The Perfect Group
Primous
wizard.
xyn...@uswest.net wrote in message <3914d914...@news.uswest.net>...
>Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
>
>I think:
>
>Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
xyn...@uswest.net
Phil Morris
Phil Morris
"Phil Morris" <xt...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:%75R4.51984$fV.32...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Gladimir
Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
--
- Gladimir, Barbarian Shaman of Clan Blackwatch, Cazic-Thule
- Baphomet, Troll Warrior, Cazic-Thule
Visit Clan Blackwatch at http://www.clanblackwatch.com
n...@sa.net
warrior-tank
enchanter-quicken tank, stop trains, hand out clarity
cleric-heal, rezz
wizard-awesome fire power
paladin-tank and heal touch
bard-heal, clairity, etc
Sean
The best group of 6 in terms of powergaming:
1 magician ~ Expendable Pets, summon food, good damage
2 warrior ~ Meat Shields
1 cleric ~ Meat Shield Healer/resser
1 enchanter ~ crowd control, fear, clarity
1 druid ~ Evac, sow, snare, backup healer
--
Sean S. -:- ICQ: 1826323
Zap small files with Zap `Em - http://home.rochester.rr.com/zapem
Visit www.ZenSearch.com a 100% quality search engine
EQ Log Renamed: http://home.rochester.rr.com/zapem/eq
(Email: sunymoon <AT> GeoCities >DOT< com )
"I tell you, there's nothing we're afraid to nerf. :)" - Brad McQuaid;
Everquest Producer
xyn...@uswest.net wrote in message <3914d914...@news.uswest.net>...
Robert Jackson
weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals, and
respect the wishes of the other party members.
<xyn...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:3914d914...@news.uswest.net...
guess away
pull/tank, tank, buffs, buff/debuff, buff/debuff/stun/crowd control,
heals as needed and stuns. Zero downtime, and mobs die quickly.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Best group for non-pvp combat:
|
|Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
Horrible, horrible. You'll have nothing but downtime.
Replace the second Warrior and the Paladin with melee damage-dealers.
These can be Rogues, Monks, or pet users (Magicians, Necromancers only here).
I prefer the latter -- pets don't need healing, they maintain standoff and get
you 2 soldiers for the price of one.
Replace the Ranger with a Druid. No sense in using the inferior version.
Replace the Cleric with an Enchanter. Adds way more value to the group.
Pre-Kunark you don't need Clerics if you're leaving the fighters home. This
does not seem to be true post-Kunark but at least as far as I'm concerned the
jury is still out.
Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture Fletcher(E'ci) dfra...@email.com
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"You bitch about the present and blame it on the past/I'd like to find your
Inner Child and kick its little ass!" -- D. Henley & G. Fry, "Get Over It"
Billy Shields
: Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
: I think:
: Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
Enchanter
Shaman
Magician
Warrior
1 tank
1 tank or necro
John M Clancy
>
> I think:
>
> Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
1 Druid Buffs, healing, DoTs, Sow, nukes, snare, Evac, teleports, Damage shields
2 Enchanter Clarity, Crowd control, nukes
3 Cleric Buffs, healing, Rezzes, undead nukes
4 Mage Pet Tank, Damage shields, summoned items
5 Necro Pet Tank, DoTs
6 Shaman Buffs, healing, DoTs, Sow
Mr. Ken Faced
High Elf Cleric (Healing)
Half Elf Bard (all-purpose)
Ogre Warrior (tank)
Wood Elf Druid (travel, light healing, etc.)
Last spot is optional.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
wrote:
|Six people who are all good communicators, understand their strengths and
|weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals, and
|respect the wishes of the other party members.
See, here's the problem with that:
It's bullshit.
Yes, six good players will probably outperform six bad ones, regardless of
exact group makeup. But a non-optimized group of six good players will be
hard-pressed to match an optimized group of six mediocre players.
Of course, ceteris paribus, an optimized group will blow a non-optimized
one out of the water entirely.
To use an extreme example: a group of six Rangers would find it nearly
impossible to match the performance of almost any group constructed with a
more balanced representation of classes, regardless of how well they played.
In a post-30 environment, I doubt they would even be able to function in the
first place. They could be the six best EQ players in existence, and it
wouldn't matter.
This is just another manifestation of the recurring cultural myth that the
human will is an irresistable force. Well, no. Moreso in games than in real
life, it's all about the numbers. Strategies have expected outcomes, and no
matter how hard you push you can't make a bad strategy transcend its
limitations.
Gladimir
We were chewing up mobs faster than they could spawn, which was rare for the
area we were in. I'm not saying that other groups won't work well, but this
is a VERY formidable group indeed.
--
- Gladimir, Barbarian Shaman of Clan Blackwatch, Cazic-Thule
- Baphomet, Troll Warrior, Cazic-Thule
Visit Clan Blackwatch at http://www.clanblackwatch.com
"Dennis Francis Heffernan" <dfra...@email.com> wrote in message
news:4b0ahsk5ve5nd40ed...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 07 May 2000 03:16:21 GMT, "Gladimir" <cfen...@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
> |Best group for non-pvp combat:
> |
> |Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
>
> Horrible, horrible. You'll have nothing but downtime.
>
> Replace the second Warrior and the Paladin with melee damage-dealers.
> These can be Rogues, Monks, or pet users (Magicians, Necromancers only
here).
> I prefer the latter -- pets don't need healing, they maintain standoff and
get
> you 2 soldiers for the price of one.
>
> Replace the Ranger with a Druid. No sense in using the inferior version.
>
> Replace the Cleric with an Enchanter. Adds way more value to the group.
> Pre-Kunark you don't need Clerics if you're leaving the fighters home.
This
> does not seem to be true post-Kunark but at least as far as I'm concerned
the
> jury is still out.
>
>
hughes
nope.
Rogue, monk , enchanter, shaman , magician(or necro), druid
Good groups dont need anyone to take massive dammage. They need people who
can avoid all dammage while doing large amounts.
Rogue (best melee dammage source in the game)
monk ( best puller in the game 2nd best melee source, may change with kunark
weapons though)
enchanter (increases everyone elses effectiveness 50%, crowd control)
shaman (phenomenal dots, pet , makes each mob a 3rd as strong as normal)
pet caster (pet 3rd best source of melee dammage , extra abilities )
druid (non emergency healer, ok dot , evac in single party groups, semi
usefull extra abilities)
SilverKelt
but how you use it, you can have a warrior who sux at his job, or a druid
who wont heal (it happens) etc etc..., best group is those who dont offend
someone by being a jerk and know how to keep each other alive.
Robert Jackson wrote in message ...
>Six people who are all good communicators, understand their strengths and
>weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals, and
>respect the wishes of the other party members.
>
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Sorry Dennis, this is a group I was actually in and there was no downtime.
Then you were fighting way under your capacity.
Robert Coleman
varies dramatically depending on what you're fighting. I'm a cleric, so
naturally I would say that a cleric should be in every group. Most times
they come in handy, but in some situations they just aren't needed. It
depends on what you're fighting.
However, if you enjoy taking risks and fighting hard stuff when you
don't know whether you'll live or not, like I do, all I care is that the
group has me (the cleric), a monk or warrior (preferably warrior), and an
enchanter. Bards are nice, but don't have the nice crowd controlling
abilities that enchanters do. Also, one pure caster is generally nice for
some DDs and/or DoTs.
Robert Coleman
----------------------------------------
Gaeodar
16th Level Human Wizard - Retired
Veeshan Server
Zarul
5th Level Iksar Shaman
Artanic
5th Level Wood Elf Bard
Sinvin Heartfang
34th Level Dark Elf Cleric
E'ci Server
Adar
guess away <n...@here.org> wrote in message
news:391500e7...@news.uswest.net...
> Monk, warrior, bard, shaman, enchanter, cleric.
>
> pull/tank, tank, buffs, buff/debuff, buff/debuff/stun/crowd control,
> heals as needed and stuns. Zero downtime, and mobs die quickly.
>
That's about what I would have as well. Possibly replace the warrior with a
fatty SK, as this group is missing snare, but only hypothetically. If we're
talking about a level 1 and up thing, playing a fatty SK would be the most
frustrating thing you could do to yourself.
Brudo (E'ci)
Loredaeron (E'ci)
Darren Terry
"hughes" <hugh...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:5lcR4.58$w13...@news4.mco...
Gladimir
blue to red to me at 39 (or maybe 38). The cleric rarely had to heal, and I
never cast heal once. The cleric would uses stun, and I would throw in an
occasionally Togors; but that was the only offensive spell I used. As I
have discovered with my troll warrior, when damage is not dependant on mana;
the killing can continue non-stop as long as the tanks are alive.
--
- Gladimir, Barbarian Shaman of Clan Blackwatch, Cazic-Thule
- Baphomet, Troll Warrior, Cazic-Thule
Visit Clan Blackwatch at http://www.clanblackwatch.com
"Dennis Francis Heffernan" <dfra...@email.com> wrote in message
news:1v6bhsgbg1uq5rbm3...@4ax.com...
Jon
The best group I was ever in consisted of 2 warriors, 2 rogues, ranger and
shaman. We were all mid to low 30's at the time camping the Avatar of Fear
in Cazic. With this group, I have never seen the AoF die so fast. With all
the fighters fully buffed and quickened, the AoF didnt know who to hit, and
the battle spam flooded the screen. The shaman never even had to cast a
heal.
"Gladimir" <cfen...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:0liR4.5050$Y4.3...@typhoon2.san.rr.com...
George Ruof
>Whan did rogue become the Best melee damage source in the game?
In a group where they can backstab often they usually are the highest
melee damage source,
--
George Ruof
gr...@pacificnet.net
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|Gladimir is right on the money.
|The best group I was ever in consisted of 2 warriors, 2 rogues, ranger and
|shaman. We were all mid to low 30's at the time camping the Avatar of Fear
|in Cazic. With this group, I have never seen the AoF die so fast. With all
|the fighters fully buffed and quickened, the AoF didnt know who to hit, and
|the battle spam flooded the screen. The shaman never even had to cast a
|heal.
Wow, you killed...
...one mob.
That group can not sustain those fighters.
Gladimir
group brings to the table because of its mana efficiency. Just last night,
I was hunting Raptors and Vicious Raptors in Timorous Deep. The group began
with a 51 warrior, a 51 Magician, a 47 Cleric, and me (40 Shaman). We had
no downtime, there were only a few moments where the warrior had to wait for
medding. After awhile, the Cleric made level 48 and the warrior camped for
the night. The 3 remaining decided to make a go at it ourselves. The
downtime after every fight was pathetic. That's the difference one tank can
make to a caster, now multiply that benefit times 4 or 5.
--
- Gladimir, Barbarian Shaman of Clan Blackwatch, Cazic-Thule
- Baphomet, Troll Warrior, Cazic-Thule
Visit Clan Blackwatch at http://www.clanblackwatch.com
"Jon" <bl...@blah.blah> wrote in message
news:IPiR4.37731$g4.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Gladimir is right on the money.
> The best group I was ever in consisted of 2 warriors, 2 rogues, ranger and
> shaman. We were all mid to low 30's at the time camping the Avatar of
Fear
> in Cazic. With this group, I have never seen the AoF die so fast. With
all
> the fighters fully buffed and quickened, the AoF didnt know who to hit,
and
> the battle spam flooded the screen. The shaman never even had to cast a
> heal.
>
>
> "Gladimir" <cfen...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:0liR4.5050$Y4.3...@typhoon2.san.rr.com...
> > We were fighting in Lower Guk and getting 1 to 4 mobs at a time; they
> conned
> > blue to red to me at 39 (or maybe 38). The cleric rarely had to heal,
and
> I
> > never cast heal once. The cleric would uses stun, and I would throw in
an
> > occasionally Togors; but that was the only offensive spell I used. As I
> > have discovered with my troll warrior, when damage is not dependant on
> mana;
> > the killing can continue non-stop as long as the tanks are alive.
> >
> > --
> >
> > - Gladimir, Barbarian Shaman of Clan Blackwatch, Cazic-Thule
> > - Baphomet, Troll Warrior, Cazic-Thule
> > Visit Clan Blackwatch at http://www.clanblackwatch.com
> >
> > "Dennis Francis Heffernan" <dfra...@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:1v6bhsgbg1uq5rbm3...@4ax.com...
> > > On Sun, 07 May 2000 08:55:48 GMT, "Gladimir" <cfen...@san.rr.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > |Sorry Dennis, this is a group I was actually in and there was no
> > downtime.
> > >
> > > Then you were fighting way under your capacity.
> > >
Pat Cole
>have discovered with my troll warrior, when damage is not dependant on mana;
>the killing can continue non-stop as long as the tanks are alive.
This is why everyone should love tanks. I can cast 1 or 2 DS, sit, and med
while monsters die. Stand at 1/2 life and snare, sit again :)
Pat
Knot: 34 Druid Lanys T'vyl
Who LOVES to group with fighters, and whose ideal group is me, bard, enchanter,
and 3 fighters of any sort
Richard G.
(2) Barbarian Warriors (or Troll if you want better vision.)
Dwarven Cleric
Erudite Wizard (Or Dark Elf if you want good vision)
High-Elven Enchanter (Dark-Elves and Erudites make good chanters too)
Dark-Elven Necromancer
The only thing this group is missing is SoW and other quick-movement
abilities. However, you don't really need those to be a successful group.
Notice I have no druids in my roundup. I still maintain that druids are
utterly worthless for groups -- especialy a 6-member group such as this.
Yes, I know they're good at soloing...but kiting takes too long and levels
you too slowly.
- Grick
Morgan
>
> Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
>
> I think:
>
> Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
I think it depends heavily on what you mean by perfect. To me, a
perfect group is one that can go just about anywhere, prevail in
any normal situation, and survive most abnormal situations. This
excludes groups that are based around some degenerate tactic like
kiting or ping-pong nuking. Of course, the most important thing
is to have six players who are intelligent and considerate and who
enjoy playing their characters.
That said, here is my pick ...
Start with:
Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter
Then choose between Druid or Wizard for evacs and to move the group
to new hunting grounds. If you take a Wizard, you will also want a
Shaman as your second healer.
Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter, Druid
Add two from: Any tank, Necromancer, Magician, Shaman
(but don't take both Necromancer and Shaman - DoTs don't stack)
Warrior, Cleric, Enchanter, Wizard, Shaman
Add one from: Any tank, Magician
Tank = Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Shadowknight, Rogue, Monk
I would never place a Bard in an optimal group because you can't
turn off the damn sparkles. I don't mind it once in a while, but
couldn't take it on a regular basis.
You can limp along without a Cleric, but it would not be optimal.
Tanks can survive with regen and wimpy heals, but expect to lose
your casters a lot.
Similarly, you can replace the Warrior with some other tank, but
they will die more often. Pets are no substitute for real tanks.
If efficient leveling is part of your criteria, then omit all
hybrids as well as Trolls and Ogres from the list. Personally, I
would not consider experience penalties when building a group for
long term play.
--
Morgan
(crossposting all posts to rec.games.computer.everquest)
Richard G.
"Robert Coleman" <cole...@home.com> wrote in message
news:AshR4.137391$8S2.1...@news1.rdc1.tn.home.com...
> Everyone here seems to be missing the point that the perfect group
> varies dramatically depending on what you're fighting.
Yes, I have to agree with this. Although druids are useless to a
well-balanced group, I won't deny their ability to harmony/snare works very
well in a small group that can handle only one mob at a time. There were
many orc/ghoul spawn points that my druid friend and I (a warrior) were very
successful at camping because of this very combination of spell abilities.
Even so, here's the perfect balanced group in almost all situations...
(2) Warriors (very important that the tanks know how and when to taunt
mob's off the casters.)
Cleric
Enchanter
Wizard
Necromancer (Helps to think of the necro pet as a very highly mana efficient
DoT spell.)
I defined this group based upon the two parameters that constitue a "perfect
balanced group":
1) Ability to constantly fight tough yellow and easy red mob's. This of
course assumes you're in a zone which supports lot's of yellow/red mob's
spawning quickly.
2) Very little downtime for eveyone while achieving goal #1
I think the question of "the most optimized group" is more easily answered
if we could all figure out just what exactly the definition of an effective
group is? I'm sure the biggest element in the definition would be to
maintain minimal downtime, but what else? Is my first parameter more
important than the second? Vice Versa?
- Grick
SwEeTnEsS
Richard G. <nos...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pBlR4.5777$Lx.7...@news-west.usenetserver.com...
> oh this is easy...
>
> (2) Barbarian Warriors (or Troll if you want better vision.)
> Dwarven Cleric
> Erudite Wizard (Or Dark Elf if you want good vision)
> High-Elven Enchanter (Dark-Elves and Erudites make good chanters too)
> Dark-Elven Necromancer
>
> The only thing this group is missing is SoW and other quick-movement
> abilities. However, you don't really need those to be a successful group.
> Notice I have no druids in my roundup. I still maintain that druids are
> utterly worthless for groups -- especialy a 6-member group such as this.
> Yes, I know they're good at soloing...but kiting takes too long and levels
> you too slowly.
>
I think your a bit off when saying kiting levels druids too slowly. I had a
friend that just started the game when I was already in my 30s. As druids
level the fastest I told him to start one, sent him to a site to learn about
kiting and whatnot, and 21 days played later he was 50. Maybe its just me,
but I think kiting is an incredibly fast way to level. I know this was a bit
off topic, but I thought I'd point it out to you.
-Zayto
Wyen
Rogue, Rogue, Ranger, Cleric, Enchanter, and Wizzie
The rogues ping-pong the mob and take equal damage. Ranger snares and
harmony pulls. Cleric, well heals. Enchanter for crowd-control and clarity.
Wizzie nukes. And since Rogues have super-taunt (backstab) no worries when a
mob jumps on the caster!
<xyn...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:3914d914...@news.uswest.net...
Chung
Billy Shields
: The perfect group is:
: Rogue, Rogue, Ranger, Cleric, Enchanter, and Wizzie
: The rogues ping-pong the mob and take equal damage. Ranger snares and
: harmony pulls. Cleric, well heals. Enchanter for crowd-control and clarity.
: Wizzie nukes. And since Rogues have super-taunt (backstab) no worries when a
: mob jumps on the caster!
I almost took this group seriously until I say 'wizard'. Replace
the cleric/wizard with magician/shaman and the group improves by
an order of magnitude.
: <xyn...@uswest.net> wrote in message
John M Clancy
> Druid can pull well in outdoor, but who pull inside dungeons?
The group is so good they can break a room and hold it.
No need to pull.
guess away
>>
>> pull/tank, tank, buffs, buff/debuff, buff/debuff/stun/crowd control,
>> heals as needed and stuns. Zero downtime, and mobs die quickly.
>
>That's about what I would have as well. Possibly replace the warrior with a
>fatty SK, as this group is missing snare, but only hypothetically. If we're
>talking about a level 1 and up thing, playing a fatty SK would be the most
>frustrating thing you could do to yourself.
Bards have snare. :)
Chung
So, ENC is most welcome in any group.
Billy Shields
: All reply have a common interest, is the Enchanter!
: So, ENC is most welcome in any group.
Yep, Verant have given enchanters almost a complete monopoly on
crucial abilities like crowd control. On top of that they have
clarity, the best speed buffs and speed debuffs. Verant has
designed it (for some reason) so you *need* an enchanter and
no other class will do so thats what you get.
Chung
I remember my guild hunting in Mistmore. Team 1 mainly from 46 to 50.
Team 2 is 30 to 45. When we go into the Music hall, someone train
more than 10+ Mobs onto us. Team 1 cleric LD, I (team 2 cleric) try
my best to heal all, but our 31 ENC and 30 Rouge dead. I think I will
die soon. Luckly my team have a 30 wizard casted EVAC. And then, I
found only Team 1 ENC(50) can flee to zone. He also pull all corpse
to zone for us to res!
No one can run to zone under 10+ Mobs attack, but ENC can!
So, Why ppl don't play ENC? I found Druid, NEC and magician is the
most in my server. But ENC and cleric always lack!
Chung
-------------------------------------
Alasdair Allan
> >Best group for non-pvp combat:
> >
> >Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
>
> NO NO
> warrior-tank
> enchanter-quicken tank, stop trains, hand out clarity
> cleric-heal, rezz
> wizard-awesome fire power
> [...]
Umm, that's a joke, right?
--
Alasdair Allan, Ibrox, Glasgow |England - Country where Marx developed
x-st...@null.net | the basis of Communism
X-Static's Rangers Webzine |Scotland - Country where Smith developed
http://www.x-static.demon.co.uk/ | the basis of Capitalism
Alasdair Allan
> Whan did rogue become the Best melee damage source in the game?
Clueful players have always known this.
It is only the most fuckwitted of sheep that doesn't actively pursue Rogues
for their group.
Alasdair Allan
> oh this is easy...
And yet you get it *so* wrong.
> (2) Barbarian Warriors (or Troll if you want better vision.)
> Dwarven Cleric
> Erudite Wizard (Or Dark Elf if you want good vision)
Wizards are shite.
> High-Elven Enchanter (Dark-Elves and Erudites make good chanters too)
> Dark-Elven Necromancer
>
> The only thing this group is missing is SoW and other quick-movement
> abilities.
Err, and Damage Shields. And Feign Death for pulling.
And the entire Insects line, probably the strongest single spell line in the
game, including the mez series.
> However, you don't really need those to be a successful group.
You need the three things listed above.
> Notice I have no druids in my roundup. I still maintain that druids are
> utterly worthless for groups -- especialy a 6-member group such as this.
Druids are excellent in the pre-50 game. Post 50 you need that Cleric, so
the Druid is the spot you need to lose to avoid losing tanks.
Alasdair Allan
> Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
>
> I think:
>
> Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
Newbie.
Well, firstly, Kunark has dramatically changed the requirement and in
effect, by requiring inefficient classes, they have slowed levelling
dramatically. This is a huge stealth nerf, I'll explain.
Pre-50.
The pre-50 group is still unchanged :-
Enchanter
Shaman
Druid
Magician/Necro/Rogue
Magician/Necro/Rogue
Monk (or other tank if feign not required).
This is the archetype XP group. It isn't possible to get xp faster unless
you have a *very* conrolled situation where it is trivial to get less than 2
mobs every time and pull non-stop. In those situations, dump the Chanter
and Druid for another couple of Magician/Necro/Rogues.
However, there is a huge change in Kunark. It basically *requires* a Cleric
because death *hurts*. You lose (as a percentage of the exp bar) the same
amount of experience you do in a non-hell level, yet they are the worst hell
levels yet encountered.
There is also quite a marked change in the Damage Tables for all classes
which benefits melee greatly. In all honesty I believe this now gives a
clear advantage to the Rogue over the pet handlers.
The new Rogue damage tables appear to offer a noticeable improvement even at
level 51 (check their new BS levels). Whereas the other melee classes
aren't showing the same sort of improvement unless they get an uber-weapon
like hte Poly axe. And the uber-weapons stopped dropping a week ago last
Friday.
Finally, feign pulling is pretty much required now if you want to get into
the depths of dungeons. Even with the best Shaman, you are looking at 5 to
8 seconds per Turgur and once you get above 3 mobs it is *very* easy to lose
track of what is Turgured and what still needs slowed. Given that a single
Enchanter can crumple easily with the new mob damage bonuses (Kunark dungeon
mobs have much higher damage bonuses than on the Mainland), you don't want
to be reliant on Enchanters.
Overall this means that my ideal group is now ;-
Enchanter
Shaman
Cleric
Rogue
Rogue
Monk
Ideally you would want a non-active guild Cleric to be on call to do rezzes
and be able to run with a Druid but that isn't practical most of the time,
for most people.
Ben wilson
>Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
>
>I think:
>
>Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
erm... perfect group to do what???
My question is not quite as flippant as it might seem.
Killing a few tough mobs, or an endless stream of blues?
Safe pulling or the chance of too many?
Inside or outside?
Competing for spawns or empty zone?
TBH, the perfect group is one which is composed of great players, who
know exactly what their class excels at. I really doubt that the
composition of the 12 man fear break in E'Ci will be brought up in this
thread as 'ideal' for example, but it was the bet for that situation.
Also, the best group is the one /shouting for a tank as I enter the zone
looking for a group...
--
Demorgoth Demonia
Ogre Warrior
E'ci
sighup
need crowd control.
My point is that there is no ultimate perfect group. Some groups are better
fitted for some situations that others.
Also, as someone else pointed out, I would rather play with 6 good players
who knows their own strengths and weaknesses as well as the other classes
than a fully "optimized" group. Of course extremes such as 6 bards etc. will
be missing out.
Regards Sighup
--
Remove nospam. to reply via E-mail
<xyn...@uswest.net> wrote in message
news:3914d914...@news.uswest.net...
Matthew Mc Clement
>
> Wyen <gks...@hotmai.com> wrote:
> : The perfect group is:
>
> : Rogue, Rogue, Ranger, Cleric, Enchanter, and Wizzie
>
> : The rogues ping-pong the mob and take equal damage. Ranger snares and
> : harmony pulls. Cleric, well heals. Enchanter for crowd-control and clarity.
> : Wizzie nukes. And since Rogues have super-taunt (backstab) no worries when a
> : mob jumps on the caster!
>
> I almost took this group seriously until I say 'wizard'. Replace
> the cleric/wizard with magician/shaman and the group improves by
> an order of magnitude.
I'd also swap out the ranger for a warrior or SK. Snare shouldn't be too much of
a problem if you had just the warrior and the rogues where wielding SBD's.
However, if you want a more reliable snare, the SK will do, although you will
give up some damage output for it. A ranger would be fine until the late 40's,
but after that, because the main tank will be the focus of the mob(rogues will
be using evade) you need as much AC as you can get.
Matt
Edam
Billy Shields <ran...@opera.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:39165e47$0$8...@echo-01.iinet.net.au...
> Chung <kc...@hk.gin.net> wrote:
> : All reply have a common interest, is the Enchanter!
> : So, ENC is most welcome in any group.
>
> crucial abilities like crowd control. On top of that they have
> clarity, the best speed buffs and speed debuffs. Verant has
> designed it (for some reason) so you *need* an enchanter and
> no other class will do so thats what you get.
>
Shamans get the best speed debuffs.
And yes verant pretty much force Enchanters to group after 50. Although
saying that almost every class's spell list after 50 looks awful with the
exception of Necros, when you look at the necro spell list you cant help
thinking Wow.
Edam
CiscoBob
>Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
>
>I think:
>
>Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
I haven't read everyones post so i really don't know if anyone stated
this:
3 wizards
one enchanter
one puller, Paladin, ranger (healer light)
last person in group can either be another wiz or mage
or the addition of another enchanter.
Senerio puller pulls 4-7 mobs to the enchanter who does
area effect stuns while the wizards cast area effect super nova
spells. everything dies in under 30 secs pal or ranger heals up self
and or casters, rinse and repeat. I've seen this work well in Karnors
Castle with gaurdians sents skells named etc. The most they got I
think was 9 mobs. Their downtime didn't seem to be bad either as they
actually were going after more while my group of two just finished of
one mob after they were done and they pull 3 more trains while we were
ready for the 2nd pull. 2 days of this and they went from 51 to 54.
Mekron
Thorncoat, Group Regen and Pack Wolf (or whatever the group wolf form spell
is), they also heal pretty well and can DoT/Snare/Nuke when neccesary.
Anyone that thinks a druid is all about kiting are either at the level where
they enviously watch Druids kiting in SK whilst they sit about waiting for
the next Aviak or they've never grouped with a 50+ druid. I play a paladin
btw so aren't exactly biased :p
Richard G. <nos...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:pBlR4.5777$Lx.7...@news-west.usenetserver.com...
> oh this is easy...
>
> (2) Barbarian Warriors (or Troll if you want better vision.)
> Dwarven Cleric
> Erudite Wizard (Or Dark Elf if you want good vision)
> High-Elven Enchanter (Dark-Elves and Erudites make good chanters too)
> Dark-Elven Necromancer
>
> The only thing this group is missing is SoW and other quick-movement
> abilities. However, you don't really need those to be a successful group.
> Notice I have no druids in my roundup. I still maintain that druids are
> utterly worthless for groups -- especialy a 6-member group such as this.
> Yes, I know they're good at soloing...but kiting takes too long and levels
> you too slowly.
>
> - Grick
>
> <xyn...@uswest.net> wrote in message
> news:3914d914...@news.uswest.net...
Mekron
paladin (me), 51 rogue, 51 shaman, 50 shaman, 51 druid and a 51 bard. Now
seems a pretty good group at first glance but it was the WORST group I've
ever been in. Why? Well being the main tank I figured healing wouldn't be an
issue but these chumps were so busy DoTing, having Togor/Turgur battles
(yeah overwriting each's others spells) and nuking that once I had to Lay
Hands on myself when fighting 2 blue mobs and the second time we had 3 mobs
I had to run for zone - I just told them fuck this and camped. Also during
multi-mob pulls the bard would charm one and I'd tried to pull a mob or two
off and root them away - but as soon as I switched targets then everyone
else seemed to. Grrr.
Robert Jackson <rjac...@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:nS6R4.13252$v85....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Six people who are all good communicators, understand their strengths and
> weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals,
and
> respect the wishes of the other party members.
Sergey Dashevskiy
> Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
>
> I think:
>
> Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
Just pretty much any 6 people that know what they are doing. Preferably
at least one healer and at least one tank
>
--
Vedun, 30th tank mage
Xirin, 31st retired druid
Xirinia Gusl'ar, 42nd tanking bard of Povar, guildless
Run fast, die often, leave a well dressed corpse.
Sergey Dashevskiy
says...
> Whan did rogue become the Best melee damage source in the game?
I believe at level 10, when they get backstab. The level 51 rogue I
group with regularly deals out more damage than a wizard, per hour.
About 3 times more
> "hughes" <hugh...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:5lcR4.58$w13...@news4.mco...
> > > Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
> >
> > nope.
> >
> > Rogue, monk , enchanter, shaman , magician(or necro), druid
> >
> > Good groups dont need anyone to take massive dammage. They need people who
> > can avoid all dammage while doing large amounts.
> >
> > Rogue (best melee dammage source in the game)
> > monk ( best puller in the game 2nd best melee source, may change with
> kunark
> > weapons though)
> > enchanter (increases everyone elses effectiveness 50%, crowd control)
> > shaman (phenomenal dots, pet , makes each mob a 3rd as strong as normal)
> > pet caster (pet 3rd best source of melee dammage , extra abilities )
> > druid (non emergency healer, ok dot , evac in single party groups, semi
> > usefull extra abilities)
Sergey Dashevskiy
dfra...@email.com says...
> On Sun, 07 May 2000 03:16:21 GMT, "Gladimir" <cfen...@san.rr.com> wrote:
>
> |Best group for non-pvp combat:
> |
>
Actually I was recently in a group like that (there was a bard instead
of cleric). We had no downtime. All the healing was done by the paladin
while the ranger was pulling.
>
> Replace the second Warrior and the Paladin with melee damage-dealers.
> These can be Rogues, Monks, or pet users (Magicians, Necromancers only here).
> I prefer the latter -- pets don't need healing, they maintain standoff and get
> you 2 soldiers for the price of one.
>
> Replace the Ranger with a Druid. No sense in using the inferior version.
Ranger snares, cleric fears, 4 tanks and shaman pet are beating it up.
Where's downtime?
>
> Replace the Cleric with an Enchanter. Adds way more value to the group.
> Pre-Kunark you don't need Clerics if you're leaving the fighters home. This
> does not seem to be true post-Kunark but at least as far as I'm concerned the
> jury is still out.
In most outdoor areas of Kunark where I hunted pre-50 mobs, not only
cleric was not needed, but any heals were needed very rarely
>
>
> Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture Fletcher(E'ci) dfra...@email.com
> Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
> "You bitch about the present and blame it on the past/I'd like to find your
> Inner Child and kick its little ass!" -- D. Henley & G. Fry, "Get Over It"
Sergey Dashevskiy
dfra...@email.com says...
> On Sun, 07 May 2000 05:07:31 GMT, "Robert Jackson" <rjac...@bigpond.net.au>
> wrote:
>
> |Six people who are all good communicators, understand their strengths and
> |weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals, and
> |respect the wishes of the other party members.
>
>
> It's bullshit.
>
> Yes, six good players will probably outperform six bad ones, regardless of
> exact group makeup. But a non-optimized group of six good players will be
> hard-pressed to match an optimized group of six mediocre players.
It depends on a setting. You are correct, if you are choosing a group
for a specific place. If you have a group of people that know what they
are doing, but aren't necessarily balanced, they can choose a place
where their group will be efficient. I went through two levels in a
group with enchanter and ranger (I was bard). We had no combat healing,
no good tanks, and we were better than fine. Killing spectres in stacks
of 5-7, with less than 2 minute downtime after the fight (I mean 7
spectre fight, not one spectre)
>
> Of course, ceteris paribus, an optimized group will blow a non-optimized
> one out of the water entirely.
Absolutely. Groups like that happen once in a lifetime though
>
> To use an extreme example: a group of six Rangers would find it nearly
> impossible to match the performance of almost any group constructed with a
> more balanced representation of classes, regardless of how well they played.
> In a post-30 environment, I doubt they would even be able to function in the
> first place. They could be the six best EQ players in existence, and it
> wouldn't matter.
>
> This is just another manifestation of the recurring cultural myth that the
> human will is an irresistable force. Well, no. Moreso in games than in real
> life, it's all about the numbers. Strategies have expected outcomes, and no
> matter how hard you push you can't make a bad strategy transcend its
> limitations.
Alasdair Allan
> >
> >I think:
> >
> >Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
>
>
> this:
>
> 3 wizards
> one enchanter
> one puller, Paladin, ranger (healer light)
>
> last person in group can either be another wiz or mage
> or the addition of another enchanter.
>
> Senerio puller pulls 4-7 mobs to the enchanter who does
> area effect stuns while the wizards cast area effect super nova
> spells.
The problem with this "strategy", is that mobs resisting the Enchanter Stuns
take *seconds* to walk through the entire group.
Add to that the fact that without the complete group, they can't fight and
it is a pretty non-sensical suggestion.
Mason Barge
"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me
some coffee."
- Abraham Lincoln
Mason Barge
>
>Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
>
Not perfect. You are underpowered on offense and have insufficient flexibility
and NO crowd control.
Mason Barge
>|Six people who are all good communicators, understand their strengths and
>|weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals, and
>|respect the wishes of the other party members.
>
> See, here's the problem with that:
>
> It's bullshit.
>
> Yes, six good players will probably outperform six bad ones, regardless
of
He's making a point and you're missing it. Although your criticism is
certainly correct from one, highly theoretical, viewpoint.
I have had a few groups where I REALLY liked the other players and they were
both excellent in skills, and fun to be with. This is perfect, IMHO, as long
as there is some sort of class balance. Enough healing, enough tanking, enough
offense.
Mason Barge
dungeons.
And the answer is:
Warrior
Cleric
Enchanter
Druid
Mage
Necro
(The highly artificial nature of this theoretical exercise can be seen by my
omission of two of the best and most versitile grouping classes, shaman and
bard.)
Warrior - I will always start a group with a warrior. You MUST have the
combination maximum AC and taunt.
Cleric - It is agony not to include one of the best and most versitile classes
(shaman). But I want the rezzes, the undisputed best healing, and the plate
capability.
Enchanter. You MUST have crowd control and clarity at higher levels, and now
enchanter has some of each at an early stage.
Druid. You need a backup healer and, again, although it grieves me to omit
shaman, this is an artificial "best" group and I am going to want snare,
tracking, SoW, teleport, and evac. So I have to have a druid.
Mage. I like mage overall better for offense than the rogue or monk (or
wizard). Since I don't have a second tank here, I want the high HP pet to
occupy the mob when the warrior has to pull a mob off the cleric or enchanter.
Good DD, good debuff. Damage shield a plus but somewhat redundant since the
druid's is nearly as good.
Necro. This spot could be filled by a lot of classes, but necro rocks. I
think the class is overpowerful and should be nerfed, but I also think its
value in groups is severely underappreciated. This is because necros as so
good solo that most of them are not group-oriented and are either not used to
grouping, or downright antisocial by nature.
But any good offensive player could go here: SK would be good, shaman would be
okay, paladin would be okay, monk would be okay, bard would be okay. I would
even take a rogue with this group although they are pretty useless except for
excellent melee damage.
I just don't want a ranger or wizard.
Sergey Dashevskiy
mason...@aol.comnospam says...
> >Best group for non-pvp combat:
> >
> >Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
> >
>
> Not perfect. You are underpowered on offense and have insufficient flexibility
> and NO crowd control.
You have weak crowd control. Cleric and paladin can stun, shaman (and I
think cleric) can root, ranger can snare, cleric can fear. You'd be
amazed at how effective root parking can be, if the player practices it.
It doesn't get any close to mesmerise though.
About being underpowered on offense... Say, the first warrior is the
tank, second warrior and ranger (together) output about same damage as
one rogue, paladin and pet do some more. It's more offense than most
groups have, and you have 6 people in the group that are capable of
taking some damage. You also have 3 that can take a lot of it too
>
>
> "If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me
> some coffee."
> - Abraham Lincoln
>
--
Gargamel
Alasdair Allan wrote in message <01bfb8c7$bdb32460$240201c0@dell40>...
>Darren Terry <dst...@pacbell.net> wrote
>> Whan did rogue become the Best melee damage source in the game?
>
>
>It is only the most fuckwitted of sheep that doesn't actively pursue Rogues
>for their group.
>
abatt...@netscape.net
> Actually I was recently in a group like that (there was a bard instead
> of cleric). We had no downtime. All the healing was done by the paladin
> while the ranger was pulling.
i was in a group similar, except enchanter instead of cleric. downtime? what
the hell is that? we were in the frenzied room pulling damn near everything
in dead side except a couple rooms. the mobs weren't spawning fast enough to
keep up. (this is last friday, only 19 people in lower guk, the other 40 that
are usually there were in karnors).
>> Replace the Ranger with a Druid. No sense in using the inferior version.
> Ranger snares, cleric fears, 4 tanks and shaman pet are beating it up.
> Where's downtime?
phooey on alasdair. i agree with ya here. we dropped bloodthirsties in less
than venom of snake duration, hell it almost wasn't worth casting togor's.
but i did make great use of enstill-parking. <G>
> In most outdoor areas of Kunark where I hunted pre-50 mobs, not only
> cleric was not needed, but any heals were needed very rarely
the only problem i had in my guild-group in burning woods was when a wandering
wurm got too close after we'd just finished two giants an ape and a hornet.
that was pretty hairy, but we killed the beast just the same. :)
--
josh
Dark Jedi of the Sysadmin Sith Darth ddifdevrandomofslash
abatt...@netscape.net
>> |Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
>>
>> Horrible, horrible. You'll have nothing but downtime.
> Actually I was recently in a group like that (there was a bard instead
> of cleric). We had no downtime. All the healing was done by the paladin
> while the ranger was pulling.
ack. phooey on dennis, not alasdair. got mixed up in my reading when i
followed up to this post the first time. sorry.
abatt...@netscape.net
> |Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
> Horrible, horrible. You'll have nothing but downtime.
downtime nothin. the only one with downtime is the shaman after all the
chloroplasting and togor's. phooey.
> Replace the second Warrior and the Paladin with melee damage-dealers.
> These can be Rogues, Monks, or pet users (Magicians, Necromancers only here).
> I prefer the latter -- pets don't need healing, they maintain standoff and get
> you 2 soldiers for the price of one.
fuck. i almost agree with you... *must...not...agree...with...dennis...*
the paladin is great if you're in lower guk dead side. as long as he has
ghoulbane <G>. monks are outstanding anywhere for single pulls and breaking
rooms. rogues are of course awesome if you want to deal damage in a hurry.
i like mages. i especially like mages with air pets against casters, and
mages with waterstones in kedge <G>. necros are good, but i'd rather have a
true melee like warrior or monk in this group.
> Replace the Ranger with a Druid. No sense in using the inferior version.
bah. most druids can't take a mob beating on them for three seconds without
screaming "get it off". the term "wet cardboard" comes to mind.
if we're talking high levels (and i am) with this group, then the ranger beats
the druid. there's plenty of healing power with the cleric and shaman, so the
druid isn't needed. there's tons of damage between the four melee/hybrids and
the shaman pet. the ranger can snare. if these are all played by smart
players, then there will never been a need to evac. what else is there for a
druid to do?
and that's why billy doesn't like his druid <Grin>.
> Replace the Cleric with an Enchanter. Adds way more value to the group.
> Pre-Kunark you don't need Clerics if you're leaving the fighters home. This
> does not seem to be true post-Kunark but at least as far as I'm concerned the
> jury is still out.
enchanter is definately preferred in my opinion over the cleric. it means the
shaman can tank and heal and togors and do all those other shaman things and
still have plenty of mana. the ranger can provide downtime healing (between
the constant pulls <G>) on the shaman while the shaman cannibalizes with
clarity and sit/medding (for those of you who don't think this is time
efficient, try it, you'll like it. worked great in frenzied on friday for me
:P).
but with a good monk in place of one of the warriors or the paladin, you don't
need the enchanter for room breaking. or much at all.
damn friday and also thursday provided lots of insights for me. thanks to the
groups in lower guk at frenzied and lord rooms :).
abatt...@netscape.net
> blue to red to me at 39 (or maybe 38). The cleric rarely had to heal, and I
> occasionally Togors; but that was the only offensive spell I used. As I
togor's is defensive :P
and you'd have to be 39 then. <Grin> :)
> have discovered with my troll warrior, when damage is not dependant on mana;
> the killing can continue non-stop as long as the tanks are alive.
eggs-fuckin-zactly. and that, right there, is why wizards suck ass and druids
shouldn't nuke, only heal and provide melee support (damage shield, regens,
snare).
abatt...@netscape.net
<asskickingscenariocut>
> the battle spam flooded the screen. The shaman never even had to cast a
> heal.
the shaman just had to equip gatorsmash, quick self and join the tanks in
melee. much more fun than sittin on yer arse!
<GRIN>
abatt...@netscape.net
>
> ...one mob.
> That group can not sustain those fighters.
dennis,
when you have a clue...
post.
have you eveer camped the avatar of fear?
there's a ton of mobs up to and in his room.
/auction Selling Dennis 1 clue, 5000p or SSoY...
:)
abatt...@netscape.net
> This is why everyone should love tanks. I can cast 1 or 2 DS, sit, and med
> while monsters die. Stand at 1/2 life and snare, sit again :)
phooey, equip a weapon instead of your paw and smack it a few times. believe
me, its more fun to melee than to meditate. :)
abatt...@netscape.net
> Whan did rogue become the Best melee damage source in the game?
level 10, when they get backstab <GRIN>
Nan Wang
doesn't have feign death, especially in dungeons.
abatt...@netscape.net
> You have weak crowd control. Cleric and paladin can stun, shaman (and I
> think cleric) can root, ranger can snare, cleric can fear. You'd be
> amazed at how effective root parking can be, if the player practices it.
> It doesn't get any close to mesmerise though.
i was able to rootpark two bloodthirsties while the group kept another frog
busy on friday night.
enstill kicks serious ass. it lasted the entire duration of the first combat
on the other two frogs. then the second died before the third broke.
> About being underpowered on offense... Say, the first warrior is the
> tank, second warrior and ranger (together) output about same damage as
> one rogue, paladin and pet do some more. It's more offense than most
> groups have, and you have 6 people in the group that are capable of
> taking some damage. You also have 3 that can take a lot of it too
indeed. my later group that night was in the lord room and we had two
paladins as the tanks, both wielding ghoulbane.
ever see a bok knight go down in less than a minute? granted, we had a mage
pet, but it was only 39th level earth.
only problem was when the lord spawned and a basilisk spawned right after and
the enchanter was low mana :(. eek.
Mason Barge
a clue. This is some poor silly wizard employing wishful thinking. Have
sympathy with wizards -- I sure do.
Clearly, every member of this group will die like flies when something goes the
least bit wrong. I mean, the guy doesn't even have a healer in the group.
This is about the WORST group of six possible.
Oh what the hell, I will have some fun with this.
>> Senerio puller pulls 4-7 mobs to the enchanter who does area effect stuns
while the wizards cast area effect super nova spells.
1. What does "senerio" mean?
2. What happens when two or three mobs resist stun and hit the enchanter at
the same time? When writing your answer, please remember to account for the
near certainty that the other mobs are now going to be unstunned for a period
of time.
3. What happens to the ranger when one of the 4-7 mobs stuns HIM on the way to
the group?
4. What happens if all of the mobs resist all of the AofE damage?
I have to grant you one thing -- the chances of a successful evac in this group
are high, but group members are going to die faster than the casting time of
evac.
>CiscoBob <cisc...@newsguy.com> wrote
>> On Sun, 07 May 2000 02:47:51 GMT, xyn...@uswest.net wrote:
>> I haven't read everyones post so i really don't know if anyone stated
>> this:
>>
>> 3 wizards
>> one enchanter
>> one puller, Paladin, ranger (healer light)
>>
>> last person in group can either be another wiz or mage
>> or the addition of another enchanter.
>>
>> Senerio puller pulls 4-7 mobs to the enchanter who does
>> area effect stuns while the wizards cast area effect super nova
>> spells.
>> [...]
>
>The problem with this "strategy", is that mobs resisting the Enchanter Stuns
>take *seconds* to walk through the entire group.
>
>Add to that the fact that without the complete group, they can't fight and
>it is a pretty non-sensical suggestion.
abatt...@netscape.net
> |weaknesses, and using a leader if necessary, all follow the same goals, and
> |respect the wishes of the other party members.
> See, here's the problem with that:
> It's bullshit.
no it isn't.
in your ranger example, if they tried to do something stupid like fire giants,
yeah, they'd suck ass and be begging for rezes and corpse summons/recoveries.
but if they pick their targets wisely, like spirocs in timourous (i'm thinkin
mid 40s group since thats what level i am), they'll kick ass and have very
little down time. (self healing when you're fighting single or double pulls).
a group of good players in a diverse group is going to be able to take on a
good deal of mobs with no problem. i've been in wacky groups in high level
dungeons and we had no problem breaking and holding:
lguk -
all named spawns, and bedroom
solb -
noble/champ/king
stone spider
the various greater kobold room (pool/ramp/window)
permafrost (group of four, 30-36)
up to the ice giant diplomat, including the champion :)
cazic (low 30's) -
anything except AoF, haven't been there personally.
kedge -
cauldronbubble
cauldronboil
seahorse room, third level i think
estrella
the groups i've been in are varied. i've grouped with every class/race
combination, some of the groups extremely wacky (three wizards once in the BR
in lower guk, holy shit was that crazy). some of them extremely well
balanced. but any time i've grouped with strong players, the group has
triumphed and there's not been any deaths. careless mistakes (like a monk NOT
feign pulling that one time, we kicked him out <G>) equals death. strong
playing in any group equals victory. you just gotta choose your fights
wisely.
> This is just another manifestation of the recurring cultural myth that the
> human will is an irresistable force. Well, no. Moreso in games than in real
> life, it's all about the numbers. Strategies have expected outcomes, and no
> matter how hard you push you can't make a bad strategy transcend its
> limitations.
which is why you don't send six rangers against fire giants.
abatt...@netscape.net
> Enchanter
> Shaman
> Magician
> Warrior
> 1 tank
> 1 tank or necro
to quote a tournament player of magic: the gathering...
"Strong, Very Strong" (tm).
imho, the last two would be monk and either ranger or rogue. magician could
be a necro, which then you want the rogue sinc the necro can pseudo-snare. :)
abatt...@netscape.net
> Erudite Enchanter (MOB control, clarity)
> High Elf Cleric (Healing)
> Half Elf Bard (all-purpose)
> Ogre Warrior (tank)
> Wood Elf Druid (travel, light healing, etc.)
why those races? it doesn't matter what race someone is if they're properly
equipped and played well <GRIN>.
> Last spot is optional.
no it isn't.
shaman.
:-P
abatt...@netscape.net
> Wizards are shite.
shit, too.
>> The only thing this group is missing is SoW and other quick-movement
>> abilities.
> Err, and Damage Shields. And Feign Death for pulling.
and sow doesn't matter if you're not outdoors.
> And the entire Insects line, probably the strongest single spell line in the
> game, including the mez series.
togor's pull rules.
except the tanks in my guild won't let me pull. something about that wolf pet
coming to "save" me <grin>
> Druids are excellent in the pre-50 game. Post 50 you need that Cleric, so
> the Druid is the spot you need to lose to avoid losing tanks.
that's simple.
you take that 50th level druid you liked playing until you got to planes and
realized they suck... then you power level a cleric that you know will be
needed :).
abatt...@netscape.net
> speed debuffs
<cough>togor's</cough>
shiftless deeds is up to 57% speed reduction.
togor's insects is up to 65%, and starts at 53%.
i speak prekunark as i don't regularly group with any enchanters over level
40. not to say i never group with higher level enchanters, just not
regularly! :)
> designed it (for some reason) so you *need* an enchanter and
> no other class will do so thats what you get.
lies, all lies.
you don't *need* an enchanter for every situation.
sure, there's some things that enchanters are needed for, according to you
planes goers. i haven't been there (yet) so i can't, and won't, comment. nor
will i listen to your flame related to that so THERE :P.
abatt...@netscape.net
> Enchanter
> Shaman
> Druid
> Magician/Necro/Rogue
> Magician/Necro/Rogue
> Monk (or other tank if feign not required).
interesting. i haven't grouped with a rogue since i was in cazic. and even
still, there's just not that many high level rogues on tribunal from what i've
seen :(.
> This is the archetype XP group. It isn't possible to get xp faster unless
> you have a *very* conrolled situation where it is trivial to get less than 2
> mobs every time and pull non-stop. In those situations, dump the Chanter
> and Druid for another couple of Magician/Necro/Rogues.
i think you'd be good with a lot of diversity at the spirocs in timourous. me
and a 49th level warrior were taking one or two at a time (up to provens, but
not warriors or lightbringer). when we had (get this, heehee) warrior monk
two shamans two druids, the pulls NEVER stopped. hell, for a time four of us
(1 druid, myself shaman, warrior and monk) were pulling one or two and the
other shaman was soloing one or two whilst the second druid kited three at a
time..
since i was lowest level (everyone else was 49-51, i was 43-44, ding), i
wasn't getting that much experience. faster than a similarly leveled group in
guk the night before, though. the warrior and monk got about a bubble an
hour, the 51's - druids and shaman 2 - got just under a half bubble.
> However, there is a huge change in Kunark. It basically *requires* a Cleric
> because death *hurts*. You lose (as a percentage of the exp bar) the same
> amount of experience you do in a non-hell level, yet they are the worst hell
> levels yet encountered.
death hurts anyway :P. kunark dungeons are dangerous. city of mist was
scary. karnor's had more trains than mistmoore, unrest, and cazic combined
(the second night kunark was open anyway). it was a madhouse. chardok is
just evil and nasty and full of badness. (hey, i was only 42nd at the time,
shut up :P).
> There is also quite a marked change in the Damage Tables for all classes
> which benefits melee greatly. In all honesty I believe this now gives a
> clear advantage to the Rogue over the pet handlers.
could be. i was whooping up on forest giants with gatorsmash for an average
of 60. lots of hits in the 80's/90's. my jade prod was doing upper 20's low
30's on them as well (all logged :). compared to guk where my average with
gatorsmash is around 30, jade prod almost always gets magic number (22 is more
often seen hit for me). not nearly as many hits over 70 and 30 respectively.
> Overall this means that my ideal group is now ;-
> Enchanter
> Shaman
> Cleric
> Rogue
> Rogue
> Monk
definately very very strong. unfortunately with the lack of high level rogues
(none in my guild. highest is level 28 or 30), that means we've got warriors.
but thats okay, i love the warriors in my guild :). got the monk, the
enchanter isn't usually on so we have a druid (which is played VERY well).
Mason Barge
>You have weak crowd control.
Oh, have it your way. Your examples to me are no crowd control at all. You
might as well just fight as have the cleric or paladin stunning.
Cleric's fear is the only crowd control here to me and is just woefully
inadequate. Plus it is mana from your primary healer.
>About being underpowered on offense... Say, the first warrior is the
>tank, second warrior and ranger (together) output about same damage as
>one rogue, paladin and pet do some more
Yes, any six players will have offense. You have five second-rate melee
players as your entire offense, with some contribution from your healers --
some good DoT from the shaman and possibily even a little DD vs. undead (or
even melee) from the cleric. But with four tanks, your healers will need to be
healing.
But this is supposed to be a perfect group. A mage will give you 50-100% more
offense (counting damage shields) than the warrior or paladin, AND more
flexibility with his DD. AND if it's well-played, won't need any healing at
all. Or a necro might do even better, considering the relative inefficiency of
a damage shield on four tanks.
A couple of big caster mobs would rip this group apart. Think maybe LGuk where
you are constantly going to pull two big wizards with one or two knights.
This will be much harder on this group than one with a caster to burn down one
of the wizard mobs. If those wizards are allowed to live for long, they HURT.
Two casts will pretty much kill a healer.
You need more DD offense to kill pulls with casters. You need more melee
offense to kill large pulls. And you need real crowd control to maximize the
number of mobs that can be killed in a single pull.
Or for a really extreme example, try a group at level 49 against the
Allizewsaur. This group of six might well have deaths. A group of three,
picked from enchanter, necro, mage, and druid, would have no problem.
Dennis Francis Heffernan
|I have had a few groups where I REALLY liked the other players and they were
|both excellent in skills, and fun to be with.
If you are interested in people who are fun to be with, a chat room will
be a more productive use of your time.
Dennis F. Heffernan EQ: Venture Fletcher(E'ci) dfra...@email.com
Montclair State U #include <disclaim.h> ICQ:9154048 CompSci/Philosophy
"You bitch about the present and blame it on the past/I'd like to find your
Inner Child and kick its little ass!" -- D. Henley & G. Fry, "Get Over It"
Richard G.
all the nerfs Verant had done to druids about 6 months ago made kiting a lot
more difficult.
- Grick
SwEeTnEsS <sweetn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:5MoR4.336$Ee7....@news.uswest.net...
> I think your a bit off when saying kiting levels druids too slowly. I had
a
> friend that just started the game when I was already in my 30s. As druids
> level the fastest I told him to start one, sent him to a site to learn
about
> kiting and whatnot, and 21 days played later he was 50. Maybe its just me,
> but I think kiting is an incredibly fast way to level. I know this was a
bit
> off topic, but I thought I'd point it out to you.
Richard G.
Chung <kc...@hk.gin.net> wrote in message
news:391662e8...@news.netvigator.com...
> So, what is the weakness of ENC?
>
The weakness of the Enchater is anything to do with fighting in melee --
which applies to all the caster types actually. As long as the enchanter
doesn't have something beating on him, he can oversee and direct the course
of battle. If something is pounding on the enchanter...well, hope a smart
tank see's this soon enough and can taunt the mob.
Same concept applies to clerics. If something's beating on you (as a
cleric,) too hard to get heal spells off without getting interupted.
- Grick
Mason Barge
>paladins as the tanks, both wielding ghoulbane.
>
>ever see a bok knight go down in less than a minute? granted, we had a mage
>pet, but it was only 39th level earth.
Bah. Put a 49 mage and a 49 necro on a bok knight and see how fast it falls.
They would do just as much melee damage and pull 1200 HP each in spell damage.
You are kidding yourself if you think you are going to have a "perfect" group
where your offense is two paladins wielding ghoulbanes (although they clearly
outstrip a 39 earth pet, which is outclassed in this example).
Best, of course, would be a tank getting fireshield and a mage with an air or
water pet.
This is just to illustrate offense. I wouldn't want to be in that part of LGuk
without a taunting tank/ puller, healing, and crowd control.
Mason Barge
>what
>the hell is that? we were in the frenzied room pulling damn near everything
>in dead side except a couple rooms. the mobs weren't spawning fast enough to
>keep up.
I don't think I have ever been in a full frenzied group where this wasn't true.
Sergey Dashevskiy
says...
> So, what is the weakness of ENC?
Hmm. They can't cast heal, can't wear plate, and can't swing a big-ass
axe. Other than that, they are gods. Err, wait. They *are* gods :)
No, really, the weakness of enchanters is deminishing returns. Chanters
are awesome otherwise
>
> I remember my guild hunting in Mistmore. Team 1 mainly from 46 to 50.
> Team 2 is 30 to 45. When we go into the Music hall, someone train
> more than 10+ Mobs onto us. Team 1 cleric LD, I (team 2 cleric) try
> my best to heal all, but our 31 ENC and 30 Rouge dead. I think I will
> die soon. Luckly my team have a 30 wizard casted EVAC. And then, I
> found only Team 1 ENC(50) can flee to zone. He also pull all corpse
> to zone for us to res!
>
> No one can run to zone under 10+ Mobs attack, but ENC can!
> So, Why ppl don't play ENC? I found Druid, NEC and magician is the
> most in my server. But ENC and cleric always lack!
>
> Chung
> -------------------------------------
> >Yep, Verant have given enchanters almost a complete monopoly on
> >crucial abilities like crowd control. On top of that they have
> >clarity, the best speed buffs and speed debuffs. Verant has
> >designed it (for some reason) so you *need* an enchanter and
> >no other class will do so thats what you get.
>
--
Sergey Dashevskiy
@netscape.net says...
> and sow doesn't matter if you're not outdoors.
Err :) SoW doesn't matter that much outdoors as well, if you have a
group with a set strategy. Hunting in Dreadlands -- the only one with
SoW was the shaman. Hunting specs at earlier levels, ranger would
sometimes cast SoW on himself, but only because he had extra mana.
> togor's pull rules.
>
> except the tanks in my guild won't let me pull. something about that wolf pet
> coming to "save" me <grin>
Sorry, I hate shaman pullers too :) Usually in good groups the only time
they get to med is when someone is pulling. I always try to make it
someone manaless, except bards (bards are feeding the thumbtwiddlers).
Togor works just as well when a ranger says "inc", shaman stands up and
togors the snared mob. With shaman pulling, it will be hard to control
where the fight will be happening (as the doggie jumps up and goes off
to help his master), and may be a bit harder to get pissed off mobs off
the shaman. Now, shamans can sometimes take some damage, but you have to
remember that *most* shamans wear flippin leather.
Sergey Dashevskiy
@netscape.net says...
> Alasdair Allan <posth...@x-static.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Enchanter
> > Shaman
> > Druid
> > Magician/Necro/Rogue
> > Magician/Necro/Rogue
> > Monk (or other tank if feign not required).
>
> interesting. i haven't grouped with a rogue since i was in cazic. and even
> still, there's just not that many high level rogues on tribunal from what i've
> seen :(.
You have no idea what you are missing. A friend of mine (51 rogue)
grouped with me, and I decided to turn on "others hits" for fun. Jesus
fucking Christ! That half-man bastard hits like hell. When he said that
he hits like a Mac truck, I think he was giving the trucks too much
credit. The regular hits were in low 50ies, very fast (about 10-13 delay
after all hastes). He was barely missing, most times he quad hit. And
the backstabs are simply insane. It's fun to watch the hp of a 45ish mob
and see it drop in big chunks once every 3 seconds after backstabs
> death hurts anyway :P. kunark dungeons are dangerous. city of mist was
> scary. karnor's had more trains than mistmoore, unrest, and cazic combined
> (the second night kunark was open anyway). it was a madhouse.
Still is. I may have to give up on my green water summoning boots, and
move to some safer areas
glenn_...@my-deja.com
can cast all can Meele, the enchanter for Clarity and Crowd controls.
With 5 pets and a charmed Wyrm for pet, think of the havoc you could
create.
Could be fun.
Snoww Silverhammer
In article <yFBR4.107153$U4.8...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com>,
abatt...@netscape.net wrote:
> Dennis Francis Heffernan <dfra...@email.com> wrote:
> --
> josh
> Dark Jedi of the Sysadmin Sith Darth ddifdevrandomofslash
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Sergey Dashevskiy
mason...@aol.comnospam says...
> >
> >You have weak crowd control.
>
> Oh, have it your way. Your examples to me are no crowd control at all. You
> might as well just fight as have the cleric or paladin stunning.
Actually no. Root-parking 3 mobs and then stunning the 4th is very
effective. Not as effective as enthrall, but very nice. Cleric and
paladin can't keep 4 mobs stunned all the time
>
> Cleric's fear is the only crowd control here to me and is just woefully
> inadequate. Plus it is mana from your primary healer.
Cleric's fear is the way to avoid 100% of damage outdoors. Why the fuck
would your primary healer needs mana if noone is hurt. In dungeons fear
can save you a few extra holes, if the mob is snared and you fear it
*once it gets to 40% hp*. It just turns around and takes it in the ass
from your tanks
>
> >About being underpowered on offense... Say, the first warrior is the
> >tank, second warrior and ranger (together) output about same damage as
> >one rogue, paladin and pet do some more
>
> Yes, any six players will have offense. You have five second-rate melee
> players as your entire offense, with some contribution from your healers --
> some good DoT from the shaman and possibily even a little DD vs. undead (or
> even melee) from the cleric. But with four tanks, your healers will need to be
> healing.
That's the point. With 3 tanks taking damage (we do assume that they
know what they are doing), against togored mobs, with chloroplast on
tanks... The cleric will be about out of job.
>
> But this is supposed to be a perfect group. A mage will give you 50-100% more
> offense (counting damage shields)
Assuming there are cleric, paladin and shaman in a group, the mobs won't
be hitting more that 10 times per fight -- just 3-4 rounds. If we are
talking about a perfect group, then the mobs are barely fighting back in
this setup
> than the warrior or paladin, AND more
> flexibility with his DD. AND if it's well-played, won't need any healing at
> all. Or a necro might do even better, considering the relative inefficiency of
> a damage shield on four tanks.
>
> A couple of big caster mobs would rip this group apart.
Hell no. A couple of big caster mobs won't be casting squat through
stuns of cleric, shaman, paladin, and (if warriors are large), warriors
as well. However, people don't get to fight casters that often
> Think maybe LGuk where
> you are constantly going to pull two big wizards with one or two knights.
This group would do badly there. For that room you need a bard, and then
you *intentionally* pull caster mobs, as they do 0 damage to you
> This will be much harder on this group than one with a caster to burn down one
> of the wizard mobs. If those wizards are allowed to live for long, they HURT.
> Two casts will pretty much kill a healer.
"You cannot cast while stunned" in case with cleric and paladin
"Your <insert bigass nuke here> is resisted" in case with bard
>
> You need more DD offense to kill pulls with casters. You need more melee
> offense to kill large pulls. And you need real crowd control to maximize the
> number of mobs that can be killed in a single pull.
>
> Or for a really extreme example, try a group at level 49 against the
> Allizewsaur.
Actually, this group would work well. Snare from ranger, fear from
cleric, tanks beating lizard up. Works great. Nobody tanks that fat
bastard
> This group of six might well have deaths. A group of three,
> picked from enchanter, necro, mage, and druid, would have no problem.
The same group will not live very long in a dungeon. So far the best
group against Dino (that I've seen) had enchanter, ranger, bard, and
rogue. When we added shaman, things got even easier
>
> "If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me
> some coffee."
> - Abraham Lincoln
>
--
Mason Barge
>The weakness of the Enchater is anything to do with fighting in melee --
>which applies to all the caster types actually.
Uh huh. Let's have a melee-only duel with a mage and any melee character you
want.
Richard G.
> Tank = Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Shadowknight, Rogue, Monk
>
I would delete Rogue and Monk from that list. They cannot taunt which is a
huge liability as a melee class.
- Grick
Richard G.
> Overall this means that my ideal group is now ;-
>
> Enchanter
> Shaman
> Cleric
> Rogue
> Rogue
> Monk
>
This group would not be able to take on more than one mob at a time. And
quite frankly, *any* group of 6 members can handle one mob. A group of 6
enchanters could take down a single yellow/red mob all the time. What
exactly is your strategy for dealing with 2 or more mobs at once? Mezzing
them while the monk/rogues twidle them down? That would take too long,
especialy in any dugeon zone. And who exactly is going to taunt a mob off
your cleric once he let's loose with the healing spells? Healing is more a
taunt than backstabing.
- Grick
Lokari
>Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
I want to say, for the record, that 4 rangers and a druid does NOT
make a perfect group!
What a mess that was.
--
www.enteract.com/~lokari
"No one of consequence"
Pat Cole
>> while monsters die. Stand at 1/2 life and snare, sit again :)
>
>phooey, equip a weapon instead of your paw and smack it a few times. believe
>me, its more fun to melee than to meditate. :)
I don't have a Paw, I have an Obsidian Scimitar :) I'll use it if I'm full or
nearly full, but I can med for 20 seconds then throw a 182-pt nuke, or attack
3-4 times in that period for maybe 60.
I agree meleeing is fun though.
Pat
Knot: 34 Druid Lanys T'vyl
Who also schooled Mayong Mistmoore and his henchmen yesterday... well, OK, just
the henchmen
Joey Bag'a'Donuts
Gladimir <cfen...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:9e5R4.4942$Y4.3...@typhoon2.san.rr.com...
> Best group for non-pvp combat:
>
> Warrior, Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Cleric, Shaman
>
>
> - Gladimir, Barbarian Shaman of Clan Blackwatch, Cazic-Thule
> - Baphomet, Troll Warrior, Cazic-Thule
> Visit Clan Blackwatch at http://www.clanblackwatch.com
>
> <xyn...@uswest.net> wrote in message
> news:3914d914...@news.uswest.net...
> > Everyone post their idea of the perfect group (6 people)
> >
> >
> > Tank, Tank, Necromancer, Wizard, Druid, Enchanter
>
>
Sergey Dashevskiy
REMOVE*THIS*malc...@iserv.net says...
> >
> > Tank = Warrior, Paladin, Ranger, Shadowknight, Rogue, Monk
> >
>
> I would delete Rogue and Monk from that list. They cannot taunt which is a
> huge liability as a melee class.
Actually the thing that makes melee class (drumroll) is melee. Tanks are
based on AC and hitpoints. Not sure when taunt became a defining ability
of tanks. Kinda funny though that you put rangers there too. At high
levels their taunt is too low to get things off the casters. Rogue that
didn't hit "evade" will be a much better taunter than a ranger.
I guess Rogues should not be counted as tanks, just as damage dealers.
Monks, however, are above rangers in tanking ability. They have low
hitpoints, but they have better ac than most SKs and paladins.
>
> - Grick
Joey Bag'a'Donuts
Tank, Tank, Enchanter, cleric, Wiz, Wiz
=)
Outdoor:
Tank, Tank, Enchanter, Cleric, Wiz, Shaman
Sergey Dashevskiy
REMOVE*THIS*malc...@iserv.net says...
> >
> > Overall this means that my ideal group is now ;-
> >
> > Enchanter
> > Shaman
> > Cleric
> > Rogue
> > Rogue
> > Monk
> >
>
> This group would not be able to take on more than one mob at a time.
Read the damn post. Especially where it says "enchanter". In case of any
pull they won't need to take more than one mob at a time
> And
> quite frankly, *any* group of 6 members can handle one mob. A group of 6
> enchanters could take down a single yellow/red mob all the time.
Uuh, a group of 2 enchanters would be able to take pairs or more of
yellow/white mobs. Safely
> What
> exactly is your strategy for dealing with 2 or more mobs at once? Mezzing
> them while the monk/rogues twidle them down? That would take too long,
> especialy in any dugeon zone.
Most AE stuns take less than a second to cast. After that you mes them
> And who exactly is going to taunt a mob off
> your cleric once he let's loose with the healing spells?
Either of the rogues or a monk. They are doing huge damage. While
fighting one mob, they won't need heals at all (see the shaman there?)
> Healing is more a
> taunt than backstabing.
That's why the first spell thrown in the fight is not a heal. And that's
what enchanter has stuns for. And that's why cleric is a plate class.
Pat Cole
>|both excellent in skills, and fun to be with.
>
> If you are interested in people who are fun to be with, a chat room
will
>be a more productive use of your time.
Ahahahah Dennis WTF do you play EQ for? It's obviously not to have any fun.
Pat
Knot: 34 Druid Lanys T'vyl
Who will leave a group right away if there are any jerks in it no matter how
good they are and how much they know
Sergey Dashevskiy
mason...@aol.comnospam says...
> >
> >The weakness of the Enchater is anything to do with fighting in melee --
> >which applies to all the caster types actually.
>
> Uh huh. Let's have a melee-only duel with a mage and any melee character you
> want.
Any time. My bard will kill the mage (melee only) before the pet will
kill my bard. A rogue will kill the mage within 4-5 rounds. That makes
for about 10 seconds, before backstabs
>
>
> "If this is coffee, please bring me some tea. If this is tea, please bring me
> some coffee."
> - Abraham Lincoln
>
--