Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[bcbrown]

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

Please quote me where I said any of this. The entire purpose of comparing a Mage's DPS to a Shaman's DPS is to get an idea of what the gap is. This makes it easier to determine the what the DPS loss is vs. the utility gained.

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

In total that means I can do 152 DPS sustained pretty consistently in an easier area like Seb. Shamans aren't even a DPS class.

Remember, I never said underpowered = bad. It just means Mages don't bring a lot to the table (which they sadly don't outside of CoTH). I wouldn't bring a Mage if that's all they can do. Shamans can output your DPS if necessary, have a decently tanky pet with Torpor, and they have a lot more utility to boot. This is talking about level 60 grouping.

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

Even with 2 mobs root rotted while the Enchanters are killing with Charm pets a Shaman will hit the Mage's minimum DPS.

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

DPS is the key argument for bringing a Mage, and they can't even hit higher numbers than a Shaman. Their lack of utility means they are just sub-par compared to a Shaman in Seb. That isn't to say you can't play with a Mage. If you want to that's great! Most people aren't Min/Maxing their groups to begin with, regardless of what other people try to claim hehe. Remember this is level 60 we are talking about.

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

But at least for the Seb example, the numbers aren't adding up to make Mages special at all. At best they can DPS at the same level as a Shaman. [...] Having Torpor/Epic means a Shaman can sustain the DPS longer, without needing a break.

[bcbrown]

You were already talking about root-rotting in the same post when you claimed you never said that.

Thank you for conceding that you did and do claim that "a shaman could put out dps similar to a 60 focused water pet mage in a group."

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

Please quote me where I said any of this. The entire purpose of comparing a Mage's DPS to a Shaman's DPS is to get an idea of what the gap is. This makes it easier to determine the what the DPS loss is vs. the utility gained.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gdAIheodtY - Here is an example of root rotting in Velks. You can provide a video of a Mage killing the same mobs, and we can see who wins!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You were already talking about root-rotting in the same post when you claimed you never said that.

Thank you for conceding that you did and do claim that "a shaman could put out dps similar to a 60 focused water pet mage in a group."

This is a silly attempt at a gotcha. Look at the two quotes below:

1. "A shaman could put out dps similar to a 60 focused water pet mage in a group."

2. "A Shaman could put out dps similar to a 60 focused water pet mage in a group while root rotting is their primary function in a group killing XP mobs".

To claim the two quotes are the same is simply nonsense. The first quote is too vague, and doesn't describe the situation in which a Shaman can increase their DPS. It's an attempt to make it sound like I was saying Shamans out DPS Mages in all scenarios, which isn't true.

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

Can you think of any conceivable scenario where it would be beneficial to have the Shaman join the group only to "root/rot [mobs off to the side] while doing little else"?

Wouldn't the Shaman and the group each be better off if the Shaman were just soloing, in that case? Since the Shaman is providing no utility value to the group, and the group is doing nothing to increase the Shaman's kill speed?

Do you see how ridiculous this idea is now?

Sure. A group of level 60s getting some XP to make up for the 4-10% loss in XP you get for being resurrected. You don't need to do advanced group tactics to kill mobs that a Shaman or Enchanter could quickly solo.

[Vexenu]

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

Sure. A group of level 60s getting some XP to make up for the 4-10% loss in XP you get for being resurrected. You don't need to do advanced group tactics to kill mobs that a Shaman or Enchanter could quickly solo.

Ok, but can you admit that even in this scenario, both the Shaman and the other members of the group would each be getting better XP if the Shaman were just root rotting solo?

What you are suggesting is literally no different than a Bard joining an XP group and swarm kiting off to the side, or a Wizard doing the same while quadding. It is completely asinine as well as dishonest to suggest that anyone in the history of EQ has ever "grouped" in this manner (with the obvious exception of PLing), much less that this sort of grouping arrangement is somehow ideal. The reason it is NOT done is very obvious: the player killing mobs off to the side of the group might as well be soloing and keeping all the XP for himself rather than sharing it with three other players. Further, said player offers NOTHING of value to the group otherwise if playing in this manner, and a Shaman playing in this manner brings no utility or synergy since he is endlessly canni dancing/Torporing/DoTing and has no time to slow, heal, tank, etc...

This latest argument of yours perfectly illustrates how you endlessly shift the goalposts and dishonestly argue that the Shaman is capable of performing 10 different group roles at the same time.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Ok, but can you admit that even in this scenario, both the Shaman and the other members of the group would each be getting better XP if the Shaman were just root rotting solo?

What you are suggesting is literally no different than a Bard joining an XP group and swarm kiting off to the side, or a Wizard doing the same while quadding. It is completely asinine as well as dishonest to suggest that anyone in the history of EQ has ever "grouped" in this manner (with the obvious exception of PLing), much less that this sort of grouping arrangement is somehow ideal. The reason it is NOT done is very obvious: the player killing mobs off to the side of the group might as well be soloing and keeping all the XP for himself rather than sharing it with three other players. Further, said player offers NOTHING of value to the group otherwise if playing in this manner, and a Shaman playing in this manner brings no utility or synergy since he is endlessly canni dancing/Torporing/DoTing and has no time to slow, heal, tank, etc...

This latest argument of yours perfectly illustrates how you endlessly shift the goalposts and dishonestly argue that the Shaman is capable of performing 10 different group roles at the same time.

Saying a valid strategy you can do in the game is "dishonest and asanine" is silly. You still haven't told me what goal post have been moved.

[Ripqozko]

Kittens be trolling like crazy these days

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Thanks for the quotes bcbrown!

In total that means I can do 152 DPS sustained pretty consistently in an easier area like Seb. Shamans aren't even a DPS class.

This is an example of root rotting DPS.

Even with 2 mobs root rotted while the Enchanters are killing with Charm pets a Shaman will hit the Mage's minimum DPS.

This was when Troxx was showing his average DPS as 70 DPS. His numbers were off, which means the discussion changed once better evidence was provided.

DPS is the key argument for bringing a Mage, and they can't even hit higher numbers than a Shaman. Their lack of utility means they are just sub-par compared to a Shaman in Seb.

This is root rotting again.

But at least for the Seb example, the numbers aren't adding up to make Mages special at all.

This is root rotting again.

[bcbrown]

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

This is an example of root rotting DPS.

Why are you calling out root rotting? Are you saying root rotting doesn't matter?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Why are you calling out root rotting? Are you saying root rotting doesn't matter?

No, I am saying all the quotes you provided were quotes of me talking about DPS in a root rotting scenario. That isn't me saying a Shaman is out DPSing a Mage on a single target situation.

When people claim that I am saying Shamans out DPS Mages, they never put it in the context of root rotting. This leads to the false assumption that I am saying Shamans out DPS Mages in a single target scenario.

[bcbrown]

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

No, I am saying all the quotes you provided were quotes of me talking about DPS in a root rotting scenario. That isn't me saying a Shaman is out DPSing a Mage on a single target situation.

5c. Fact: DSM claimed that a shaman could put out dps similar to a 60 focused water pet mage in a group.

You disputed this quote, but it's not about a single target situation, this is just about grouping. Do you still dispute this?