Any classes still not happy on Live at 125?

Mages are top tier in the category of least gear dependent classes in the game.

Do this test with a rogue in full T2 group gear vs a rogue and T2 raid gear and let us know your findings.

I'm willing to be open minded about your findings, but my anecdotal experience from being a group geared ENC to a raid geared ENC dealing with a charm break is very noticeable. I'm genuinely open minded and curious to see how a class like a rogue would compare in the same circumstances as your mage test.

Better than a rogue, let's have a Wizard do it. Lets compare a fully decked out T2 raid wizard against a group geared mage molo against a T2 named.

Mage pets are absolute monsters. Even the mage RS pet is an absolute beast when tanking. I'm just not sure MAG is the best baseline for discussing the difficulty in the game. I suspect your test is better evidence of the disparity in class balance than it is the difficulty in the game. I said in an earlier post, when I play a MAG in any capacity, or a raid geared SHD, it feels like I'm playing a completely different game than my ENC, DRU and RNG.

A rogue or a wizard is not designed, as a class, to be able to solo a named. The test that I performed was because someone told me the only reason why I was able to solo a named is because of raid gear. The test wasn't to compare magician vs T2 named and rogue vs T2 named.. it was raid magician vs T2 named and group magician vs T2 named.

There are different discussions in this thread- the original of class balance at 125 as of now... is the game too easy... raid gear compared to group gear... solo capabilities of different classes, etc. I take some blame in the sense that I got off track from the original premise because I made a comment that clerics are not wanted/needed in current content because it is too easy, and that got sidetracked into raid/group and other stuff. I base "easy content" on the ability for a player/group to complete mercs, partisans, missions, hunter. I don't base it on time, how many mobs you can kill at once, etc. Can you get checkmark in LS and defeat content regardless of gear and group composition? And IMHO outside of two specific partisan spots, I contend that yes anyone can. And to me, that is not challenging.

As an aside, I have a 125 ranger. Lacking in augs, no raid gear, IIRC heroic dex is like 2400 or something very low. Low AA, has a lot of work to do. Other day I was doing Tim Falls partisan and had to kill some mosquitos. As a solo self buffed, under gear, under AA non tank I decided to tank the mosquito straight up, no discs. I got it to 14 before I died. If I had a partner it would obviously die. If I had more AA or more augments, it would obviously die.

LS is just way too easy. I hope next expansion is harder. And I hope clerics get some love. Although I feel that the tank bloat is so great that the cleric class, at least in group game, is close to irrelevant (if not already). And that is sad. Because I do feel that the game is balanced for the most part as far as class expectation/results except for clerics.

They told you wrong. You were able to solo it because you are a mage. Your gear doesn't matter because you are a mage. You soloed a T2 named because you are a mage. Perhaps the person who said your gear didn't matter didn't realize you were a mage when they said it, or maybe they did and they just don't grasp how strong mage pets are.

The ranger died to a T1 trash mob because gear does matter for rangers. I'm glad you were able confirm that. Feel free to let us know how it goes soloing the T2 named you soloed with the mage with the ranger tanking. Actually, feel free to grab a few more AA and bring a friend for that.

Your tests show that gear has a minimal impact on pet tanks and casters who are not being hit, and a significant impact on PC tanking and melee DPS. It also shows that T1 is tuned for weaker players to grind catchup so they can move into T2.

This is the 3rd time I have said this in this thread. The difficulty of the game is not the same for all classes. Mages absolutely can not be used as the baseline for the game difficulty or gear requirements.

I don't have a dog in this race, but this is blatantly disingenuous. You can't take a tanking class (yes pet classes are designed to have their pets tank) and put it in a tanking scenario and then take a non tanking class and put it in a tanking scenario and call it an even comparison.

That would be equivalent of comparing my BST heals to that of a Cleric and saying it's a fair representation.

A paladin could solo a T2 named in group gear. And SK could. Warrior would need to molo for lack of heals, but could.

A group geared tank + a group geared dps could handle a T2 named. You have to keep things in line with what they're designed to do.

As such, for the Ranger it would have to be some sort of DPS check. Like hey we got this achievement for beating this mission in 4 minutes. "Oh you can only do that because you're in raid gear" - nope, got the same achievement in my group of group geared XYZ classes. Here's the parse. Here the magelo profiles. Blah blah blah

Nah, this Cicelee’s 125 Ranger getting owned my T1 trash in Timorous Falls was a perfect example of an average player. Below-mid skill level, not maxed AA, and gear that’s pretty close to the average player.

It seems like pretty good tuning to me.

I have a ranger in all T1 LS gear, no augs (account is currently free to play), and I can solo goblins in AF doing 800Kish DPS snare kitting. Rangers are meant to range (and headshot). I use him to power level my persona's. He does have max AA's. HIs burns last a while too, and during burns I'm doing 5M dps. When I had my prestige gear on it was 8M dps on burns.

I've kitted 3 goblins and burned all three down under a minute. I have a free to play mage also who has max AA. They can kill, just slower. I haven't tried soloing constructs, maybe it's quicker.

I think your missing the point here. The entire thrust of Cicelee's idea is that gear is meaningless. A group geared ranger is getting wrecked when it tries to tank t1 trash. A raid geared ranger will be able to tank named.
The entire point here (which is getting lost) is that raid gear REALLY makes an incredible difference about how easy content can be for the player. The entire mage thing not only is the least gear dependent class, but also in a situation designed to be optimal for a mage. Single target without adds, and no/minimal ae damage. Thus "hard" content is so ambiguous because hard for someone in raid gear is impossible for group gear if you go by mob power levels.

Pets can be good at one on one tanking. Pets CANNOT tank 5 things. Its simply not possible due to lack of ae agro. A real tank is required to tank multiple things, what a mage pet cannot do. Mages can try to handle 2-3 by going all out and hoping for the best with gargoyles and assuming the cleric merc behaves itself. Even then your gonna get knocked around and suddenly all that raid gear makes an incredible difference. T2 named hitting a group geared caster? Thats not gonna last long

I'm not. My point wad that it wasn't a fair comparison. People are comparing an apple to a potato (Mage tanking to Ranger tanking).

Now a fair comparison concerning raid gear would indeed be fleshed out group geared Ranger trying to tank a T2 named vs a raid geared Ranger doing the same. As to whether or not it could I can't say, I haven't played my Ranger (much less in Raid gear) in quite awhile.

Now no one has said that Raid gear doesn't help. That it doesn't make a difference. And I think people are trying to gaslight with that argument to prove a point. No one has said that there is no difference between group gear and raidngear. Simply that raid gear isn't required in group content.

Now if a Raid geared Rogue were making the accusations that he can solo the entire group game and that the group is too easy, then we'd have some merit. But the simple fact is group geared players can easily clear group content. And this all started based on the accusation of: you couldn't do that in group gear.

The claim was never "all classes can tank T2 nameds in group gear because thats how easy the expansion is". Things got taken a little outta proportion for the claim that was made and why it was made.

I think you’re missing the perspective on this, he complained it’s too easy clearing T2 names and the tank and spank FF mission with his Mage. Now, he swapped to his 125 Ranger, and can’t solo T1 trash. You really shouldn’t need a plate tank for T1 trash.

His Ranger situation best represents the 5 G’s of EQ.

-Get Good
-Get Gear
-Get Levels
-Get AAs
-Get a group

Seems like the tuning for T1 is ideal.

nt

I can break this down easy.

Raid gear makes the most difference when players take damage from mobs during normal play. This includes Tanks obviously, but also regular melee DPS when mobs have large Damage Shields, PBAE damage, AE Rampage, or when players gank aggro on burns or get hit before tanks lock down mobs.

If you don't take damage, then even a naked toon could do what a Raid geared toon could do. it just takes longer.

Also, i would not use LS as a measuring stick. I view it as a catch up expansion and i found it much easier than previous expansions. I'm expecting next expansion to be a kick-in-the-teeth, w-t-f, it's-too-hard reality-check expansion.

Nope. This is what was said:

Now, in light of this context, he did say he doesn't like that a simple 2 box crew can knock out all progression. He also mentioned boxing his Bard with Mage for the FF mission (2 chars and 2 mercs? Just 2 chars? Unclear). Bit I can sympathize with his sentiment.

As a BST / Bard box combo (only run 1 merc)
ToL was about right. I was able to handle most nameds just fine. Got rocked by a couple and didn't complete Hunters. Missions I needed a little help with. Restless Assault I was able to handle myself once I hit 115 (needed upgraded Bard AoE mez for adds).

CoV was a bit tough (lack of gear and augs). But not horrible. Didn't do near as much progression through here. About 117 I got my hands on a few ToL pieces and moved into ToL.

Last night i stepped into LS for the first time and knocked out the Merc quests in record time (not that merc quests are any indicator). I know in ToV and ToL that getting an add mid fight could be dangerous as I pet tank (ignore the bard for this). In Laurions Inn, tanking 2 mobs at a time happened more often than not while knocking out those Merc quests. Mentioned ignoring the bard because right now I'm capped at CC'ing mobs at level 123 and half the mobs were 124 so didn't really have a choice but to tank them

It does seem relatively easier than prior expansions. All of this from a strictly group geared perspective. Im enjoying it (and the fact I can stack the same type 5 HDex augs!) being a little easier simply because I'm playing catch up.

LS is the perfect expansion (from my limited experience) for the solo/molo player. I was mowing it down with my simple 2 box set up. I couldn't imagine the snoozefest it'll become at 125 with better gear/augs/spells, or in a full group.

Given that, even though I'm enjoying the ease of the expansion, I am hoping the next one will be a bit more of a challenge. This will lead into my next point.

A plate tank, no. A tank though, yes. Now from what he said about his Ranger, I have no doubt that even in group gear he would/will be able to tank t1 trash. I think the tuning should be where you need a tank, until you hit raid level gear. But also, certain hybrids (Ranger/Bard) and those will an affinity for higher ddefense (Monks) should be able to handle t1 trash MOLO in T2 group gear.

Would this change the demographic of the game? I don't know. But it would promote actual grouping by wanting a real tank in the early stages of the expansion. Or if no tank is available (or having to rely on mercs), CC comes in to play to keep from getting multiple adds until youre through the T2 stages and geared up and what not.

My idea behind this is that at least there is progression. You get to actually see the power creep happen rather than just being able to tackle everything from 121 in t1 gear.

Based on class design, I think a Necro/BST/Mage in T2 should be able to solo/molo a T2 named (mob abilities pending).

I think a raid geared Ranger/Monk should be able to molo a T2 named.

I think it should take more than 2 raid geared DPS on burn to take down a T2 named (which may directly affect my ability to box a named mob). What i mean by that is even in raid gear, if your class isn't meant to be taking hits, there should be some risk involved (from a T2 named at least).

Assuming properly geared/role, there should be no threat on a 1:1 playing field

T1 trash
Tank: no threat
Hybrid: Moderate (molo) / High (solo)
Pures: Do not attempt!
T2 tank: "I laugh in the face of danger"
T2 Hybrid: no threat (molo) / low (solo)
T2 DPS: Moderate (molo) / High (solo)
Raid tank: SK level achieved
Raid Hybrid: "darned mosquitoes"
Raid DPS: No risk (molo) / Low (solo)

Obviously just a quick made up rough draft. But just to illustrate the power creep. Each time you move up in power, you drop a risk factor. And likewise, going the opposite way and punching up, you increase the risk factor appropriately

Not once during this deviation from the original post have I stated that gear is meaningless. It is getting tiring discussing and debating with people who repeatedly state false accusations as fact. Sounds like when I have a logical discussion with my wife who believes the shirt I am wearing is red, even though all data and facts state it is blue.

I made a comment that I felt LS was too easy of content, and brought up that I can duo FF. Someone said part of it is because I have raid gear. My debate is that raid gear doesn't make me win FF. It helps me defeat FF faster than a group magician, but a group magician can still defeat it. That has been my contention all along- raid gear makes me kill faster than group gear. But it isn't the be all/end all. Group gear can still kill whatever.

Someone said I can solo because I have a raid pet focus. I proved I can solo with a group pet focus. Raid gear is irrelevant in this scenario. I can solo because I play a solo class. You can discuss how strong that class is in another thread if you prefer. But my point all along is that whether you have group or raid gear, you can do anything in the game.

I took a ranger to Tim Falls. Auto attack, every now and then threw a dot or an arrow spell on a T1 trash. I did not heal myself. I am under geared, under AA, few augments, all that stuff. If LS content is actually semi challenging, I should have gotten wrecked. I died when the mob was at 14 health IIRC. If I had actually tried, I would have tanked it straight through. This tells me that LS is easy content. There should be no way my ranger succeeds in that battle.. and yet without barely trying I came pretty close.

A group tank with group gear can tank anything in LS. They may need a few more heals than a raid gear tank. They may have a heal land on them when their health is at 35 whereas the raid tank has his/her heal land at 65. It will take a raid tank longer to get to 35 than a group gear tank. But again, in both scenarios, the tank wins the battle. There are people saying "raid tank wins only cause of raid gear". No, the tank wins either way. Raid gear just makes it faster and easier.

So please stop saying that the thrust of my argument is that gear doesn't matter. It does. But it is not the be all/end all. It does not determine success or fail. It makes things easier. But easier does not mean someone who has it harder will fail, because they won't fail.

Well, I certainly wouldn't use HF as the zone to parse/benchmark anything. Both the trash and named mobs in that zone are barely at T1 difficulty. I've literally engaged a named in HF with my 3-box SK/ranger/rogue group, then suddenly had to go afk and take care of a household emergency, and come back a couple of minutes later to find the mob dead..

If you want to prove something, especially about gear, the named in Unkempt and Pal'lomen are way, WAY tougher and on par with what T2 mobs this expansion should be.

People need to remember that Rangers are Warrior hybrids. Ranger is the only class that can use every weapon (edit: weapon skill) a warrior can use. They have almost every defensive skill a warrior has. They are the only non-tank class with taunt. Before they got huge bow buffs and became a primary ranged class, they were played more often like second rate warriors with spells.

Gear absolutely determines success or fail for certain classes. Warriors are a highly gear dependent class. Rangers are half warrior and are also highly gear dependent. A Ranger in Raid gear is often as capable as a group geared warrior when discs are removed from the scenario. Rangers are very capable tanks, but they need much better gear than a warrior to do it.

The issue is simply this. The argument is being made as a magician. The person who said "you" can do it because of raid armor either did not know they were talking to a mage or were unaware of how mage pets tank. For a caster that doesn't take a hit, raid armor doesn't matter much and the foci only increase DPS. However, for people taking hits, armor absolutely matters. For second rate tanks, like rangers, the cumulative benefits for having raid armor is absolutely the difference between success and fail.

It's absolutely wild to me that a Mage can molo a T2 named and that means the game is too easy but a Ranger tanking a T1 trash mob in a level expansion for too long before dying is okay. It's justified because we can't compare apples to potatoes because mages are tanks and rangers are not. Rangers, the class designed to be the most tank of the non-tanks, can't be compared to the mage, the current highest DPS and the 4th best tank in the game that gets that title while not needing armor to do it.

I can't comprehend how we conclude this as "the game is too easy" instead of a "major class balance issue". Mages are out there by themselves in old armor taking down T2 named for the best group armor in the game while other classes are designed to fail.

We have reached a point in class imbalance where there are classes that can molo content and classes that tag along with the classes that can molo content to speed up the rate things die.

Yet, rather than discussing this major class balance issue, which this thread is about classes being happy, we are saying the game is too easy.

As an Enchanter, no, I am absolutely not happy. I am not happy DDs eat my runes. I am not happy that a Knight can tank 3 mobs without a healer while procing their own slow. I am not happy that those 3 mobs will kill me faster than I can cast a spell. I am not happy that certain classes have become so strong that the role of the enchanter in the modern game is obsolete. I am not happy that we have mobs in raids that are mezable and charmable but we just tank them because tanks tanking 3 mobs is just normal now while I'm losing 60% of my health in a round.

I love my SHD and my MAG but it irks me that the only difference my 20 year old raid geared ENC makes to either of them is that things they are soloing die faster and their mana pools last longer.

Rangers shouldn't be taking hits though. That's what youre failing to take into consideration. This isnt 1999 any more. Rangers aren't the quasi 4th tank that they used to be considered.

They have no means of mitigating damage as tanks do.

So it's not really all that wild when you look at it in the proper lighting and contextm which is: a class that's not meant to take hits dies before finishing off mob because it was taking hits when it's not meant to vs class that has a form of a tank and ways to heal said form of tank and its own means of DPD solo's

Warriors have had their own unique weapons for quite a while now.
https://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/item.html?item=147097

I am sorry I accidentally said "every weapon" instead of "every weapon skill". The difference between the WAR and Melee 1HS is the focus being hate procs for warriors and DPS procs for the melee. It's fundamentally the same weapon.
The stagger dagger is almost the same exact stats as the Invictus Warmaker.
https://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/item.html?item=147096

It might just sound like I'm ranting or complaining about things in general, but my favorite and most played alt is my Ranger. Back when using a bow was less DPS and frowned upon, I was crafting arrows and using my Tolan's bracer. I absolutely love that they have become so bow focused, but they should not have lost their warrior roots in the process.

I agree that rangers are no longer the "quasi 4th tank" they used to be but my question is why? If they do the most DPS with a bow, then being the tank significantly negatively impacts their DPS. Why then are they not being maintained defensively to be a stand in tank? Sure they don't have the discs to tank multiples, but
A) tanks are tanking 3 mobs without discs so why should a ranger not be tanking a single? What is wrong with a ranger having above average mitigation for a chain class?
B) why not give the ranger an extra tool to stand in as the tank? The argument is that it is not in their class design or it encroaches on other classes, but with tanks getting slow belts, monks getting paci&mez, etc. what's wrong with a ranger having more options to increase their tanking? The argument that it is not in their class design doesn't hold water in my opinion. BST got FD because of their MNK roots. RNG has WAR roots and some extra tanking tools are just as justified.

I'll readily admit my ranger is generally poorly geared / AA and I'm average in ability at best. I might be a terrible Ranger, but I am a stake holder. Talking about how rangers shouldn't be getting hit as anything other than a class design oversight/problem needing fixed is something I certainly don't like hearing.

So their primary focus has always always always been DPS. They're part Druid too. But there's no argument for them to be replacing Clerics in content now is there?

When I said they're not meant to be taking hits, I meant continuously. I think they're meant to stand in and take a few hits if a real tank goes down. They have taunt, can equip a shield, wear chain, and have aggro generating abilities at the ready, and like shield wearers, have the shield block AAs.

Outside of tanks (ignoring Enchanter style runes), they take hits better than everyone else. So they can take hits. But I don't think they're meant to nor designed to sit there and tank a T2 named for 2-3 minutes straight.

Now can you gear up and aug up and throw a shield on and tank single pull trash? Most likely, but still not recommended.

This is my standpoint on Rangers and "not taking hits". Also this is from someone who's got a 120 ranger (so its not like I'm making claims from a Heroic 85 Ranger).

I do think that giving them the tools to be a stand in tank would be too much encroachment. But as a temporary punching bag, go for it!

(Monks have had paci/mez since Gates to further their identity as pulling machines)

I appreciate the quality and candor of this discussion. With how easy it is to find personal attacks and anger on forums, I always find it worth it to note when people are having civil discussion in topics that have a high potential for conflict and contention. There have been a few times where we have gotten after each other, but I think that there are a lot of people in this thread that should take a moment to pat themselves on the back and appreciate the quality of this thread.