Quote:
Originally Posted by Danth
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Debate has subtly shifted from shaman matching magician damage in normal situatons--that's been largely walked back from--to the classic offense vs. defense/utility debate that will rage as long as this genre exists. Nobody's winning that one and if someone even could it would indicate a major game balance problem.
My problem with a magician isn't even the shaman, exactly, but that unless I need to be Call of the Hero'd someplace I will always prefer a necromancer. A Shaman can at least justify himself once in awhile--your cleric goes AFK, or doesn't log on, you go to West Wastes and want a pseudo-tank, etc. I regard both magician and shaman as a 4th in that group as a battle of the back-ups but between them I still like the shaman better, accepting that in practice the difference in outcome will be relatively minor in either case and there are some individual locations that favor the magician.
Danth
|
I didn't walk it back to be honest. Someone simply pointed out that you could get a bit more DPS from clickies. It was a good point, and changes the equation a bit, but a Shaman can also get more DPS from clickies. My calculations for 80DPS vs. 70DPS weren't taking into account Shaman or Mage clickies. It wasn't a one sided shift.
Math-wise Mage and Shaman DPS doesn't have a vast gulf, like people have been trying to claim. The entire argument of bringing a Mage is Malo + Charm Break Safety + DPS. A Shaman has Malo + Charm Break Safety covered, and DPS wise the different isn't vast. A difference in 30 DPS isn't going to matter with two Charmed Enchanter pets. A Shaman is simply bringing a much broader toolkit to the table without a huge sacrifice in DPS.
Again, this is assuming a level 60 group that doesn't need CoTH. As I have always stated, a Mage is superior levels 1-59, because Torpor is what pushes the Shaman ahead.