Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[Troxx]

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

You need to provide evidence that the variability in the group is affecting the Shaman more so than the Mage. Otherwise if a group is doing 20% less DPS for whatever reason, that affects both the Mage and Shaman equally. So it is irrelevant.

Last I checked YOU are the shaman with skin in the game. I provided the data of how a mage functions in a fast high paced group. You have not provided the same for the shaman … at all … despite being asked.

Why should I provide YOUR classes data for you? I already gave you mage data to compare it to and so did Ally.

You’re the one that can but WON’T provide the “evidence”.

I have a good guess though. It will be lower. You will probably sustain closer to 40-45 dps (possibly lower) due to time spent casting canni, torpor, and missed nukes given thr 7 second long cast time.

But we will never know until you actually do it.

No more napkin math.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Last I checked YOU are the shaman with skin in the game. I provided the data of how a mage functions in a fast high paced group. You have not provided the same for the shaman … at all … despite being asked.

Why should I provide YOUR classes data for you? I already gave you mage data to compare it to and so did Ally.

You’re the one that can but WON’T provide the “evidence”.

I have a good guess though. It will be lower. You will probably sustain closer to 40-45 dps (possibly lower) due to time spent casting canni, torpor, and missed nukes given thr 7 second long cast time.

But we will never know until you actually do it.

No more napkin math.

Again, this isn't how burden of proof works. Both sides provided evidence.

You are making a new claim my evidence is invalid. Therefore it is up to you to prove it.

Asking me to prove a negative is nonsense. I could keep claiming your parse data is photoshopped and not from a Mage. That is the same thing you are doing here.

[cyxthryth]

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

Again, this isn't how burden of proof works. Both sides provided evidence.

The above Quote is simply you sharing your opinion of how burden of proof works/"doesn't work"; which is simply your opinion.

I am also not sure why your post(s) would seemingly indicate that you - still - think that the particular data/information that you keep providing in your copy/pasted posts - which includes data/information of your Shaman's performance in an environment/context/scenario that is contrary to the environment/context/scenario relevant to this discussion, as has been pointed out to you multiple times by multiple posters - is somehow relevant to this discussion. It is not. It is simply irrelevant for reasons explained in multiple posts by multiple posters (including in this very post).

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

You are making a new claim my evidence is invalid. Therefore it is up to you to prove it.

For the sake of civil discussion, can you please provide the definition that you are using for the word "new"? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

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

Asking me to prove a negative is nonsense. I could keep claiming your parse data is photoshopped and not from a Mage. That is the same thing you are doing here.

The above Quote is simply you sharing your opinion of what the "thing Troxx is doing here" is ("nonsense" apparently, although - again - you have not provided the definition that you are using for "nonsense" so I am not sure what point you think you are making or what fact you think you are refuting); which is simply your opinon hehe.

Feel free to support it with relevant factual evidence/data if you believe that you can and are willing to do so for the sake of civil discussion. This really isn't hard hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Troxx]

One side provided relevant data.

The other side posted videos of solo encounters.

It’s funny. If this were a game of chess DSM was solidly in “check-mate” sometime around 300 pages ago. Instead this clown has spent weeks arguing he’s not actually in checkmate. His dead queen, bishops and rolls are clearly not dead. They are alive because his napkin math stated evidence to the contrary.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]


I don’t know though … who’s the bigger fool? The fool or the folks who foolishly think they can talk sense into the fool?

For now I’m mostly in it for the laughs. The longer this drags on the more foolish the fool looks.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

One side provided relevant data.

The other side posted videos of solo encounters.

It’s funny. If this were a game of chess DSM was solidly in “check-mate” sometime around 300 pages ago. Instead this clown has spent weeks arguing he’s not actually in checkmate. His dead queen, bishops and rolls are clearly not dead. They are alive because his napkin math stated evidence to the contrary.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]


I don’t know though … who’s the bigger fool? The fool or the folks who foolishly think they can talk sense into the fool?

For now I’m mostly in it for the laughs. The longer this drags on the more foolish the fool looks.

It is up to you to prove the DPS numbers will change. That is the claim you are making. I am not making this claim at all, because mob AC/HP/Resists factually do not change when soloing vs. grouping. It is a strange claim to be honest if you understood how the basic math of the game works.

[cyxthryth]

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

It is up to you to prove the DPS numbers will change. That is the claim you are making. I am not making this claim at all, because mob AC/HP/Resists factually do not change when soloing vs. grouping. It is a strange claim to be honest if you understood how the basic math of the game works.

You 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.

and then you simply contradicted yourself 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.

As I have repeatedly stated to you - it is not always clear to other posters what particular position/claim/"arguent" you are defending at any given time due to how often you have moved the goalposts & edited your posts. This really isn't hard hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Which belief do you currently hold/"argue" hehe? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Please elaborate for the sake of civil discussion.

[PlsNoBan]

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

The data shows otherwise.

It doesn't though. It really really doesn't. The data says mages do significantly more damage than shamans and will net the group more kills over time. Your opinion says the group will wipe without shaman heals/utility. Everyone's common sense says that won't happen.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It doesn't though. It really really doesn't.

It does. It really does. You even admit the math is correct.

[PlsNoBan]

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

It does. It really does. You even admit the math is correct.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It doesn't though. It really really doesn't. The data says mages do significantly more damage than shamans and will net the group more kills over time. Your opinion says the group will wipe without shaman heals/utility. Everyone's common sense says that won't happen.

No. The data shows the Mage's extra DPS gives you no more kills over time.

There is always the possibility of wiping. It is silly to claim I said it is a guarantee. But when you have an x% chance to wipe, it can happen, and has happened.

This isn't "common sense", you have this strange notion people never wipe in Everquest. It's nonsense.