ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 ส.ค. 2024
- A small overview on the different Everquest classes for anyone interested in the TLP's coming up
Join us on Discord!
/ discord
0:00 Intro
1:16 Warrior
2:11 Wizard
3:34 Cleric
5:18 Rogue
6:57 Monk
8:25 Necromancer
10:05 Mage
12:25 Enchanter
13:45 Druid
15:16 Shaman
16:45 Paladin
18:55 Shadowknight
20:17 Ranger
21:48 Bard
23:43 Outro and begging for subs - เกม
Found my way back to this video. After playing on the TLP as a shadow Knight I learned that a ranger is perhaps the greatest Agro machine when they use flame lick over and over and over again. So in classic I don't think anybody can out taunt a ranger. For several expansions they can also tank in groups
Oh indeed. For group content rangers can really pump aggro with flamelick. However in PoP the aggro component gets mutilated sadly with a change to debuff aggro. Bard and Ranger are always my first two classes so I hope you enjoy it as much as I do!
This is a great review of all the classes. It will help me in choosing mine (pally probably) for Oakwynd TLP server
Glad it helped! I enjoy paladin quite a bit myself. Erudite pally for the extra style points
I've quite a cleric on P99 and I got to say against Undead the DPS is good not very strong. The Druid and Shaman probably both can kill Undead more effectively. But it is nice that you can sit there and tank as well as the Healer
Good information, this has made me want to play everquest, You guys should watch this man, and this is a totally unbiased comment :^)
Liked the video, thanks
Playing on classic I have to say I've seen Road B main think about 30% of the time no one ever talks about it we just let it happen I'm not sure what the situation is with armor having not played a rogue
Mr Lokiramza, for algorythm purposes I'll ask it here. Why would you play the weaker classes when there are stronger ones available who seem to be better in all aspects of group number?
Several reasons, One and most importantly because they are fun. Second this is only taking into account combat/raids and there is so much more to experience in EQ. Such as rangers are much better at getting around than Say warriors. This is also rated for fresh launch, As the xpacs carry on weaker classes get MUCH stronger
@@lokiramza I see, thank you
Everquest balance wasn't great.
And unfortunately they never really try to tweak that for tlps
The original trinity didn't include DPS . It was tank, healer, utility of some sort(slows, buffs , debuffs, snare crowd control etc) / DPS were just the fillers of the group
In original everquest this is correct, To be more specific Tank/Healer/CC(which you covered). However the original Holy trinity existed years before EQ player used the term. The term was used in Muds and less often in Dungeons and Dragons pre-EQ.
Admittedly, It was a much more obscure term before the breakout success that EQ was/is. But terms evolve over time and Holy trinity is now associated with the tank/healer/dps roles. All Mmos are to an extent bent to the whims of WoW terminology
@@lokiramza
AHH I never got into any Muds. I don't see why any game with only 3 things to do would even need to use a term like the trinity of types you need to have for a not doomed group.
@@Bad_Moon_Rising Honestly? I think players just like naming things lol
@@lokiramza Loki is right - it was basically warrior/cleric/enchanter - warriors were thought to be the best group tanks back in the day too, at least on my server. It wasn't until Paladins/Sks started learning how to tank that they became part of the trinity as 'tank'.
Cleric and Enchanter were irreplaceable though - Shaman was just a nice to have for grouping but not part of the trinity