Jump to content

Photo

Lock Lock Lock Rogue Pala vs. Warr Warr Druid Shaman Paladin


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#1 Clinkz

Clinkz
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • EU-Frostwhisper
  • Rampage / Saccage
  • Posts: 132
  • Talents: Assassination

Posted 12 November 2007 - 08:28 PM

Suggestions?
We generally try to kill the shaman and cc healers but 2 sword warriors just kill me in some seconds even if i have a healer on me,a WF and a sword proc finishes it at all :/
If any1 has a tactic to beat that combo please help me
  • 0

#2 Turbohatch

Turbohatch

Posted 12 November 2007 - 08:45 PM

3 warlocks arent very viable in 5 v 5 especially facing double warrior teams
  • 0

#3 Shadowsaurus

Shadowsaurus

Posted 13 November 2007 - 12:50 AM

Won't beat 2 warrior teams with that. Why do you have 3 locks anyway? Take one out for a shammy or something.
  • 0
S3:
2v2 - spriest/rogue - 78-8 - ~2400 - 9th
5v5 - mut/ua/spriest/ele/rdruid - 72-8 - ~2350 - 7th

S4:
2v2 - spriest/rogue
5v5 - mut/ua/spriest/mage/rsham

#4 Clinkz

Clinkz
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • EU-Frostwhisper
  • Rampage / Saccage
  • Posts: 132
  • Talents: Assassination

Posted 13 November 2007 - 05:25 PM

Well sometimes we use a frostmage instead of a lock but thats all.We cant beat 2 warr teams with that neither,u have any tactics if we do like "lock lock mage rogue pala" ?
  • 0

#5 Saura

Saura
  • Members
  • Blood Elfclass_name
  • EU-Shattered Hand
  • Cyclone / Wirbelsturm
  • Posts: 41
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 05:27 PM

The obvious would be to have your frostmage kite the warriors.
  • 0
Beastial Wrath to ferals please!

#6 Saffira

Saffira
  • Members
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Stormscale
  • Cyclone
  • Posts: 347
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 05:56 PM

Use a rogue,f mage, lock, pally, shaman. Plenty of CC and you can kite warriors pretty easily.
  • 0

#7 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 07:46 PM

first of all folks, dont suggest a shaman when he is obviously a dot/silence/fear based 4 dps.

Shaman go in teams with frost mages ideally and even moonkin (moonkin need bloodlust for 5's). And frost mages dont always work too hot on teams with 2-3 dotters.


Your ideal setup would be shadow priest-warlock-warlock-rogue-druid. But this is a bit more radical of a departure from your current setup. The reason for the druid over the paladin/resto shaman is that cyclone-ing a healer in conjunction with silence effects will usually spell the death of one of those warriors. Paladins have bubbles and freedoms but really suit a bloodlust based 4 dps, imo. Resto shaman is possibly the weakest healer for a dot team. Providing no dispels and bloodlust which really does not have that much of an effect on your team.

Also, a shadow priest would really help you out immensely. They make excellent tanks, more so than affliction warlocks or rogues at least and are usually the primary target over a rogue due to mana burns/mass dispells/massive DPS and other stupidity. Oh did I also mention they can mass dispel the paladin bubble, making your burst much more effective.



As for your tactics for facing this team-
toss around dots, ignore one warrior, keep pressure up on one, then cyclone one healer, silence the other two, then coordinate fear bombs keeping the healers locked down hopefully dropping the warrior.

dot based teams require a bit more finesse than the bloodlust based ones which are just pop bloodlust and and cooldowns and hope the warrior drops.
  • 0

#8 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 13 November 2007 - 07:56 PM

Run with a frostmage. FF one warrior, keep another one sheeped/snared.

I'd have to disagree with the ideal setup being a druid healer. Bloodlust's consistent DPS increase far outweigh the advantages of cyclone. Plus as a solo healer your druid will be behind on healing if he decides to put out more than the initial cyclone rotation.

Edit: Also disagree with a 2nd lock instead of mage. Having three of CCs be on the same DR is not ideal. The mage's snares will help alot with locking down your initial FF target. Plus his burst is alot more beneficial than another set of dots.
  • 0

#9 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 08:00 PM

Run with a frostmage. FF one warrior, keep another one sheeped/snared.

I'd have to disagree with the ideal setup being a druid healer. Bloodlust's consistent DPS increase far outweigh the advantages of cyclone. Plus as a solo healer your druid will be behind on healing if he decides to put out more than the initial cyclone rotation.



against 4 dps teams, most set ups are forced to play extremely defensively making healing for the druid light at best. Only difference being if the opposing team can pull a quick kill on one of your guys. And did I mention druids are far more resilient to opposing counterspells?

The way my own team plays 4 dps is turtling through their CD's then landing a CS on their healer and going to town on one of their DPS.

BTW, I have never liked frost mages in conjunction with dot based 4 dps. Another fear spammer is far more useful, imo, than a frost mage.
  • 0

#10 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 13 November 2007 - 08:22 PM

against 4 dps teams, most set ups are forced to play extremely defensively making healing for the druid light at best. Only difference being if the opposing team can pull a quick kill on one of your guys. And did I mention druids are far more resilient to opposing counterspells?

The way my own team plays 4 dps is turtling through their CD's then landing a CS on their healer and going to town on one of their DPS.

BTW, I have never liked frost mages in conjunction with dot based 4 dps. Another fear spammer is far more useful, imo, than a frost mage.


I currently run with a restoration shaman as our only healer. I've tried druids in the past, and imo its simply not the best healer for this setup. The lack of DPS pressure w/o lust gives the opposing team too much room to DPS/mana burn freely. Lust is equivalent to adding another DPS to your team within that 40 second period. Even against teams that turtles through the initial rush down (example: teams that have their warrior mount kite) they simply cannot keep up with the sustained DPS that bloodlust outputs. However, I'd have to agree healing is trivial in this role, where a shaman/druid can both handle easily. But the utility factor: Cyclone vs Bloodlust will put a Shaman far above a Druid. Under heavy FF, a druid will _not_ be able to keep a target up without using a castable heal: regrowth. In that case a druid is just as easily counterspelled as a shaman.

I'm not exactly sure of the reason why you favor a warlock over a frost mage in this setup aside from you just don't like it. Poly Spamming > Fear Spamming. Having the ability to CC a warrior is fantastic. Since you are putting out so much DPS pressure already having their healer wasting a GCD on dispelling puts them even further behind on healing. Again, you won't have the DR problem with 3 of your CCs being fears.
  • 0

#11 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 08:58 PM

the main problem with a frost mage is that he really forces a certain strat on the team. You cannot effectively do what many dot based 4 dps teams do, which is split dps, with a frost mage. And frost mages really need bloodlust, which means if you pack one, you need a shaman. And if you are packing a shaman and a frost mage, you really are not a dot based 4 dps team.


What you are suggesting to the OP is for him to retune his strat from a dot based to a bloodlust based.


As to the whole resto shaman vs druid in a dot based team. Resto shaman may make it 6 on 5, but a druid is going to make it 5 on 4. Couple that with the fact of a number of handy "tricks" that a druid can pull (cycloning the focus fire target when he gets low and then having your team mates queue up a shit load of burst is one of those things).

All in all, I think it fits the more controlling nature of dot based 4 dps based teams to utilize a resto druid rather than become a bloodlust based 4 dps team and be forced to include a frost mage.
  • 0

#12 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 13 November 2007 - 09:51 PM

the main problem with a frost mage is that he really forces a certain strat on the team. You cannot effectively do what many dot based 4 dps teams do, which is split dps, with a frost mage. And frost mages really need bloodlust, which means if you pack one, you need a shaman. And if you are packing a shaman and a frost mage, you really are not a dot based 4 dps team.


What you are suggesting to the OP is for him to retune his strat from a dot based to a bloodlust based.


As to the whole resto shaman vs druid in a dot based team. Resto shaman may make it 6 on 5, but a druid is going to make it 5 on 4. Couple that with the fact of a number of handy "tricks" that a druid can pull (cycloning the focus fire target when he gets low and then having your team mates queue up a shit load of burst is one of those things).

All in all, I think it fits the more controlling nature of dot based 4 dps based teams to utilize a resto druid rather than become a bloodlust based 4 dps team and be forced to include a frost mage.


I never stated for him to switch up his current team, I just refuted your suggestion of the ideal setup.

I failed to see why frost mages cannot split DPS. I've ran countless games where split target worked perfectly with a mage. So instead of having another set of dots on a target he'll be direct damaged. Plus its not entirely beneficial to split DPS running 4 DPS. You lack healing debuff/snares on whoever you are split DPSing and this is ignoring the huge LOS issue for split targeting.

So.. you are comparing an instant cast (bloodlust) versus a series of cyclones/feral charges/bash/roots? Please find me a druid that can make a game 5v4 for 40 seconds while healing the whole team, I would love to have such an amazing druid.

Actually no, you are severely exaggerating how much controlling a druid can actually do while healing the team. You are not losing control having a mage/restoration shaman over another lock/druid on the team. You are essentially trading the occasional cyclones/roots and full time fears (thats already on DR with TWO other classes) for a full time polymorph and a 40 seconds of 30% DPS increase. This is assuming the shaman does nothing (no shocks/purge/grounding/tremor etc.) but heal and pop bloodlust.
  • 0

#13 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 10:30 PM

all you have done is illustrated the difference between bloodlust based 4 dps teams and dot based ones.
  • 0

#14 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 13 November 2007 - 10:49 PM

So I'm not on a dot based DPS team even though half of my team's DPS is DOT based?

I'm just providing reasons to back up why I think there are other more optimal setups if you want to run spriest/lock/rogue 4DPS teams. Just because Xecks made it work to some extent on BG9 doesn't mean people should blindly worship it.
  • 0

#15 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 11:26 PM

just b/c you have someone that rolls with dots on your team, does not make you dot based.


There are two styles
bloodlust and dot based. If you run bloodlust and roll with a mage you are a bloodlust based team.

One is more of a brute force dps team and the other is a finesse based. The problem is you think all 4 dps are the same.
  • 0

#16 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 13 November 2007 - 11:39 PM

just b/c you have someone that rolls with dots on your team, does not make you dot based.


There are two styles
bloodlust and dot based. If you run bloodlust and roll with a mage you are a bloodlust based team.

One is more of a brute force dps team and the other is a finesse based. The problem is you think all 4 dps are the same.


I couldn't careless how you categorizes each teams.. If this discussion forums is called lets name that team and what style they play then you might have a point.

All my posts are directed towards which rogue based 4DPS setup is more optimal in their overall success. Yet you have not refuted a single point I made.

No, I do not think all 4 DPS teams are the same, but I do consider some setups more viable than others. Hence my last 3-4 posts. Please please read those before further comment.
  • 0

#17 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 13 November 2007 - 11:49 PM

actually the op asked what strat his team should run vs double warrior/tri healer teams.

You tell him to run a shaman + frost mage. That is a totally different style than what he is running. Thats like telling a tri healer team to drop their warrior for a frost mage and make the shaman respec resto.

What you are telling him is to radically adjust his strat.


You might prefer bloodlust in your setup, but the optimal 4 dps build does not utilize bloodlust via resto shaman, but with elemental shaman paired with mages.


what point are you trying to make? That resto shaman are workable in 4 dps? Yeah I would agree. Are they optimal? No, I would say they are not.


And whats with the hostile high and mighty attitude? Is it really worth getting angry about me saying that resto druids > resto shaman in teams that do not run frost mages and elemental shaman?
  • 0

#18 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 14 November 2007 - 12:14 AM

/sigh, I'll say it again you case you missed it.

"I never stated for him to switch up his current team, I just refuted your suggestion of the ideal setup."

The op asked for what strat to use with his team. I suggested to CC/snare one of his warrior while FFing the other with the rogue locking him down. Since he mentioned earlier they do switch in a mage from time to time.

I stated my point many times already and you still seem to miss it every time. Heres it again. Imo restoration shaman + mage will be more optimal than a restoration druid + 2nd warlock in a spriest/lock/rogue 4DPS team. I'm saying this from personal arena experience, actual class benefits on the team, and the practicality of the team makeup.

I'd love to hear why you think the optimal 4DPS setup have to utilize Bloodlust via elemental shaman with a mage instead of just providing an empty statement.

Its not the hostile high and mighty attitude, its just that I have to keep restate my self over and over and you still misread my points. Its a discussion forum, if you prefer me to just to agree with you on every other post then I'm sorry but you are misinformed.
  • 0

#19 gatoja

gatoja
  • Junkies
  • Orcclass_name
  • US-Eredar
  • Vindication
  • Posts: 798
  • Talents:

Posted 14 November 2007 - 12:16 AM

if you are going to run bloodlust elemental > resto. To run a resto shaman in 4 dps means you cant run a holy paladin.

Simply put, for bloodlust, it is better to have the shaman in a dps role rather than the healing. Its as simple as that.
  • 0

#20 Ekun

Ekun
  • Members
  • Undeadclass_name
  • US-Kil'jaeden
  • Bloodlust
  • Posts: 14
  • Talents: Demonology

Posted 14 November 2007 - 12:31 AM

if you are going to run bloodlust elemental > resto. To run a resto shaman in 4 dps means you cant run a holy paladin.

Simply put, for bloodlust, it is better to have the shaman in a dps role rather than the healing. Its as simple as that.


Why is a paladin necessary or even needed? As you stated earlier healing is going to be light in a 4DPS team, why would I want an outlasting healer that has 0 offensive contribution to a 4DPS team.

Please stop providing blank statements with nothing to back it up. To have an elemental shaman means you are sacrificing a caster with a spammable CC, this also means you can't run spriest/lock/rogue combination. Which is the whole point I'm getting at, Restoration Shaman + Mage > 2nd Lock + Restoration Druid in a spriest/lock/rogue setup.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

<