Iksar Shaman - Solo Challenges?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

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

Agreed. Your idea that you can simply state something is true without anything to back it up is a joke. Unfortunately trolling isn't valid evidence either, even though that is a common tactic of yours.

[Tann]

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

jesus christ lmao

Page 11.. a reminder for the topic:

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

Hey Shamans,

I'm looking at making an iksar shaman because I think they look cool, but wanted to get some experienced solo shamans takes first.
Is missing out on JBB going to hinder me on any solo challenges or is it mostly just for powerleveling yourself?

Cheers Nerds!

[Troxx]

11 pages? This is nothing. We got us another DSM thread!

Key take home points:

-JBB is, at best, marginally useful other than PLing the late 40s and early 50s
-Racial regen > FSI
-the best solo artist shaman was a barbarian
-iksar shaman will do great

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

11 pages? This is nothing. We got us another DSM thread!

Key take home points:

-JBB is, at best, marginally useful other than PLing the late 40s and early 50s
-Racial regen > FSI

Please stop lying. Trolling and lying helps nobody. These two statements are trivial to disprove. Why are you so destructive?

[bcbrown]

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

These two statements are trivial to disprove.

Given that we're at something of an impasse regarding the latter statement, I'd be very interested in seeing you disprove the former statement. And I'm not talking about mathematical notation; any format will do. For what target is JBB necessary?

[Jimjam]

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

Please stop lying. Trolling and lying helps nobody. These two statements are trivial to disprove. Why are you so destructive?

Examples of there being situations where FSI may be more useful than regen is certainly evidence for the case, but it doesn't disprove regen being being better than FSI.

Saying FSI helps you solo dragons at 60 better than regen may be true, but so is the fact that a rusty halberd helps bowquest better than any ToV melee weapon (due to how damage bonus works). I think we can agree just because we have an example of rusty halberd being better than tov weapons doesn't disprove the assertion that ToV weapons are better than rusty halberds.

[Duik]

Caaant. Beèeeee. Wronnnnng. Angerr. Risinng.

StressBall: ahhhhh yo lucky sucker, this stress ball just saved your life.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Examples of there being situations where FSI may be more useful than regen is certainly evidence for the case, but it doesn't disprove regen being being better than FSI.

Saying FSI helps you solo dragons at 60 better than regen may be true, but so is the fact that a rusty halberd helps bowquest better than any ToV melee weapon (due to how damage bonus works). I think we can agree just because we have an example of rusty halberd being better than tov weapons doesn't disprove the assertion that ToV weapons are better than rusty halberds.

The issue is you haven't proven Regen is better than FSI to begin with. You cannot simply assume this is the case for whatever reason.

Thus far I have provided a lot more evidence showing FSI is the Min/Max option than the opposition. It is easy to rebut the claims put forth so far from the opposition with math and evidence too.

This is the problem, you are claiming Regen has already been proven to be better than FSI without merit, and this makes no sense. Nobody has actually done this.

[Toxigen]

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

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Given that we're at something of an impasse regarding the latter statement, I'd be very interested in seeing you disprove the former statement. And I'm not talking about mathematical notation; any format will do. For what target is JBB necessary?

I didn't say JBB was necessary to kill mobs. That doesn't make it useless. No Shaman racial item gives you the ability to kill a specific mob that you normally couldn't. This means you simply need to look at which racial item gives you the most use comparatively.

When it comes to leveling, JBB can take you from 45-60 if you don't have Epic. Claiming it is only good from 45-51 is nonsensical.

Spamming a manaless clickie nuke like JBB is more efficient than using your mana DoTs to kill mobs. It's the same reason why Epic is a good leveling tool.

Spamming JBB is 32 DPS, and a hasted level 55 pet is roughly 17 DPS. Epic DoT is almost 16 DPS. Pet + JBB spam is the equivalent of Epic DoTing 3 mobs at a time. Just like using Epic to DoT mobs, this strategy is manaless in terms of the DPS.

Without Epic, root rotting three mobs at a time takes a minimum of 300 mana for roots, and 320 mana x 6 = 1920 mana for Dots. That is 2220 mana per 3 mobs.

JBB spam + pet + slow + face tanking costs 250 mana per mob, and some damage taken per mob. That is 750 mana total, and some damage.

If Troxx wants to show JBB becomes useless 51+, they need to show a more efficient strategy in terms of DPS vs. mana/hp spent for leveling. As per usual, Troxx is unwilling and probably unable to do this.

When you hit level 60, JBB is still a good tool. It saves you mana when clearing trash mobs in lower level dungeons. It is a good way to finish a mob at 2 or 3 percent instead of wasting the mana on a fresh DoT. It provides free damage in long fights when all debuffs and dots have been applied.