Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[PlsNoBan]

Originally Posted by PlsNoBan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't have to convince anyone that I'm right. Literally everyone but you already knows.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

You have lost the debate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum is a fallacy hehe.

[PlsNoBan]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You have lost the debate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum is a fallacy hehe.

You

Are

Braindead

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I am not.

Originally Posted by PlsNoBan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Literally everyone but you already knows.

You are using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum to try and win the debate. I am sorry, but that doesn't work. It is a fallacy.

Provide evidence for your claims please, or admit defeat.

[PatChapp]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The same thing can be said for Malo. A Malosini'ed pet is a happy pet. With two healers (a Shaman heals much better than a Druid), you are in a good spot without Snare. Plus a Shaman can AoE slow in an emergency if you really need to drop mob DPS.

And for the sake of argument, let's say we could prove snare is far superior safety wise. That would still mean you wouldn't bring a Mage hehe. It would just mean people have been underestimating the poor Druids!

I think safetywise it would depend on the mobs MR. Enchanter can debuff -80 with some cheap items, bit more with some slightly more expensive ones,topping out at -95 I believe.
If the mobs aren't very high mr,that should bring most to near zero

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by PatChapp [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think safetywise it would depend on the mobs MR. Enchanter can debuff -80 with some cheap items, bit more with some slightly more expensive ones,topping out at -95 I believe.
If the mobs aren't very high mr,that should bring most to near zero

Malosini adds an extra -60. If the mob never breaks Charm due to their MR being low enough already, you wouldn't need snare either.

[Danth]

Debate has subtly shifted from shaman matching magician damage in normal situatons--that's been largely walked back from--to the classic offense vs. defense/utility debate that will rage as long as this genre exists. Nobody's winning that one and if someone even could it would indicate a major game balance problem.

My problem with a magician isn't even the shaman, exactly, but that unless I need to be Call of the Hero'd someplace I will always prefer a necromancer. A Shaman can at least justify himself once in awhile--your cleric goes AFK, or doesn't log on, you go to West Wastes and want a pseudo-tank, etc. I regard both magician and shaman as a 4th in that group as a battle of the back-ups but between them I still like the shaman better, accepting that in practice the difference in outcome will be relatively minor in either case and there are some individual locations that favor the magician.

Danth

[PatChapp]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Malosini adds an extra -60. If the mob never breaks Charm due to their MR being low enough already, you wouldn't need snare either.

Mobs at this level are likely to require boltrans, which is the shorter duration charm. Your still dealing with regular breaks,even if the mobs are 0mr.
Malo is helpful for sure, especially since a lot of enchanters for some reason don't use the cheap -mr gear.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Debate has subtly shifted from shaman matching magician damage in normal situatons--that's been largely walked back from--to the classic offense vs. defense/utility debate that will rage as long as this genre exists. Nobody's winning that one and if someone even could it would indicate a major game balance problem.

My problem with a magician isn't even the shaman, exactly, but that unless I need to be Call of the Hero'd someplace I will always prefer a necromancer. A Shaman can at least justify himself once in awhile--your cleric goes AFK, or doesn't log on, you go to West Wastes and want a pseudo-tank, etc. I regard both magician and shaman as a 4th in that group as a battle of the back-ups but between them I still like the shaman better, accepting that in practice the difference in outcome will be relatively minor in either case and there are some individual locations that favor the magician.

Danth

I didn't walk it back to be honest. Someone simply pointed out that you could get a bit more DPS from clickies. It was a good point, and changes the equation a bit, but a Shaman can also get more DPS from clickies. My calculations for 80DPS vs. 70DPS weren't taking into account Shaman or Mage clickies. It wasn't a one sided shift.

Math-wise Mage and Shaman DPS doesn't have a vast gulf, like people have been trying to claim. The entire argument of bringing a Mage is Malo + Charm Break Safety + DPS. A Shaman has Malo + Charm Break Safety covered, and DPS wise the different isn't vast. A difference in 30 DPS isn't going to matter with two Charmed Enchanter pets. A Shaman is simply bringing a much broader toolkit to the table without a huge sacrifice in DPS.

Again, this is assuming a level 60 group that doesn't need CoTH. As I have always stated, a Mage is superior levels 1-59, because Torpor is what pushes the Shaman ahead.

[Gloomlord]

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.