Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
If you think a Druid would bring more than a Shaman, you have lost the debate. Unless you are in an area where the Druid can Charm, you gain very little from adding the Druid. Even the people who disagree with me aren't arguing for a Druid. It is pretty clear at this point you don't even know what a Shaman is capable of if you think a Druid would provide more on average.
The other people have NOT provided math hehe, that's the problem. The data they have provided doesn't help their case. You need to read the thread a bit more carefully.
You are simply saying "I am right and you are wrong", because you are just making a claim without evidence. I can do that too. If I say "Shamans are better and I don't need to provide evidence", we are back to square one. You said it, I said it, and we are at an impasse.
It was a self fulfilling prophecy. You are the one providing the bad arguments. This thread would have been over a long time ago if you could just look at the math objectively and realize Mage DPS isn't as much as you thought.
|
Guys, I think it's obvious he's a troll with the way he speaks.
The pathological lying and twisting your counter arguments into something they weren't.
We're arguing about why mage is better, then you bring in the insane argument that the shaman isn't so redundant if the cleric can throw in his animation when he heals. That's when I said, by that logic, even a druid is better.
Druid would bring damage shield, evac, better nukes and even a potential 3rd charm if it were something like Chardok.
No, noone is arguing for a druid. That's correct. Stop deliberately misinterpreting that point I made, because we all know we're talking about a mage overtaking a shaman here.