Update - Thursday, December 8, 2011
Lanier
lol... necromancers are one of the most powerful classes in the game. I certainly don't see how they need "fixing".
Martin Alvito
Quote:
#3 and #4 are both going to become less likely to be true in the face of a large monster hp buff. To the extent that the problem is degen not getting a chance to run its course (#4), or giving it a chance to run its course is a stupid voluntary decision (#3), this update will go a long ways towards fixing degen.
|
If the HP buff is relatively small when compared to the armor debuff, degen will become worse because damage will become more efficient and remain sufficient to produce rapid kills.
Chthon
You cited #2 to argue against #1. I concede #2. But I don't think that (a) it's the only reason degen sucks right now, or (b) so predominant that it negates the impact of taking away #3 and #4. Now, degen may still suck after this update (in fact, I think it's likely to still suck after this update), but I suspect that it's going to suck less badly than before.
You're correct. We have no idea what the magnitude of the hp buff will be. In my mind, I've been mostly assuming a hp buff that exactly offsets the armor nerf in terms of the raw, pre-armor damage it takes to kill a target from full hp. (Which I think should occur at ~(0.34*Lvl + 0.34)hp for each point of armor lost.) If the monsters get less hp than that, the game is made globally easier for anyone using armor-respecting damage, and degen becomes even worse than it is now for precisely the reasons you described. If the monsters get more hp than that, then the game is made globally harder, and degen becomes somewhat better (though perhaps still objectively bad) as I described above.
Quote:
That depends entirely upon the magnitudes of the HP buff and the armor debuff. Your claim will only be true if the former is very large and the latter is very small.
If the HP buff is relatively small when compared to the armor debuff, degen will become worse because damage will become more efficient and remain sufficient to produce rapid kills. |
AndrewSX
Eles deserved a fix because they need it since HM introduction.
With heroes and cons HM now is easy enough to be done w/o any skill in your bar, so stuff like "I've VQ all areas with my ele, no prob/Use Cracked armor you noobs" doesn't work, sorry.
But when you see Rogdort invocation dealing 35 dmg instead 108, unless you're blind or a troll everyone should understand that something is wrong with the class that should be "Master of caster dmg".
HM changes serves this purpose. Skill changes instead are oriented to give ele something more that plain dmg with ridicoulous bar expansion (3-4 skill for ene, 1 utility and...3 dmg? if you're lucky) rather than compression, more party support outside underpowered wards and emo gimmick, more utility, better elites in general. Not more dmg on his own.
Those changes will lead to more durable mobs, sure, but that's just what we need to have a HM "Hard". And having mobs last 2-3 secs more shouldn't screw PvE tbh.
(Degen has become useless from ages, increasing mob's hp doesn't mean anything: nobody uses it now, nobody will later. That's all.)
About next prof in line, thinking about what anet said some time ago, i'd guess moti(non.imba) para, rangers (overhaul) and smiters - in this oreder. All PvE side mostly.
If GW2 hasn't come out for that time, then they could think about making necros a bit more entertaining to play(cuz now they're powerful, but most of times quite boring), but not before that time.
With heroes and cons HM now is easy enough to be done w/o any skill in your bar, so stuff like "I've VQ all areas with my ele, no prob/Use Cracked armor you noobs" doesn't work, sorry.
But when you see Rogdort invocation dealing 35 dmg instead 108, unless you're blind or a troll everyone should understand that something is wrong with the class that should be "Master of caster dmg".
HM changes serves this purpose. Skill changes instead are oriented to give ele something more that plain dmg with ridicoulous bar expansion (3-4 skill for ene, 1 utility and...3 dmg? if you're lucky) rather than compression, more party support outside underpowered wards and emo gimmick, more utility, better elites in general. Not more dmg on his own.
Those changes will lead to more durable mobs, sure, but that's just what we need to have a HM "Hard". And having mobs last 2-3 secs more shouldn't screw PvE tbh.
(Degen has become useless from ages, increasing mob's hp doesn't mean anything: nobody uses it now, nobody will later. That's all.)
About next prof in line, thinking about what anet said some time ago, i'd guess moti(non.imba) para, rangers (overhaul) and smiters - in this oreder. All PvE side mostly.
If GW2 hasn't come out for that time, then they could think about making necros a bit more entertaining to play(cuz now they're powerful, but most of times quite boring), but not before that time.
Chris616263
Xsiriss
This arguing is ridiculous. We KNOW that a few things will happen and that's all that matters: Armour relative damage is made more effective (obviously we don't know by how much), armour ignoring damage and degen will be made less effective (again we don't know by how much). That's it.
As a few side notes: Necros suck beyond their meta niches, blood and curses are useless on their own and provide mediocre support. Rangers are stale and have been left behind, especially after all those PvP oriented nerfs that heavily impacted on their PvE play (remember the days of sundering/penetrating shot spam?). PvE skills are a controversial area, HM isn't easy because of them but then again seeing as many mobs are given OP monster skills and have insane attributes it helps create a more even playing field. The problem is that HM wasn't really designed intelligently but rather just the 'buff everything up and make them kite quicker'.
As a few side notes: Necros suck beyond their meta niches, blood and curses are useless on their own and provide mediocre support. Rangers are stale and have been left behind, especially after all those PvP oriented nerfs that heavily impacted on their PvE play (remember the days of sundering/penetrating shot spam?). PvE skills are a controversial area, HM isn't easy because of them but then again seeing as many mobs are given OP monster skills and have insane attributes it helps create a more even playing field. The problem is that HM wasn't really designed intelligently but rather just the 'buff everything up and make them kite quicker'.
roachsrealm
Necromancers do not need an update. I can regularly do packets of 100+ and 80+ damage in groups of 3 or 4 all at once every 5-7 seconds. These trigger upon mod death, the same time I get my almost 20 energy since I can boost my attributes to near HM Boss levels *without* cons, and still have 3 slots open on my skill bar not reserved for energy management. I haven't met an Ele that can do that without chaining endless meteor showers with an elite not even from their own profession.
And this all pales compared to how much damage I've seen a Dom Mesmer with e-surge, e burn and aneurysm fares. They felt cheated after the Intensity change, and they STILL do more damage.
Ele's have needed this for a long time. Now all casters can do damage without having to look at a green or purple bar.
And this all pales compared to how much damage I've seen a Dom Mesmer with e-surge, e burn and aneurysm fares. They felt cheated after the Intensity change, and they STILL do more damage.
Ele's have needed this for a long time. Now all casters can do damage without having to look at a green or purple bar.
Wenspire
Considering the current state of the game, I'd rather call certain classes "overpowered" and a few "underpowered" when it comes to their decision in changing things. If they just buffed the underpowered classes, the game would get even more unbalanced.
That being said, I think their decision to lower armor levels and increase life is the better choice compared to what could have been done otherwise.
That being said, I think their decision to lower armor levels and increase life is the better choice compared to what could have been done otherwise.
Lanier
Quote:
As a few side notes: Necros suck beyond their meta niches, blood and curses are useless on their own and provide mediocre support.
|
Then, we have minions. In pve, minions are rediculously OP, and probably the one hero that I would never leave out of my party in an area with corpses in my minion bomber. Minion bombers and OoU minion masters can produce a lot of damage and soak up a lot of incoming damage.
And of course, there is also all of those melee support skills. OoP, OoV, Dark Fury, blood bond, mark of fury, barbs, MoP, etc. You can't tell me these are weak spells. BiP and blood rit are also very useful caster support skills.
Honestly, necromancers are probably the second most powerful class in PvE after rits. I would even place them above mesmers, who's support options pale in comparison to those available to the rit or the necromancer. OP energy management + OP support skills = an OP profession. I feel like whenever someone says that necromancers need an update, they are just saying that b/c necromancers have not recieved one recently. Skill balance should be about balancing professions, not making them fresh, or adding new stuff for the sake of adding new stuff.
gw_poster
Wow, I can see whole ele teams chaining these insane 'doublecast' skills. They are like mini paras now with localized party protection but with the bonus of added damage and condition infliction. Gg
And why f with SoS???
And why f with SoS???
HigherMinion
Kunder
Swingline
Quote:
Nerfing Mesmers to make Eles better in HM, and then randomly nerfing Rits.
|
@Xsiriss
PoD, SS, FoC, Defile/Desecrate Enchantments and Enfeebling Blood(reduces melee damage by 66%) all stand great on their own. Then theres Barbs, MoP, etc that support other party members. Even the single target skills are good but are overshadowed by the AoE curse skills and people don't want to sit and spread them when they have 50 other mob groups to kill for the VQ. I don't see why you have a problem with necros.
Also HM has better AI than NM. Higher levels and attributes were not the only thing they gave the mobs
Jeydra
Quote:
Mistrust dealt 142 damage and Searing Flames did 34 damage in HM. See a problem? When the game first started Eles were the main nukers of the game, not Mesmers and Rits. So this small skill nerf is in order with the blanket HM armor loss/hp increase.
@Xsiriss PoD, SS, FoC, Defile/Desecrate Enchantments and Enfeebling Blood(reduces melee damage by 66%) all stand great on their own. Then theres Barbs, MoP, etc that support other party members. Even the single target skills are good but are overshadowed by the AoE curse skills and people don't want to sit and spread them when they have 50 other mob groups to kill for the VQ. I don't see why you have a problem with necros. Also HM has better AI than NM. Higher levels and attributes were not the only thing they gave the mobs |
Incidentally Enfeebling Blood and Shadow of Fear (and Spiteful Spirit) are all weak skills. No comment on Necros beyond that.
Swingline
Quote:
Unless you are trying to hit Burning Spirits or something with Searing Flames (when I'd call you an idiot), you do not deal 34 damage per cast -_-;;
|
EB and SS are not weak skills, they are just not surging with retarded OPness.
Jeydra
And there are some cases where a 16 Fire Magic Searing Flames does the full 106 damage without team support (i.e. no Cracked Armour and no EBSoH). What's your point?
Don't quote 34 damage as though it's representative. It isn't, just like 106 damage isn't representative. Searing Flames damage is generally much closer to 60-70 iirc, which is still a full 100% increase over your "34 damage".
Second Wind is not a weak elite, it's just not surging with retarded OPness.
Your sentence is so vague as to be useless ~_~
Don't quote 34 damage as though it's representative. It isn't, just like 106 damage isn't representative. Searing Flames damage is generally much closer to 60-70 iirc, which is still a full 100% increase over your "34 damage".
Quote:
EB and SS are not weak skills, they are just not surging with retarded OPness. |
Your sentence is so vague as to be useless ~_~
Elnino
His point is that in every case, mistrust still does 142 damage. Whereas, searing flames only does full damage in some cases. Which is a problem that'll be solved once the update hits so idk why we're still talking about it. ^^
Jeydra
Yes - but it doesn't deal 34 damage. That is blatant exaggeration and obscures the differences, viz. if Searing Flames got buffed to deal 1060 damage per hit, it is going to be hugely overpowered even though it still "only does full damage in some cases".
If Swingline wants to argue that Searing Flames / Elementalist damage in general is underpowered, he ought to do it fairly.
If Swingline wants to argue that Searing Flames / Elementalist damage in general is underpowered, he ought to do it fairly.
HigherMinion
Amy Awien
jazilla
Does anyone here argue that the Ele SHOULDN'T be the main damage dealer again? I'd like to see some reasons why the initial "nuker" of the game shouldn't fill that role anymore?
zwei2stein
Did someone seriously claim Enfeebling Blood is weak skill?
Feeble minds theese days...
Here.
Elementalist SHOULDN'T be The damage dealer.
Why? Because there are 9 other classes that need reason to exist. There should should not be "main" class for anything.
Also, his initial role (as in, role to which elementalist was most suited in begining, hence wards/blinds/snares) was 75% support/control.
Elementalist has poor synergy with other classes. Zero synergy to be specific. While physicals can enjoy being helped out by other classes and thus provide motivation for more diverse setups, elementalist just does not need anyone else in party than elementalists to be effective.
News skills are prime example. Eles now can provide interesting buffs to alies. But what can allies do for eles besides vacating party slot in favor of another ele?
(that was not that hard, was it?)
Now, elementalist being powerfull damage dealer again? That is commendable effort.
Feeble minds theese days...
Quote:
Does anyone here argue that the Ele SHOULDN'T be the main damage dealer again? I'd like to see some reasons why the initial "nuker" of the game shouldn't fill that role anymore?
|
Elementalist SHOULDN'T be The damage dealer.
Why? Because there are 9 other classes that need reason to exist. There should should not be "main" class for anything.
Also, his initial role (as in, role to which elementalist was most suited in begining, hence wards/blinds/snares) was 75% support/control.
Elementalist has poor synergy with other classes. Zero synergy to be specific. While physicals can enjoy being helped out by other classes and thus provide motivation for more diverse setups, elementalist just does not need anyone else in party than elementalists to be effective.
News skills are prime example. Eles now can provide interesting buffs to alies. But what can allies do for eles besides vacating party slot in favor of another ele?
(that was not that hard, was it?)
Now, elementalist being powerfull damage dealer again? That is commendable effort.
Martin Alvito
Quote:
Why? Because there are 9 other classes that need reason to exist. There should should not be "main" class for anything.
|
Either team members are self-sufficient, or they need someone to keep them upright. If self-sufficiency is possible, only classes which can provide it will be included. If not, some class is going to be most effective at keeping people alive, and will see play in those slots at the expense of other classes.
Some combination of skills and tactics is going to kill the monsters faster than all other combinations. In other words, an optimal team build exists for any given purpose. Only a limited number of possible purposes are profitable and therefore see replay, with the result being that some classes see play and others get marginalized.
If there were enough profitable areas to farm and enough variability across those farms, then it would be possible for all classes to have a use. Unfortunately, that requires precisely balancing the time -> reward function across a bunch of endgame content areas, and that just isn't going to happen. Doing so would be overly costly to the developer, and would spread the player base out even more thinly.
In principle it's possible to have all ten classes see play in PvP if there are enough viable builds, but it turns out that it's very difficult to create such diversity in a dog-eat-dog competitive environment. Players are too incentivized to find the optimal build and tactics.
urania
big update hit gw. guess it's the update they 'accidentally' leaked a week ago?
HigherMinion
zwei2stein
Quote:
If there were enough profitable areas to farm and enough variability across those farms, then it would be possible for all classes to have a use. Unfortunately, that requires precisely balancing the time -> reward function across a bunch of endgame content areas, and that just isn't going to happen. Doing so would be overly costly to the developer, and would spread the player base out even more thinly.
In principle it's possible to have all ten classes see play in PvP if there are enough viable builds, but it turns out that it's very difficult to create such diversity in a dog-eat-dog competitive environment. Players are too incentivized to find the optimal build and tactics. |
I am more talking about general PvE. Anytime you look for PUG or pick your heroes - there you have a bit more leeway with power levels and group composition (as no-one has desire to wait hours to get perfect party).
What is undesirable is to create enviroment where most players can agree that certain class is simply must-have.
Yes, we have monks and their monopoly at keeping people alive ... two party slots permanently occupied. I do not think we would ever want some of remaining slots reserved for another class.
That is, of course, overblown concern, considering age of game.
jazilla
Quote:
Lets just not consider farming (which produces only abominable builds) and PvP (where this kind of ballance is indeed not worth issues and effort).
I am more talking about general PvE. Anytime you look for PUG or pick your heroes - there you have a bit more leeway with power levels and group composition (as no-one has desire to wait hours to get perfect party). What is undesirable is to create enviroment where most players can agree that certain class is simply must-have. Yes, we have monks and their monopoly at keeping people alive ... two party slots permanently occupied. I do not think we would ever want some of remaining slots reserved for another class. That is, of course, overblown concern, considering age of game. |
Malganis
Jeydra
Quote:
Mistrust deals 140dmg vs Destroyers whilst Searing Flames does 0! Tadah!
|

And yes, Enfeebling Blood is a weak skill. If you're having trouble with melee, use Aegis. If you're STILL having trouble with melee (and it's not your technique ...), use an Ineptitude Mesmer. Monk heroes definitely do not have a monopoly on keeping people alive; I regularly use one only and have recently been trying to use none. There is something of a monopoly on what gets in, however. I would never run without Ritualists and seldom go without Necromancers, Mesmers and (yes) Elementalists.
drkn
Quote:
I never take monks into PvE with heroes. I use N/Rt healers and Mesmer heroes and their hex removal. There is no monopoly on what gets in really. |
Still, you have your staple. You need a healer, and there are three generally used archetypes of healers used across GW; two of them are not even a primary monk or ritualist. This leads to a conclusion that, actually, N/Rt and E/Mo being so good at healing might be somewhat beneficial to the game itself - it creates some diversity, without the need to rely on just one (actually two, after the dawning of Factions) class that can heal and protect the party well enough to survive the hard mode elite areas.
Without N/Rt and E/Mo, monks would, pretty much, be a must in every party (rits might be acceptable, but probably would be a bit frowned upon, and monks would be preferred). This would, actually, further lead to more players picking monk as their main, or at least setting up a viable secondary monk character, what coupled with the great demand for monk heroes, would make the prices of monk runes skyrocket through the roof, making it much harder to set up a proper monk hero/character for new players.
The above rant is a bit off-topic, but not so much - its conclusion lies in my belief that E/Mo infusers/bonders shouldn't be erased, though they should be nerfed a bit, just the same as N/Rt healers. Primary monks and ritualists should hold the upper hand when it comes to keeping people alive, but other professions - or, for the very least, other caster professions - should be able to contribute to it as well, fulfilling the role of an off-healer, or becoming the main healer for not-so-high-end content. For example, it might be fun to rework some of the useless monk or rit healing spells so that they would become useful in the hands of a primary mesmer, with high fast casting, so that yet another class could fill the niche of party's healer - but, keep in mind, still inferior than primary healer classes.
I realise it's too late for such a drastic change and balancing the healing/support power of classes and their mixes (which, as i like to point out, are the greatest problem when it comes to balancing GW), i'll end up with a reference to Jazilla - be it monk or necromancer, everyone has to dedicate a slot or two for a toon that primarily focuses on keeping the red bars up. It makes those classes/people who can roll a healing role invaluable and necessary, giving them the monopoly. I know about events held out for fun when everone in the party is of the same profession, but has anyone ever completed any HM elite area with only warriors, without resorting to severely overpowered consumables or other broken things like SY or perma?
This only proves that, god-mode broken mechanics aside, healers - though not necessarily monks - got monopoly of getting into virtually every party. And the opposite of this is what i'm looking forward to in GW2.
Swingline
Quote:
Yes - but it doesn't deal 34 damage. That is blatant exaggeration and obscures the differences, viz. if Searing Flames got buffed to deal 1060 damage per hit, it is going to be hugely overpowered even though it still "only does full damage in some cases".
If Swingline wants to argue that Searing Flames / Elementalist damage in general is underpowered, he ought to do it fairly. |
Lanier
err, no. Enfeebling blood is very, very good. It alone makes melees a piece of cake to defend against. Aegis is good too... but I would still rather have enfeebling in my party due to the short duration of aegis. Then again, I usually use both because I like excessive defense. As for the ineptitude mesmer comparison... no, just no. You can't tell someone to replace a skill (enfeebling blood) with an entirely new character. Personally, I find illusion mesmers to be a waste of a party slot anyway. Enfeebling blood is easy enough to place on just about any character in the party (a smite monk, a dom mesmer, an ele, a SoGM rit, etc.), and I would far rather bring a single, powerful non-elite melee shutdown skill (or 2 if you want to count my party's copy of aegis) than an ineptitude mesmer.
Jeydra
@Swingline - maybe, but I still feel it's grossly unfair that you claim Searing Flames does 34 damage while Mistrust does 142.
@Lanier - Ineptitude Mesmers are bad, I completely agree, but in certain areas where there are plenty of melee mobs I use them for damage. Damage, not defense. The fact that they double as defense is just icing on the cake.
Enfeebling Blood is still bad. Melee monsters generally don't pose enough of a threat to warrant taking more than one copy of Aegis. You have plenty of time; in that 11s of Aegis you can not only kill some of those monsters, you can fix the aggro of the rest onto something disposable (minions, spirits, EBVAS). Enfeebling Blood cannot be setup before aggro, does not necessarily hit all targets (unlike Aegis, which automatically protects the entire party), involves health sacrifice, locks down a primary or secondary (again unlike Aegis, because you are either running ST Prot when you have Displacement and Shelter, or you need Prot Spirit anyway; personally most of my available secondary profession space goes into "Fall Back", I have 3 copies in the team) and does not protect against stuff like Savage Slash, Savage Shot, Skull Crack and Temple Strike.
tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.
@Lanier - Ineptitude Mesmers are bad, I completely agree, but in certain areas where there are plenty of melee mobs I use them for damage. Damage, not defense. The fact that they double as defense is just icing on the cake.
Enfeebling Blood is still bad. Melee monsters generally don't pose enough of a threat to warrant taking more than one copy of Aegis. You have plenty of time; in that 11s of Aegis you can not only kill some of those monsters, you can fix the aggro of the rest onto something disposable (minions, spirits, EBVAS). Enfeebling Blood cannot be setup before aggro, does not necessarily hit all targets (unlike Aegis, which automatically protects the entire party), involves health sacrifice, locks down a primary or secondary (again unlike Aegis, because you are either running ST Prot when you have Displacement and Shelter, or you need Prot Spirit anyway; personally most of my available secondary profession space goes into "Fall Back", I have 3 copies in the team) and does not protect against stuff like Savage Slash, Savage Shot, Skull Crack and Temple Strike.
tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.
zwei2stein
Since when is this "either or" situation? Three copies of FB is quite overkill.
Besides, Enfeebling Blood also gives protection to non party members (minions, spirits, escorted npc). That is very valuable.
There are few mobs with skills that require blocking on your side.
Besides, Enfeebling Blood also gives protection to non party members (minions, spirits, escorted npc). That is very valuable.
There are few mobs with skills that require blocking on your side.
Jeydra
Aegis > Enfeebling Blood like 99.99% of the time, zzz. I use three copies of Fall Back because two copies leads to downtime; with the standard 9-spec Command you have 4s downtime. To get to no downtime you need like 14 Command, which in turn forces you to use Paragons, which are in general subpar heroes. Three FBs also helps patch up any lagging heroes (e.g. I hit one Fall Back and someone isn't affected, I can hit another and get the entire party running and still not have downtime).
Minions don't need defending, if they live great and if they die so be it, triggers Death Nova too. Spirits don't die easily with their massive health (Spawning Power ftw) and can be resummoned. Escorted NPCs also should not die with the massive health and armour they seem to have for some reason, and besides like all other characters the real threat to them are casters, not melee.
Sure there are a few skills that hit harder when blocked, but they are all way less dangerous than the ones that hit harder when not blocked. What's the strongest skill out there that hits harder when blocked anyway, Irresistible Blow? How is that even comparable to Savage Shot / Temple Strike / Skull Crack etc?
tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.
Minions don't need defending, if they live great and if they die so be it, triggers Death Nova too. Spirits don't die easily with their massive health (Spawning Power ftw) and can be resummoned. Escorted NPCs also should not die with the massive health and armour they seem to have for some reason, and besides like all other characters the real threat to them are casters, not melee.
Sure there are a few skills that hit harder when blocked, but they are all way less dangerous than the ones that hit harder when not blocked. What's the strongest skill out there that hits harder when blocked anyway, Irresistible Blow? How is that even comparable to Savage Shot / Temple Strike / Skull Crack etc?
tl; dr: Enfeebling Blood sucks. Use Aegis.
Elnino
So now it's Aegis vs. EB huh?
Aegis being the mathematically superior skill doesn't mean that EB is a weak skill. I personally bring both because I can fit them in nicely into my team build.
Aegis being the mathematically superior skill doesn't mean that EB is a weak skill. I personally bring both because I can fit them in nicely into my team build.
Kunder
1 EB is enough to have 100% uptime. You need 3x Aegis for that, which translates into 3 heroes that need to take a secondary and invest lots of attribute points that are otherwise useless. I can use those to kill things faster or move around faster.
EB working on minions can't be overstated if you use them. With EB nothing can kill minions other than spell casters with strong nuking abilities. Furthermore, the better player you are the more damage that the minions take in your place. Many battles not a single of my party members comes under attack from an enemy, Aegis would be useless. If you want minions to be able to tank through HM DoA, you need something like EB.
Mathematically EB is not inferior to Aegis in protective ability, it is quite comparable if not better in some instances. Aegis is 50% miss chance, EB is -66% damage plus -1 attributes (another -3-5% on average probably). Aegis has the side benefit of working vs attack skills and adrenaline, but enemies that hit for 200 damage apiece are dealing 90% of their damage with what EB is reducing. Unless the enemy is using interruption skills that need to be blocked I would put EB firmly ahead of Aegis. EB is also consistent unlike Aegis where there is a 12.5% chance of 3 of those hits getting through in a row and killing a character quickly. Not terribly likely in individual battles but over the course of an area it can easily translate into an extra death.
EB working on minions can't be overstated if you use them. With EB nothing can kill minions other than spell casters with strong nuking abilities. Furthermore, the better player you are the more damage that the minions take in your place. Many battles not a single of my party members comes under attack from an enemy, Aegis would be useless. If you want minions to be able to tank through HM DoA, you need something like EB.
Mathematically EB is not inferior to Aegis in protective ability, it is quite comparable if not better in some instances. Aegis is 50% miss chance, EB is -66% damage plus -1 attributes (another -3-5% on average probably). Aegis has the side benefit of working vs attack skills and adrenaline, but enemies that hit for 200 damage apiece are dealing 90% of their damage with what EB is reducing. Unless the enemy is using interruption skills that need to be blocked I would put EB firmly ahead of Aegis. EB is also consistent unlike Aegis where there is a 12.5% chance of 3 of those hits getting through in a row and killing a character quickly. Not terribly likely in individual battles but over the course of an area it can easily translate into an extra death.
Gill Halendt
So, basically, some people are trying to say that Weakness (in this case, mantainable, AoE Weakness) sucks.
I might be in the wrong topic then, thought this was a thread about some December update, not "What's The Stupidest Thing You've Heard While Playing Guild Wars?"
I might be in the wrong topic then, thought this was a thread about some December update, not "What's The Stupidest Thing You've Heard While Playing Guild Wars?"
Kunder
Quote:
So, basically, some people are trying to say that Weakness (in this case, mantainable, AoE Weakness) sucks.
I might be in the wrong topic then, thought this was a thread about some December update, not "What's The Stupidest Thing You've Heard While Playing Guild Wars?" |
qazwersder
I think its important to remember that some skills/classes are overpowered and not that the majority are underpowered.
If we say that everything needs a buff apart from Mes, rits and dervs, maybe its that mes, rits and dervs need a nerf.
Its also important to remember not all classes have the same role or achieve things in the same way. They are meant to be played differently.
If we say that everything needs a buff apart from Mes, rits and dervs, maybe its that mes, rits and dervs need a nerf.
Its also important to remember not all classes have the same role or achieve things in the same way. They are meant to be played differently.