Charm is too strong

Or:

By removing the variable that presents such a huge viability discrepancy in efficiency, you realistically see more groups popping up who are actually willing to run with a setup that isn't being built around the "optimal" from step one of it's inception, or which might be more likely to "rough it" without an enchanter for a more equal opportunity at much more similar exp gain. Which in turn opens up a greater amount of opportunity for said rogue to find that said group to begin with.

The min/max extremists out there insisting on the "perfect group" or perfect ratio of per/character contributing efficiency, regardless if you take that huge discrepancy in actual results away or not, is going to always going to be a thing either way. But either way...those people weren't ever going to be the ones sending your classic rogue a group invite even if they had the spot open anyway. But in the event they were to consider the possibility, I'd go as far as to say the overall likelihood is higher you'd see an invite for that open 6th spot without charmed pet damage (as is) being in the backround equation

Yet another greatly exaggerated twist into something I never said.

If that is the foundation rock you have to keep gravitating around in any counter argument against charm being greatly unbalanced....kinda speaks for itself imo.

It's not an exaggeration. Learn EQ game mechanics before commenting on them. EZ add to the ignore list

Yet one enchanter / cleric duo + charm pet would out dps both those groups with ease.
What other wonderful match ups do you have?

Better question would be how many rangers does it take to out DPS an enchanter pet.

Trick question because the rangers are all dead.

You are creating imaginary arguments that do not match what actually happens in game based on your overriding desire to see charm nerfed and/or other classes gaining parity. You will say anything no matter how completely baseless and lacking in any sort of evidence if you think it will help your internet argument. Good on you, I guess. Your assertion is dead wrong though.

Look what happens to casters, especially wizards, trying to find groups in oow and compare it to rogues/melee in classic. People don't get a 2.0 berserker or monk and say "we're good now" and grab whoever the way a group with an enchanter is willing to just fill very often on tlps. You won't even see groups of all casters with no melee dps rolling around the way you can see suboptimal noncharm groups form in classic. Then god forbid you look at a tank without raid gear, who CAN do content but takes a toll on healing and needs extra leeway for threat... most players would rather afk than group with an undergeared tank. The opposite happens when people farm easy content - people smacking through ldons with full raid gear, or doing mpg trials or don missions on a 75+ for an alt or returning player, who already have that one absurdly OP dps slot covered? They grab whoever and roll, just like enchanters did on classic TLPs outside your "min/max extremists".

Nerf charm and don't be surprised when people get MORE picky about wanting good dps classes like mage and later monk and no longer feeling like they have room to carry... because that's what actually happens (once you get past pop aka everquest ends and doesn't exist anymore) so we can already predict how it ACTUALLY will be.

Charm use to be more dangerous because people had less gear and the situations were more chaotic, and resists were different back in the day, it didn't land as much. Or stick as long. And people just weren't familiar, didn't trust it much.

That said, for the first 3 expansions, I don't think we should balance the game again. It is what it is. Let people enjoy their OP enchanters. No one is forcing us to play one.

I'm aware of how the mechanic works. Which is still one you'd use just as much as you do now with my proposed fix.

Well...maybe you wouldn't I guess. Given your entire stance in this thread has seemingly revolved around the mindset that anything less then being completely unbalanced/overpowered is completely unacceptable to you, and one as somebody who has played and will likely still end up leveling another enchanter I don't share in this debate.

Some people wouldn't end up playing chanter without that massive imbalance appeal attached to it. I fully understand that. Yet the game world would move on, and plenty of people would still end up playing them. With that still present need factor involved in the grander scheme of things just balancing itself past the crowd who "welcome to ignore" raged out over not being able to benefit from a massive game in-balance that got changed and has already existed for far too long.

It's fairly obvious now that some people simply can't stand it when someone else has fun the wrong way. In their perfect world there would be perhaps 6 classes played in total out of the original 14 available but at least enchanters couldn't ruin the game aesthetics by potentially having a pet that may tank well or do decent DPS

Every supporting example you go on to counter with there seemingly wants to focus on what basically takes place after my proposed fix is still relevant.

So minus that...what specifically are you finding imaginary about my argument? Or better yet, give me a different direct argument to why *you* believe charmed pet dps *isn't* presenting an in-balance factor in the early expansions that extends beyond the reasons of raids are boring on an enchanter or I want/like the class being OP.

What is imaginary about the scenario proposed is that players will suddenly seek to fill the final slots with classes that they view as having sub par DPS once they've got Tank (Warrior) Healing (Cleric) Crowd Control (Enchanter) Slows (Shaman) Puller (Monk)

Is it just me or but in that imaginary perfect 6 person grp wouldn't they just pretty much grab anyone?

Anyway mutiple combinations can duo or trio just fine, make friends, at pick ups if ur bored and want to socialize, if u want to hit 50 in 3 days, solo, buy a PL, or roll an enchanter, or have a druid/chanter friend pl u

Why would that be the obvious take away here? I don't see anybody making that claim here in this thread...but you.

It is the people upset about the idea of re-balance, who apparently don't have much of a direct argument to why the people who state that one exists are wrong, that keep projecting the silly proposition concepts like that one. You just seem to be jumping in there with more of the same after I offered a different scenario take to your rogue scenario.

I don't know where you guys are finding all these non-boxed chanters who are willing to join pugs and make it possible for "weak" classes to level. Some exist, but in my experience the vast majority of them can be found with their boxed cleric clearing camps by themselves that would ordinarily sustain a full group. It's a big reason why a month from now you'll be picking through LGUK instances with fewer than 20 people in them only to find the entire dead side and decent chunks of the live side dead. Very few people would care about how OP charm is if this was a single player game.

Yes and you will be picking through LGUK instances and finding other people camping your precious camps with other classes no matter what you do. So don’t nerf chanters. If the problem is that other people play this game and camp stuff, it’s not solvable without AoCs for every XP spot.

What happens when you nerf chanters and all the camps in LGUK are still taken? Do you call the next best class suddenly OP and call for a nerf to them too? Then when the camps are still taken, do you call for the next nerf until there is nothing left to distinguish any class from another?

People seem to think that ‘fixing chanters’ will suddenly make less people camping efreeti and hamlord and frenzy but it won’t. As long as other people exist and play this game your camp will be taken and you will have to find a way to get the camp through patience like everybody else.

I’ve never had a problem getting a camp I wanted if I was patient enough. So your problem doesn’t really exist and isn’t solved by nerfing enchanters. All you are doing is calling for nerfs that will ruin somebody else’s gameplay and you won’t even get the result you desire from it.

Of course that's exactly what happens. We've got 20 years of history proving it.

As for the idea that we should nerf a class because one class being better then others in some way means that min maxers will require that class in their group in order to play the game, that problem is not solvable either because the min maxers will just require the next best class when chanters get nerfed and you’ll be on here complaining about groups of necros or monks or SKs or whatever the flavor of the month is to be nerfed to ‘fix’ the problem. The problem is the min maxers and the people who listen to them instead of playing a game to have fun.

I don't think the min maxers are the ones calling for a nerf...

Good point Machen. I guess it’s the people jealous of the min maxers.

This is very much like being mad at the guy who could play more quake or halo and was therefore better at circle strafing.

Wow please, just stop. Min maxers will just use anything in the game that's the best so of course if charm is strong they will use it. If it's not strong they won't use it. It doesn't make a difference. Jealousy has 0 to do with anything, everyone has a choice to roll a class that can charm, the server isn't out yet.

All these BS arguments still doesn't change the fact that charm is OP