Quote:
Originally Posted by Crede
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
What is your definition of a "good pick"?
You provided a video where you averaged 15 dps & your group wiped multiple times. You were also criticized by your ability to assist others in charm breaks. This is by no means evidence of anything you have claimed in this thread, lol, and in fact directly contradicts all of what you have previously claimed.
Please come back with something actually meaningful to this discussion, for all intensive purposes, nobody would consider your "evidence" as signs for why a shaman would be a "good pick".
|
You are either purposely straw manning my arguments, or simply not reading what I am saying. Neither of these tactics are helping your position, and make you look like a troll.
The arguments below are assuming you only have 1 slot left in the group, and are trying to determine which class is best for that remaining slot.
Here are some common arguments for a Cleric, and my rebuttals thus far:
1a. Argument: Clerics have Resurrection and Shamans do not.
1b. Rebuttal: Pocket Clerics are a common tactic when it comes to Resurrection, which you agree with:
https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...78&postcount=6
2a. Argument: Clerics have CH, which is a better tool for keeping Charmed Pets alive.
2b. Rebuttal: With Torpor + Slow, Shamans can tank the mobs instead of the Charmed Pets. This removes the need to CH pets, and it allows the pets to do a bit more DPS, because they can both be behind the mob.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG1Aat1XdbI - Here is an example of this, and you can go on my youtube channel to see other examples of Shaman tanking.
3a. Argument: Clerics have Stun Command, which is a useful spell during Charm breaks.
3b. Rebuttal: Stun Command is not required to properly handle Charm breaks. You need to show evidence as to why this is a huge benefit over Malo/Malosini on a pet for Charm breaks, for example. Shamans have quite a few tools to use when helping out with a Charm break.
4a. Argument: This group of 4 players without a Warrior need at least one cleric for CH when dealing with slow immune mobs.
4b. Rebuttal: People making this claim have yet to name a camp where they think this will be an issue. They are assuming there are camps that a group of 4 players without a Warrior could reasonably do by CHing the pet, since the mob cannot be slowed. We could test if this camp isn't doable by a Shaman, and we could debate the merits of trying to do this camp to begin with in a four man caster/priest group. Also, if you have a pocket Cleric at level 49, you will be able to swap to them for CHing one or two very specific camps.
Here are some common arguments for a Mage, and my rebuttals thus far:
5a. Argument: You cannot use solo DPS videos to mimic group DPS when trying to determine which classes are better/worse for DPS.
5b. Rebuttal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG1Aat1XdbI this video shows you can use a solo video such as
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XwiGKTuu2E to mimic group DPS. This means you can get an accurate idea about what the DPS difference is between a Shaman and a Mage, to better understand what the tradeoff is between a Mage and a Shaman. Crede didn't watch the video I posted, which is why he thought I was only doing 15 DPS. With a Shaman pet and 1x Ice Strike, I am doing 30ish DPS minimum, not including the DPS boost from avataring the Charmed pets, and the DPS boost from having the Charmed pets hitting the mob from behind. This group was also not an example of a "perfect group", as the Enchanter and Necromancer were not level 60. This means there is room for improvement. I also would have been able to root/rot in HS west if the group wanted more kills per hour.
6a. Argument: The DPS advantage a Mage can provide in a group out weights the Utility of a Shaman.
6b. Rebuttal: DPS has diminishing returns, based on the camp you are currently doing. As as simple example, if you are camping a mob on a 5 minute timer and it takes 1 minute to kill the mob, you are getting 10 kills per hour. If you double your DPS to where you are killing the mob in 30 seconds, you are getting 11 kills per hour. While you did double your DPS, you did not double your XP gains, you only boosted them by 10%. In a group that is camping a single high priority mob, such as Fungi King, you are not getting any more kills per hour by increasing your DPS via bringing a Mage. At 200 DPS you kill him in 90 seconds. At 300 DPS you kill him in 60 seconds. Saving 30 seconds per 30 minute respawn timer would require you to camp him for 30 hours to get an extra spawn. If your group is killing a lot of trivial mobs for XP, that camp/area has a limit on how many mobs are killable per hour. You may already be at that limit with 2x Enchanters. A Shaman can also increase their DPS by root rotting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gdAIheodtY This is what that would look like in Velks. The Shaman would be root rotting in one area, while the group is in another nearby area killing other spiders.
Thus far, No evidence has been provided for any of these 6 arguments that dismantle my rebuttals.
The idea that I said Shamans will typically out-DPS Mages is a strawman, and thus not one of the points mentioned here. Mages will generally out-DPS a Shaman in single target scenarios and burst scenarios. Shamans can out-DPS Mages in root/rotting scenarios.