A well rounded group . . .Follow

Was that an attempt at being cutting?

It would be more effective if you made sense.

...beastlord, necromancer, mage.

What can I say? Pets can't be beat

Necromancer's can't slow(yes, I know, they get undead slow. You're not always going to be fighting undead), they can't summon gear for the other pets, they can't summon mod rods, and their mana regen requires mobs with mana to work, and unless it was changed, mana taps don't stack.

Utility is a nice thing too. I'm not saying that necromancers aren't great to have around, just that the beastlord and mage will usually bring more utility to a group than two extra necromancers.

Shaman 1550 heal 3.75 sec cast time = 2.5k fast heal focused in 3 sec let say avg 3k heal crit that's more than enough for any Ele/hard LDON(dont believe me......I have shaman healing hard 65s and ele groups all the time with me in them) Now I will say they can't heal Tipt+ groups....but druids can't either........Now lets see druids also slow a mob ans haste a melee class as well as focus, boar, FA and diaku them.....

Shaman>druids nuff said(my 1337 sp33k>j00 >_>)

Ok now you are talkin bollox.

Druids get a BETTER & QUICKER quick heal than shamans, they also get the same crit AA as shammies making them better healers comprende?

the group he was putting them in already had a slower <Chanter> so that makes the druids can't slow/haste arguement moot.

They may not be able to Focus, Boar, FA and Diaku but at EP level if a tank does not already have maxed out STA you are making less difference than Po9/Kazard.

Just admit you are wrong for once Blah because in this case YOU ARE!

From personal experience, a Good Chanter or Bard is the foundation of the core of a great group.

A Pally or Warrior gives you the tank.

And I like to have a Cleric for heals. The other 3 you pick up aren't really important.

So rather than argue about best CLASS, look at it this way.

1. Crowd Control
2. Tank
3. Healer

IMHO, if you have 1,2, and 3, and they are good, your group is WIN.

Tank
Bard
Cleric
Beastlord
Necro
Rogue

Hands down.

Then you're an idiot.

You already backed off the original false statement you made that Shaman were better healers than druids. Now you are arguing the utility of Shaman.

If utility is a good thing then a druid has far more utility than a second cleric. If things are tough you have a very good healer and if things are easy for a bit you have a very powerful offensive caster. A second cleric is fine for the heals but they are useless for much else. Clerics don't stack well and I certainly wouldn't put two of them in a "well-rounded group" (not that I think that concept has any validity or relevance to the game beyond making people even more narrow-minded)

It is not everyone else for whom "liking druids may be your preference". It is you who seem to have an irrational dislike of them. Unusual to see druid-envy in a wizard - perhaps it is the leather.

It is indeed if your Bard is a good player, if you get a crappy bard that group would struggle <So would most groups with 1 crap char but bards are hard to find with high skill levels>

Lets take a tipt or Vxed farming group You have a cleric chanter and ranger now I would much rather have a cleric as the back up healer than a druid b/c they can heal better and they can rez not to mention stun. Now if I had a necro in the group I wouldn't really care if I had a druid as back up healer or a shaman as backup healer since the necro can rez a dead cleric.....
Now YOu said something about me agruing about a shamans utility which I was when compairing a shaman to a druid........Then you went off and compared the utility of a druid to a cleric as a back up healer to another cleric.....I said If I need a 2nd CHer for the group there aren't many times when that is needed....I explained one but here's another. When say grouping seru or cursed I would much rather have 2 clerics than a cleric and druid since the cleric heals better and the druid wouldn't nuke(need mana for healing oh such a high HP target).
Now back to the shaman Vs Druid utility arguement

Shaman
------
Slow(both magic and diseased based)
Haste
Focus
FA
Boar
Assorted melee stat buffs
A pet that can OT decently
Really nice dots
1550/1300 3.75 sec cast heal without focuses
Breath of Trushar///Quiescence best HoT in game
So so nukes
Druid
-----
Bo9
decent "CH" 10 sec cast time
Sylvan Infusion///Nature's Infusion 2100/1750 3.75 sec cast heal
seasons
snare
a little rat pet that is funny to watch
decent nukes
so so Dots
DS
porting


Ok Now The druid can heal better(barely on the fast heals but still better) but can not slow or haste(both very very important) but can not buff nearly as well as a shaman. The druid can nuke better but shamans can dot better. Druids pets are laughable shamans pets are decent really I honestly do not see how you could think a druid is more useful to a group than a shaman??? Maybe thats why shaman have no problems getting groups in earth KT or Ldon yet I see druids complaining all the time and end up going to HoH or Fire if they are lucky and kiting.




YOu should play more before you call ppl idiots.


Oh and Yeah I've only come across one bad bard and he ended up just twisting which was fine with me I love the mana and resets.



Edited, Mon Sep 13 01:15:07 2004 by elorianBLAH

None of us was argueing that shamans sucked, we where argueing that shamans where lesser healers than druids.

My point <that you completely missed> was that if a group already has an enchanter then a druid would be a better choise for the group.

Why?

1.Better heals.

2.Higher DPS <DS + Nukes over Pet/DoT>

If you where going to take a Pet/Dot in that slot you would take a Necro they are far more efficient.

I am curious Blah why you insist on using tipt/Vxed as your examples, they are not "average zones" and only 1% of players will hunt there on a regular basis. maybe it is to pump your over inflated ego i am not sure.

i Use tipt and vxed as examples b/c thats the only time really(unless grouping lucin raid mobs) that I can think of where a 2nd complete healer would be needed. Any lesser zone(non gates I mean) one healer (cleric druid or shaman) will work just fine. I think I miss stated my thoughts on druids Im not saying they are a useless class(coughzerkerscough and maybe coughSKcough....but SKs are kool...someone should start a petition to make them more useful for end game play) I'm jsut saying that In your abg group a shaman can heal it just fine(My brother's shaman heals hard LDoNs for me and my guildies shamans heal in earth for me just fine) and since they can heal and slow that opens up a spot for more dps thus having faster exp.


kobba You'd need the beast for that last slot for slow but yeah that would be some nice dps :) though I would think a pally might actually be a better tank for a group like that since they have the best snap agro if one of the dps classes pulls agro.

Just one more thought to Blah...

If a chanter is in a group, no one will take a shaman over a druid ... NO ONE!!!! Your arguements for better buffs... the few shammy buffs that are better, all last a long time and can be bought in PoK.

What function does a shammy bring to a group other than crowd control that a druid can't ....nada. And what little benefit they had was taken over by the beastlord that is usefull.

Further, my druid will stomp you shammy any day of the week and twice on Sunday as it will stomp most other classes as well. Why do you think that is... because a druid owns a shaman.... PERIOD!

You need to grow up and admit you have no idea what you are talking about. Go make a druid (yourself, not an ebay) and find out for yourself. Talking about things you obviously know nothing about makes you look stupid.