groups for ports/evacs. Even more essential in Kunark than before.

Plus, Wizard lure spells mean they shine as the primary nuking class in Kunark.

[Friday]

voted everything

[Chrushev]

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

Why don't more people include a wiz/druid with their groups for ports/evacs. Even more essential in Kunark than before.

Plus, Wizard lure spells mean they shine as the primary nuking class in Kunark.

Yeah, I guess with an ideal group that knows what they are doing you wouldnt need an evac :P

Although this is EQ were talking about... OH hello Frog... you say you were on the other side of the wall, managed to agro me yet not walk through the wall, so you brought all your friends with you to the party that were on the way as you ran through a 2 mile long winding tunnel? Oh my... ..LOADING PLEASE WAIT..

[Ankiilbiter]

Kind of shocked to see Necro's as low as they are, but then again they can solo exp nearly as well as grouping so I'm not too concerned (I'll be playing a Necro).

But for Rangers....

I never recalled Rangers really shining in original EQ or even the Kunark expansion for that matter. The only time I remember demand for Ranger's getting an equal footing to others was when EQ/AM3 was introduced, and when the zones that took advantage of their Pacifying ability increased (Bastion of Thunder for instance). Until then unless you were highly skilled/geared over your other dps counterparts, rangers performance was sub-par.

[baalzy]

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

Kind of shocked to see Necro's as low as they are, but then again they can solo exp nearly as well as grouping so I'm not too concerned (I'll be playing a Necro).

But for Rangers....

I never recalled Rangers really shining in original EQ or even the Kunark expansion for that matter. The only time I remember demand for Ranger's getting an equal footing to others was when EQ/AM3 was introduced, and when the zones that took advantage of their Pacifying ability increased (Bastion of Thunder for instance). Until then unless you were highly skilled/geared over your other dps counterparts, rangers performance was sub-par.

Necros are great, they can patch many holes in a group and fill a bunch of different roles. If you had all the class at your disposal and competent players behind each of those classes, I just wouldn't find a necro to fit 'optimally'.

However i think something like war/cleric/necro/bard/shaman/rogue would work out very nicely for a group composition.

[Ankiilbiter]

Oh I agree with you. I view Necro's as mainly a good solo class and raiding class. Necro's post some amazing numbers when raiding because they can use their DoT's to their full advantage. In groups though their damage output is somewhat mediocre but nothing to be ashamed of either.... rangers fill that role lol...

J/K, I played a ranger up to 70 so I know that Rangers aren't bad they just need to be used by a competent player who can maximize every ounce of their potential to the best utility and they'll be just as desirable as other classes...

I can't remember how many times I got a group simply because the group was "snare-less" and needed that role filled because it's so critical in dungeons/small enclosed areas.

[danus]

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

Dunno what you're talking about, theres a time and place for every class.

There's neither a time nor a place for Rangers.

My group is Enc, Cle, Wiz, Wiz, Wiz =p