EQ TLP - Mischief (Free Trade / Random Loot)

Guess what all classes are equal when you are 675th in the que and the servers are unplayable, that's the truth.

True. But, out of all the classes in the queue, which one are you REALLY praying comes through it?

*cough* enchanter *cough*

If you cannot be convinced that sk/shm is the best basis and not clr/enc than why even argue it? You've already made up your mind based on theory crafting even though almost every tlp veteran who boxes goes a very different route.

Enchanters are god tier for leveling. They are not god tier for casual grinds, for long term but distracted play, for many many encounters where charm isn't available, for anything 70+ where they are nerfed into the ground. If you ARE willing to put in the work to have a class that is the best, there are two other classes that get charm spells and both of them are superior damage. You could run sk/shm/nec. You could run tank/bard/druid. You just have to not be a giant pussy and actually use charm and your limited but quite sufficient tools to handle charming.

Or you can think that the 90% of vets who dodge enchanter in their own box armies are all lazy shitters and you can do better and go for it. They'll all thank you for playing enchanter.

You plan your box team for 9+ months in the future and I'll plan my box team for what's the best for the first 9 months

If he wants to set specifications for what qualifies as the best. I don't mind arguing those points at all. When I hear best, I think most powerful. Able to do things that the other trios cannot do.

If we're talking best for his specific situation or your specific situation, then yah I can get on board with enchanter not being the best for someone who gets distracted or wants to get drunk and high and not take on the responsibility of an enchanter. I can totally understand those things.

If you aren't looking to get yourself into the situations where the enchanter dominates, then it's not a big deal.

I personally want to clear high lvl camps that aren't possible with the other trios. If I have to put in "more work" to do it... yeah well that makes sense to me.

Charming as a druid sucked. I didn't have the magic resists debuff like enchanters did, if I remember right

yerm said:

Or you can think that the 90% of vets who dodge enchanter in their own box armies are all lazy shitters and you can do better and go for it. They'll all thank you for playing enchanter.

Click to expand...

How can you make this comment when literally the last 4 people who commented about this subject admitted that they either couldn't be bothered to pay that much attention or that it was too exhausting...

I am not calling anyone LAZY. Just because you don't want to put in the work that a chanter requires, does not make you lazy, someone else is making this correlation but I never said that.

I admit that an enchanter is a lot of work and I have no issues if the reason someone doesn't want to play one is because they are exhausting or boring or because they don't want to worry about charm pets. Those are all completely fine reasons. But, none of them are "because they are a shit class"

This entire thing is pants on head stupid. There's 2 basic camps here, the people that want to plan for longterm and the people that are probably going to reroll again the next TLP cycle or will eventually change mains. SK/SHM/Bard is pretty good at jump and just gets better as expansions go on. Cleric/Enchanter/X people are correct that it's awesome now, but there's a definite expiration to it being awesome. Both groups are right in that context. One thing that the cleric/enchanter/X people is that if X is also a caster that they can go all gnome, which is for sure a very strong selling point.

TJT said:

Your hardon for gnomes disturbs me.

Click to expand...

I'm just spreading the Gospel.

More kegkilla sightings.

LachiusTZ said:

The day I model decisions off what "vet" EQ TLP players do, put a fucking tag on my toe and bury me

Click to expand...

If someone comes to a forum and asks for recommendations, what else is there to go with? The people I consider the most skilled in eq who box go with bards.

Los_Necros said:

How can you make this comment when literally the last 4 people who commented about this subject admitted that they either couldn't be bothered to pay that much attention or that it was too exhausting...

I am not calling anyone LAZY. Just because you don't want to put in the work that a chanter requires, does not make you lazy, someone else is making this correlation but I never said that.

I admit that an enchanter is a lot of work and I have no issues if the reason someone doesn't want to play one is because they are exhausting or boring or because they don't want to worry about charm pets. Those are all completely fine reasons. But, none of them are "because they are a shit class"

Click to expand...

I can make this comment because I just did the enc/clr duo on rizlona, originally +mage and now also +ranger. There are places mostly off limits to me because of my composition. I have no way of doing motm shit without help. I suffer dramatically if trying to play while doing other things, and sometimes I HAVE to do other things so there is no "just focus on eq" option, and I refuse to believe that isn't true for anyone but a jobless antisocial degenerate.

Enchanter is a short term pick. It's good initially and falls off, it's good in some spots and shit in others, it's good for short focused play spurts and shit for long distracted grinds. It's best in theory. It's replaced over 90% of the time in practice.

edit - note - I literally run enc/clr/mag/rng on rizlona. Ranger added mid luclin.

Los_Necros said:

Right... But, the discussion is the best. I have no problem if the discussion is I just don't feel like playing a chanter because it's exhausting or because they suck on raids after 2 expansions.

If we want to discuss the best 3 box without involving a chanter, we can do that. No one is ever going to convince me that either of his suggested trios are more powerful than chanter/cleric.

Click to expand...

the only thing enchanter/clr can do better than sk/shm is solo brother q/z in classic, and kill non named. thats it.

LachiusTZ said:

You are a moron

Click to expand...

Can you name something that the enc/clr can do better? Id love to hear it.

yerm said:

If someone comes to a forum and asks for recommendations, what else is there to go with? The people I consider the most skilled in eq who box go with bards.



I can make this comment because I just did the enc/clr duo on rizlona, originally +mage and now also +ranger. There are places mostly off limits to me because of my composition. I have no way of doing motm shit without help. I suffer dramatically if trying to play while doing other things, and sometimes I HAVE to do other things so there is no "just focus on eq" option, and I refuse to believe that isn't true for anyone but a jobless antisocial degenerate.

Enchanter is a short term pick. It's good initially and falls off, it's good in some spots and shit in others, it's good for short focused play spurts and shit for long distracted grinds. It's best in theory. It's replaced over 90% of the time in practice.

edit - note - I literally run enc/clr/mag/rng on rizlona. Ranger added mid luclin.

Click to expand...

This is why my 3rd becomes SK. Because it helps the downsides of chanter/cleric and fixes the issues if your chanter/cleric/mage trio. You can do anything with chanter/cleric/sk that any other trio can do.

Again, I just think there is some confusion here like I am trying to dis anyone for not playing a chanter. Because your reasons just go right back to "trying to play while doing other things."

It's just if someone asks me what the best trio is, I assume they are trying to min/max unless they specify otherwise.

I guess I take the question/discussion too straight forward and don't take into account the "trying to play while doing other things" as being a factor when someone wants to discuss best.

I genuinely just try to give the best answer to what the person is asking about. So, it does completely depend on the person asking the question. I agree that someone should not play an enchanter if they don't want to. There are much more fun and relaxing trios that are still extremely strong.

Shammy, Bard, SK
or
Shammy, Bard, Monk
do sound VERY fun and powerful and lasting and would probably be one of my choices. If I took enchanter out of the equation

Cupie12 said:

the only thing enchanter/clr can do better than sk/shm is solo brother q/z in classic, and kill non named. thats it.

Click to expand...

The only thing chanter/cleric can do better than sk/shm is duo brother q/z, duo king/queen in chardok. duo named camps faster/more efficiently... exp/grind faster... i can't think of what the sk/shammy does better.

I'd like to see the sk/shammy do the live side of guk king camp. Chanter/cleric can do that at lvl 40.

What exactly is an sk/shammy doing that a chanter/cleric can't do? And if you're going to start off in velious+ with any of your examples, then let's add SK to chanter/cleric since we are talking about trio. The chanter/cleric just doesn't really need a trio and that's why I use it as an example because chanter/cleric is as powerful as non chanter trios in classic/kunark.

yah but lots of duos can do tranix. necro/shammy can do easily too. Just have to split him out and slow him and have any sort of healing lol.

edit: Although I guess in my example the necro is probably better than the SK in classic lol. But either way. FD class + shammy = easy