Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[cyxthryth]

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

Completely contrary to what you wrote

It would - seemingly - appear that you have a certain amount of experience with posting things that are contrary to what you have already posted, and I submit the following - irrefutable - proof/evidence:

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM attempting to move the goalposts by bringing a 5th "pocket" character into his "arguments" (even though this is intended to be a civil discussion - not an argument) pertaining to the "Best 4 person all caster/priest group" discussion":

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

OP never said you couldn't have a pocket cleric. I am not sure why people keep thinking this is not a possible route to take. Between four people it would be trivial to level a cleric to 39. It is pretty common for people to make pocket clerics on P99.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM attempted to accuse others of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum:

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

The post history is clear. You are now including cyxthryth to try and strengthen your https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum argument because you have nothing else. I find it highly amusing.

Here is my reply to DSM's attempt, in which I point out to him the irrefutable fact - which cannot be refuted - that DSM himself attempted - laughably - to claim (intentionally or otherise) that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum strengthened his argument when one (1) single other person seemed to agree with him:

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

Your post would seem to betray that you are aware that you have moved goalposts, because you are now attempting (disingenuously) to validate said goalpost-moving by stating that it is objectively true that the OP's post "is general" and that this somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts" by changing the basis of the discussion (from being about 4 priests/casters, to being about 4 priests/casters plus X amount of pocket Clerics, or other pocket classes). It is not objectively true that you are "not moving the goalposts" just because you and OP both agree that the OP's post "was general" and that that somehow means "you are not moving the goalposts". That is simply you - laughably - claiming you (and OP) are correct due to argumentum ad populum hehe. This really isn't hard.

Please clarify what you mean by stating OP's post "was general"?

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM tried to claim:

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

Assuming your group plays correctly, you will DPS the same way every time, the same as if you were solo.

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

I am very confident it won't change in a group scenario.

Here re is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - that DSM simply contradicted himself afterward by subsequently posting:

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

in a group setting, there are too many variables out of your control that can skew the data

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

Once you add in outside variables, that changes the DPS equation NOT because of what the class can do, but because of what other players are doing.

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM's post claiming Troxx's data was way different from Allishia's:

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

Also Allishia's numbers were way different from yours

Here is irrefutable proof/evidence - which cannot be refuted, and which is self evident - of DSM's post to Allishia when they provided their initial data:

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

Thanks for the data! I'll get the logs from you a bit later today. Just looking at it here, the numbers are the same as Troxx's data.

As I have repeatedly stated - it is not always clear to other posters what particular position/claim/"argument"(s) DSM is defending at any given time due to how often he has moved the goalposts & edited his posts.

For these reasons - which I have repeatedly stated - I am not sure which particular/specific belief/claim/stange/"argument"(s) that DSM is currently holding/defending/"arguing"; it would be helpful if he could elaborate/clarify/specify for the sake of civil discussion.

[Danth]

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

A Shaman doesn't suddenly lose it's overpowered nature in a group with one more person lol.

Admittedly I haven't read most of the past ~250 pages (wow!), but I've read the past dozen posts or so:

Shaman loses some of its power due to some of its best abilities--haste and slow--being redundant in this group. The shaman adds less to this group than what it can do solo or as the anchor of a typical melee duo. So, here, it's merely a strong character rather than an overpowered (or necessarily the best--I like necromancer better, as said before) addition.

Unlike you I do look down on magicians; I consider them little more than a crappier necromancer suited mainly to bad or low-motivated players. At least a shaman has some remaining advantages of its own right even when its best advantages are nullified. Magician looks at necromancer and feels small and useless. Heck, we have another thread on the forum, right now, where there's considerable agreement as to how bad magicians are in a world where necromancers also exist.

Comparing the shaman to a druid makes for an interesting task. Druids didn't get much thought earlier in the thread but in truth druids are one of the game's most popular enchanter partners so obviously they fit in here. They provide ports so the group doesn't have to constantly pay for them or level their own port-mule, they do what they do without needing 100K+ worth of spells, they have a part-time charm option in some of the best high-level zones, they're a fair choice. Compared to shaman it has less mana regeneration, can't really act as a tank, and gives up malo but it does get a lot in compensation. Both of them allow the group to break up into two powerful duos when desired, and both provide buff and heal back-up in case the cleric doesn't log on (a serious weakness for Team Mage--stuff like that happens in the real world). It's pretty close.

Chalk me up as a tie for now. I'm leaning slightly toward druid due mainly to it being so much cheaper, but it's a weak lean and I don't feel very emphatic about it. I might change my mind later if someone makes a particularly sound argument for one over the other but for a few minutes' thought they look pretty close overall.

Danth

[Troxx]

Thanks for the input Danth.

Druid 3
Shaman 1
Tie 1 (with druid lean)

Get your votes in!

As DSM won’t cast an official vote, I’ll presume shaman is his preference and have cast his vote in absentia for him. If he changes is mind I’ll happily change his vote to druid.

[Gloomlord]

I vote druid for reasons I stated long ago in this thread.

Also: did DSM also suggest a pocket druid just before?

What is wrong with this lunatic?!

[PlsNoBan]

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

What is wrong with this lunatic?!

I've been trying to figure that out for a long time now. The way I see it is basically there's a couple options.

A: Drugs. Lots and lots and lots of drugs.
B: Actual mental illness/autism of some kind
C: An extremely unintelligent nerd with an obsession for everquest shamans

All are equally possible I think. It's tough to nail down where the truth lies.

[Troxx]

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

I vote druid for reasons I stated long ago in this thread.

Also: did DSM also suggest a pocket druid just before?

What is wrong with this lunatic?!

Druid 4
Shaman 1
Tie 1 (with druid lean)

Get your votes in!

As DSM won’t cast an official vote, I’ll presume shaman is his preference and have cast his vote in absentia for him. If he changes is mind I’ll happily change his vote to druid.

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

I've been trying to figure that out for a long time now. The way I see it is basically there's a couple options.

A: Drugs. Lots and lots and lots of drugs.
B: Actual mental illness/autism of some kind
C: An extremely unintelligent nerd with an obsession for everquest shamans

All are equally possible I think. It's tough to nail down where the truth lies.

Perhaps an eclectic mix of A, B and C?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Admittedly I haven't read most of the past ~250 pages (wow!), but I've read the past dozen posts or so:

Shaman loses some of its power due to some of its best abilities--haste and slow--being redundant in this group. The shaman adds less to this group than what it can do solo or as the anchor of a typical melee duo. So, here, it's merely a strong character rather than an overpowered (or necessarily the best--I like necromancer better, as said before) addition.

Unlike you I do look down on magicians; I consider them little more than a crappier necromancer suited mainly to bad or low-motivated players. At least a shaman has some remaining advantages of its own right even when its best advantages are nullified. Magician looks at necromancer and feels small and useless. Heck, we have another thread on the forum, right now, where there's considerable agreement as to how bad magicians are in a world where necromancers also exist.

Comparing the shaman to a druid makes for an interesting task. Druids didn't get much thought earlier in the thread but in truth druids are one of the game's most popular enchanter partners so obviously they fit in here. They provide ports so the group doesn't have to constantly pay for them or level their own port-mule, they do what they do without needing 100K+ worth of spells, they have a part-time charm option in some of the best high-level zones, they're a fair choice. Compared to shaman it has less mana regeneration, can't really act as a tank, and gives up malo but it does get a lot in compensation. Both of them allow the group to break up into two powerful duos when desired, and both provide buff and heal back-up in case the cleric doesn't log on (a serious weakness for Team Mage--stuff like that happens in the real world). It's pretty close.

Chalk me up as a tie for now. I'm leaning slightly toward druid due mainly to it being so much cheaper, but it's a weak lean and I don't feel very emphatic about it. I might change my mind later if someone makes a particularly sound argument for one over the other but for a few minutes' thought they look pretty close overall.

Danth

Of course. Any fourth member can bring interesting options to a group.

In your example where the groups can break up into two powerful duos, the Shaman clearly wins. You really don't see Druid/X duos as a popular choice. Not to say you can't do it, but Shaman is a much more popular duo choice.

Druids basically have the same problem as all of the teleporting classes (Mage/Druid/Wizard). Their toolkits simply aren't powerful enough in the endgame to justify them, and most people don't bother with evac on P99 due to the ease of corpse recovery.

I personally don't consider spell price to be a huge factor when dealing with the scenario of a four man group leveling up to 60 and then farming high level gear. You will get the necessary platinum/gear in that kind of a composition. Enchanters also spend a decent chunk of money on their spells.

If you feel you are highly unlikely to finish the leveling process, then the group composition honestly doesn't matter that much. Any four man group can level up to the 50s really easily. At that point you win simply by having four players.

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

I've been trying to figure that out for a long time now. The way I see it is basically there's a couple options.

A: Drugs. Lots and lots and lots of drugs.
B: Actual mental illness/autism of some kind
C: An extremely unintelligent nerd with an obsession for everquest shamans

All are equally possible I think. It's tough to nail down where the truth lies.

There is nothing wrong with me. You are simply a troll that prefers to troll over having a conversation, and the hundreds of troll posts prove it.

[PlsNoBan]

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

Druids basically have the same problem as all of the teleporting classes (Mage/Druid/Wizard). Their toolkits simply aren't powerful enough in the endgame to justify them

Did DSM just call mages a teleporting class? I was joking earlier when I asked if he even played this game. Now I'm not so sure?

[Danth]

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

You really don't see Druid/X duos as a popular choice. Not to say you can't do it, but Shaman is a much more popular duo choice.

Has this changed of late? I admittedly have not been very active on P99 this year, but when I was most active druid/enchanter was an extremely popular duo, probably second for enchanter after cleric. Shaman/enchanter was extremely rare. Popular tactics do change over time on P99 so maybe it's different now?

[PlsNoBan]

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

Has this changed of late? I admittedly have not been very active on P99 this year, but when I was most active druid/enchanter was an extremely popular duo, probably second for enchanter after cleric. Popular tactics do change over time on P99 so maybe it's different now?

Druid is a popular choice for duo with enc. It just doesn't fit DSM's narrative so he says it isn't. Most enchanters don't want their charms attack speed slowed when their duo partner heals it.