Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[cyxthryth]

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

1) In an XP group the Shaman can Root Rot. This is not necessary

Even though you argued fervently for tens? hundreds? of posts that you did/could/can, to this day you - still - have provided zero evidence that you have ever done such a thing to multiple mobs parallel to a group (that you are currently in), let alone that such a thing occurs often/frequently,

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

2) A Shaman/Enchanter/Enchanter/Wizard solo farm crew can split off and solo at 3-4 separate camps when there are no duo/group targets in window. If you are sniping something like Magi in Hate, he has a long respawn timer, so it isn't like you are always in a situation where you are camping something that requires a duo or group. With a Cleric, you reduce the possible split to 2-3 separate camps, which means you have less flexibility. Fortior's idea is to have the group split up into solo players to maximize gains.

To "maximize gains" you simply need a Cleric's utility to offset inevitable deaths/wipes. Friendly reminder:

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

Cleric is simply safer & more reliable than Shaman, because a Cleric's superior utility over a Shaman's simply offers safer & more reliable solutions to inevitable deaths/wipes, which Shaman's toolkit simply has no answer for.

DSM agrees:

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

3) It is a fact that pocket Clerics are a common strategy on P99, because leveling to 49 is not difficult. Individual players and guilds do it. Denying this fact is not benefiting the conversation. If you are opposed to creating a pocket Cleric for some strange reason, you can usually find a Cleric who is willing to res you if you tip them.

It is a fact that this conversation is about a 4-player group consisting of only casters/priests, arguing for the inclusion of pocket characters in addition to the 4 players which make up said hypothetical group in order to decide what is "best" is not benefiting the conversation. If you are opposed to staying on-topic for this thread for some strange reason, you can find plenty of other threads which do not specify this ONE (1) singular specification. Just like when someone else tried to start on "apples to apples" or "oranges to oranges" terms with you and you rejected/declined their starting conditions, I reject your attempt at insisting the starting condition be "for the purposes of this discussion you can include pocket characters".

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You have provided zero evidence that you have ever done such a thing, let alone that such a thing occurs often/frequently.

You have provided zero evidence for all of your claims thus far. I have actually provided evidence for multiple claims in this thread, while you have not.

You don't have to believe me when I say I have root rotted in a group before, just like nobody else has to believe you when you say Shamans are a not a good option, and inferior to Clerics in this scenario[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Vexenu]

I think the general problem is that:

1) You overestimate the abilities of the Shaman class. You do this through a bit of rhetorical slight of hand, whereby you change your arguments in favor of the Shaman based on the various different roles the Shaman can play. On the surface this makes sense, because the Shaman is a generalist class with a decent amount of utility. But the problem is that the Shaman cannot perform all of these roles at the same time, and in a 4 man group all of the roles the Shaman fills best are already filled by the Enchanter and Cleric, leaving the Shaman either to tank or DPS, neither of which it does better than other available classes (or charm pets).

2) You underestimate the abilities of the Cleric class. Clerics provide more than just rezzing, and a level 49 Pocket Cleric is not the same thing as a well-played and geared level 60 Cleric in group. Beyond CH, which is inarguably superior to Torpor, Clerics also bring substantial HP buffs and stuns, both of which make charming (which, I will remind you, is the bread and butter of a group with two Enchanters) much safer. A Cleric also requires much less APM than a Shaman and thus is much less susceptible to make mistakes due to player fatigue/laziness.

3) You discount the value of group synergy and assume the Shaman's strength as a soloer makes it fit for every group composition. Yes, the Shaman is very good at soloing using certain specific tactics. But solo tactics do not always translate to group tactics, i.e. a Necro can solo well by fear kiting, but fear kiting becomes extremely annoying and impractical if you have melee players in the group. Your love for the Shaman class makes you want to shoehorn it into every conceivable place it might fit, while ignoring the obvious fact that other classes would often perform better in its place.

[cyxthryth]

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

You have provided zero evidence for all of your claims thus far. I have actually provided evidence for multiple claims in this thread, while you have not.

You don't have to believe me when I say I have root rotted in a group before, just like nobody else has to believe you when you say Shamans are a not a good option, and inferior to Clerics in this scenario[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I have made no claims, merely stated irrefutable facts and asked simple questions.

You have provided irrelevant evidence - the former/older was irrelevant because you were solo, the current/newer is irrelevant because not only were you in a 3-man group but you were simply not DPSing like you argued you can/could for tens? hundreds? of posts.

Nobody "has to believe" anything, irrefutable facts will remain irrefutable facts.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I think the general problem is that:

1) You overestimate the abilities of the Shaman class. You do this through a bit of rhetorical slight of hand, whereby you change your arguments in favor of the Shaman based on the various different roles the Shaman can play. On the surface this makes sense, because the Shaman is a generalist class with a decent amount of utility. But the problem is that the Shaman cannot perform all of these roles at the same time, and in a 4 man group all of the roles the Shaman fills best are already filled by the Enchanter and Cleric, leaving the Shaman either to tank or DPS, neither of which it does better than other available classes (or charm pets).

2) You underestimate the abilities of the Cleric class. Clerics provide more than just rezzing, and a level 49 Pocket Cleric is not the same thing as a well-played and geared level 60 Cleric in group. Beyond CH, which is inarguably superior to Torpor, Clerics also bring substantial HP buffs and stuns, both of which make charming (which, I will remind you, is the bread and butter of a group with two Enchanters) much safer. A Cleric also requires much less APM than a Shaman and thus is much less susceptible to make mistakes due to player fatigue/laziness.

3) You discount the value of group synergy and assume the Shaman's strength as a soloer makes it fit for every group composition. Yes, the Shaman is very good at soloing using certain specific tactics. But solo tactics do not always translate to group tactics, i.e. a Necro can solo well by fear kiting, but fear kiting becomes extremely annoying and impractical if you have melee players in the group. Your love for the Shaman class makes you want to shoehorn it into every conceivable place it might fit, while ignoring the obvious fact that other classes would often perform better in its place.

1) I think the problem is reversed. You underestimate the abilities of the Shaman class. I have multiple videos showing a Shaman's capabilities, while you have no evidence showing the equivalent for a Cleric. You cannot back up anything you are saying, while I can.

2) I am not underestimating Clerics at all. They are a fantastic class. The simple truth is most content that doesn't require a Warrior discing is tankable with Torpor + Slow. Therefore you do not need CH, and pocket clerics are an easy solution for resing. Please do not bring fatigue into this. Enchanters are also a high stress class. You are always paying attention to make sure your pet doesn't break, you are casting a lot of spells, etc. If that was a serious factor here, people wouldn't suggest Enchanter/Enchanter/Enchanter/Cleric.

3) I think Shamans synergize very well with groups. That is why I am suggesting it! Again, you are the person claiming Shamans bring little to a group. You need to provide evidence for this claim. You are simply misunderstanding my argument about why the best solo classes are also great group classes. Enchanters are the best solo class because they can manipulate the game better than any other class, both in solo and group situations. Shamans can also manipulate the game very well, because they have a unique method to tank and quickly recover mana. That is why they are very strong in both solo and group situations. Shaman/Enchanter/Monk is a very strong trio for this reason.

[cyxthryth]

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

1) I think the problem is reversed. You underestimate the abilities of the Shaman class. I have multiple videos showing a Shaman's capabilities, while you have no evidence showing the equivalent for a Cleric. You cannot back up anything you are saying, while I can.

# of posts about Shamans improving the DPS of their group via Root-Rotting mulitple mobs parallel to the group: tens? hundreds?
# of posts including evidence of such: 0

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

2) I am not underestimating Clerics at all. They are a fantastic class. The simple truth is most content a group that doesn't need a Warrior is doing is tankable with Torpor + Slow. Therefore you do not need CH, and pocket clerics are an easy solution for resing. Please do not bring fatigue into this. Enchanters are also a high stress class. You are always paying attention to make sure your pet doesn't break, you are casting a lot of spells, etc.

Constantly cannibalizing over long periods/gameplay sessions = fatigue

Stress because a Charm might break =/= fatigue from constantly Cannibalizing

Paying attention because a Charm might break =/= fatigue from constantly Cannibalizing

Enc is casting a lot of spells =/= fatigue of equivalently "casting a lot of spells" Shaman who will be constantly Cannibalizing in addition to "casting a lot of spells"

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

3) I think Shamans synergize very well with groups. Again, you are the person claiming they bring nothing to a group. You need to provide evidence for this claim. You are simply misunderstanding my argument about why solo classes are also good group classes. Enchanters are the best solo class because they can manipulate the game better than any other class, both in a solo and group situation. Shamans can also manipulate the game very well, because they have a unique method to tank and quickly recover mana.

Did you forget about the tens? hundreds? of posts you made claiming Shaman can improve group DPS by Root Rotting multiple mobs parallel to the group? None of your "evidence" has included your Shaman doing this. Again, you are the person claiming you can do this. You need to provide evidence for this claim.

[Vexenu]

You have stated your arguments repeatedly, but the vast majority of the fellow EQ veterans who comprise this forum have not found them compelling. If this were a trial, you would lose, and a jury of your peers would find you guilty of Shaman fanboyism to a unhealthy degree. The punishment is having your character permanently exiled to Oggok, where you will live out the rest of your days buffing the Bouncers and killing the wandering level 2 Armadillo. Eventually, you will run out of banked plat and no longer be able to afford food and water, at which point you will be forced to beg from the players who come in to farm the guards.

"Please, sir, can you spare a plat for a starving Ogre, I am hungry," you will say. The player, probably some upstart level 40 Mage or Necro, will stare at you curiously, before finally saying. "Aren't you that DSM fella? The guy who got exiled here for Shaman fanboyism?" at which you will be forced to nod meekly. They will laugh and drop transfer you a fine steel short sword (refusing to even sully themselves by opening a trade window with such an infamous character as yourself), which you will delightedly run off and vendor for a few plat, relieved to be able to afford the loaves of bread and bottles milk that sustain you in your exile.

This is the fate you chose. It didn't have to be this way, DSM. But you just couldn't help yourself.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

# of posts about Shamans improving the DPS of their group via Root-Rotting mobs parallel to the group: tens? hundreds?
# of posts including evidence of such: 0



Constantly cannibalizing over long periods/gameplay sessions = fatigue

Stress because a Charm might break =/= fatigue from constantly Cannibalizing

Paying attention because a Charm might break =/= fatigue from constantly Cannibalizing




Did you forget about the tens? hundreds? of posts you made claiming Shaman can improve group DPS by Root Rotting multiple mobs parallel to the group? None of your "evidence" has included your Shaman doing this. Again, you are the person claiming you can do this. You need to provide evidence for this claim.

The number of posts you have in this thread is 376, which is basically your entire post count.

You have no posts that contain any evidence for anything you are saying. I am not sure what you are trying to argue here. If your point is that every claim needs some evidence, you need to start that first. I have provided multiple pieces of evidence for multiple claims thus far.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You have stated your arguments repeatedly, but the vast majority of the fellow EQ veterans who comprise this forum have not found them compelling. If this were a trial, you would lose, and a jury of your peers would find you guilty of Shaman fanboyism to a unhealthy degree. The punishment is having your character permanently exiled to Oggok, where you will live out the rest of your days buffing the Bouncers and killing the wandering level 2 Armadillo. Eventually, you will run out of banked plat and no longer be able to afford food and water, at which point you will be forced to beg from the players who come in to farm the guards.

"Please, sir, can you spare a plat for a starving Ogre, I am hungry," you will say. The player, probably some upstart level 40 Mage or Necro, will stare at you curiously, before finally saying. "Aren't you that DSM fella? The guy who got exiled here for Shaman fanboyism?" at which you will be forced to nod meekly. They will laugh and drop transfer you a fine steel short sword (refusing to even sully themselves by opening a trade window with such an infamous character as yourself), which you will delightedly run off and vendor for a few plat, relieved to be able to afford the loaves of bread and bottles milk that sustain you in your exile.

This is the fate you chose. It didn't have to be this way, DSM. But you just couldn't help yourself.

When you can't rebut my arguments or evidence, you go back to simply saying "I am right and you are wrong, because other people agree with me". Ad populum fallacies are not compelling.

Your comparison to a jury trial is also irrelevant. A trial can find an innocent man guilty, or vice versa. The truth of a matter is not tied to the result of a jury trial.

A lot of these "veterans" who disagreed with me were also trolling for hundreds of pages. I am not sure why you think people who turned to trolling for hundreds of pages are credible. If my argument was so easy to rebut, someone would have made a video by now.

[cyxthryth]

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

The number of posts you have in this thread is 376, which is basically your entire post count.

You have no posts that contain any evidence for anything you are saying. I am not sure what you are trying to argue here. If your point is that every claim needs some evidence, you need to start that first. I have provided multiple pieces of evidence for multiple claims thus far.

The evidence which proves you have made tens? hundreds? of posts claiming that Shamans can improve group DPS by Root Rotting multiple mobs parallel to the group - while providing exactly zero evidence that your Shaman has ever done such a thing, much less that it is a common/frequent occurrence - is this entire thread.

Furthermore, I have made no claims in this thread, I have only stated irrefutable facts - like the above - and asked simple questions.