GoofyWarriorGuy said:I personally don't think comparing groups based on classes will really get us anywhere. Once you have the needed basics (tank/healer) then the rest can work itself out.
In my opinion it's really going to come down to the players themselves. Some players are going to be better than others, and I'd rather pick players I want to group with than classes I want to group with.
Also, as long as the players in my group 1) are not jerks, 2) don't suck, I'm sure I can work with them :-)
It's just a bit of fun...
zoltar said:GoofyWarriorGuy said:I personally don't think comparing groups based on classes will really get us anywhere. Once you have the needed basics (tank/healer) then the rest can work itself out.
In my opinion it's really going to come down to the players themselves. Some players are going to be better than others, and I'd rather pick players I want to group with than classes I want to group with.
Also, as long as the players in my group 1) are not jerks, 2) don't suck, I'm sure I can work with them :-)
It's just a bit of fun...
Fun? Fun! Dammit man, this is a serious game, there is no fun intended here!!
Enchanters are great pullers, so is the cleric due to the lines of pacify etc... if you go by the models of EQ.
How many times have they been asked to split mobs at the classic levels and i dunno maybe later on. Tash pulls work good.
One of the reasons years later i wanted the tash clicky, paci focus items due to a mage pulling single or spliting. It was not easy to pull as a mage, why mages where upset at the pet nerfs they did.
Anyways Enchanters will be busy for sure, a good class for anyone to pick right off the bat.
Darkintellect said:I'd hate to be that Cleric. Tons of downtime.
How do you figure?
Rogues should be some of the highest dps. They have no mana so will never need to slow down or stop. They can CC adds while burning down the main target, and every mob is slowed by the shaman meaning less heals needed from the cleric.
If the cleric runs low mana. The shaman can take over for a few mobs while the cleric rests.
Darkintellect said: I'd hate to be that Cleric. Tons of downtime.
Porygon said: How do you figure? ..... meaning less heals needed from the cleric.
I think this was his point. If you had such a dps strong group that everything died really fast with very little need for heals but you bring along 2 healers. The Cleric has a lot of downtime where he can get some reading done... perhaps nit that sweater for his mom... paint his toenails... boring...
Only thing I'll say is this:
IMO, If Rogues (even 2 or 3) start replacing the role of an Enchanter, that will be the exact moment mobs are made immune to that exact strategy, via whatever outright immunity, multi-rogue effect-blocking, diminishing returns, or nerfing required.
There is no way in hell Pantheon would permit such an egregious role overlap for the stars of the show (Enchanters) to even slightly get sidelined. :)
They already nerfed Smoke and Mirrors, hard. It used to be that a single Rogue could keep one mob mezzed for a reasonable amount of time (keeping in mind the demonstrated TTK values for the past 2 years). NOPE. BZZZT. Not gonna happen, nerfed that emergent gameplay tactic rfq. Repeat precedent as necessary.
I had hopes for possibly playing a Rogue until I saw that attitude demonstrated. Once again, they're going to end up being the half-assers of everything, and be charged consumables for everything. A shame, but once bitten, twice shy.
@ Porygon
"Rogues should be some of the highest dps"
Yes but you run into the issue of adds. Smoke and Mirrors having a much longer cooldown now. No mana regen or mana feeds which will be killer for healer mana, not to mention the times when the Cleric also has to heal other members. Having an additional rogue in the group as opposed to an Enchanter isn't really going to be more damage. Support being the most vital aspect of the CC/Support role, hastes and mana regen alone allow them to passively do about 50-80% the DPS of a Rogue but with the ability to slow and deal nukes at the same time. There's also the ability to simply use Shock & Awe to turn an add on the target you're on effortlessly which adds much more to the damage to drop a target along with the hastes, regens and nukes they provide.
"They have no mana so will never need to slow down or stop. "
You'll always be limited to the Healer or Healers and that will be a serious issue unless you're only doing easy or moderate content. Dungeons are going to be a different issue altogether though.
"If the cleric runs low mana. The shaman can take over for a few mobs while the cleric rests."
Unfortunately, it never works out like you think it does on paper. Overall though, the Enchanter with all their tools will provide more DPS than a single Rogue. I'm not saying it won't work, but you'll end up being slower overall and will be limited in the difficulty of the content you wish to tackle. The passive and active damage a CC/Support can bring in the form of hastes, regens, nukes, DoTs and Charms is just too great. But that shouldn't be an issue. The Rogue shouldn't replace the CC/Support role much like it shouldn't replace the Tank or Healer roles which can be equally as vital.
DPS have the advantage though in that Rogues stack, Enchanters do not anywhere near as well. Enchanter and Rogue in two slots is better than two Rogues or two Enchanters in those two slots. Two Rogues are also better than two Enchanters as again, only one Enchanter will suffice.
I'll restate this because it needs to be said again. CC/Support is not just a DPS in a different setting, they are very much a different archetype that the game type and combat depends on heavily. By design it's like the Healer or the Tank in the need within a group. Can groups be done without Healers and Tanks? Yes. Can groups be done without CC/Support? Absolutely. The weakness of the CC/Support is the fact that they stack poorly and only benefit from an advantage when in a full or near full group. They're force multipliers and in that they are a unique structure from that of DPS who are devoted to that play style and because of the method in which they do so, they can play with other DPS and not suffer from a degradation in their potential in the group.
Not to mention, while three Rogues and a Shaman as a secondary healer instead of Shaman or Druid and Enchanter with two Rogues is possible, with how few Rogues from the pool to pull from, it isn't a setting you're likely to see much if at all in a random setting. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q-OK1vgnlic27yfnZKVYfRTKGbXHxEusIBws9iONvIM/edit?usp=sharing
I'm not sure why you think that 1 healer wont be able to keep up with slowed mobs beating on 1 tank.
I think you vastly underestimate the efficiency of a well oiled group.
The shamans job in this group is to buff, slow and offheal. Meaning that if a rogue gets hit, which should not happen often... the cleric doesnt have to heal anyone but the warrior.
I know there is a large contingent of players who love the enchanter role. But to be honest, if you play at a high level. Enchanters are not needed at all. They weren't in eq1 (once people learned the game) and they probably wont be in pantheon.
The best group makeup is one without a dedicated CC.
"I'm not sure why you think that 1 healer wont be able to keep up with slowed mobs beating on 1 tank."
The issue is, currently Shaman slow caps at 18% by level 30 with 4% incrimentation. I don't think we'll see any 50 or 75% slows this time.
"I think you vastly underestimate the efficiency of a well oiled group."
It's more about what's more efficient though. Your group idea can work in 70-80% of content possibly, but if you care about efficiency, an Enchanter using nukes, with Shock & Awe alone with group hastes is going to lend a great deal more damage than one of those Rogues, possibly two Rogues, and if efficiency matters to you, you'd be crazy not to have it. That's not counting interupts and long duration silences, mana regens, mana from nukes, spell haste for both healers, and even pacify pull which can prevent those pulls of 4-6 mobs we're expecting to see.
"Enchanters are not needed at all. They weren't in eq1 (once people learned the game) and they probably wont be in pantheon."
Neither are Tanks by that stance or Healers, although the method for Enchanters to prevent damage and slow content by 70% isn't really possible in Pantheon so Healers are still necessary. However, like I said, there will be limitations for certain group makeups as the four archetypes are key for more challenging content. It ultimately comes down to what would you choose to have, a group with three Rogues which will be extremely difficult to find considering only 5.5% of the player base will be playing them, or two Rogues and an Enchanter which ends up providing more damage than one or two Rogues along with more sustainability, utility, support and CC?
I could argue your counter stance and say I can do group content with just a Tank, Cleric and Enchanter. No DPS being needed. In EQ1, that composition could go anywhere, however in Pantheon, while it's very viable, would I want to do that? Not if I'm tackling higher end challenging content. The same for your group, it strikes at a bit forced. As though you're working extra hard to make a group composition less viable, more challenging to put together and play with and less damaging.
If you can honestly get three Rogues consistently when only one is already at a 4.5% reduction of likelyhood to be found (Rogues by themselves should be at 10% in the class spread) and intend to go at it under a damage, CC and support handicap, by all means and I honestly wish you well.
"The best group makeup is one without a dedicated CC."
Not in any reality I've ever heard. It may work, but isn't the best group since the role of an Enchanter is only 20% CC. It's far more valuable for everything else it contributes to the group being a 'force multiplier'.
If you guys want to argue killing efficiency then your truely most efficient group in EQ1 was 3 enchanters 3 wizards/mages. Wizard pulls 35+ mobs and drags them to the corner where 3 enchanters spam their AoE stuns and then the wizards/mages start AoE dmg until everything dies. You could do it with 2 enchanters, but 3 was usually safer since with 35+ mobs you had to account for random resists on the stuns so you had redundant enchanters so stuns were always landing at least every half second or less.
@Goofy
Yeah, can't forget about AE groups. Hands down the best AA farming method in the game. Acrylia Caverns. Stun web at zone in, then Wizards would epic up and pull ten at a time with flux staff until 50+ are in camp. Three Enchanters were typically used and Cleric would use their Quake line to deal PBAE damage with the Wizards or Mages. Enchanters in Pantheon may be limited in that but we only know of one of the PBAE stuns. With a one second cast it's faster than in EQ, larger range at 6 meters and a 5 second stun with a 20 second recast. I would think that if they had three other versions as upgrades, you can get a web from a single Enchanter allowing for the possibility of AE groups again.
That of course depends heavily on if Wizards or other DPS classes get PBAE damaging spells or abilities. We'll have to see but I would guess the option isn't feasible, at least in the way it was in EQ1. In Pantheon, it may only work with a pull of 6-15 mobs.