Soloability

[Athe]

I purchased EQ II back at launch and I decided to quit, mainly for the reason that I started a predator, and the only way I could level was to find groups, which was a huge pain in the [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn].Well I decided to come back and I wasn't sure which class would be best to solo with. Is this a viable option in EQ II? I remember in EQ1, Necromancers were the best soloers. Also , is soloing an efficient way to level or is grouping really the way to go? Thanks.

[KBern]

<P>It all depends on you.  Soloing is viable for many classes, but not all.  Necros are one it is viable.</P> <P>Grouping is overall the fastest exp in the game IF you have a good group, and fight in level appropriate areas.</P> <P> </P>

[Psyrus2]

I was in the same boat as you Atheal.  I started a ranger and had one heck of a tme finding a good group.  I played 2 nights a week at best and at least 45 min's was LFG, and I couldnt solo anything (this was before LU13).  So I rolled a Necro and never looked back.  It is true that you will get better xp and loot if you are in a good group, but it makes it really nice to solo until you find that group.  We've had out ups and downs with with different updates, but we are still a solid class that has great utilities that are benificial to any group. <div></div>

[Mentla]

Same here sort of, retired my Ranger at 52.  I like to quest (mostly with ep off) so I have a conj that has just become a necro and a Bruisa.  Bruisa almost exclusively soloed anything that moved until she was 49 and I still very rarely group with my necro. Takes a while to learn the ropes, and I can't emphasis enough the need for a decent level of pet (Adp III or Master) for soloing, but well worth it <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> Fury solos too if you fancy a different challenge, but much tougher. <div></div>