Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Ripqozko]

39 pages to go, we can do it boys

[PlsNoBan]

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

He's now admitted that mage is better at royals and necro is better at fungi king. He's basically just clinging on to shaman being helpful for ixiblat and maybe like WW dragons? He's backed himself into a very tiny corner with his own words at this point. Would ANYBODY base their entire group makeup for 1-60 and beyond around what class makes more sense for Ixiblat? Or would you take a mage/necro that makes more sense in the vast majority of cases? I played actively on blue for YEARS and I think I killed Ixiblat like twice.

This thread really should be over. I know it won't end. But DSM literally backed himself into a tiny corner and the floor has fallen out beneath him. He's dangling by a thread and is going to continue to argue from there I'm sure.

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

I said all of this before, you just aren't reading, as usual. You simply have this strange straw man that I am obsessed with Shamans.

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

Okay so we've established shaman has no place in this hypothetical best 4 man caster group outside of a niche mob or two. You keep bringing up Ixiblat which is one of very few situations where I think shaman might be helpful.

There ya have it boys and girls. If you want the best 4 man caster group for Ixiblat and maybe 1-2 other things put a shaman in there. For 1-60 and 95% of everything else at 60 pick something else.

End of thread.

Reminder: You admitted shaman is only better for niche shit like ixiblat. Not sure why you insist on backpedaling so hard. You were so close to being honest for a brief moment [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Vexenu]

Has anyone ever been in an XP group with 2 or 3 Shaman? How about 2 or 3 Clerics or Bards? The answer is probably no, and if the answer is yes, you likely did not find the experience particularly productive or enjoyable.

On the other hand, has anyone ever been in an XP group with 2 or 3 Rogues or Mages? I would say most of us at some point. And you probably marveled at how quickly things died and how much XP you were getting.

The point is to illustrate that DPS stacks infinitely, while utility does not. You can always benefit from more DPS, but you don't always benefit from more utility. This is the fundamental truth about EQ that DSM refuses to acknowledge.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Has anyone ever been in an XP group with 2 or 3 Shaman? How about 2 or 3 Clerics or Bards? The answer is probably no, and if the answer is yes, you likely did not find the experience particularly productive or enjoyable.

On the other hand, has anyone ever been in an XP group with 2 or 3 Rogues or Mages? I would say most of us at some point. And you probably marveled at how quickly things died and how much XP you were getting.

The point is to illustrate that DPS stacks infinitely, while utility does not. You can always benefit from more DPS, but you don't always benefit from more utility. This is the fundamental truth about EQ that DSM refuses to acknowledge.

This is such a bad example. Of course you are less likely to hit DPS thresholds with 3 clerics. Who was arguing otherwise?

You are just going between the two extremes lol. Four Mages is redundant DPS with no utility, and 4 clerics doesn't have enough DPS.

Thats why you build something balanced, like Shaman/Necro/Enchanter/Mage. You get all the utility and you hit the DPS breakpoints.

[cyxthryth]

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

This is such a bad example. Of course you are less likely to hit DPS thresholds with 3 clerics. Who was arguing otherwise?

You are just going between the two extremes lol. Four Mages is redundant DPS with no utility, and 4 clerics doesn't have enough DPS.

Thats why you build something balanced, like Shaman/Necro/Enchanter/Mage. You get all the utility and you hit the DPS breakpoints.

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

You wouldn't cast Malo/Slow on mobs dying in 30 seconds, so I am not sure why you are even talking about that.

Let's continue our civil discussion guys!

According to DSM, you would not Malo/Slow mobs dying in 30 seconds. In the context of a high level fast-paced killing DPS group, this would presumably be most mobs.

What value does a Shaman add to Enc/Enc/Clr group over a Mage if the Shaman will (as has been irrefutably stated by DSM in this thread) not utilize Malo or Slow for most of the mobs the group is killing hehe? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Karanis]

HUH.jpg

[slard271]

I'm still confident we will all come to unanimous consensus in this Internet forum thread. In the meantime, we're eyeing 300. I don't know if a 300 meme is more appropriate or an "I'm doing my part." Or maybe popcorn. All I know is I'm sitting in EC right now /ooc'ing for DPS shaman for my Mistmoore group; while we're fighting up in CE, he can be root rotting all of pit for absolute supreme mana efficiency and DPS. The group had a long discussion about it and concluded that would make the most sense.

[PlsNoBan]

Hi, I'm DSM, I acknowledge that my malo and slow and dots aren't beneficial in fast killing groups. My data shows that my DPS is inferior to actual DPS classes. I realize a cleric will have no problem keeping this group alive. When someone asks me what the best 4 man caster/priest group is I insist it must include shaman. So I'll post 800+ times about it and make 17 different arguments and keep changing them and moving the goal posts when people call me on my absolute bullshit. My latest and greatest argument is basically "I'm better than more DPS cause just in case the cleric is retarded or goes AFK I can heal or something? Also more DPS is bad if it doesn't get you more named/PH cycles in under 3 hours cause nobody on P99 plays more than that LOL". I believe this is very persuasive and will turn many forum reading elves to my side of the argument. Shamans 4 lyfe!

P.S. I can always root rot adds for extra DPS. That's not stupid at all trust me.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Hi, I'm DSM, I acknowledge that my malo and slow and dots aren't beneficial in fast killing groups. My data shows that my DPS is inferior to actual DPS classes. I realize a cleric will have no problem keeping this group alive. When someone asks me what the best 4 man caster/priest group is I insist it must include shaman. So I'll post 800+ times about it and make 17 different arguments and keep changing them and moving the goal posts when people call me on my absolute bullshit. My latest and greatest argument is basically "I'm better than more DPS cause just in case the cleric is retarded or goes AFK I can heal or something? Also more DPS is bad if it doesn't get you more named/PH cycles in under 3 hours cause nobody on P99 plays more than that LOL". I believe this is very persuasive and will turn many forum reading elves to my side of the argument. Shamans 4 lyfe!

P.S. I can always root rot adds for extra DPS. That's not stupid at all trust me.

Mega yikes. I wouldn't bother writing these long paragraphs, since none of it makes sense anyway. You're just wasting your time doing this instead of providing evidence. You just keep rehashing your obvious strawmen because you can't address my arguments directly.

[PlsNoBan]

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

Mega yikes. I wouldn't bother writing these long paragraphs, since none of it makes sense anyway. You're just wasting your time doing this instead of providing evidence. You just keep rehashing your obvious strawmen because you can't address my arguments directly.

The evidence is already provided. Much of it by yourself. The evidence is contrary to your argument though unfortunately. You continue to argue your opinion as fact then ask others to provide evidence which is quite silly.