I think the general problem is that:
1) You overestimate the abilities of the Shaman class. You do this through a bit of rhetorical slight of hand, whereby you change your arguments in favor of the Shaman based on the various different roles the Shaman can play. On the surface this makes sense, because the Shaman is a generalist class with a decent amount of utility. But the problem is that the Shaman cannot perform all of these roles at the same time, and in a 4 man group all of the roles the Shaman fills best are already filled by the Enchanter and Cleric, leaving the Shaman either to tank or DPS, neither of which it does better than other available classes (or charm pets).
2) You underestimate the abilities of the Cleric class. Clerics provide more than just rezzing, and a level 49 Pocket Cleric is not the same thing as a well-played and geared level 60 Cleric in group. Beyond CH, which is inarguably superior to Torpor, Clerics also bring substantial HP buffs and stuns, both of which make charming (which, I will remind you, is the bread and butter of a group with two Enchanters) much safer. A Cleric also requires much less APM than a Shaman and thus is much less susceptible to make mistakes due to player fatigue/laziness.
3) You discount the value of group synergy and assume the Shaman's strength as a soloer makes it fit for every group composition. Yes, the Shaman is very good at soloing using certain specific tactics. But solo tactics do not always translate to group tactics, i.e. a Necro can solo well by fear kiting, but fear kiting becomes extremely annoying and impractical if you have melee players in the group. Your love for the Shaman class makes you want to shoehorn it into every conceivable place it might fit, while ignoring the obvious fact that other classes would often perform better in its place.
|