![]() |
#4881
|
|||
|
![]() Ok, so far we've covered stuns and lull-pulls. Moving on to pet healing:
Shaman greater healing: 270/150 is 1.8 HPM. Complete Heal costs 400 mana, so as long as it's healing more than 720 health, it's a better ratio than shaman healing. It needs to heal at least 932 health to be more efficient than cleric superior healing, so if CH is landing at 30%, as soon as the pet is above 1300-1400ish health it'll be the better choice from a hp/mana conversion point of view. A Spurbone Skeleton in City of Mist is at 1496, so by the low 40s you'll be using complete heal for pets from now on. Before then, starting at 34 clerics will have superior healing at 583/250 or 2.33HPM, while shamans have greater healing at 1.8HPM. So from level 34 onwards, clerics will be more efficient at healing charm pets. | ||
#4882
|
||||
|
![]() Quote:
I'm guessing you have as much evidence supporting this claim as you have supporting your Shaman in a 4 person high dps group, root-rotting mobs parallel to the group? So... zero evidence 🤣 | |||
#4883
|
||||
|
![]() Quote:
Yes, somewhere in the 40s or 50s you start using CH more often, as already stated. This depends on the area. Next piece of evidence you need to provide is camps that benefit from Cleric healing efficiency. You are simply assuming it is needed right now. If both Shamans and Clerics can keep a party healed, and they don't lose kills per hour, you don't really benefit using CH or other Cleric heals during the leveling process.
__________________
| |||
Last edited by DeathsSilkyMist; 07-01-2024 at 03:11 PM..
|
#4884
|
|||
|
![]() Now that we have established that clerics have substantially better mana efficiency on healing charm pets from 34 onwards, lets talk about hp buffing our friendly casters:
At 34 shamans have Talisman of Tnarg at 150hp. Health gives 31 sta, happy to call it 50hp At 44, Altuna gives 250. Stamina gives 40sta, or say 80hp 55 has Kragg for 380, and Riotous Health gives 50 sta or 100hp At 34, clerics have valor at 168hp/12ac, and Symbol of Pinzarn, 224 hp At 44, Resolution gives 232/15, and Symbol of Naltron, 406 hp At 52, Heroic Bond is 360/18 for whole group At 54, Symbol of Marzin gives 640hp And of course, at 60, Aegolism gives 1100HP and 54 ac to the group. So at 34, the shaman can buff 200hp, while the cleric is buffing 392, almost twice At 44, the shaman can buff 330, while the cleric has 638 At 55, the shaman has 480, while the cleric has 1000hp So at all levels the cleric can HP buff about twice as well as a shaman. | ||
#4885
|
|||
|
![]() Thus far Bcbrown has repeated that Clerics have better better Heals and HP buffs. Neither of these points were in question. The healing efficiency comparison was simply to show Shamans have good healing efficiency too.
He hasn't explained why the extra healing efficiency or HP buffs are speeding up the leveling process compared to a Shaman, he is just assuming this is the case. He can't explain why Cleric Stuns are better than Malo either. I am disappointed thus far. I think he is just going to repeat what I have already said, without explaining why the Cleric is helping the group more, and thus a better choice.
__________________
| ||
#4886
|
|||
|
![]() Buddy, not once in your three thousand word magnum opus did you mention how shamans speed up the leveling process. I'm going point by point. Your first two points were healing efficiency and HP buffs. I'm trying to have the dialogue you said you wanted.
| ||
#4887
|
||||
|
![]() Quote:
You need to tell us why a Cleric is better. I don't think anybody wants to see you just repeat what I said across multiple posts. We already agree that they have better HP buffs and Heals. Where is this benefit speeding up leveling compared to a Shaman?
__________________
| |||
#4888
|
||||
|
![]() I'm directly rebutting what you said:
Quote:
| |||
#4889
|
||||
|
![]() Quote:
Clerics are the ones who believe their healing and HP buffs are speeding up the leveling process from my understanding. You need to tell us why you believe this. That is how you support your position. It is what I am asking you to do. Thus far, your only point about Clerics being better was your opinion Cleric Stun is better than Malo. But you can't support this opinion, so it's moot. This means you've provided nothing to support your position thus far after multiple posts. When will you tell us why Clerics are better?
__________________
| |||
Last edited by DeathsSilkyMist; 07-01-2024 at 04:38 PM..
|
#4890
|
|||
|
![]() Clerics have better healing efficiency on charm pets. Clerics have substantially better HP buffs. Clerics have faster blast healing for group members. Clerics have stuns to support charm breaks. Clerics open up tricky pulling maneuvers with lulls and DAs. Clerics can rez, including on dungeon crawls where you can't park a pocket cleric.
If you don't want to hear any of that, that's on you. | ||
![]() |
|
|