Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Danth]

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

Lol, this has nothing to do with this thread.

Original poster already said his group decided on shaman/necromancer x2/enchanter so the thread's completed its purpose. Nothing left to do but shoot the breeze.

With respect to single target damage dealt, the magician wants the constant-activity group Shamwowi is using in his hypothetical comparison. Groups that stop for downtime lose a lot of value from the damage shield, the pet won't be quite as strong proportionally, and periodic burst will tend to favor the shaman in this group because the shaman's a near-tank who doesn't care if he rips aggro while the magician's a squishy who doesn't want to rip aggro off the pets so the mage has to hold back more. The magician can readily out-burst the shaman when he has perfect front-loaded aggro generation from something like a shadowknight but they don't have that here.

I recollect Shamwowi said he considers the magician better for experience grinds where constant-activity chain pulls have the most relevance. I don't know the gulf here is as wide as the arguing outwardly suggests.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Original poster already said his group decided on shaman/necromancer x2/enchanter so the thread's completed its purpose. Nothing left to do but shoot the breeze.

With respect to single target damage dealt, the magician wants the constant-activity group Shamwowi is using in his hypothetical comparison. Groups that stop for downtime lose a lot of value from the damage shield, the pet won't be quite as strong proportionally, and periodic burst will tend to favor the shaman in this group because the shaman's a near-tank who doesn't care if he rips aggro while the magician's a squishy who doesn't want to rip aggro off the pets so the mage has to hold back more. The magician can readily out-burst the shaman when he has perfect front-loaded aggro generation from something like a shadowknight but they don't have that here.

I do recollect Shamwowi said he considers the magician better for experience grinds where constant-activity chain pulls have the most relevance. I don't know the gulf here is as wide as the arguing outwardly suggests.

Well said.

And yes, a Mage can out DPS a Shaman for very short periods of time by just spamming their nuke spell, but that is tough to do with agro, as Danth points out, and will drain your mana, as I have pointed out.

Mages are better before level 60, because Torpor is what propels a Shaman far ahead of a Mage. I have said this repeatedly. But since OP never mentioned the level range for his scenario, I am assuming a group composition that wants to play at all level ranges, including 60. If it is a static group you would have to decide on whether you want a Mage for easier leveling 1-59, or a Shaman for level 60 camps. That will depend on what you want to do with the group. For me I would prefer a group that could do level 60 camps, so you can experience more of the game and get really good items. With a 4 man static the leveling experience will be great no matter what. It will fly by. I think it would be a waste to use the Mage to level the group a bit faster, at the cost of them basically being dead weight for the most part at 60.

[Danth]

Magician would fare best for a player who's either innately limited (say, a little kid or a non-gamer), or a player who has no intention of putting all that much work into his character. Magician would work fine if it's topping out at level 55-57 or some such and wearing rags, heck gearless if it wants, while the shaman's going to be a downer if played by the same individual, not useless, but always haunted by the knowledge of how far it is from its potential. Shamans require a lot of investment to get the most out of them, both time and platinum, it's probably the class's largest drawback.

The shaman's single target damage dealt is lower than the magician's on average, but not by so much as most folks typically expect. Part of the reason for the larger gulf, in usual practice, is because damage isn't everything and the shaman can usually find other better things to do to make the group more comfortable and the game session more pleasant while the magician has no choice but to deal damage since it's all he can do. Power gamers tend to ignore things like convenience or mental fatigue but such factors, with real people involved, are quite often the difference between having say a 2 hour session versus going three or four hours.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Magician would fare best for a player who's either innately limited (say, a little kid or a non-gamer), or a player who has no intention of putting all that much work into his character. Magician would work fine if it's topping out at level 55-57 or some such and wearing rags, heck gearless if it wants, while the shaman's going to be a downer if played by the same individual, not useless, but always haunted by the knowledge of how far it is from its potential. Shamans do require a lot of investment to get the most out of them, both time and platinum, it's probably the class's largest drawback.

100% agree. Other circumstances change the equation, such as the player's ability or time. You aren't going to be asking an 8 year old to play an Enchanter hehe.

A Shaman has a huge investment for sure. With a 4 man static you could farm plat pretty well to get your Shaman Torpor, and then your static would be in a great spot.

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

The shaman's single target damage dealt is lower than the magician's on average, but not by so much as most folks typically expect. Part of the reason for the larger gulf, in usual practice, is because damage isn't everything and the shaman can usually find other better things to do to make the group more comfortable and the game session more pleasant while the magician has no choice but to deal damage since it's all he can do. Power gamers tend to ignore things like convenience or mental fatigue but such factors, with real people involved, are quite often the difference between having say a 2 hour session versus going three or four hours.

Agreed.

[Crede]

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

It's really simple. It is a fact a Shaman can output the same DPS as a Mage. Unless you need CoTH, there really is no reason not to bring a Shaman instead to benefit from the utility. Any slowed mob can be face tanked by the Shaman too if you really care about another tank[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Torpor is a powerful tanking tool, plus a Shaman can generate agro really well with spamming slow.

Lol, it's not a fact. You've proved nothing to any of us, nothing real, except 1-2 shaman fights where you're specifically trying to make a point vs actual real sustained mage dps with no focus/epic over an extended period of time. And if we can cherry pick 1-2 fights, then a mage can burst for far more dps.

Sorry, continually repeating something, doesn't make it true, real, or factual [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Lol, it's not a fact. You've proved nothing to any of us, nothing real, except 1-2 shaman fights where you're specifically trying to make a point vs actual real sustained mage dps with no focus/epic over an extended period of time. And if we can cherry pick 1-2 fights, then a mage can burst for far more dps.

Sorry, continually repeating something, doesn't make it true, real, or factual [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The math is factual. If you think a Mage's Pet DPS wasn't represented correctly with Troxx's parses, do your own and share it.

You should take your own advice. Repeating "the factual math isn't true" doesn't make it so.

I am sorry Mage DPS isn't great on P99. I didn't balance the classes hehe.

Mage Epic is pretty rare, so I wouldn't count on having a Mage with an Epic.

Nobody is debating that a Mage can out DPS a shaman via burst. But a Wizard can out DPS a mage with burst. I don't see you arguing for Wizard in this comp[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] The problem is when you are bursting you either run out of mana, or get agro. Then your DPS will be lower for the next few fights. It averages out in the end.

[PatChapp]

DPS isn't an issue in a group with multiple charm pets, is the most worthless part of this argument.
You want utility. Mage pet to backup tank on breaks os somewhat useful,but a big dumb bear with torpor can do it better.
Neither is optimal, both would work.
Continue flinging poo from your cages

A hasted and torched illis frog will clock near 200dps. Two of them don't need help to kill things

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

DPS isn't an issue in a group with multiple charm pets, is the most worthless part of this argument.
You want utility. Mage pet to backup tank on breaks os somewhat useful,but a big dumb bear with torpor can do it better.
Neither is optimal, both would work.
Continue flinging poo from your cages

Shaman is much more optimal than a Mage, unless you need CoTH. I agree with the rest of this.

[Crede]

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

The math is factual. If you think a Mage's Pet DPS wasn't represented correctly with Troxx's parses, do your own and share it.

You should take your own advice. Repeating "the factual math isn't true" doesn't make it so.

I am sorry Mage DPS isn't great on P99. I didn't balance the classes hehe.

Mage Epic is pretty rare, so I wouldn't count on having a Mage with an Epic.

Nobody is debating that a Mage can out DPS a shaman via burst. But a Wizard can out DPS a mage with burst. I don't see you arguing for Wizard in this comp[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] The problem is when you are bursting you either run out of mana, or get agro. Then your DPS will be lower for the next few fights. It averages out in the end.

Troxx's math was fine. It would have been even better if he had a focused/epic pet.

Your shaman math isn't factual. It's just numbers on a screen. You haven't provided any real time numbers. 1-2 fights doesn't count. Shamans on average will not dps like a mage.

I am sorry you proved nothing and used all that time trying to post numbers. Please come back when you actually have real data, not just shamans trying to flex their dps to win a lost debate.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Troxx's math was fine. It would have been even better if he had a focused/epic pet.

Your shaman math isn't factual. It's just numbers on a screen. You haven't provided any real time numbers. 1-2 fights doesn't count. Shamans on average will not dps like a mage.

I am sorry you proved nothing and used all that time trying to post numbers. Please come back when you actually have real data, not just shamans trying to flex their dps to win a lost debate.

My Shaman data is factual "real time numbers". Troxx brought single encounters, and so did I lol. How many fights do you want? I'll post a few more logs. It doesn't change.

My data is better than Troxx's because it's an actual log lol. With Troxx's data we have to assume his parser is correct.

You can parse my data right now if you don't believe it. I am even showing what mob I fought, so you can do the same and post your own logs with a Mage. We don't know what mobs Troxx was fighting.

My base DPS is going to be 60 with Bane + Envenomed Bolt. The only thing that is going to vary is my pet DPS, but that is true of a Mage as well.