Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Troxx]

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

This needs to be settled with an actual demonstration where DSM tries to keep up with Mage DPS for a couple hours straight. It will quickly become apparent that he is wildly overestimating his ability to sustain respectable DPS for more than a few minutes at a time, despite what his "math" says.

Example of DSM math:

DSM: Did you know that Usain Bolt can run 100 meters in approximately ten seconds?
Non-autist: Cool.
DSM: By my calculations that means Usain Bolt can run from New York to Los Angeles in just 5.2 days.
Non-autist: No man, that's not how that works.
DSM: Clearly you just don't understand math.

Omg I just died laughing

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Omg I just died laughing

It's sad that you did, because the example is horribly wrong. It is such an obvious strawman that it just makes you and Vexenu look silly[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's a good thing though. It shows everybody that you don't understand math problems, because you think a real life situation such as a runner running towards a specific location is the exact same thing as a video game where the math never changes, the rules are fixed, and it is a much simpler world. You are also expending a lot less energy as a whole.

Running long distances is much harder and more complex than playing a video game for a few hours lol.

When you can't win with evidence, you got back to trolling.

[Crede]

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

It's sad that you did, because the example is horribly wrong. It is such an obvious strawman that it just makes you and Vexenu look silly[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's a good thing though. It shows everybody that you don't understand math problems, because you think a real life situation such as a runner running towards a specific location is the exact same thing as a video game where the math never changes, the rules are fixed, and it is a much simpler world. You are also expending a lot less energy as a whole.

Running long distances is much harder and more complex than playing a video game for a few hours lol.

When you can't win with evidence, you got back to trolling.

It's really not a strawman point. I brought this up many pages ago when I said a shaman would have to go "bonkers" to keep up with a mage, even at 60. This makes sense, because a mage was designed specifically as a group dps class.

People are lazy, especially who play this game hehe. We look for the most efficient, laziest way to do something. That pretty much sums up human behavior in general. Why would I want to do an action every X seconds when I could be more lazy and do an action slower every Y seconds and still end up doing superior dps, even if the difference isn't gamebreaking? We also aren't all 14 years old anymore, we have jobs/lives/families and sometimes need to be semi-afk along with more distractions these days technologywise to be doing at the same time. Hell, I bet a lot of people are probably playing blue/green both at once, which results in even more lazy play when evaluated in isolation.

For me, utility has extremely diminishing returns. DPS doesn't, because more DPS just means more kills/xp/loot. If I already have an enc/cleric, I'm taking a mage 100% of the time over a shaman if I don't need Torpor and I'd bet that if you took a fairly sizable sample of players, most shaman's will lose even more ground on dps compared to a mage as time went on due to the shaman needing to play at such a higher level for longer.

You think that because this game is built on math/logic, that everything can be explained with math/logic. This is your biggest fallacy, because everything changes in application given how diverse humans are.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It's really not a strawman point. I brought this up many pages ago when I said a shaman would have to go "bonkers" to keep up with a mage, even at 60. This makes sense, because a mage was designed specifically as a group dps class.

People are lazy, especially who play this game hehe. We look for the most efficient, laziest way to do something. That pretty much sums up human behavior in general. Why would I want to do an action every X seconds when I could be more lazy and do an action slower every Y seconds and still end up doing superior dps, even if the difference isn't gamebreaking? We also aren't all 14 years old anymore, we have jobs/lives/families and sometimes need to be semi-afk along with more distractions these days technologywise to be doing at the same time. Hell, I bet a lot of people are probably playing blue/green both at once, which results in even more lazy play when evaluated in isolation.

For me, utility has extremely diminishing returns. DPS doesn't, because more DPS just means more kills/xp/loot. If I already have an enc/cleric, I'm taking a mage 100% of the time over a shaman if I don't need Torpor and I'd bet that if you took a fairly sizable sample of players, most shaman's will lose even more ground on dps compared to a mage as time went on due to the shaman needing to play at such a higher level for longer.

You think that because this game is built on math/logic, that everything can be explained with math/logic. This is your biggest fallacy, because everything changes in application given how diverse humans are.

Except it simply isn't true that you would need to go "bonkers". That is the point you are missing.

A level 60 group is not pulling 70+ mobs an hour in most camps. A Shaman will have plenty of time between pulls to recover mana, go AFK, etc.

If a level 60 group is pulling 70+ mobs an hour, that means you are in an easier zone like Velks, Seb, etc., where the Shaman can go off and root/rot mobs to deal good DPS if that's what the group needs. A Shaman can easily do over 100 DPS in this scenario.

Utility does not have diminishing returns at all. If you don't have CC, Heals, etc., you die in a lot of areas hehe. Any area where you don't need CC, Heals, etc., the content is already so trivial your Mage could probably face tank the mobs themselves just fine. At that point we are talking about farming greens or something. A Shaman could again just go around root/rotting everything hehe.

It is a fact that games are built on Math and Logic. It is not a fallacy at all. It is quite easy to figure the math out if you know the variables.

The only fallacy here is people are trying to use the "people are lazy argument" to lower the DPS of a Shaman, while keeping a Mage's DPS the same. That just isn't a good argument, because a lazy Mage is going to be doing less DPS too. Whether you are intentionally doing it or not, you are trying to find a way to increase the DPS gap between a Mage and a Shaman without using actual data. You just have some fuzzy concept about what you think players do. This isn't an insult, it is simply what you are doing when you field this kind of argument. It isn't a valid argument at all, so it is not relevant to the topic at hand.

When determining a classes power, you always assume the class is being played correctly. Otherwise, you could just say Mages are bad because all they do is summon items and then AFK. That isn't what people do, but you don't actually have the data to prove this isn't the case.

[Danth]

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

For me, utility has extremely diminishing returns.

This is always going to make this type of debate unending because utility doesn't have a set value and doesn't show up on a convenient log parser. Different folks value it differently. I've had that argument before in game with couple of friends who had a monk and shaman duo. After a friendly competition we were all slightly surprised to see the wife and I (sk/shaman) had more kills over a 5 hour period than they did because they died a couple times and we did not. Even that could've gone the other way. At the end of the game EQ's a fairly loosely-tuned game and offers different ways of achieving success. That success *is* a finite end point: There reaches a point in any player's career where there is no more loot he cares about, where platinum no longer matters. Nearly any group discussed in this thread could reach such a point and in truth there won't be THAT much difference in how long it takes them to get there given equal effort.

(edit--for the post below)

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

... but I do believe most people have an "APM bucket".

Maybe....but equally as maybe the shaman player's already a bit manic and can simply go longer than the lazier dude who picks a magician. I definitely know shamans who are very much capable of maintaining their constant activity for hours on end, and keeping it up for years. I'm married to one such EQ'er. I sure as heck wouldn't do that, I hate shaman mechanics, I'll stick with my SK, thanks. The wife's far enough to the other end that as her health has declined and she's less physically able to play the shaman consistently anymore, she'd mostly rather not play at all than play a lower-activity character like her druid or cleric. Some people are funny like that--and because of that, for the sake of this type of discussion we might as well assume that the characters in question are being played similarly for similar lengths of time. That's really all we can control for. Likewise the magician is WAY better for limited players (kids, non-gamers, etc), dramatically better, but we can't really control for player ability either other than to passingly aknowledge that advantage.

Danth

[Karanis]

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

It's sad that you did, because the example is horribly wrong. It is such an obvious strawman that it just makes you and Vexenu look silly[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's a good thing though. It shows everybody that you don't understand math problems, because you think a real life situation such as a runner running towards a specific location is the exact same thing as a video game where the math never changes, the rules are fixed, and it is a much simpler world. You are also expending a lot less energy as a whole.

Running long distances is much harder and more complex than playing a video game for a few hours lol.

When you can't win with evidence, you got back to trolling.

blink.jpg

[PlsNoBan]

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

Example of DSM math:

DSM: Did you know that Usain Bolt can run 100 meters in approximately ten seconds?
Non-autist: Cool.
DSM: By my calculations that means Usain Bolt can run from New York to Los Angeles in just 5.2 days.
Non-autist: No man, that's not how that works.
DSM: Clearly you just don't understand math.

[Troxx]

He really did have some of the best posts. Kudos to Vex (page 48)

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

Example of DSM math:

DSM: Did you know that Usain Bolt can run 100 meters in approximately ten seconds?
Non-autist: Cool.
DSM: By my calculations that means Usain Bolt can run from New York to Los Angeles in just 5.2 days.
Non-autist: No man, that's not how that works.
DSM: Clearly you just don't understand math.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Lol the difference there is there are more variables to that equation[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Your Everquest character never tires, they always have the exact same performance. And the player behind the keyboard isn't running a marathon, so they aren't expending energy that fast either.

This is a terrible straw man.

[Ripqozko]

Join VQ and be guilded with DSM