Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[bcbrown]

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

I still think that assuming the presence/utility of another class by just saying you’re pocketing them is not following the spirit of the question. If you can pocket rez or coth you can pocket TL or malo too, the most objective thing would be to limit your available tools to exclusively the classes you picked

I agree. I think the question gets a lot less interesting when you assume you have other classes in your pocket. It's certainly valid to interpret the question in that manner, I just think it's a less interesting question when you have fewer constraints.

[plzrelax]

4 wizards in an outdoor zone for leveling

[Duik]

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

4 wizards in an outdoor zone for leveling

Only if virtually limitless mobs and great mana regen.
Still is just 4 soloing chars chatting /g.

[Vexenu]

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

Can you point to where OP says "No pocket characters?". It's not in the title of the thread, the initial post, or any of the replies OP gave.

I don't think you have the right to make up a restriction and enforce it as if it were part of OP's question.

That would be like saying " There is a restriction of no charming allowed while playing". OP never said this, but for some reason you want this as a restriction, so you just tell people it is a restriction of this thread.

The spirit of the question DEMANDS that you only respond with FOUR classes. That is the entire purpose of the discussion; that limitation is the only reason there is any debate whatsoever. Otherwise there are no limitations, and we should then assume that all four players in the theoretical group have access to full accounts of alts and guildmates to help them in whatever situation they face. In that case, there is nothing to even talk about, because it doesn't matter what they play. They could have a group of four Rogues, and as soon as they ran into some difficulty, they could swap in literally any other configuration of classes. The entire question then becomes moot.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

The spirit of the question DEMANDS that you only respond with FOUR classes. That is the entire purpose of the discussion; that limitation is the only reason there is any debate whatsoever. Otherwise there are no limitations, and we should then assume that all four players in the theoretical group have access to full accounts of alts and guildmates to help them in whatever situation they face. In that case, there is nothing to even talk about, because it doesn't matter what they play. They could have a group of four Rogues, and as soon as they ran into some difficulty, they could swap in literally any other configuration of classes. The entire question then becomes moot.

You are not the ultimate authority on this thread, and thus have no power to assume such restrictions. This is just your opinion on the matter. OP has replied to this thread multiple times, and hasn't banned pocket characters yet.

A group of four individual players with four primary characters that are casters/priests are the only restrictions thus far. These are the limitations, which I have been working in. The four primary characters get most of the loot, and are leveled to 60 with full spellbooks. This is not the case with pocket characters.

Your idea that pocket characters are the same as regular characters is nonsense. Pocket characters are not usually level 60 raid geared toons with full spell books. They are hastily leveled non 60 characters that are minimally geared to supply the group with some necessities when the occasion is called for. Reses, CHing, and CoTHs should be rarely needed, which is why it is a waste to level a Mage to 60 just for the occasional CoTH. It's easier to stop at level 55 and just move the Mage around occasionally. The Cleric only needs to be level 49 to have access to 90% Res and CH. You don't need to get them an epic for the extra 6% res. A group of four casters shouldn't be dying often.

If someone wants to powergame by creating the best group they can, there is no reason to assume they cannot have pocket characters. Plenty of people do it already.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Otherwise there are no limitations, and we should then assume that all four players in the theoretical group have access to full accounts of alts and guildmates to help them in whatever situation they face. In that case, there is nothing to even talk about, because it doesn't matter what they play.

I am going to dismantle this argument more directly. It is easy to disprove, and I am not sure why people keep trying to make it.

There are four different character types the community generally agrees upon. They are categorized differently because they operate differently:

1. Main Characters - These are the characters you play the most, and invest the most resources into. You don't normally share your account information for Main Characters.

2. Alternate Characters - These are the characters you play less often, but still pour resources into. These can become Main Characters one day if you like them enough. You don't normally share your account information for Alternate Characters.

3. Mules - These are low level characters which store items that your Main and Alternate Characters cannot hold. You don't normally share your account information for Mules.

4. Pocket Characters - These characters are specifically designed to be geared and leveled as minimally as possible, so they can provide utility when needed. You DO share the account information for Pocket Characters, so they can res your character for example. This is due to the restriction of being unable to res yourself without another player's help for most classes. Because you share your Pocket Character's account information, you don't want to have a bunch of expensive items on a Pocket Character. You never know when people who have access to your account will steal or destroy stuff.

It's not accurate to try and claim Pocket Characters are somehow equivalent to Main/Alternate Characters, and thus the discussion becomes moot when you include them. They are not the same. The spirit of the discussion involves four individual players and four Main/Alt Characters that are casters/priests. If these four individual players have Mules and/or Pocket Characters, this does not invalidate the four Main/Alt Characters they are playing most of the time. People do have a Main Character Cleric and a Pocket Cleric if they want to keep their Main Character Cleric's account information private, but still want a Pocket Cleric around to res their other characters.

[Vexenu]

Everyone: Four characters

DSM: Let me tell you why four characters does not actually mean "four characters"

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Everyone: Four characters

DSM: Let me tell you why four characters does not actually mean "four characters"

You just need to read this post:

https://project1999.com/forums/showp...postcount=4706

It rebuts your argument completely. We do no say this group isn't allowed mules to store their items lol. The same thing applies to pocket characters, which are different from main/alternate characters.

[bcbrown]

This entire discussion is nothing but opinion, and Vexenu's opinion is as valid as anyone else's. You of course are free to go on advocating including pocket characters in your analysis, but it seems most people who have expressed an opinion on the matter are in favor of disregarding pocket characters.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

This entire discussion is nothing but opinion, and Vexenu's opinion is as valid as anyone else's. You of course are free to go on advocating including pocket characters in your analysis, but it seems most people who have expressed an opinion on the matter are in favor of disregarding pocket characters.

People are free to express their opinions. But they cannot claim "no pocket characters" is a hard requirement of the thread. This has been done in the thread to dismiss what I am saying.

Unlike them, I am not restricting their opinions. I am simply pointing out they are wrong when they say pocket characters are prohibited in this thread.

They are also wrong to equivocate Main/Alt Characters to Pocket Characters, as explained here https://project1999.com/forums/showp...postcount=4706

I also disagree with your premise that everything is opinion. We are dealing in facts too, and we cannot say facts of the game are opinions.

Someone can say a group of four clerics using rusty weapons to melee is the best group, because they like the playstyle. If they simply say it is their opinion, that is fine. If they make a factual claim that this group composition and rusty weapon strategy is factually the fastest leveling group possible, they have crossed from opinion into a factual claim. People can measure which groups compositions and strategies work the best to disprove this factual claim.