If you need me to for real I can, my bona fides with regards to shamaning are quite in order, thank you. But I don't think it'd make you happy. Why you're hung up on the power of a spell you cast at most once a minute anyhow I don't know.
He literally said it multiple times. Because shaman haste isn't desirable. Other sham buffs are already desirable, there is no reason to further add anything to them. In order to make sham haste somewhat desirable, it would be good to add extra mods to it like enchanter haste. I'm not sure how much clearer Fenudir can be. Enchanter Haste (RK 3): 2: Increase AGI by 225 3: Increase DEX by 188 4: Increase ATK by 197 5: Increase Attack Speed by 68% 6: Increase Chance to Critical Hit by 35% with All Skills 7: Increase Chance to Triple Attack by 22% 8: Increase Critical Damage by 15% with All Skills Sham Haste: 1: Increase Attack Speed by 60% Beast Haste: 1: Increase Attack Speed by 31% (L93) to 84% (L45). Beasts are starting to step on sham toes from a buff perspective. Their haste has already been superior. Their main buff (focus) is now more desirable, too. The sham class is very strong still, but getting an upgrade to haste is long overdue.
Lucy is the only spell parser that thinks beast haste is 84%; Raidloot and eqresources both list it as 53%
Pretty sure beast haste is 53%. And even if it was 84%, who cares at this point? Everyone hits the cap more or less anyway. And uh, I think you entirely missed Brohg's point. If you add mods to shaman haste, you risk there being stacking issues. The very basic celerity with the other shaman buffs is already superior to enchanter haste with all the mods. I mean, if they could add a shaman haste with mods with absolutely no stacking issues, hey, great.
"Shaman haste because shaman haste!" isn't an answer. Does it matter to you that you no longer have to cast Altuna plus Strength plus Brute plus Cat plus Avatar plus Infusion? It's all part of the package. They're all just "shammy luv pls" to dickholes in the Lobby. Whether bits & pieces of shaman buff power are on haste or on focus or on the cha buff doesn't matter at all to them, or to anyone. More fundamentally, Shamans just like all classes are or should be valued for the contribution they can make to battles, not for how many hugs they get in the Lobby. If someone out in the field wants haste, they just click their potion/CBQbelt, they don't drop all their shite and run for an enchanter. When folks appreciate an enchanter is when CC is called for or they want the caster dps thing going on in their group. In the same way, buffs aren't what folks group with shaman for. So if shaman power needs shoring up somewhere, it isn't on an ultimately irrelevant quartenary vector.
Lol, nobody serious is saying shams are a complete revamp or aren't appreciated so don't get your panties in a bundle. Simply saying, their haste buff (and HP buff) could use a little love.You seriously have some insecurity problems. 1) Potions only last 30 minutes which is annoying to constantly clicky. 2) Not everyone has CBQ belt. Nobody got time for that annoying camp . Oh and I mainly appreciate my sham for only buffs...lolz. And the back up heals whenever I need em. The strength of the sham in most situations can be summarized in half a dozen button clicks: 1) Epic 2) Third Spire 3) Ancestral Aid 4) Malo/Pathosis 5) Slow 6) Surge. Shams lack the versatility of some heals that druids/clerics have (but that's fine, because they can still heal great). VP and Spray are great CC too, but I'm not going to be grouping with a sham strictly because of their CC ability. Oh, and how about enc haste is one slot and gives you multiple mods, meanwhile sham buffs take upwards of 6 slots (4 for unity, 1 for haste, 1 for regen). It'd be nice to consolidate some of the buffs or mix haste with mammoths and add something extra. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. Maybe it'll calm you down!
I didn't say anything about what you use or appreciate your shaman for. Act a little less attacked, champ. Though that you use your shm for backup heals instead of as your primary healer is suspect, but WHATEVER. Duration is an argument against adding to the haste buff instead of one of the others, it's 1h instead of 2.2 on focus&co. Enchanter haste having a bunch of other mods on it instead of separate isn't a good thing, that just makes it more vulnerable to overwriting AEs & dots. You still haven't justified wanting something extra on shm buffs, let alone justifying how you want that something extra to be on the haste.
Lol I don't feel attacked in the slightest. I find it more humorous that you're always on the defensive of something. Your entire tone of each post says more than your words. I just giggle . So in a time when most people agree that all buffs should have lengthy timers, having haste a short timer makes it justification that it shouldn't be merged into a longer lasting buff? Well, that just makes perfect sense (end sarcasm). That also doesn't explain why enchanter haste is significantly longer lasting than sham haste. Why then aren't all hastes the same timer? I'll stand by duration being an arugment for merging it to another. Oh, and conveniently you completely overlooked/ignored the buff slot portion of the argument. Good job, you're a true politician. I'm starting to get an understanding of your mentality...it's not a good one. Possibly, but I've literally never seen this happen to me before. And this scenario you bring up is almost exclusively in a raid setting. What about the group setting? Or does that not count? Just because you don't agree with the justifications, doesn't mean there aren't any...The world doesn't revolve on the ideas of Brohg, no matter how much you wish they did. How about we keep to the conversation and stop throwing some red herrings around. How I play is up to me. I choose not to use the sham as the main healer because I don't need it. Why put in the extra work when I can concentrate on my other two boxes if I don't have to? I'd rather be focusing on the necro than the sham for the extra dps. I'm old fashioned and don't use programs to box. I use simple alt/tab so the more boxes I have, the less effective I become. If I don't need the sham, then there is little point of using him. But go ahead, keep trying to jab the oh so not subtle remarks against me. I'll continue laughing, meanwhile I'll picture you at the keyboard like this You lack of constructive arguments IS suspect, however. It actually matters quite alot since we have limited buff slots. I'd rather not have one class take up 6-10 buff slots on me depending on what they cast. It's extremely relevant in raids when temp buffs will quite often buff block me at times in the middle of tanking. Getting hit with disorientation, SB, sluggishness, reptile, bear, runes, spires, and god knows what else starts to add up rather quickly.
Advocating another bonus be put on Talis of Celerity would make it ANOTHER buff that you have to wear
And this doesn't deviate to the current situation I, along with many others, are already in so what's your point? If I'm using sham haste, I most likely need sham haste in the first place so I will have to wear it regardless if it remains unchanged or gets new mods on it. But then again, I'll reference my previous response to merging buffs. (And then you'll respond with the stacking issues, which I'll refute with the rarity of that happening and your argument will go on endlessly so I'll just stop it right here for you ) You know, if you use circular logic, you're just going to get the same type of responses, right? You can't say the same thing (albeit a different way) and expect different results. If I drive 60 mph for 1 hour, I'll get the same distance regardless of what kind of car I'm in. I will say this though: Enchanters are the primary caster ADPS/support class while sham's are the primary melee ADPS/support class (obviously there are others, but let's just speak to basics). From this statement, is it not logical that sham's should have the more melee oriented buffs, rather than enchanters? Enchanters have mainly caster/spell-oriented buffs, why should they have the superior haste buff, which for all intents and purposes is like the fundamental melee buff since the beginning of EQ? Common sense would tell me the melee support class would have the best buffs for melee. Right now, that's not the case. One could make a very strong argument that beasts have the best melee buffs in the game right now (fero, better focus, SV if you don't have a ranger, etc). You cried for justification, well, I hope the simple fact that basic class lore would hint that sham haste could use an upgrade.
Make Shaman haste raise minimum hit by 100 for 1h 200 for 2h or whatever is actually reasonable for that. Maybe somewhere between 15-25%? I really do get the feeling that shaman are slowly getting outclassed in a few of the longer term buffing areas, but I don't think anything is too egregious. I still like shaman.
Id like bards to get a new slow (or an aa that gives it a minor cripple) personally. Shaman haste should just be rolled up into mammoth's strength.
So you want warriors to overwrite haste? This is Brohg's argument to adding additional benefits, you might have attacking issues. Maybe combine bih'li with haste? and maybe regen? Why doesn't a spell that affects hand speed movement also affect foot speed movement?
Nope, nothing you said remotely explains why a caster buffer has the best melee haste buff also. Shams don't get a single buff that increases caster-based stats and/or mods like an enchanter has. All of the shamans buffs are melee-oriented. And you are still failing to explain this: Why have beastlords now caught up, and arguably surpassed, shamans in melee buff strength/effectiveness? Self-imposed ignorance is never a good thing. Either thoroughly read the argument, or don't read it at all. Don't read parts of it and select which parts you think you want to answer. What do we get that overwrites mammoths? Nothing overwrites it. I just clicked every offensive disc/AA I have. Maybe it doesn't stack, but nothing strips mammoth's off of me.
That the sum of enchanter melee buffing happens to all be piled on their haste is a red herring. Enchanters cast buffs, there's a total result. Shaman cast buffs, there's a total result. As to *why* their buffing is all on haste? You'll have to time travel for the answer to that one, I wasn't sitting in on the design meetings of 1997/8 when enchanters were assigned Quickness at level 16 that shm didn't get till 29, which happens to be the same level that Enc haste Alacrity started getting extra crap on it that made it get stripped by cripple spells and necro dots, which continues to happen straight through today. Beastlords now? Beastlords have 53% haste they have to recast every 20 min, a good group attack buff - also every 20 min, and single target focus that lasts an hour. Having played many years with pain in the butt mid-duration buffs like that, I'm unenvious. You know, I think the big problem with this conversation is that I just don't feel the problem you do. I wasn't in awe of shaman buffs before choosing to make Brohg during Luclin. Buffing would never have made my top 5 in abilities I had pride in as I raided across ten years as a shaman. Anyone who wanted me around for buffs would probably have been laughed at. I sure don't play the shaman with my warrior now for his buffs. To me these complaints feel like clerics who express frustration over mercenaries. Just how clerics are crap clerics if their role is seriously at risk of being filled by a moron AI who's big selling point is not AFKing, shaman whose place in EverQuest depends on their buffs are crap shaman. Or they're just, you know, buff bots. Which really isn't the same thing.
1) Clearly you don't know the definition of a red herring. Enchanter buff types have a direct relation with the conversation at hand. Something completely unrelated is a red herring, for example you bringing up my playstyle in the conversation. These two topics don't go hand in hand. Buffs and a total result is disregarding the type of result there is. Enchanters cast a buff which direct affects people with mana and only mana (clarity). Then they have another buff which directs only melee types (haste). They are completely different buff types which lead to different results and are directed towards very specific class types. Sham buffs are melee-oriented and give melee-oriented results IE more strength, dex, haste, hp (even though hp a global want, it's more a concern with melee/tank types), weapon procs, etc. Now beastlords - Regardless of how many it hits with a spell, the focus is still more desirable for melee dps classes, which is exactly the point. Just because the sham buff may be easier to get, doesn't take away from the fact that the beast one gives superior stats - the whole point of the conversation. Spell duration is a red herring in this debate. But you also brought it up with the problem with bst buffs. However, when I brought up the shorter duration of sham haste compared to enc, you put down the notion of merging it with a longer lasting buff because...spell duration is an argument against merging?? Now suddenly spell duration for this buff is a concern for you, but clearly isn't on haste? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Contradictions are always so fun to point out! Oh and for the record, beast focus is a group spell: http://spells.eqresource.com/spells.php?id=45087 You should probably research it before replying. There's one of your complaints slashed off. And according to eqresource, bst haste lasts an hour (without spell duration increase) which would make it last longer than sham haste? http://spells.eqresource.com/spells.php?id=30300&source=test So the 7% haste or longer time duration. Kind of evens out, huh? Not to mention you're forgetting buffs like SE and SV. Both these buff types, shams have literally nothing to compete with them. SE is universally wanted because it does all regen types unlike the enchanter/sham regens. Enc gives mana, sham gives hp. Neither give endurance, but SE does and in today's EQ, endurance is the new yellow mana for melee. Highly desirable. I'm sure you'll bring up that it's only 6 endurance regen, but it's better than nothing! SV is also a very good buff because it does both HP and attack. If you lack ranger buffs, SV is the next best option if you're not a war/pal/sk. Fero is an amazing group attack buff which sham also cannot compete with. It's the best of it's kind, regardless of duration (again, red herring). When discussing spell power IE the mods and the strength of the buff, it's usually in your best interest to discuss the topic, not deviate to a completely separate topic, kk? Thanks. You entire opposition is circular and contradictory to things you previously stated. Unfortunately, my complaint about shams was very minor and a simple suggestion that I requested to be upgraded. I personally am not in anger that sham haste is inferior, but it would be nice to have it boosted. The problem with you, however, is that you take everything on the defensive and if you don't necessarily agree with it, you try to shoot it down as if people are dead wrong (which they aren't, it's an opinion). You are thinking a person's request is a direct relationship that the person think's the sham is a useless piece of garbage that is nothing more than a buff bot. Nobody here is saying that, nor will they ever. It was a very minor criticism to shams, which I'm perfectly content living with, but it would be a nice gift to see their buffs get boosts. However, in Brohg's Norrath, you think they are saying that. You were personally offended, and it's clear by your tone, and you went on the defensive over something as minor and non-vital as a request to get a boost to sham haste (and potentially buffs) for nothing more than you don't want it. Your entire argument had nothing more than your personal feelings, nothing substantial. Unfortunately, I had way too much fun pointing out your clear ignorance and contradictions or else I would've stopped long ago.
I guess it's not a red herring if you don't recognize the sideline's irrelevance, it's just an error? That's a fair cop. The point remains: to go on about where among their buffs the melee boosts are for enchanters is not relevant. It just doesn't matter to the game power they're conferring (except as a negative, due to the added overwriting vulnerability that doesn't afflict shm bst or brd). If someone were only getting a haste buff, then sure the one that wraps in the other stuff is better, but shaman don't just cast a haste buff. When someone looking for melee power, they get an enchanter to cast all they can on them, and/or they get a shaman to cast all they can on them. The shaman clicks two buttons instead of one, but is providing a suite of boosts that add more power than the enchanter's does. How about approaching it this way: you suggest something, anything, that you'd like added to shaman haste. I will reply "it would be better for shaman and for everyone else if that thing were on some buff other than haste". I will be objectively right. And then we come back to this discussion about the way other classes do things.
Why? I have been a Shaman ( Cauled- on the Rathe) for almost as long as the game has been around and I think Shaman have been one of the luckier classes. I would like to see a better Haste spell and wish we had some nice shaman pacific looking gear rather then chain breast plates like a tank class. If you can't play the class try a monk instead, any beep can play that class.
