Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[PatChapp]

There's a couple spots where ide rather the druid,and a couple where the shaman will do better.
The group of 4 could do gwurms with the shaman tanking,for instance.
I think in chardok I would prefer the druid.
Most seb camps I would take a necro.

Only one I would I would want the mage would be chardok Royals. Mage makes that camp much easier.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

There's a couple spots where ide rather the druid,and a couple where the shaman will do better.
The group of 4 could do gwurms with the shaman tanking,for instance.
I think in chardok I would prefer the druid.
Most seb camps I would take a necro.

Only one I would I would want the mage would be chardok Royals. Mage makes that camp much easier.

Agreed. Different classes shine at specific camps. Thats why I say Enchanter/Mage/Shaman/Necro would be best. You open up all of camp options and still have enough healing and DPS.

To Troxx, you are the only one who is getting triggered. You had to double post to vote on your own poll lol.

[Troxx]

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

I don't know why you think it bothers me...

And how many posts have you wracked up in this thread alone. You seem to have OCD about always being right. You always have the last post. Anyone disagreeing with you or having the most recent post gets you

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It’s why we’re nearly on page 340. It’s why we will eventually hit page 400 … and then 500. Cause you can’t resist it. You won’t stop. And I’m so fucking amused that I’ll keep prodding your angsty arse along.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In the meantime I recommend that those collectively following along cast your vote. In this theoretical group we are drafting and considering the full scope of 1-60 play. All camps. All zones. Creature comforts. Mobility. Usefulness not just farming Ixblatthefckzitsname. Which would you rather have.

Druid or shaman.

I’ll go first.

[cyxthryth]

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

Druid or shaman.

My vote would be Druid.

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

Agreed.

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

If you were to attempt to utilize the fact that another particular/specific poster seemed to agree with you on one or more particular points to attempt to claim, state, or otherwise imply/reveal/betray/expose (intentionally or otherwise) that you believe that could, would, or did somehow strengthen your argument, that would simply be an example of you claiming your argument is strengthened due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum - like you previously (intentionally or otherwise) attempted to claim by attempting to claim/imply that it was relevant that you and OP both (apparently) believe that "OP's post was/is general", and that that somehow meant there are no goalposts and/or that you have not moved the goalposts, simply due to you (and OP) making and agreeing with that claim. You have - laughably - still not provided the meaning that you were attempting to convey by "general" (or what meaning you believed the OP was attempting to convey causing you to - seemingly - agree with them).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

As I have stated many times shamans are arguably tied for first as the single standalone best solo class in the game. Top 3 for standard groups. Top 2 for duos. Cleric/ench is best but cut out the enchanter and shaman can duo with pretty much anything to great effect. Sham + any melee (even rog let the sham tank. Sham plus any pet class. Heck even 2 shamans if you split the “extra” duties, rock 2 pets, stagger who casts what dots, etc.

Top tier for raids too.

Troxx seems to think Shamans are pretty good.

OP thinks so too.

You don't have to bend over backwards to try and exclude Shamans just to try and "win" against me.

I don't have any Mage hate. I like Mages. I like Wizards too. But I am also realistic about how the game works.

[Troxx]

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

As I have stated many times shamans are arguably tied for first as the single standalone best solo class in the game. Top 3 for standard groups. Top 2 for duos. Cleric/ench is best but cut out the enchanter and shaman can duo with pretty much anything to great effect. Sham + any melee (even rog let the sham tank. Sham plus any pet class. Heck even 2 shamans if you split the “extra” duties, rock 2 pets, stagger who casts what dots, etc.

Top tier for raids too.

They simply do not thrive in this theoretical group as well as others.

You forgot the relevant part of the quote. Conveniently left out so it fits your agenda? I have come to expect nothing less from ya DSM. Quote the whole me, not excluding the parts you find objectionable.

I have lots of love for shamans. Overpowered class to be honest. But reference the above part I appropriately quoted and made BOLD SO YOU CAN READ IT BETTER

But … when you can’t win the argument ..

If you can’t objectively make the case that starting with the agreed upon best of the best starting three classes in this theoretical 4 man group …

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Remove the cleric? What a dumb thing to even consider.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You forgot the relevant part of the quote. Conveniently left out so it fits your agenda? I have come to expect nothing less from ya DSM. Quote the whole me, not excluding the parts you find objectionable.

I have lots of love for shamans. Overpowered class to be honest. But reference the above part I appropriately quoted and made BOLD SO YOU CAN READ IT BETTER

I read that part the first time. It is simply a silly comment based on your description above. Completely contrary to what you wrote above.

It is clear you are only rating Shamans lower here out of some desire to prove me wrong. A Shaman doesn't suddenly lose it's overpowered nature in a group with one more person lol.

[cyxthryth]

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

Completely contrary to what you wrote

It would - seemingly - appear that you have a certain amount of experience with posting things that are contrary to what you have already posted, and I submit the following - irrefutable - proof/evidence:

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM attempting to move the goalposts by bringing a 5th "pocket" character into his "arguments" (even though this is intended to be a civil discussion - not an argument) pertaining to the "Best 4 person all caster/priest group" discussion":

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

OP never said you couldn't have a pocket cleric. I am not sure why people keep thinking this is not a possible route to take. Between four people it would be trivial to level a cleric to 39. It is pretty common for people to make pocket clerics on P99.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM attempted to accuse others of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum:

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

The post history is clear. You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else. I find it highly amusing.

Here is my reply to DSM's attempt, in which I point out to him the irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - that DSM himself attempted - laughably - to claim (intentionally or otherise) that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum strengthened his argument when one (1) single other person seemed to agree with him:

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

Your post would seem to betray that you are aware that you have moved goalposts, because you are now attempting (disingenuously) to validate said goalpost-moving by stating that it is objectively true that the OP's post "is general" and that this somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts" by changing the basis of the discussion (from being about 4 priests/casters, to being about 4 priests/casters plus X amount of pocket Clerics, or other pocket classes). It is not objectively true that you are "not moving the goalposts" just because you and OP both agree that the OP's post "was general" and that that somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts". That is simply you - laughably - claiming you (and OP) are correct due to argumentum ad populum hehe. This really isn't hard.

Please clarify what you mean by stating OP's post "was general"?

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM tried to claim:

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

Assuming your group plays correctly, you will DPS the same way every time, the same as if you were solo.

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

I am very confident it won't change in a group scenario.

Here re is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM simply contradicted himself afterward by subsequently posting:

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

in a group setting, there are too many variables out of your control that can skew the data

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

Once you add in outside variables, that changes the DPS equation NOT because of what the class can do, but because of what other players are doing.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM's post claiming Troxx's data was way different from Allishia's:

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

Also Allishia's numbers were way different from yours

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM's post to Allishia when they provided their initial data:

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

Thanks for the data! I'll get the logs from you a bit later today. Just looking at it here, the numbers are the same as Troxx's data.

As I have repeatedly stated - it is not always clear to other posters what particular position/claim/"argument"(s) DSM is defending at any given time due to how often he has moved the goalposts & edited his posts.

For these reasons - which I have repeatedly stated - I am not sure which particular/specific belief/claim/stange/"argument"(s) that DSM is currently holding/defending/"arguing"; it would be helpful if he could elaborate/clarify/specify for the sake of civil discussion.

[Danth]

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

A Shaman doesn't suddenly lose it's overpowered nature in a group with one more person lol.

Admittedly I haven't read most of the past ~250 pages (wow!), but I've read the past dozen posts or so:

Shaman loses some of its power due to some of its best abilities--haste and slow--being redundant in this group. The shaman adds less to this group than what it can do solo or as the anchor of a typical melee duo. So, here, it's merely a strong character rather than an overpowered (or necessarily the best--I like necromancer better, as said before) addition.

Unlike you I do look down on magicians; I consider them little more than a crappier necromancer suited mainly to bad or low-motivated players. At least a shaman has some remaining advantages of its own right even when its best advantages are nullified. Magician looks at necromancer and feels small and useless. Heck, we have another thread on the forum, right now, where there's considerable agreement as to how bad magicians are in a world where necromancers also exist.

Comparing the shaman to a druid makes for an interesting task. Druids didn't get much thought earlier in the thread but in truth druids are one of the game's most popular enchanter partners so obviously they fit in here. They provide ports so the group doesn't have to constantly pay for them or level their own port-mule, they do what they do without needing 100K+ worth of spells, they have a part-time charm option in some of the best high-level zones, they're a fair choice. Compared to shaman it has less mana regeneration, can't really act as a tank, and gives up malo but it does get a lot in compensation. Both of them allow the group to break up into two powerful duos when desired, and both provide buff and heal back-up in case the cleric doesn't log on (a serious weakness for Team Mage--stuff like that happens in the real world). It's pretty close.

Chalk me up as a tie for now. I'm leaning slightly toward druid due mainly to it being so much cheaper, but it's a weak lean and I don't feel very emphatic about it. I might change my mind later if someone makes a particularly sound argument for one over the other but for a few minutes' thought they look pretty close overall.

Danth

[cyxthryth]

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

I find it interesting you are trying so hard to talk up Druids simply because you cannot say anything good about Shamans, for fear of me being right.

The above Quote is simply an example of you sharing your opinion of what is interesting, and you seemingly attempting - laughably - to make claims about what others or a particular/specific other can or cannot say, as if you have knowledge over what they can or cannot say and can therefore make objective claims such as that "they cannot say anything good about shamans, for fear of you being right" (which would also seem to imply that you believe you have knowledge of and cann therefore make objective claims about others' or a particular/specific other's fears).

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

Any class can work fine as the fourth member, Druid and Wizard included. But it is amusing to see you struggle to try and come up with why a Druid would be superior in a general sense.

You have not provided the definition that you are using for "general", so I am not sure what point you think you are making or what fact you are refuting, or what meaning you are attempting to convey by stating "why a Druid would be superior in a general sense".

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

You can get PoTG and ports from any outside Druid. Nobody has argued against people getting ports/buffs from people outside of the four man group (yet). I am sure that will probably happen now.

We are not here to "argue" - we are here to - civilly - discuss the "Best 4 person all caster/priest group" and, unfortunately for you: 4 =/= 4 + X pocket characters, which is a fact that has been previously stated to you multiple times by multiple posters.

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

Snare isn't necessary. Enchanters solo perfectly fine using Charmed pets without it. When having two Enchanters and a Shaman Charm breaks are not an issue with the safety all three classes provide. I have never seen a group need snare for Charm safety.

The problem is that nobody has stated/claimed/implied that "snare is necessary", and you have simply apparently built a strawman that somebody has stated/claimed/implied such so that you can argue against that strawman. I am not sure why you have - seemingly - done that. Can you please explain for the sake of civil discussion?

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

Druid charming is restricted to specific zones, so it is going to be less useful overall, and you still have the same problem of having 3x Charmed pets, which is riskier. Just pick a third Enchanter at that point since you can charm everywhere.

The above Quote is simply an example of you sharing your opinion of what is going to be "less useful overall"; which is simply your opinion (and which you have provided zero data/evidence or logic or math that supports such opinion nor explains why you hold/"argue" it).

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

Alternatively, you could pick a Shaman to open up camps that charming classes have problems with.

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

Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you SHOULD do something and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean it's the "best" thing. Which is what this thread is about.