Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I do not recall ever citing “need” for cheal on a pet. That is just an idiotic straw man demand you made of me - one I’m still happy to ignore on the grounds of the absurdity of the ask and the argument that would follow.

Asking you to provide evidence for your claims is not a straw man lol. You need to show why a Cleric's kit is better for this group, beyond merely saying so. If you don't need CH for the pets, that weakens your argument for a Cleric. How desparate you are right now. You know you can't back up your claims.

The rest of your post is just a combination of lies about things I have said, or lies about what you claim I believe. I'd ask you to actually quote me on any of this, but you can't of course. You can't even provide logs for your clams about Mage DPS, which is the easiest thing in the world to do.

Just look at your claim that I said "you can pocket any class". Clearly nonsense. Please quote me saying this. Do you have reading comprehension issues, or are you delusional?

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

-you are now trying to warp reality in asserting that an enchanter charming a high dps quadding hasted pet would rather have a shaman watching their back than a cleric

Troxx has apparently never done Fungi King, as Enchanter/Shaman/Monk(or SK) is a very common setup. He doesn't understand how Shaman Torpor tanking works. Shamans can solo tank 6+ WW Dragons, but somehow Troxx doesn't understand how powerful of a tank Shamans are on anything that is slowable.

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

A shaman in this group would basically be tossing unnecessary buffs, standing by for backup heals that won’t be needed, and maybe trying to contribute some dps - but as has already been proven - they will do that poorly when you’ve got 2 buzz-saw ench pets going to town. The best damage shamans put out are dots - and this group isn’t really going to have mobs living long enough for dots to do much of anything

Here is Troxx proving he still doesn't understand how Shamans work. He also has this strange idea that a group of level 60s are mostly killing a lot of mobs for XP, and not camping items. He seems to think XPing with four casters before 60 is somehow difficult, and needs optimization, instead of optimizing for level 60.

You look really silly right now. Thank you for continuing to concede via trolling and meltdown.

[Troxx]

This this thread has within its scope the full game. Like also levels 1-59. Enchanters can flat out solo most content that a small squad can be expected to tackle.

What content/targets does a shaman make possible that otherwise couldn’t be done with 2 enchanters and a cleric (just 3) couldn’t handle?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

This this thread has within its scope the full game. Like also levels 1-59. Enchanters can flat out solo most content that a small squad can be expected to tackle.

What content/targets does a shaman make possible that otherwise couldn’t be done with 2 enchanters and a cleric (just 3) couldn’t handle?

Precicely. As you said yourself, the Enchanters can solo the content already. A group of four casters with at least one Enchanter is stomping content so hard a Cleric isn't needed for the first 59 levels.

You bring the Shaman because they provide more use at level 60 with Torpor. West Waste Dragons and Fungi King are two level 60 camps where a Shaman is preferred over a Cleric. The truth is most camps that this group would be going after can use a Shaman instead of a Cleric, because Torpor Tanking with Slow is very effective. This thread doesn't allow Warriors in the group, so content that needs a Cleric to CH a Warrior is off the table. I liked some of 7ThGate's suggestions for possible Cleric camps, but those are pushing the limits of what this group could do, and also you'd run afoul of guild politics if any of your group members are in a guild.

If you are going the farm crew Wizard port route, Wizard/Shaman/Enchanter/Enchanter can solo three separate camps while waiting for bigger targets. Cleric can't solo a lot of higher value camps unless the group is spending a lot of money on things like Puppet Strings, so they'd just be stuck with an Enchanter who could solo the camp without the Cleric. You'd only have two separate camps being farmed if you had a Cleric.

A group of four level 60 casters can easily power level a shared pocket cleric account to 49 for occasional CH and reses.

I am glad we finally agree on something.

[Troxx]

You seem to make a few assumptions here. One of these is outright not the case, the other is debatable.

Assumption 1: Pocket characters are allowed. The fact that the OP limited the group size to 4 and the class types to casters only implies that they want to know what the best possible set-up would be that ONLY ALLOWS 4 players and all must be casters. Not 4 casters who leveled a pocket 5th (or 6th/7th/8th/whatever) to meet the needs that couldn't be met by the 4 person limit. This assumption to me seems to be just simply wrong. Pocket classes were not to be considered. If you give up the cleric spot you permanently give up cleric rezzes/buffs and whatever else you might need or want from a cleric.

Assumption2: that the scope of this thread was only factoring level 60 and with a farm crew mentality. If that's the case it is 4 separate solo classes holding down 4 separate camps and "grouping" cooperatively in separate locations.


Assumption 1 is clearly wrong.
Assumption 2 is up for debate as the OP didn't really specify.

I interpreted this thread as a challenge of sorts. 4 friends had to get together and make new level 1s and experience EQ with the 'best possible 4 person all caster class'. This includes leveling, camping items, buying spells gear, getting TO 60. Getting those 60 spells .. and doing all the coolest things within the potential of a 4 person (4 in game character restricted) group that was all casters.

Please quit shitting around with the concept of a pocket cleric. If you drop the cleric for a shaman you have no rez, complete heal, cleric buffs, etc.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You seem to make a few assumptions here. One of these is outright not the case, the other is debatable.

Assumption 1: Pocket characters are allowed. The fact that the OP limited the group size to 4 and the class types to casters only implies that they want to know what the best possible set-up would be that ONLY ALLOWS 4 players and all must be casters. Not 4 casters who leveled a pocket 5th (or 6th/7th/8th/whatever) to meet the needs that couldn't be met by the 4 person limit. This assumption to me seems to be just simply wrong. Pocket classes were not to be considered. If you give up the cleric spot you permanently give up cleric rezzes/buffs and whatever else you might need or want from a cleric.

Assumption2: that the scope of this thread was only factoring level 60 and with a farm crew mentality. If that's the case it is 4 separate solo classes holding down 4 separate camps and "grouping" cooperatively in separate locations.


Assumption 1 is clearly wrong.
Assumption 2 is up for debate as the OP didn't really specify.

I interpreted this thread as a challenge of sorts. 4 friends had to get together and make new level 1s and experience EQ with the 'best possible 4 person all caster class'. This includes leveling, camping items, buying spells gear, getting TO 60. Getting those 60 spells .. and doing all the coolest things within the potential of a 4 person (4 in game character restricted) group that was all casters.

Please quit shitting around with the concept of a pocket cleric. If you drop the cleric for a shaman you have no rez, complete heal, cleric buffs, etc.

1. The only person making assumptions about pocket classes are yourself. Please show me where OP said they weren't allowed. Stop making things up to try and win.

2. I didn't bring up the Wizard farm crew setup, Foritor did. Please actually read the thread. This is just another example of you making things up.

You agreed in the previous post that the Enchanters don't need the Cleric to level to 60, so you have no reason to prefer the Cleric over the Shaman, other than your opinion.

If you think this group isn't going to reach level 60, group composition doesn't really matter. Four Mages could get from 1-40 just fine, and quit after getting bored.

Please stop trolling this thread with nonsense, lies, and silly gifs.

[Troxx]

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

1. The only person making assumptions about pocket classes are yourself. Please show me where OP said they weren't allowed.

If you are allowed to pocket whatever you want but don't have on the side what is the point of restricting this theoretical group to only 4 and only casters?

Look man, we get it. You want to be able to pocket a cleric because:

-Shamans can't complete heal
-Shamans can't buff the cleric/druid line of HP and don't have symbol
-Shamans can't stun charm breaks
-Shamans are not really effective blast healers

... and when shit hits the fan (and it will with nasty charm pets)

-Shaman's can't rez


You've just moved the goalposts again to make the entire scenario allow for your chosen class to fit into this class.

Quit being obtuse

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

If you are allowed to pocket whatever you want but don't have on the side what is the point of restricting this theoretical group to only 4 and only casters?

Look man, we get it. You want to be able to pocket a cleric because:

-Shamans can't complete heal
-Shamans can't buff the cleric/druid line of HP and don't have symbol
-Shamans can't stun charm breaks
-Shamans are not really effective blast healers

... and when shit hits the fan (and it will with nasty charm pets)

-Shaman's can't rez


You've just moved the goalposts again to make the entire scenario allow for your chosen class to fit into this class.

Quit being obtuse

Here is Troxx continuing to show he doesn't know what pocket characters are. It's quite sad really. I never said you could pocket any class. The simple fact that Troxx thinks you can pocket any class shows he doesn't understand pocket characters at all. It's strange, because this has been a common practice for many years now.

He doesn't understand how Shamans work, and can't even name one camp that needs a Cleric, while I can name multiple camps that need a Shaman.

Please stop trolling, and learn the game.

[Troxx]

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

He doesn't understand how Shamans work...

I've got a 60 shaman. That shaman hit 60 years ago. I've solo'd ever piece of garbage you have and have done so without anything you might call "raid gear". EQ isn't hard. You're not special because you've soloed WW dragons or done small man Fungi groups in king. Many of us have done that also.

... because EQ isn't actually hard.

Only classes I haven't leveled to 60 are rog/sk/ench/wiz.

I'm not sure which project I'll take up next.

You only argue for allowing pocket clerics because YOU KNOW that without that allowance there is no reason ... whatsoever ... to EVER consider replacing a cleric with a shaman (as the sole healer) for this group.

[Troxx]

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

... and can't even name one camp that needs a Cleric, while I can name multiple camps that need a Shaman.

Name one.

Actually ... name every single camp out there you can think of that needs a shaman where 2x enchanter + cleric + literally any other caster would not be sufficient.

I swear to god if you name WW dragons I'm gonna laugh in your face. A necro or mage summon pet can tank a slowed WW dragon far better than a shaman ever could - and enchanters can still handle their pets getting charm dispelled periodically. Funny thing then is that a long ass shaman solo fight suddenly becomes 90-99% shorter in duration.

Nothing in this game NEEDS most classes.

I'll be impressed if you can name one single encounter in this game that is possible WITH a shaman but is impossible WITHOUT a shaman that could be done by 4 caster classes otherwise.

You threw down the gauntlet.

Ball is in your court.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Troxx is mad with a double post.

He still can't explain what a pocket character is, even though this is common practice for many years.

He still doesn't know that Shamans can Torpor tank, because he never metions it when describing how shamans work.

He can't name a camp that needs a Cleric. I've named camps that are better with a Shaman compared to a Cleric multiple times, but he doesn't read.

He constantly asks other people for evidence, while never providing any of his own. It's sad. This is why he trolls, because he can't win an argument normally. He cannot admit when he is wrong.