View Full Version : Warrior with shaman or cleric?
04-23-2003, 04:36 AM
Might have some free time, still not sure hehe
What would be thee best thing to do for a duo from level 1 to 60
Warrior Shaman or Warrior Cleric ???
Is thee healing of shaman enough to keep warrior alive?
04-23-2003, 04:51 AM
I'm not sure how good Warrior/Shaman is in pop zones, but I would say pre-pop Warrior/Shaman is better than Warrior/Cleric at 60. Personally I have only done duo with 54 shaman and 58 cleric and shaman was the better of the 2, mainly because of the slow and extra dps. I wouldn't count out using a druid to duo. I use my 61 druid to duo with mostly and the added dps from the druid makes aa farming so much faster.
04-23-2003, 04:57 AM
pre-PoP, Shaman is any melee's best friend.
Slow + Heal + Canni > CH
Bring bandages. Nothing better than getting an oom shammy back in business by working up your bind wound skill as they canni.
Tarsk, who duo'd with a Shammy on and off from 25 to 55
04-23-2003, 05:19 AM
(innoruuk diety cleric= clicky snare) +fear+heal=good for outside zones
shamans are good for inside where fear is bad and trolls can get the snare clicky too
big hp buffs vs. haste stat buffs
the shaman would be better off solo then keeping some warrior healed the cleric kinda has no other opion
just group lvling slower and learning key group skills>lvling realy fast
04-23-2003, 05:59 AM
Bah, I hate fear kiting, I ain't no necro pet.
04-23-2003, 06:08 AM
Warrior - shaman duo is great. Even in PoP zones (mainly PoV and HoH) I've duo'd with a shaman, and it's worked well. Slow is great, even with weaker heals and smaller hp buffs, I'd still pick a shaman first. Cleric isn't bad either, really, it's whichever you would prefer playing, both combos work very well.
04-23-2003, 07:00 AM
Once you get shaman to 58+, they are the way to go for sure. Slow and Canni mana regen owns. Healing may be a little rough to start out with, but the lower levels are cake anyways, especially if you plan on twinking at all.
04-23-2003, 07:10 AM
1-60 I'd say warrior/druid. DS > All
After that it's warrior/shaman for sure.
04-23-2003, 08:09 AM
Shaman is better than a cleric to duo with, but it's still really rough for me to duo in Tactics.
Also as stated above, any shaman can do MUCH better solo than he can do with a warrior. It's clerics that are screwed and must have a warrior. But with PoP and slow being the most powerful spell in the game, clerics either go nearly OOM duoing per fight, or you need to 3 box a shaman along with a cleric.
Either a shaman or cleric will work in PoV/PoS, but shaman is much more efficient.
Warrior/monk/rogue are about the most inefficient PoP duo classes, and of course can no longer solo. If you really want to duo, pick some other class.
04-23-2003, 08:19 AM
I can duo fine in PoV/S and CoD with a cleric.
As i dual box with a console switch i cannot play the second character as effective as someone with a second keyboard, mouse and monitor.
I usually pull, wielding usually willsapper/prismatic combo for the procs, then switching to my usual setup.
Snare whip at half mob health if it is a runner.
I usually only need hammer pet/MOR/K (Mok from BP now) and CH from cleric.
Last weekend i got a truncheon of doom which seems to proc a lot more often than the willsapper, although the slow fades faster, and this makes things even easier.
I only dual box though if i need cash bad or i can get no groups, or dont have much time online anyway which isnt too often.
Havent tried HoH yet as cleric has no pacification(has spell but lacks level) yet to lull mobs there (wake of tranquility wont work on mobs over 60) and cleric is not tactics flagged yet.
04-23-2003, 09:33 AM
Cleric is uber because of pacification.
At 65 i wouldn't take anything other than a cleric.
There is NO way a shaman can keep up with heals in Earth or deep in Fire for xp.
Pacify , Rez , CH , bigger HP buffs.
Cleric is the way at high levels.
04-23-2003, 10:41 AM
Heh, at 65 I prefer a shaman. The vast majority of lvl 65 people won't see the elemental planes. Cleric may be better at a higher tier. Higher levels depends on where you exp. Shamans can keep up fine in PoV, HoH, etc.
04-23-2003, 11:04 AM
Geez, this question was asked like 6 months ago and there was a lot more agreement.
Here's the real deal response.
Is this duo going to be you and a friend, or you on your 2nd comp?
If so, how well can you multi-task?
And finally, where do you plan on going with this duo?
If it's you and a friend, shaman is hands down the way to go. The shaman brings a metric ton of utility to your warrior...but only if someone has time to play him correctly. If it's you on your 2nd comp, then it relates to question number 2. Some people, due to a setup or other factors have problems doing more than clicking a CH button every once in awhile...that's not a slam, it's just the way some people are. If you are really good at 2 boxing, pick a shaman. I did, and the only reason people could tell I was playing both is because i only talked with one character. That's gonna help you out a lot in the long run. Why bother with pacify when you can pull 2 and have the shaman tank one? hehe.
And 3rd, this question will probably vary quite a bit with what you plan on doing with this duo. If you want to hit indoor dungeons under 60, shaman, no doubt, hands down. If you're spending most of your time outdoors, druid or cleric is passable, and perhaps in some situations better. If you're in an enclosed space tho, you're gonna need everything the shaman has for a duo.
I 2 boxed the mines in chardok when I was bored (level 60 mind you)...everything was level 56, single pulls were rare, but it wasn't an issue with my shammy behind me. I have a hard time believing you could do it with any other healer.
If you want to do PoP with your duo, then I got nothing for you. I stay far away from that POS expansion.
04-23-2003, 11:08 AM
If it's a duo I'd say Warrior/Shaman for sure, but when you get into grps, Warrior/Cleric is really good.
I play both a 65 Cleric, and 65 Warrior in all grinds, and it takes me no time to make/get a grp with them, find a slower and your set!
04-23-2003, 04:00 PM
Well first time i post on warrior board and seing all thee info i had today while i am at work i sure like thee warrior spirith that is on those board /cheer
Will see what i do after reading more about warrior and SK...im pretty set on thee shaman thee other is sk or warrior.
04-23-2003, 04:57 PM
I wish I could dual box my cleric in PoV. He's only 55 =\
04-23-2003, 05:11 PM
I myself have both a shaman and a cleric to choose from when dual boxing. The shaman is 52 and the cleric is 53 so they pretty well equal on levels. Anyway the cleric is great...when you need lots of healing and some pacification. But the shaman just owns up on the cleric and let me list some reasons.
1. Shaman slow (dont need to heal as much)
2. Regen - nuff said
3. Shaman pet is not to be scoffed at when you need a little extra dps.
4. Shaman have hp and ac buffs (so do clerics) BUT
5. Shaman have str, dex, agi, haste, stamina, see invis, invis, lev, enduring breath, sow, nukes, dots, roots
need i say more?
04-23-2003, 06:26 PM
I two box a cleric and duo regularly with a shaman, and I prefer the cleric.
Slow...this is big
Travel...sow, invis, lev, EB
Damage...dots, pet, haste buff, cleric has better nukes
REAL healing...clerics heal an order of magnitude better than other healers.
Rez...This is huge, noting will ruin your night like eating an unrezzed death, running 6 zones to do a CR, or having to beg a cleric to cross 6 zones to rez you
Better ac/hp buffs...stat buffs are worthless
Much easier to 2-box at full efficiency...You're not going to be getting 100% capability out of a 2-boxed shaman, it's a very active class to play at full efficiency while 2-boxing.
Regen is worthless if you have a CHer. Unless you have great aggro weapons the shaman won't be able to go all-out damage-wise. Once the shaman stacks 2 dots +epic and slows you aren't gonna get aggro and hold it unless he keeps the mob rooted, at least not until the shaman has tanked for a while. Anytime after level 40ish the shaman struggles to keep me healed and still slow and do any dot damage without downtime. Healing a warrior is effortless for a cleric. My cleric bot and I can take 3 spiders at once in velks. Me and the shaman could too, but the shaman would be OOM at the end where the cleric can finish full mana.
Main drawbacks of a warrior/cleric duo is lack of DPS and a lack of travel skills, plan to spend a lot on invis pots and sow pots. Warrior and cleric though are a great foundation for a group and you can add virtually anyone and have a solid group.
A shaman and a warrior are a good duo. I leveled my current warrior to 43 duoing with a shaman, but at that level the shaman was struggling to keep me healed. Then I leveled my 2-box cleric and at this level (52) at least I like the cleric better. As others said, I feel like I'm slowing the shaman down when he could be doing better soloing and I would hate to play a class as active as a shaman as a 2-box bot.
04-23-2003, 07:14 PM
I would say that if you have the utility weapons to make up for the loss of some shaman spells (sapper or truncheon for slow, some type of snare weapon, perhaps a primal / prismatic to help the other procs out a bit) and also just a big dps weapon combo for after all the procs land, clerics would be the way to go. 65 cleric can arrange single pulls with pacification quite a bit, and spend a ton less mana per fight on healing (though shaman doesn't generally have mana problems either thanks to canni / torpor).
On the other hand, I'd say the general population of warriors out there don't have a full set of utility proc weapons, so you'd be talking about fighting mobs unslowed and possibly having to root mobs to keep them from running (increasing the damage from that unslowed mob during the last 10 percent or so). For most of us, a shaman rocks, especially if they're 65 with Quiescence. I've had groups with nothing but a shaman healing in BoT, and against non-named, the shammy could keep me at near full hp doing nothing but slowing / crippling the mobs, and chaining quiescence on me while canni'ing to keep his own mana up. It's a nice cheap elixir that they can keep on casting and rarely have to touch their 1300 or 1900 spells.
All depends on which warrior, which shaman, and which cleric you're talking about :) The gear and the spells will tell ya which combo is best (odds are it's the shaman and the cleric.... but then we poor warriors are out in the cold :P )
04-23-2003, 08:25 PM
I 2 box a 61 War and 62 Shammy now. Just got War flagged for PoV so have only done Tier one PoP, but they have worked fine there. I do the Hobgoblins in PoN a lot now, decent exp still and easy to do, with Torpor and Canni 4 the Shammy never runs low on mana. And I have a blast Duoing the Nightmares there, but since there are only 2 I can pull and the respawn is over an hour on them they arent steady exp, but Doing a Lvl 62 mob that hits for 544 just never seemed possible not all that long ago.
When it really gets fun is when ya fill up the group with friends, and are still doing the pulling/ MT syuff, and doing CC with the shaman at same time. Boy that can wear ya out after a while but is fun trying to keep 2 or 3 mobs all aggroed on the tank while ya get em all slowed and crippled and also keep yourself healed.
04-23-2003, 10:03 PM
Originally posted by artmer
What would be thee best thing to do for a duo from level 1 to 60
His shaman isn't gonna be 65 with quiessence hehe, he's starting from scratch. The question is which is better to level up with.
04-24-2003, 12:55 AM
Regen is worthless if you have a CHer.
CH is worthless if you have regen :)
I guess I could qualify that by saying that i had fungi tunics for both of my toons, regen 3, and Regrowth for 3+ person groups and Replenishment for when I duoed. It's forken hard to beat 40+ regen a tick with a slowed mob. When I was duoing in Akheva, my first torpor on Haass came around the 1 hour mark...that's when they finally whittled me down to berserk.
If you don't have such capabilities, you may have a harder time. Level 55-59 was particularly brutal without Kragg's mending. I gained a lot of bind wound skill points as an alternate method of healing to chloroblast. Cleric is easy...I got no argument with that, but if you've got a good setup, hardware wise with your comps and with gear, tough it out...the shaman pays off in the end.
Unless you have great aggro weapons the shaman won't be able to go all-out damage-wise. Once the shaman stacks 2 dots +epic and slows you aren't gonna get aggro and hold it unless he keeps the mob rooted, at least not until the shaman has tanked for a while.
2 dot's is probably overkill for most XP mobs. I don't wield great weapons...dual fleshgrinders and windblade, but I can hold aggro thru malo (when required), slow, epic, and either Bane or Pox with no issues. Alternately, you can chain the JBB and get pretty much the same DPS, just less aggro. Just don't sit the shaman down. After 58, you don't have any reason to sit anyway :)
Anytime after level 40ish the shaman struggles to keep me healed and still slow and do any dot damage without downtime. Healing a warrior is effortless for a cleric
Up until 60 anyway.
I won't argue the fact that duoing with a shaman has rough times. It's friggin hard from 40 until 58, unless you've got a camp with low dps mobs you can sit at from 44 to 55 like I did :) However, at 60, if you can scrounge halfway decent gear for your shaman, like epic, jbb, torpor, malo, pox, fungi tunic, etc...it is WELL worth the effort. So, that in mind, I guess ask yourself how much effort you're going to put into these toons once they hit 60. If you just hit 60 and stop and roll another set of twinks up, then a cleric will be a lot easier for ya. If you're gonna grind out 60-100 aa's at 60, a shaman is gonna make your life a whole helluva lot easier.
Matter of opinion I reckon.
04-24-2003, 06:02 AM
When the mob's 75% slowed, you don't need a 7.5k heal, and shamans have the best mana regen in the game, bar none. (Don't whine necros, you don't get to stack KEI on top of lich *ducks*) - Two boxing with my cleric and he *needs* KEI to keep the pulls coming, because unslowed mobs hurt big time.
Two-boxing with my fungi-equipped Shaman, and she can go all day and then some without needed a mana break. Must get Torpor and Canni V. Seriously never oom then.
Slow mitigates 75% of the damage. Kragg's is more than 25% of a 7.5K CH.
04-24-2003, 09:09 AM
Once again you guys are talking about 60+ duoing here. Pre-58 shamans are just not very good healers, and they don't become great healers until they get 60 and Torpor.
04-24-2003, 09:44 AM
Point taken, Brutul.
But we managed just fine all the way from 25-58 on GHeal and SHeal. Doesn't matter how much HP you have when you don't have CH around. And either way, slow is the best heal in the game, period.
04-24-2003, 12:03 PM
Pre-58 shamans are just not very good healers, and they don't become great healers until they get 60 and Torpor.
And if being a good healer was the only qualification for a good partner, you'd have a point :)
04-24-2003, 02:46 PM
Pre-58 shaman Are only like 4 levels behind the cleric when it comes to heals actually, so they not all that bad of healers and like everyone has said. Slow + Regen + Haste + Pet + AC and HP buff = Who needs CH? Not to mention if you want to get skill ups in your weapons and be more all around later you will need a Dex buff. Because if you are duoing you wont have time to skill up all your skills before you ding again. (Of course with a cleric you will level slower so you may not need the dex.)
On a side note, this person is talking about starting out these characters, dunno if he's willing to pay assloads of money for a trudgeon of doom and a SWoE ect ect.
04-24-2003, 02:54 PM
I play a 65 war and 62 cleric all the time. I also go out a lot with a friend who has a 65 shammy and 62 monk.
I honestly think you can kill bigger mobs faster with a shamman, however, cleric is soooo much less maintenance its not funny.
I cast one buff at the start (virtue), and then cast ch every once and a while as the cleric melees away from behind. Being able to res is also a huge bonus.
Shaman is just too busy for me, so I think it comes down to what you really want.
Considering I have a slowing weap, buy kei and vog at nexus, shaman is just not worth the extra effort to me.
04-24-2003, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by Perpull
Pre-58 shaman Are only like 4 levels behind the cleric when it comes to heals actually, so they not all that bad of healers and like everyone has said.
You're right up to level 29 hehe.
Greater healing...Cleric 24, Shaman 29
Superior Healing...Cleric 34, Shaman 51
Complete Healing...Cleric 39, Shaman get a half-assed version at 58
Of course how valuable CH is to you depends on how many hps you have. If you're a major twink the cleric will be more efficient than if you're not. If you've never played a shaman or druid through the 40s, GHeal sucks horribly at that level. Nowadays shamans get the baby torpor at 44 if you quest it in LoY, but it's barely better than celestial healing that clerics get at 44 and it snares and slows you for 24 seconds.
It's true that healing isn't everything, but from 40-58 no one is even close to a cleric in the healing department. Especially on a big tank that you can land a big CH on.
04-24-2003, 03:51 PM
It's true that healing isn't everything, but from 40-58 no one is even close to a cleric in the healing department. Especially on a big tank that you can land a big CH on.
Well then, lets talk about that.
He wants to level from 1 - 60 with a healer. Lets face it. up until 38, clerics are shit. Total freakin garbage. They've got a slightly better heal a few ranks ahead of the other healers, and that is about it. Their nukes at that level are mana hogs, and not impressive to say the least, and their buffs aren't game deciding.
Level 1-38 winner = anything but a cleric.
Now, at level 39, cleric gets CH. Is CH really efficient at level 39? Not really. Most clerics don't have the mana pool to be spamming a 400 mana spell constantly, plus you have to heal a pretty good chunk of HP to be more efficient than Sup Heal, which won't fizzle as much at 39 either. So to be safe, we'll say he starts using CH regularly at 44 (the level where CH would stop fizzling so much, and gives a few extra levels for the tank to gain some more HP). So, level 39-44, the table still sits with anything but a cleric.
44-50, no doubt, none whatsoever that the cleric has more healing power than the other 2. Once the other 2 get Sup heal, the gap closes a little bit, and for at least a level or 2, druids and shamans are once again, passable healers.
44-50 winner -- Cleric.
51- about 53-54, the Shamans and Druids have the advantage I'd say. Passable healing, which is MORE than made up for in the powerful utility that these 2 classes represent. Turgurs insects is a beast, far less resisted than Togor's, and at 51, shamans are just animals. With the druids, you've still got a viable 25 point damage shield at that level, not to mention the ports, and a great HP buff, and at 51, a damage shield can still turn the tides of your battles.
51-53 winner = shaman/druids.
54-57 - I gotta go with cleric again on this one. In the mid 50's, a lot of stuff greens out, and you have to start fighting much tougher mobs. Shaman and druid healing slows down a ton at these levels, and cleric healing makes a much bigger difference.
54-57 winner -- Cleric.
58-60 -- Tunare's renewal, for the VAST majority of people playing this game, is complete heal. Any way you slice it, unless you're sitting at 5hp after you zoned, TR is a CH at level 58. Why bother with a cleric when you can get a druid who can do EVERYTHING that a druid can do AND CH? There is no reason.
Kraggs mending is not nearly as great, but shamans have the ace in the hole....Turgurs insects, which more than makes up for any deficiency between Kragg and TR or Kragg and CH. Torpor at 60 only sweetens the deal, and once a shaman hits 58, they are never, ever OOM, ever again.
58-60 winners = Druids and shamans.
Now, lets go back and look this over. Clerics rule the healing ground for about 10 levels between 1 and 60 unconditionally. The rest of the time, the other 2 priests are either completely viable healers, or passable healers with MAJOR extra's included, such as damage shields, slows, ports, ATK buffs, pet damage, etc.
Do you want a toon that's going to be useful for 10 levels between 1 and 60, or a toon that's going to be more useful for the majority of the time you're going to be spending between 1 and 60?
Cleric is easy. That's the only argument they have. If you're capable of doing more than hitting a CH hotkey every minute and a half, you're better off with either of the other 2. If you're not...hey, there's no shame in that. Maybe your setup doesn't allow more action than that. That's not a big deal. But if you are duoing with a buddy, or have 2 boxed before, you're holding yourself back picking a cleric.
04-24-2003, 03:57 PM
Dude, I'm not even going to reply to that. Let's just say I think you're exaggerating a lot on both sides.
If you like the shaman, go for it, no skin off my nose. I'm gonna stick with my cleric.
04-24-2003, 03:59 PM
I have to agree, you include slow as making up ground on a cleric, yet fail to mention Res, is res not beneficial anymore?
04-24-2003, 04:08 PM
Dude how did I exaggerate?
When was the last time you took an unrezzed death? I don't know. If I want a rez, I can find one, cleric in group or not. The game doesn't work like that anymore?
/tell randomclericsitting at zone in "Hey, can ya toss me a click?
/tell randomclericsitting at zone in "Thanks, have a stack of dots"
If it's that big a deal, there, I included it.
Want more proof?
Before Tunare's Renewal and Kragg's mending came into the game, my friend and I were both 2 boxing. I had my war/shm, he had Monk/Druid. We did alright I guess, considering the best heal we had was Nature's Touch (880 before they removed the druid/shaman healing penalty). We mixed and matched that with Torpor.
CT opened up...the druid/shaman thing just didn't keep up anymore, so he put his druid in dry dock, and rolled up a cleric. We powerleveled him to 40 and included him in our hunting group. He got to 53 before Tunare's Renewal and Kragg's mending were implemented. Once we had TR scribed on the druid, we stripped off the cleric and parked him in TOV to check spawns for us, and we haven't used him since.
We die somewhere? Oh shucks. hey, there's a cleric over there, ask him to rez us.
You don't have a slower in the group, you gonna try the same thing with a shaman? I think not.
Exaggerations or not, cleric is inferior. My heart bleeds for the clerics, it really does, because it shouldn't be this way. I said it the day they implemented TR and Kragg, and I still believe it to this day. It was wrong to implement those 2 heals for druids and shaman, but as long as it's in the game, i'm gonna exploit the hell out of it.
Point is each class caters to different people. Go with what works best for you.
04-25-2003, 04:20 AM
I don't exp without slow.
Therefore, if I'm two-boxing, I want my partner to be a slower. (or I have to rely on my massively bad luck with the RNG and my ToD)
04-25-2003, 04:46 AM
Haass, your statements might be correct for pre pop content although i had a rough time keeping my warrior healed with my druid in CoM.
My druid was high 40s low 50s and my warrior went from 49 to 55 there.
Druid has some obvious advantages like wolf form, chloroplast, SLN, damageshield and superior heal past 51.
But even past 51 there was a lot of downtime with the druid as he had it rough keeping up with heals (i buffed with my cleric -symbol and AC - who was around same level as druid back then).
Druid is has specialization alteration so that was not the reason for running out of mana that fast.
The druid was working very well for my monk as partner when i played him actively still though.
But for PoP duoing a druid will never be a viable choice even past 63 or 64 where he can use the 5k heal, in my opinion.
Especially in PoP there is a lot to be said of the low agro heal over time spells a cleric can use.
A druid or shaman who has to use his direct heals right from the start to keep a tank up is very likely to catch agro.
When i duo with my cleric and slow doesnt proc fast i start healing with supernal elixier (or celestial elixier pre 62/post 59).
I auto sit after complete heals and i havent been summoned once due to sitting agro.
04-25-2003, 04:48 AM
Shaman is infinitely more valuable than a cleric in an XP group, but it doesn't really matter because most people perceive clerics to be more useful. Shaman heals are basically always 100% efficient so max HP doesn't really matter, and it's not like you couldn't pay someone to virtue you if you really care about such things. Rez, like mentioned before, is something you can find by asking. The only scenario where a shaman isn't as good as a cleric is if something hits so hard that can kill you before you can slow it. But if you're dealing with such mobs, a cleric will want a shaman to help out (via slowing) too so it's really no advantage there.
But then again, most of the shamans I know are soloing or two-boxing somewhere, so I'll take a cleric over a nonexistent shaman anyday.
04-25-2003, 05:25 AM
Shaman heals are basically always 100% efficient so max HP doesn't really matter
I'm glad someone else pointed this out. Doesn't matter how much HP you got if you're not being healed for 7.5K.
Druids sit somewhere in the middle. They heal better than Shammies, but they don't have slow and a DS just can't replace that.
04-25-2003, 05:42 AM
*cough* 7408 hp with virtue.
CH for 6k+ are quite regular in Tier 2.
But I readily admit i like shamans (not for stat buffs though).
I played a bunch of classes (bard, cleric, rogue, druid, 2 monks *dont ask*, warrior) to 49+ and i always liked playing the cleric on a stressful day.
But believe me, cleric role has changed quite a bit, depending how much use you make of it.
Puller, healer, low dps post 56 but dps all the same with monster hammer of proccing.
Just depends how much work you want to do in a group, lots of cleric still love their old role of pure healer/buffer.
I have a 22 shaman i play from time to time, mostly dualboxed with a 22 enchanter.
Maybe one day i get him high enough to actually see if he works better than my cleric.
At the moment i dont have a reason to change the setup.
04-25-2003, 09:18 AM
04-25-2003, 09:58 AM
what about three man group of chanter cleric and warrior?
thats what I am using right now
04-25-2003, 11:30 AM
One of my old guild leaders used to 3 box a cleric/chanter/warrior. Dude was psycho...he'd camp anything by himself.
If you've got the skills to play all 3 with a reasonable efficiency level, that combo is insane. Don't need a group with those 3. You might not kill as fast, but you don't need to be dependant on anyone else damned near anywhere.
But for PoP duoing a druid will never be a viable choice even past 63 or 64 where he can use the 5k heal, in my opinion.
That's why in the original post he refers to levels 1 -60, and I do too. He's not asking about PoP levels, and i'm not giving advice based on them.
04-25-2003, 11:35 AM
yeah i actually two box the cleric, I play the warrior and bot the cleric and my RL wife plays the chanter
What is it like in the planes as far as POP goes? I mean can we zone in, grab a wall and setup camp there? I have only been to PON with my mage (55) and he died fast in the group he was in.
But that was when the expansion first came out its more camped now then it was then
04-25-2003, 11:38 AM
Well, could do that I suppose, but that's not really where that combo would shine.
If you're over 60, i guess you don't have a choice. If you're under 60, you can farm the holy hell out of your favorite dungeon with that group. Only thing you're missing is snare, which can be offset pretty easily via nukes from the 2 casters and from having mezzed mobs around.
That group is the core of any dungeon crawling group, and has everything you really need to do most camps. If you want to hunt in PoP, you shouldn't have any issues, but with a group like that, there's no reason to hunt outdoors if you have other options.
04-25-2003, 03:28 PM
Cleric, warrior, enchanter is a hard group to kill. It's the "Holy Trinity" yanno. You have all the defense in the world. You may not kill fast, but you can go anywhere and survive anything. Throw in a couple rogs or mages in your group and you'll own any zone. Add anybody of any class and you'll have a good group.
You could handle PoP with those 3, but I think it would be highly desireable to pick up a damage dealer if there's one LFG.
04-25-2003, 04:15 PM
It's not easy to squeeze that much out of CH unless you've someone slowing, and in that case the efficiency of CH is founded upon the slow, not CH itself. Even with 9K HP buffed I rarely see a good CH heal more than 5k because 10 seconds is a long time to wait and you have to play safe, especially if it's unslowed (assuming only cleric and no shaman). Have I been healed for more than 5K? Of course, but most of heals look like I'm about to die and isn't something I want to count on in a regular basis while xping let alone duoing.
Between Can4 & Cannibalization, a shaman has at least twice the mana regen as a cleric of similar gear/AA. This means his heals are actually twice as efficient since he has double the mana to spend, so even if a mob is not slowable, a Kragg's Mending is really a 4K heal which is on the same level as an efficient CH. Unless the mob hits over 200 DPS, the Shaman pretty much heals as efficiently as well as a cleric, without even factoring slow or the godly quiscience (and to a lesser extent Torpor). And even for >200 DPS mobs, a cleric wouldn't be able to keep up the mana even if he can keep the person alive so such mobs aren't really what you'd xp on in the first place.
04-25-2003, 05:40 PM
Why in the world would a cleric be landing 4k CH's on a tank with 9k hps in an exp group? Your clerics CH's are landing when you are at 3 bubbles of health? That's not being cautious, that's wasting mana. There's no exp mobs that I have done in PoP that would require even starting a CH before 50% or so, and I have never been close to 9k hps. You should be able to heal 6k hps on a 9k tank easily. I can land 4k CH's on myself regularly with a bot cleric and I only have something like 4700 hps with Virtue and shaman buffs. I know Velk spiders aren't elemental planes mobs but still.
04-25-2003, 11:46 PM
This means his heals are actually twice as efficient since he has double the mana to spend
/boggle. Shaman below 60 have the same (and frequently smaller) mana pool as a cleric, of which they can regain some during melee. That 10 second cast of Kragg's Mending is 10 secs that they're not Cannibalizing. Gods forbid they're chaining Superior Heals or Chloroblasts.
Slow -- not the brute-force mana regen -- is the mitigating factor. Slowed, Kragg means as much for the time it takes to cast as a CH does when fighting an unslowed mob.
Still, that's a lot of levels to traverse without a big heal. As long as you survive the fight (which root should allow on the lower mobs) the shaman as a parter will have you back in the fray quicker.
04-26-2003, 03:52 AM
I do believe you are overlooking the benefits of more dps.
Not that it matters what partner you have so long as you could kill the mobs by yourself. Then healing is just there to reduce downtime and you are looking entirely at their secondary powers.
Either one will work, really. And has been said, if you it is you and a buddy, have the buddy make a shaman. Unless your buddy has their heart set on playing a cleric. If you are running 2 characters, and aren't very co-ordinated (like me), make a cleric.
I 2 box on occasion, using my 56 cleric, and I'm quite happy with it. However, I didn't begin pairing them up until the war was 59 and the cleric was 40... and I already had the bag of procing toys (snare, slow, etc) when I started. A shaman is just simply too busy for a klutz like me.
That being said, I'll gladly camp out the cleric (or leave her in group, if I'm wanting to level her some more) and have a friend or guildy join me. Playing alone gets quite boring after a while. ;)
04-26-2003, 06:17 AM
I three box a war(60)/dru(60)/clr(56) always in tier 1 PoP zones but have been considering swapping out the clr for a shaman. I use a ToD for slow and then switch to Windblade when the ToD procs. That works fairly well, but with real slow and haste I think it would be a big DPS bump (cause I can use Windblade+haste full time). My main concern right now is upping my DPS.
Some things to keep in mind when building these combinations in your minds, assuming you have C3 and PoTG the Dru should be able to baby cheal AND dot/nuke (which is lots more dps). In my threesome the druid outdamages the war every time. Also, when considering clerics, don't forget clerics get some fairly efficient nukes and also a 15 point ds at 54.
imo sham always own cleric for duo, mostly after post-pop i duo with a rl sham friend all the time in PoV and PoS
04-28-2003, 02:11 AM
Depends all on your computer and toon equipment, AA level and where you duo.
I got a ToD last week and that made my duo even more efficient.
ToD seems to proc slow a lot more than willsapper (although my 2hb is far from maxed), i switch back to BoC and Blackout after (switching in prismatic for avatar proc) and i can down PoS desert crap (no giants-never tried) and CoD entrance (no Greater Foul Puslings as they are not slowable, and worse not snareable and running at 20 life - train incoming) before tepid deeds wears off most of the time.
Might a shaman be more efficient ? Maybe, but i dont have the cash to buy him equipment and more importantly torpor.
I have played my cleric as main for a long time and can hold my own even if i need to play him on raids.
His mana pool is limited compared to other clerics in guild and no FT except earring of solstice and mental clarity 1 but i was able to survive a AoW rotation with 40 percent mana left(6 healers in rotation - 1 of them a druid).
But I guess a shaman might be more efficient if item haste is below 36 percent and you have no slow proccing weapon, especially in PoP.
04-28-2003, 08:29 AM
thanks for the responses
heh i have levelled to 51 already with the cleric chanter combo so all is good so far
the combo is highly lethal
we have the ability to add a shaman friend every now and then but we are doing ok for now.
much rather have my rogue buddy join
chanter provides us with mana and haste and slow as well as a wealth of other talents, I would rather have her in the group right now. We let the shaman slow if he joins the party. With my new gear this weekend (guard captains mallet etc etc) i am having little trouble maintaining agro so we are set on cruise control
basically at this point, and I know she cant do this later, she single pulls and lines the mobs up for me to totally destroy
and she has a new haste coming up
I love chanters :)
"Then healing is just there to reduce downtime and you are looking entirely at their secondary powers"
Correct, and when she hits 54 we already have bought Clarity 2 and the cleric will be even happier. AS it is right now the cleric is ssitting so much that she is nuking to finish the mobs
All of our strategies will change later of course when we play with the big boy mobs but at this point I would not swap the cleric out for anything.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.