Best 4 person all caster/priest group

[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.

[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.

[Gloomlord]

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.

[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.

[Gloomlord]

But it is irrelevant when you think a solo parse is applicable to group DPS...?

You've already lost the argument, don't you see that?

[cd288]

Remember when we’re talking about a group and DSM starts talking about how shamans are better dps while solo root rotting? Lmao

[Crede]

Why are you guys so obsessed in getting him to admit he’s wrong? Once he picks an opinion, he will never change that. Maybe little facts here and there, like underestimating mage epic dps, but he has never changed an opinion about a debate that he started.

The facts are simple. Mages can put out high amounts of group dps barely doing any actions. Shamans have to wait to 60, and go apeshit clicking buttons to even remotely come close. No shaman is going off on the side root rotting with epic in a fast pace killing group unless you’re trying to win this thread.

Nobody in their right mind is inviting a shaman for a group dps role over a mage if minimum utility is met.

More dps is always good, even if the seconds saved per kill starts to lessen per kill.

Wasted utility is always bad, unless your group sucks.

There’s no reason to continue this debate.

[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

[cd288]

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

Please show me where I did this. Your lack of reading is astounding.

I never claimed a Shaman deals more damage than a Mage, unless root/rotting.

The question has always been how much difference in DPS is a Shaman compared to a Mage, and if it matters. Clearly the answer is it doesn't matter in a four man group based on the data.



So a fresh group is going to be so pro they don't need a Shaman, but so not pro they can't level a pocket cleric? You are contradicting yourself, yet again. OP never claimed he was a noob, forming a group with other noobs, with no gear what-so-ever.

Dude this is so fucking funny I’m loving this. Dude sits around demanding more and more data, someone goes and does a parse in KC and proves that mages are better dps than shamans, and then this dude decides to change the argument to “well it’s just irrelevant for the group anyway”

Yeah no shit man the 4th person in a two enchanter and cleric group is kind of a pointless addition no one disagrees with that. But in this scenario we are forced to choose a fourth person and therefore the only thing that makes sense is more dps (which you agreed on Friday the best group would be three enchanters and a cleric).

Honestly I’ve never laughed harder at a thread on here before. It’s so satisfying watching you act all sanctimonious about data and then Allyshia proves you wrong with data and your response is that it’s irrelevant for the group anyway. Seriously, so funny. This is amazing watching you get destroyed after you made such a big deal out of this for like 900 posts lmaoooooooo