Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[PlsNoBan]

The data says shaman is only the best choice for this group for a couple niche things. The data says mage/necro/enchanter are all better options for the vast majority of content. The data says you have contradicted yourself and admitted this fact already and are now trying to backpedal and go back to your original incorrect argument.

The post history is clear my friend. Everyone knows the truth. You have thoroughly and completely lost this argument. You can stop posting now.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

The data says shaman is only the best choice for this group for a couple niche things. The data says mage/necro/enchanter are all better options for the vast majority of content. The data says you have contradicted yourself and admitted this fact already and are now trying to backpedal and go back to your original incorrect argument.

The post history is clear my friend. Everyone knows the truth. You have thoroughly and completely lost this argument. You can stop posting now.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The data shows Mage DPS as irrelevant in a four man group, even with Epic. I am not sure why you keep trying to read it differently.

[PlsNoBan]

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

The data shows Mage DPS as irrelevant in a four man group, even with Epic. I am not sure why you keep trying to read it differently.

You keep doing this weird bullshit where you equate DPS to time spent per kill and try to calculate how many extra spawns you get for that DPS. Here's a hint: It doesn't matter. You can make the difference between SK and Rogue sound small if you calculate it that way. Everyone is still taking rogue over SK for DPS. It's an extremely dumb argument like most things you have argued. Literally 5 more DPS is objectively better than an extra healer with nothing to heal. An extra slower when everything is already slowed. Whether you like it or not you're playing in a group with subpar players if 2 encs and a cleric needs your extra healing and utility. They don't. Realistically 2 encs and a cleric probably doesn't need a 4th but in this hypothetical if we're gonna force a 4th person then shaman isn't even close to the most optimal choice. This is EXTREMELY simple and obvious. The lengths you're going to try to justify the dumbest shit anyone has ever heard is a weird mixture of impressive and sad. You have openly admitted that other classes than shaman are better for most situations. You keep going back to Ixiblat cause it's one of the only things that is actually a semi understandable argument for your side. Arguing that a shaman's extra heals/utility is needed for KC/Seb/HS or most other content 1-60 and beyond is absolutely ridiculous.

I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or seriously believe this shit. I lean towards trolling cause you mistakenly admitted you were wrong once already and have been trying to backpedal ever since. You are very very seriously mentally ill if you believe anyone is buying any of this though.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You keep doing this weird bullshit where you equate DPS to time spent per kill and try to calculate how many extra spawns you get for that DPS. Here's a hint: It doesn't matter. You can make the difference between SK and Rogue sound small if you calculate it that way. Everyone is still taking rogue over SK for DPS. It's an extremely dumb argument like most things you have argued. Literally 5 more DPS is objectively better than an extra healer with nothing to heal. An extra slower when everything is already slowed. Whether you like it or not you're playing in a group with subpar players if 2 encs and a cleric needs your extra healing and utility. They don't. Realistically 2 encs and a cleric probably doesn't need a 4th but in this hypothetical if we're gonna force a 4th person then shaman isn't even close to the most optimal choice. This is EXTREMELY simple and obvious. The lengths you're going to try to justify the dumbest shit anyone has ever heard is a weird mixture of impressive and sad. You have openly admitted that other classes than shaman are better for most situations. You keep going back to Ixiblat cause it's one of the only things that is actually a semi understandable argument for your side. Arguing that a shaman's extra heals/utility is needed for KC/Seb/HS or most other content 1-60 and beyond is absolutely ridiculous.

I honestly can't tell if you're trolling or seriously believe this shit. I lean towards trolling cause you mistakenly admitted you were wrong once already and have been trying to backpedal ever since. You are very very seriously mentally ill if you believe anyone is buying any of this though.

You keep saying I mistakenly admitted something, but it's just nonsense. Nobody is arguing a Necromancer wouldn't be a good addition to a four man group due to FD. I really don't know why you think this has ever been argued against. Nobody has argued other classes can't contribute to this group either, such as needing Mage if you want CoTH. These aren't revelations, and you can see the post history. It's been said already multiple times, you are simply trying to do some silly gotcha that doesn't even work.

My argument has been the same since page 1: The DPS of the fourth member isn't relevant, which is why utility and safety is better. The data keeps showing this fact. Your strawmen that I said Shamans DPS is higher than a Mage (except via root/rotting), Warriors solo better than Enchanters at higher levels, I have some Shaman fetish, etc., are just that: strawmen. You haven't provided any data, and you have been trolling for 300 posts at least.

The only reason to bring DPS is to get more kills per session. As you keep claiming, the hypothetical group is good enough not to wipe, so it isn't like they need 4 less seconds on a kill to save some mana on healing. If you aren't getting more kills per session, the DPS is useless. Utility and safety on the other hand may save you from an unexpected train, group member DCing due to lag, etc. While these occurrences are unlikely in a skilled group, something is better than nothing. The DPS offers nothing once you hit the ideal breakpoint. Camp options are always nice, since it expands what you can do.

I am sorry, no data so far has supported your point that Mage would be superior, unless you need CoTH. A group with 2x Enchanters and a Cleric is leveling fast enough, it doesn't need the Mage's DPS due to the DPS breakpoints.

For maximum camp options, I would still go with Necro/Enchanter/Mage/Shaman with a level 49 pocket cleric. You hit the DPS breakpoints with this group, and the level 49 pocket cleric can provide CH and reses.

Necro/Enchanter/Mage/Shaman is the group OP picked as well, possibly minus the pocket cleric.