SK Race Choice

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

In my opinion the trolls are just the symptom.

This is the core issue. I am not forcing people to troll. They do it on their own accord.

You are blaming people who get trolled, and telling them to try and appease the trolls so they stop.

This is very bad advise. It doesn't work. The trolls will troll no matter what. They are doing it on their own free will.

If you actually want to help the forums, fight the trolls. They will just take more and more if you give into them.

If you give a mouse a cookie...

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

...

I'll Reply to Crede when I get some more time. Thanks again for replying in a cordial manner! I really do appreciate it.

[Crede]

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

The fact that mobs like WW Dragons can produce damage spikes via multiple high rolled double attacks seems to further support the case for regen. 42/tick makes torpor do 342/tick. This just made it 14% better and there is a chance it could save your life depending on the damage spike. Again though, I can't prove this, so I won't try it argue it will save your life. But it always working for you while Torpor isn't always, or when you have to cast canni and can't torpor, it is still working for you. Torpor could also get dispelled, while racial regen + fungi cannot, and regrowth can be instantly refreshed with the fungi staff.

As far as the APM advantage by stacking regen, it is hard to calculate this exactly, but I can throw out some numbers.

Say you're in a sustained dungeon crawl group and have slowed 4 mobs. This costs you 1000 mana(250 turgur * 4). For the sake of this discussion let's say Torpor heals 1350 health, because we don't know on average how often you will get the 5th tick. In order to recover 1000 mana, you would need to cast canni 4 12.20 times(1000 / 82 = 12.20). This equates to 1,806 damage taken. Torpor heals for 1350 on average, but it does have an opportunity cost. You need to canni 3 times to make up the mana cost of Torpor. In the process you would take 444 damage also. So in the end, Torpor on average nets you about 906 hp when you factor in it's opportunity cost(cost of mana & canni damage(1350 - 444) = 906. In order to make up the 1,806 health cost from the 12.20 canni's initially, you would need to cast Torpor twice and canni 6 times, to get roughly 1812 hp back. So that's 8 actions. This would also take about 35 seconds(30 seconds + 5 second buffer assuming you have a few fizzles and that you aren't hitting your global reset timers perfectly). Let's assume in an extended session you are dropping a slow around once a minute. so that is 8 actions to make up for 4 slows once a minute resulting in a total of 2 APM saved. That value add of that APM savings can vary based on how many actions you are doing per minute, so I'm not going to come to a conclusion about how much % you would save in APM. It could be a 20% savings, 10%, 5%, etc. You also get back roughly 8.75 seconds/minute to do other things with those 8 actions, and 42/tick in regen can nearly offset the 1 slow per minute for free.

So in conclusion I am hypothesizing that 42/tick in regen(racial + fungi + regrowth) at 60 can save around 2 APM, while also freeing up about 8.75 seconds/minute to do other things with that time(or nothing if you wish). I am not going to sit here and say these numbers are 100% accurate, but I think it gives a rough estimate of the potential APM savings of adding in as much regen as you can. It also makes Torpor 14% stronger which can potentially help with damage spikes to save your life.

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

I'll Reply to Crede when I get some more time. Thanks again for replying in a cordial manner! I really do appreciate it.

Let’s get back to this discussion, it seems you have plenty of time to engage with others. Looking at my numbers I realized I wasn’t factoring in the APM of a gcd. Going back to my above example, 4 slows costs you 1000 mana. This is approximately 2 torpor’s and 6 cannis. That would be 14 actions((torpor+gcd+canni+gcd+canni+gcd+canni) * 2 = 14). This results in about 4 APM based on my earlier post. If you’re taking things somewhat easily which lets say is about 20 APM, that could potentially be a 20% APM reduction. To me that is significant. I don’t know what the average shaman APM is though as there’s likely too much variance there, but I do think there’s value added here. And as previously mentioned, regen also can make torpor 14% better. While you may not feel this is personally worth it, I do think people should realize these numbers and let them decide accordingly.

Such thing can vary based on the type of engagement you are using, but I think where you’ll see the true benefit of regen is in longer situations, which you’ve previously agreed with. Or if you ever find yourself in a bind and have to use FD ring, it can be really nice for that. I don’t think there’s enough evidence that supports neglecting it completely.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Let’s get back to this discussion, it seems you have plenty of time to engage with others. Looking at my numbers I realized I wasn’t factoring in the APM of a gcd. Going back to my above example, 4 slows costs you 1000 mana. This is approximately 2 torpor’s and 6 cannis. That would be 14 actions((torpor+gcd+canni+gcd+canni+gcd+canni) * 2 = 14). This results in about 4 APM based on my earlier post. If you’re taking things somewhat easily which lets say is about 20 APM, that could potentially be a 20% APM reduction. To me that is significant. I don’t know what the average shaman APM is though as there’s likely too much variance there, but I do think there’s value added here. And as previously mentioned, regen also can make torpor 14% better. While you may not feel this is personally worth it, I do think people should realize these numbers and let them decide accordingly.

Such thing can vary based on the type of engagement you are using, but I think where you’ll see the true benefit of regen is in longer situations, which you’ve previously agreed with. Or if you ever find yourself in a bind and have to use FD ring, it can be really nice for that. I don’t think there’s enough evidence that supports neglecting it completely.

I did not forget about you. I simply want to look over my logs on the Ionat fight to compare it against your ideas. I do not have access to my logs right now. That is why I was responding to others. Apologies.

[Crede]

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

I did not forget about you. I simply want to look over my logs on the Ionat fight to compare it against your ideas. I do not have access to my logs right now. That is why I was responding to others. Apologies.

No worries! Thanks for the heads up.

[Troxx]

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

Let’s get back to this discussion, it seems you have plenty of time to engage with others. Looking at my numbers I realized I wasn’t factoring in the APM of a gcd. Going back to my above example, 4 slows costs you 1000 mana. This is approximately 2 torpor’s and 6 cannis. That would be 14 actions((torpor+gcd+canni+gcd+canni+gcd+canni) * 2 = 14). This results in about 4 APM based on my earlier post. If you’re taking things somewhat easily which lets say is about 20 APM, that could potentially be a 20% APM reduction. To me that is significant. I don’t know what the average shaman APM is though as there’s likely too much variance there, but I do think there’s value added here. And as previously mentioned, regen also can make torpor 14% better. While you may not feel this is personally worth it, I do think people should realize these numbers and let them decide accordingly.

Such thing can vary based on the type of engagement you are using, but I think where you’ll see the true benefit of regen is in longer situations, which you’ve previously agreed with. Or if you ever find yourself in a bind and have to use FD ring, it can be really nice for that. I don’t think there’s enough evidence that supports neglecting it completely.

TLDR.

Cliff notes:

-hp = mana for shamans
-regen buff = most efficient hp per mana spell
-fungi > Vindi bp by 13hp/tick
-troll innate regen stacks on top
-more hp regen baseline, fewer torpor casts
-fewer torpor casts is less canni 4s needed to regain it and more time spent doing literally anything else. This could be productive things like casting other spells or Quality of Life things like scratching my ass, picking my nose or just spacing out on a busy busy class that has all the shit to do. Buff others, debuff mobs, heal self/others, cast other crap. Playing a shaman is almost as time intensive as playing a bard. Any free time to space out is golden.

For a shaman:
-fungi is the BIS bp item for 99.99% of content
-racial regen does matter
-why the heck wouldn’t you cast regrowth once every 20 mins??

As for me, I gave my fungi to my monk and am using thurg bp on my troll shaman. I did it because I’m poor and lazy and … I agree with DSM that with torpor I can get by just fine. If I had a Vindi bp? Even better. Unlike DSM my troll shaman keeps regrowth up so I win.

What I am not conceding is that fungi isn’t better than Vindi bp. It is. It is flat out better. I’m just too poor and lazy to buy and farm another. The one I have is where it will be needed the most.

Playing a torpor shaman is about the easiest, slack jawed, easy ass class I could play at 60 other than my mage. A shaman with an IQ of 75 can operate at 95% capacity because its just that easy and overpowered.

[Troxx]

Double post

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Let’s get back to this discussion, it seems you have plenty of time to engage with others. Looking at my numbers I realized I wasn’t factoring in the APM of a gcd. Going back to my above example, 4 slows costs you 1000 mana. This is approximately 2 torpor’s and 6 cannis. That would be 14 actions((torpor+gcd+canni+gcd+canni+gcd+canni) * 2 = 14). This results in about 4 APM based on my earlier post. If you’re taking things somewhat easily which lets say is about 20 APM, that could potentially be a 20% APM reduction. To me that is significant. I don’t know what the average shaman APM is though as there’s likely too much variance there, but I do think there’s value added here. And as previously mentioned, regen also can make torpor 14% better. While you may not feel this is personally worth it, I do think people should realize these numbers and let them decide accordingly.

Such thing can vary based on the type of engagement you are using, but I think where you’ll see the true benefit of regen is in longer situations, which you’ve previously agreed with. Or if you ever find yourself in a bind and have to use FD ring, it can be really nice for that. I don’t think there’s enough evidence that supports neglecting it completely.

Ok I took a look at my logs.

1. 400 actions over 21 minutes (19 APM)
2. +15 Regen provided 2400 HP (2 Torpors). I didn't have Regrowth on for the first 5 minutes or so.
3. I cast 33 Torpors and 121 cannibalizes, which means 4 cannibalizes per Torpor.
4. (4 actions from 2x Torpor + 2x GCD) + (16 actions from 8x cannablizes + 8x GCD) = 20 actions saved potentially with Regrowth.
5. Theoretically I saved 1 APM in that fight from Regrowth, assuming I needed the two Torpors. I would have been at 20 APM without Regrowth + Fungi.

Using the data above and assuming I had Fungi + Regrowth on the entire fight:
1. 420 actions over 21 minutes (20 APM)
2. +30 Regen provided 6300 HP (5 Torpors)
3. 4 cannibalizes per Torpor
4. (10 actions from 5x Torpor + 5x GCD) + (40 actions from 20x cannablizes + 20x GCD) = 50 actions saved potentially with Regrowth + Fungi.
5. Theoretically goes down to 17.7 APM

Fungi + Regrowth saves roughly 2 APM. That is why I am saying it's not really noticeable for Shaman players. 20 APM really isn't bad to begin with. 18 APM isn't going to feel different over a fight this long. This is especially true since Shaman spells are long casts. You are looking at 5-10 seconds per 2 actions via waiting for spells to finish, so you can rest your hands. The cannibalize portions are going to be the heaviest, but you are still forced to wait 4 seconds per cannibalize, so that is 1 action per 2 seconds per cannibalize.

This is why Shamans prefer Vindi BP. Fungi Tunic alone is saving 1 APM, and Vindi BP provides more AC, HP, and Resistances. All of these stats are better for mitigating damage spikes, which are the biggest problems Shamans run into when soloing tough mobs. This is also why I typically don't bother using Regrowth. I don't notice the 1 APM it saves me. A lot of fights are also shorter than this, so you get less benefit from HP Regeneration. This is one of the longest fights I can think of.

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

I'm not scrubbing your 4500+ posts for historical tidbits. I cant recall you posting once with any humility, running one stupid test without an ounce of "I could be wrong here but..." baked in. Nobody here has poisoned my views against you, an ounce of levity in a DSM post would be refreshing though. Hell, it's a video game. You arent trying to convince people against eating Tide pods.

You simply missed those posts. You have admitted that you haven't read all of my posts, and you have been caught misquoting me multiple times. I didn't poison your views, you simply cherry picked some data, read a few things incorrectly, and came to a faulty conclusion. Please stop spreading misinformation about me.

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

I don’t agree or disagree with the person. I disagree or agree with what is being said. Unfortunately you are wrong in these discussions more often than not. What brings you ire, however, is the stupid way you go about being wrong.

You troll a lot, even when you are incorrect on a point and refuse to admit it. You cannot deny this based on your post history. You have hundreds of posts of just gifs.

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

regen isn’t worthwhile on a 60 shaman with torpor …

You are misquoting me here. Please stop creating strawmen.

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

or when you say shaman dps in a high dps group with 2 charm pets is as good as a mage …

You can get to Mage level DPS when you root rot. Please stop creating strawmen.

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

or when you say 4.3% more dps isn’t “worth it” compared to minuscule extra total mana pool on a casual sk….

So far my data on this topic is more conclusive than yours is. Please stop saying this is BS when you haven't done anything to show otherwise.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I'm not blaming you. Again with the rigid binary thought process. If you want to say it's bad advice that's fine. I'm willing to accept that criticism. But ask yourself why do the trolls come after you so often and not others? You seem to get trolled and insulted a LOT more than other people. What are you doing that they aren't? What are they doing that you're not?

Mice and cookies, that's funny, imo you are the one giving the mice the cookies.

It is a question of priorities. The bigger problem is the trolls who attack people on these forums, not the people being attacked. If you do care about the forums health, fight the trolls first. Do not give in to them.

Constantly asking me to reform myself and simply ignoring the more obvious problem is the issue. You are actually fueling the trolls by continuing to single me out, while giving them a pass. Just take a look at your signature.

I do not have a rigid binary thought process. You have been trolling me by your own admission in the past. I do not trust you to be sincere right now. This is what happens when you destroy your credibility via trolling. You can build back this trust, but it will not happen instantaneously. Making assumptions about my thought process is not a good start.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

If you want to deflect and change the conversation that's fine but I'm not choosing to speak to the trolls and I don't believe there is a dependency between speaking to you about changing your methods and speaking to the trolls about their trolling. You could say that correlation is not causation, and you'd be right. Obviously just because you post things and people troll you does not mean you are causing the trolling. But I believe there is a preponderance of evidence that shows it's more likely than not that when you post, because of how you speak/debate/argue, trolls come after you in a way that they do not come after other people.

I do not believe I'm ignoring the more obvious problem. You are free to disagree with me about that, but that is not my belief. I believe based on the overwhelming evidence of how often you are targeted and trolled that there is something unique to you that is attracting the trolls to come engage you. I don't believe that uniqueness is a positive thing because I have seen dozens of non-trolls get incredibly frustrated with you to the point of not wanting to engage. If every conversation you engage in ends up devolving this way but you observe plenty of other conversations that you are not a part of on these very forums that do not devolve this way I think it's fairly obvious what the common denominator is. I have even seen plenty of the people trolling you in this thread be completely reasonable and able to converse in a normal and civil manner in other threads with other people.

The "assumption", as you put it, that I'm making about the way you think isn't made flippantly or at random. It's made after a critical examination of literally hundreds of forum posts you've made. The data converges in a very specific way. I don't think you're able to look at yourself in the same critical manner that you subject others to. I think if you put up a poll on the forums (and reject the people you consider trolls from the data) you would find people agree with me about your thought process. It is very rigid and very binary. You have a hard time thinking outside the box of the "DATA/NUMBERS" to other reasons or causes for things. You very much seem obsessed with making every argument quantifiable with Mathmatics and that is not always how the world works.

Even in the world of video games and within the framework they present. You still have the human element and that can't always be expressed as a set of equations or simple numerical data. You constantly refuse to engage with peoples questions or ideas if they don't first jump through a series of hoops that you lay out. It's not a requirement of rigorous debate for people to do their own testing and present their own data before being able to speak on yours. You very often hold that up as a shield to block any and all criticism of the things you post, and that is a very intellectually dishonest way to debate and engage with people.

What behavior do you believe to be better?

1. Posting strawmen, false information, and gifs in an attempt to undermine a debate partner?
2. Posting evidence to back up your position?

The question is really that simple. People have different personalities. Sometimes personalities conflict, there is no inherit problem with that. Your assessment of my personality is a complete fabrication, but I cannot stop you from believing false information. I'd ask you to provide evidence to show where you got your ideas about me, but I will not hold my breath.

You are actively supporting the first behavior by choosing to ignore the trolls and go after people being trolled.

Actions speak louder than words. You can choose to believe you are trying to help here, but you are not. I am amazed you think you can sound sincere when your signature is "Please be warned when trying to take advice from DSM". You are telling the entire forum that you will attack anybody who disagrees with you via any method possible with a signature like that. It is beyond petty.