Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I mean, if the moment came where I needed a tanky class in order to do some mob in a zone, screw the caster only composition, because I'm grabbing myself a Warrior or knight.

Why would I need a completely redundant Shaman?

If you lost the restriction on cloth casters Shaman/Enchanter/Monk is an extremely efficient trio, and you could add whichever fourth class you wanted to it.

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

Well there's a period on the server where shamans are fantastic, but that window pretty much closes permanently once velious releases. Massive stats on items, unslowable mobs, and charm doesn't get reeled in until later.

DSM sounds like someone who has been stuck with the very limited toolbox of a shaman for a long time, and he probably just doesn't even know about the crazy things other classes can do (together). Like there's no way this dude knows about coth pulling.

I understand CoTH pulling. The question is simply how many camps actually need it? Very few as far as I am aware. Chardok Royals is what comes to mind.

[Crede]

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

It's not reaching. I would love to see a video of this if you have it. The 55 Enchanter animation is barely better than the 55 Shaman pet, and it cannot tank a slowed WW Dragon. You would be doing a lot of pet resummoning.

Wrong. Much Higher level. Has over 1k more hp. Much better. I’ve killed many nameds with the animation. This would be easy with slow and a cleric in this group. Or if you want to put a mage in. Even easier.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Wrong. Much Higher level. Has over 1k more hp. Much better. I’ve killed many nameds with the animation. This would be easy with slow and a cleric in this group. Or if you want to put a mage in. Even easier.

Would love to see a video!

[Toxigen]

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

It's simple math.

A Mob with 8000 HP is dying in 40 seconds with 2 Enchanters.

A Mob with 8000 HP is dying in 26 seconds with 3 Enchanters.

100 DPS is giving you 14 seconds back per kill. That is saving 30 seconds per hour, assuming a 30 minute respawn. You are going to run out of mobs to kill before respawns in both cases, and you aren't saving enough time to get an extra cycle of respawns in a single play session. Long spawn times cause DPS to fall off sharply after a certain amount, which is why you don't see 6 player XP groups very often.

This world of paper napkin math you choose to exist in is comical.

[Gloomlord]

He should provide one as soon as you provide one where a charm group is perfectly fine with you doing some moronic root rotting.

Seems fair, right?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

This world of paper napkin math you choose to exist in is comical.

You could provide a video to prove me wrong. So far you haven't provided any evidence. I am not sure how your world of saying "you're wrong" is any better lol.

[fortior]

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

I understand CoTH pulling. The question is simply how many camps actually need it? Very few as far as I am aware. Chardok Royals is what comes to mind.

It's not about needing things, it's about you not realizing how good having certain options is because you don't play with those options. The first clue this was happening was when you said having in-group ports isn't a big deal. Anyone who plays with in-group ports being readily available instantly knows how misguided this take is. It enables chasing timed repops across Norrath instead of sitting at the same camp grinding mobs.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It's not about needing things, it's about you not realizing how good having certain options is because you don't play with those options. The first clue this was happening was when you said having in-group ports isn't a big deal. Anyone who plays with in-group ports being readily available instantly knows how misguided this take is. It enables chasing timed repops across Norrath instead of sitting at the same camp grinding mobs.

Ports aren't a big deal on these servers. Have you ever been in a position where you couldn't find a porter? I haven't. We aren't talking about a fresh server where there are no dial-a-port characters yet.

[Crede]

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

He should provide one as soon as you provide one where a charm group is perfectly fine with you doing some moronic root rotting.

Seems fair, right?

Not gonna happen. I’d boot a shaman trying to do this.

[cyxthryth]

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

If you can do more camps with one composition over another, why limit yourself?

Why "limit" the conversation to being about level 60 with full spellbooks?

It could be argued that by insisting the conversation be focused solely (or even mostly) around the capabilities of classes at level 60 with full spellbooks - because that particular/specific specification can allow you to say "Shaman adds WW dragons to the list of camps this group can possibly do" - that you are simply specifying a precondition designed to restrict the conversation to try and make a certain class (Shaman) favorable for specific scenarios (which the OP did not specify any, remember?) and that you are simply fervently trying to win the argument by creating a scenario where your favorite class is the best, and then using that to claim other classes can never be superior.

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

He did not poke any holes, nor has he ever done so in his copy/paste nonsense.

The default assumption for any group is they want to level to 60. That is the purpose of leveling. That is not a contrived precondition.

What definition of "nonsense" are you using again?

There are more reasons to play the game than "wanting to level to 60" even if eventually becoming level 60 is a product/result of playing the game. Regardless, even if "wanting to get to level 60" and "will eventually reach level 60" are accepted preconditions, the discussion is simply about the "best" 4 person all caster/priest group - and such a group will simply begin at level 1, without full spellbooks. Therefore:

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

it could be argued that by insisting the conversation be focused solely (or even mostly) around the capabilities of classes at level 60 with full spellbooks that you are simply specifying a precondition designed to restrict the conversation to try and make a certain class (Shaman) favorable for specific scenarios (which the OP did not specify any, remember?) and that you are simply fervently trying to win the argument by creating a scenario where your favorite class is the best, and then using that to claim other classes can never be superior.