Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[cd288]

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

Oh yea what was I thinking that's an absurd idea [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]



I agree. Which is why I would suggest leveling something other than shaman which only "helps the most" for a couple niche things.

Lol he got talked into a corner without realizing it yet again

[Gloomlord]

DSM, just admit you're wrong.

Is your ego that fragile you can't concede if your life depended on it?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

DSM, just admit you're wrong.

Is your ego that fragile you can't concede if your life depended on it?

I will happily admit I am wrong if you can prove it. I have done so before.

I am not going to admit I am wrong just because you want me to. Trolling, memes, and insults is not how you win a debate.

So far you haven't provided any data or math to back up your points, but you keep whining about the data and math presented. If you think it isn't correct, you can provide your own data and math at any time.

[slard271]

Poll: Which happens first?
a) End of thread; consensus is unanimously built that redundant Shaman over Mage for fantasy land fast killing group scenario is lolz.
b) Heat death of universe.

[PlsNoBan]

This fuckin clown lol. Can't go 3 posts without talking about data and math. All the data and math points to mage doing more damage than shaman by varying degrees. His entire argument is "Yeah but I play in bad groups that need extra heals for all the mistakes they make constantly so shaman is better" which can't really be quantified by raw data easily. Yet he keeps saying look at the data or asking other people to provide data to prove him wrong lol. All the data he's ever posted says mages are better DPS. He counters with "safety" being more important than the extra damage but has no data to back this up.

I don't have the ability to accurately describe in words how stupid this is

[Gloomlord]

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

This fuckin clown lol. Can't go 3 posts without talking about data and math. All the data and math points to mage doing more damage than shaman by varying degrees. His entire argument is "Yeah but I play in bad groups that need extra heals for all the mistakes they make constantly so shaman is better" which can't really be quantified by raw data easily. Yet he keeps saying look at the data or asking other people to provide data to prove him wrong lol

I don't have the ability to accurately describe in words how stupid this is

Yeah, he's a self-righteous hypocrite.

You can't proclaim one moment that variables make data irrelevant, and then ask for data when people say that, through experience, one class would bring more to the table.

He wouldn't "happily admit he's wrong". The fact that he even says "happily" implies he's disingenuous. Even humble people wouldn't proclaim they're "happy" when they have to admit they've made a mistake.

[Gloomlord]

I know we've been over this before, but...

Isn't the onus on you to prove that shaman does more DPS? I'd say the overwhelming majority of players in this game think mage does more DPS, but you're saying otherwise.

Recent data has shown that mages do a significant amount more for a fraction of the effort. And since it's a meleeing pet, that DPS is also reliable...unlike nuking and dotting.

You're saying it's "redundant", but isn't the utility a shaman brings also redundant? If it's all subjective what people prefer, wouldn't most pick the mage?

Honestly, I'd even go for a druid over shaman if the argument is for utility and safety. At least druids can port and evac this group if things go south, and even provide a serviceable DPS in the form of animal charming if it's possible.

That's how pointless shaman is in this hypothetical group.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I know we've been over this before, but...

Isn't the onus on you to prove that shaman does more DPS? I'd say the overwhelming majority of players in this game think mage does more DPS, but you're saying otherwise.

Recent data has shown that mages do a significant amount more for a fraction of the effort. And since it's a meleeing pet, that DPS is also reliable...unlike nuking and dotting.

You're saying it's "redundant", but isn't the utility a shaman brings also redundant? If it's all subjective what people prefer, wouldn't most pick the mage?

Honestly, I'd even go for a druid over shaman if the argument is for utility and safety. At least druids can port and evac this group if things go south, and even provide a serviceable DPS in the form of animal charming if it's possible.

That's how pointless shaman is in this hypothetical group.

Oh we have been over burden of proof already. You simply don't understand it.

Both sides presented DPS numbers to try and discover the difference in DPS between the two classes. The point was never to prove which class does more DPS. The point was to find the difference, and see if the difference mattered. The evidence shows it doesn't.

You are making a new claim, that my DPS numbers are invalid, because they will be considerably different in a group. That is your claim, and YOU need to prove it.

What you are doing is asking me to prove a negative by asking me to show evdence that my previous evidence is valid.

[PlsNoBan]

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

Oh we have been over burden of proof already. You simply don't understand it.

Both sides presented DPS numbers to try and discover the difference in DPS between the two classes.

You are making a new claim, that my DPS numbers are invalid, because they will be considerably different in a group. That is your claim, and YOU need to prove it.

What you are doing is asking me to prove a negative by asking me to show evdence that my previous evidence is valid.

You have conceded that mages do more damage than shamans. All the data in this entire thread agrees with this. You have expressed your opinion that redundant utility and healing from shaman is more important than the mages extra damage. You have not provided data to prove this.

Please provide data showing how redundant utility/heals is better than mages doing more damage. Which all the data in this thread backs up. Until then we can assume you tend to play in bad groups that need extra heals beyond a cleric and slows beyond an enchanter. I've been in many many groups where this was not the case.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

You have conceded that mages do more damage than shamans. All the data in this entire thread agrees with this. You have expressed your opinion that redundant utility and healing from shaman is more important than the mages extra damage. You have not provided data to prove this.

Please provide data showing how redundant utility/heals is better than mages doing more damage. Which all the data in this thread backs up. Until then we can assume you tend to play in bad groups that need extra heals beyond a cleric and slows beyond an enchanter. I've been in many many groups where this was not the case.

I didn't concede that Mages deal more damage, because I never made the claim that Shamans normally deal more damage lol. That idea is a strawman you created. Shamans can match DPS when root/rotting, but you don't want to discuss that aspect of the game because it hurts your position.

I have already shown that the DPS a Mage brings is irrelevant due to the DPS breakpoints and respawn timers here: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...postcount=2399

This shows the Mage's DPS isn't helping the group at all. Having a Shaman gives you a broader toolkit than a Mage. That is an easy fact you can figure out yourself by looking at the wiki page for Shaman spells and Mage spells.

Having a broader toolkit offers more than DPS that isn't doing anything due to the DPS breakpoints and respawn timers.

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

You provided a parse of solo DPS. This parse can be considered irrelevant in a group with two charm pets. End of story.

One side provided honest data, you provided dishonest data.

This is a claim that needs to be proven by you. Just saying my data is irrelevant isn't a valid argument. When two sides present data to strengthen their claims in a discussion, you don't get to throw out the other side's data by simply claiming their data isn't valid. If you think the other side's data is invalid, that is a new claim that must be proven. Otherwise evidence would never be valid because you could just keep claiming it is invalid.