Why do some classes suck so much? Do you LOVE your class?

Coates · Post by **Coates** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 3:19 am

I'm just about 50 and need a twink now. Im not sure what route to go.

Chanters = useless
Necro = most useless class in the game
Summoners= 2nd most useless class in the game
Pallys = So useless they should delete
SK's = Why did they add this class?
Brigand - decent for raid mobs...but thats it.

Wow Sony needs to get there act together.

Just did the healer thing, and i think i would hate being a Guardian(zerkers are just stupid when you can be a Guardian- so thats not a option)

Bruisers and Dirges are the 2 best classes in the game by far. If you have a high level dirge in your group you will get exp twice as fast.

Bruisers do the most dps in the game by far. So i think i may be looking at one these.

I'm on fence and don't know what to do. Any high level Driges or Bruisers convince me P

The most efficient group would easily be:
Bruiser
Bruiser
Guardian
Warden
Dirge (playing power song - Warden never run out of heals - of course you could also put a cleric type here)
Ass

AS a fury i love it. I don't think there can be a "funner" class to play. Nukes, Regens, Heals, Buffs, De-buffs, turning people into lions etc, damage shields, cure all the diseases, sow, GROUP invis-so ubir, DOTS, AOE nukes and just so much more.
We can really change it up, its crazy. Im 99% of the time the only healer when there is a dirge present (always is, you must find one for max exp 45+)...we killed the "2nd hardest" mob in the game yesterday with 1 group...it was a +++ group *2 mob in perma we did with 6 of us. So ya, we can heal ok )

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:53 am

So are you basing your criteria on what's fun or how useful they are?

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:12 am

Generally at the endgame if you are getting wiped out due to your class being mediocre, there isn't much fun.

Funny, this is exactly what someone told you *cough, couhg* :cool6:

Just for the record, Coates, a Ranger does identical damage as an Ass but needs to know how to play the class. They also give you strong steady ranged damage if you need it which puts them a bit over the Ass in utility

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:19 am

My personal opinion, which has held true thru several games, is a class is what a player makes of it. A bad guardian is much worse than a good paladin. A good player can take a 'sucky' class and make it work in ways most people couldn't dream to duplicate.

You are right in a good guardian will outplay a good paladin every day of the week, however.

kaharthemad · Post by **kaharthemad** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:36 am

Not sure about fury. I play a Mytic. albeit atm he is only 23 but in any given situation I am main healer with cleric having no clue why he is in group. with wards going I can usually keep a group alive alot longer on harder hitting mobs. Bear form does some good consistant dmg, and the dot line is fairly respectable.

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 7:48 am

A good driver in a pinto will still go half the speed of a bad driver in a Ferrari.

Why limit oneself?

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 7:55 am

Who says getting there the fastest is the best or funnest way?

mofish · Post by **mofish** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:29 am

That's kinda disturbing if those classes are actually useless. On the other hand, have a 23 bruiser, and they are rare, so glad to hear they are a good class at 50.

Cant decide which to take to 50, Guardian or Bruiser. My Guardian has a bit more style, seeing as he's an evil wood elf

And about the Dirge thing, what about Troubadors? Are they not as useful in a group?

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:43 am

Martrae wrote:Who says getting there the fastest is the best or funnest way?

Classes are vehicles for groups in EQ2 to perform things. There is no miscellaneous roleplaying goals, even though I wish they'd make things based around this more important.

A group is a team. A team is as good as the sum of its parts. This means if you have low damage people, bad tanks, and bad healers you will lose encounters, die in dungeons, and overall spend much of one's time in debt and not exploring or advancing through the world.

Guilds advance as your 'teams' complete quests which give more points and results based on how 'good' you are. Thus, the whole glory of EQ2 is based on your efficiency and balance of your group.

Now, if your goal is to do your own thing, and simply roleplay then that's fine. My goal is to explore content, to advance through the world, and to not spend my time in piss poor pickups, acquiring debt, or levelling at the speed of molasses.

I want a castle, I want to see things, I want to conquer. Accomplishing and winning to me is fun. Not going painfully slow and dying often due to the allure of playing a poorly setup group for whatever reason.

This also has no bearing with speed. In EQ, I levelled faster than people with twice my played time, simply because I was in better balanced groups, playing smarter.

horendus · Post by **horendus** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 8:44 am

I dunno about the rest of your list, but ShadowKnights do not suck. I can without a doubt out tank any tank class if they are poor at their class, and can stand toe-to-toe with any tank class that know how to play. I would say I have been MT in 90% of the groups I have been in and can solo orange solo mobs as well as solo blue group mobs and green ^^ group mobs.

It's not all about your AC and HP as a tank, it's also the way you use your abilities.

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:08 am

You are also level 25. Coates is talking about 40+.

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:13 am

It's not about roleplaying, it's about feel. You can be in the most luxurious car in the world and if you don't like the way it handles you won't like to drive it.

I do see your point, but I think you may be failing to see mine.

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:18 am

Please tell me what I'm not understanding.

I know some like to play classes due to what they seem to offer. I understand that, but my point is that poor groups are just like anything else poorly setup. They do not work well, despite having individuals who are playing what they personally think feels or sounds best to them.

Post by **Martrae** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:24 am

It's a challenge not to take the road everyone else takes, to work with odd combinations and STILL make it. I personally don't care if I'm in a 'perfect' group. To me it's more about enjoying what I'm doing and still accomplishing something.

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:30 am

You believe the person is more important than the group in adventuring.

I believe the group is more important than the one.

As long as it's not

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:35 am

ninja-fix

Darcler · Post by **Darcler** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:37 am

The way his coat if flowing, he looks a little chunky around the midsection.

Post by **Tossica** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:49 am

Tossica owns shit. I am only 23 but have generally been welcomed to groups and feel like I am kicking some ass at least. In groups where I can't AE, I feel crippled but in AE groups, I own shit. Massive DPS.

mofish · Post by **mofish** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:57 am

Another thing to remember about all this class balance stuff, is the game is what, 2 months old. There will be patches, adjustments, new strategies, count on it.

Im middle-of-the-road on this issue. I seriously doubt classes like enchanters are 'useless.' Even if mez isnt that powerful any longer, they have AE DD also. If a group killls at 90% of the rate of 'optimal' but everyone is competent, loves their characters and is having fun, is that really such a horrible thing?

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 9:58 am

Keep in mind the game is slated for 200 levels. Everything done so far is for the first 50, and is not really how things will be after the first expansion and upgrade.

Also, it is a Sony game and will go through massive gyrations.

mofish · Post by **mofish** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 10:00 am

Yeah, I look at 50 as only the first step. 50 will be 'omg you nub' in a year or so.

Coates · Post by **Coates** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 12:26 pm

200 levels, sheesh?

Ya, sorry just talking 40+. Anyone uder 35 is usefull since it doen't make a difference.

I know the few high level pallys,necro and sk's on my server solo 95% of the time.
Can be a group of 4 people and won't take them.....why take them when you can wait a few hours for a real class and get better exp?

All shammy are very decent also...you can essentially never go wrong with any priest class.

A lot of classes have to be fixed. Summoners aren't "that" bad. I parse my buddy at 45dp and his pet around 50dps.
Necro's, pallys and sk's aren't even welcome in my guild. Scary eh? They want to keep it with 30 people and don't want to waste any spots.

Troubadors are also decent....but if your going "bardish" then go Dirge since there so amazing.
They are "good" for sure, but dirges are so ubir. Its the only class to get nerfed so far.....they broke there dots. Too much kiting.

And yes Rangers and Ass's are typically the same. Nice to have either really. Especially for the J-boot run P.

Just a little opinion of a high level. Hopefully things can change because its stupid.

Who needs a chanters in EQ? nobody. Get a dirge for power song. Chanters are as useless as a SK.

kiral · Post by **kiral** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:12 pm

rofl.. necro and pally useless?

PS: brigand does more dmg then bruiser..

and a troubadour is better then a dirge. i have one of each, id know~

mofish · Post by **mofish** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:32 pm

See, I seriously like seeing people disagree on this shit. Means that there is more than one way to be successful at this game. Gogo EQ2

Post by **Lyion** » Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:50 pm

kiral wrote:rofl.. necro and pally useless?

PS: brigand does more dmg then bruiser..

and a troubadour is better then a dirge. i have one of each, id know~

Give us some levels and experience, please.

Coates is 43.