Curse

Avarre · Apr 11, 2006, 12:36 PM // 12:36

Quote:

now it is you assuming that "my" 5man fow build is the same as 5man SF build. And then you assuming it has flaws in it while having a no way of knowing it. Im sorry, you talking bull right now. If "my" build has so many horribly flaws in it, how come it flyes thru the whole place like nothing?
Dont insult something you dont even know. "My" build _works_. It works fast and easy (unless someone drops ofcourse).
And "my" build isnt really mine. I can only guess that you play on american server, because anything but ballanced 8 man pve group is very rare thing there.

Like I said, the build has redundancies.

In FoW, the absolute bare minimum triangle build is 3 man (tank-heal-nuke). It can and has been done. A bonder is useless (tanks can lower damage enough on themselves). More than 1 damage dealer is just extra gilt. The drops are better in a small group too.

There's no problem with running a 5 man build... but it's not as efficient as a smaller one, and I'll take any challenge that 3man can race 5man in FoW..

Quote:

By saying "extra" you already saying that you have a valid point about battery and book. I have yet to see it.

Unless you can't take aggro or your monk is horrendous, a battery isn't needed. Especially in a 5-man group... having BR is useful in 8 man because of minor PuG errors, but not in a small team...

You're not wrong in that the 5man team is good. But my point is, it's not as good as it could be, with redundant chars as a cover for players that are far from perfect.

striderkaaru · Apr 11, 2006, 02:35 PM // 14:35

*sigh*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

I did not assume anything.

you didn't? then please explain this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

But since you have already cleverly notice that those skills are in fact stances and can not be used more than one at a time, your whole argument fails.

when did i ever say to use both at the same time? how does my argument fail?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

I simply pointed out that mesmer stances only protect you from one source of damage leaving you vulnerable to some other source of damage same way as warrior stanses do. You have failed to prove that tactics is any worse than inspiration in this regard, yet continue to address using tactics as mistake. Please stop addressing your own preference as common sense.

so maybe inspiration stances are a bad idea too. maybe. but the fact is that a w/me can switch stances based on what he is facing. physical resistance for shadow warriors, abyssals, shadow rangers, and cave spiders. elemental resistance for shadow elementals and icehands. tactics stancers can't do that, and it hardly nullifies my argument regarding tactics stances. have you ever been to the wailing forest or the burning forest? elemental resistance helps there too, btw.

i never said that w/me is my personal preference, and it actually isn't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

You just assume that people around are not openminded because they do things different way, while totaly failing to justify why things they do are in fact wrong.

umm... do you read? i actually have proven to you why they are, in fact, wrong.

if you want to do things a different way, be my guest. i'm all for variety of builds. but when every single pug is looking for a "stance tank" and a "bonder," how is that variety?

if you seriously wish to argue my points, then please bring up your own proof as to why tactics stances and a bonder are actually effective. until you bring up your own proof and arguments and stop nit-picking mine, your posts are nil. thank you.

conclusion: stance tank + bonder = bad idea in fow

and for those who care about farming fow effectively, here is the group build avarre had mentioned:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...d.php?t=113320

this isn't just me bragging about my guild, because no matter how you look at it, sharing the loot amongst 3 people is a lot better than sharing with 5. if you want to keep farming with a stance tank and a bonder, go ahead. but don't call it the most effective build, because it isn't.

ender6 · Apr 11, 2006, 03:35 PM // 15:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by striderkaaru

this isn't just me bragging about my guild, because no matter how you look at it, sharing the loot amongst 3 people is a lot better than sharing with 5. if you want to keep farming with a stance tank and a bonder, go ahead. but don't call it the most effective build, because it isn't.

Your concept of effectiveness is questionable. Your equation is based upon party members and drops obatianed alone--I would love to know time taken. For example if it takes a party of 3 players 3hrs to accomplish a task that takes a party of 5 players to do in 1hr, well then it wouldn't be more profitable to go the 3 man route.

Secondly, I need not quote you here, your concept of the word Bonder seems to be a bit skewed, perhaps this is due to your lack of English? At any rate, a bonder is a monk who bonds another player, which means cast enchants upon another player to help reduce dmg. Furthermore, any good bonder will cast barrier and life bond as well as an assortment of other enchants on the player they are bonding. The effectiveness of a Bonder has been proven time and time again, so your conclusion that a stance tank + bonder is ineffective is simply absurd. Is there room to improve the build? Of course.

Your claim that bonders only cast life bond as a generalization would be like saying if we had an inept interrupt ranger who only used a sword, and I will now compare all interrupt rangers to this standard -- that's absurd.

Happy misnomers!

Ira Blinks · Apr 11, 2006, 03:55 PM // 15:55

Avarre
Redundancy is in fact trade off. A fair trade off I might add.
Point about race is simply laughable. Can your SS handle 3 groups with 3-4 monks and 30+ mobs in total? Can your tank handle that? Somehow I doubt that

Yet when I go with people I know we do it all the time. It is not because we dont know how to controll aggro, no - it is because we know it better than you, because we lazy and want to be efficient. It is because regardless of amount mobs they will die faster than they can say "wtf" to one SS necro and one fire ele when pulled right. And to survive that pull tank needs bonder and cover-ups for his enchants.

Ira Blinks · Apr 11, 2006, 04:04 PM // 16:04

striderkaaru

1) stop juggling words. I think you understood very well what i meant and simply making up excuses now.

2) you havent proven anything. You have stated your own preferance but never justified why it is better.

3) as far as i know point about 3 people getting better drops than five also has never been proven. And this isnt only because of time factor pointed out by ender6. As far as I know drops for each individual member of the group only depend on his own farming status and got nothing to do with amount of people in the group (henchies maybe, but not real people).
The main reason why smaller group is better is because it is more managable/leadable and faster to form.

striderkaaru · Apr 11, 2006, 04:28 PM // 16:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

2) you havent proven anything. You have stated your own preferance but never justified why it is better.

i actually have proven why a tactics stance tank and a bonder are ineffective (if you actually read). where is your proof for your argument? still waiting, ira.

will a stance tank + a bonder still work? yes, it will, but that's because pve is easy, and you have other people on the team covering for mistakes. if you have no interest in improving your game and only care about farming, then so be it. but unless you have anything constructive to add, don't ruin it for people who actually do care about becoming better and not making the same mistakes that pugs make.

so, like i said, provide proof for your arguments or just stop posting.

@ender
regarding the whole "bonder monk" term, i do realize that a typical bonder will cast more than just life bond. life barrier, watchful spirit, essence bond, balthazar's spirit, etc. can all be in the skill bar at one point or another. however, the main skill is life bond. hence, the name "bonder." a bonder without life bond is as much a barrage ranger is without barrage. why else would you call him BONDer without life BOND. unless of course you are using prot bond. in which case, i stand corrected.

a stance tank and a bonder may be effective, but not in fow. this is because tactics stances and life bond prevent damage from attacks. the majority of damage in fow doesn't come from attacks, which is the main point i am trying to make.

Ira Blinks · Apr 11, 2006, 04:40 PM // 16:40

striderkaaru
1) quote your proof please. All you said is that damage that comes from attacks is negligible compared to spells and hexes. I can only conclude you have never tryed to tank abyssals and skellie wariors (that is in fact where my earth ele tank (non-55) failed me when i tryed to solo fow) - they do LOTS of armor ignoring damage.
2) i never stated anything that requires proof. I only pointed out _facts_ that you have missed when comparing tactics to inspiration. You assumed stuff, and I reminded you that those are only assumptions and not proven facts.

Carinae · Apr 11, 2006, 04:42 PM // 16:42

Ira, you would do well to listen to striderkaaru, Avarre and Racthoh.

This isn't an attack, I just don't understand why you are so adversarial towards people who are just posting guides based on their extensive experience?

Diablo™ · Apr 11, 2006, 05:03 PM // 17:03

While I agree with most of Strider's points, I think while equipping a Battery necro, teamates often swap their "energy managing" skills for a more effective offensive skill. It's not to say that these people lack the skills necessary to compensate their energy dependency, its just that knowing theres an energy fallback on their team it would work better to bring more offensive skills and put the fallback to good use.

Alternatively it is a much safer way to equip your own energy managing skills in case the Battery should ever die mid-combat... but then I would say the real problem isn't in the lack of energy management but just a bad pug.

just my $.02

Sol_Vie · Apr 11, 2006, 05:19 PM // 17:19

Slight mistake. Not sure if anyone's mentioned it. Bonetti's blocks all attacks, you just don't get energy for non melee attacks.

ender6 · Apr 11, 2006, 05:20 PM // 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by striderkaaru

@ender
regarding the whole "bonder monk" term, i do realize that a typical bonder will cast more than just life bond. life barrier, watchful spirit, essence bond, balthazar's spirit, etc. can all be in the skill bar at one point or another. however, the main skill is life bond. hence, the name "bonder." a bonder without life bond is as much a barrage ranger is without barrage. why else would you call him BONDer without life BOND. unless of course you are using prot bond. in which case, i stand corrected.

I'm glad you have acknowledged the correction...I am now at peace

Effendi Westland · Apr 11, 2006, 06:12 PM // 18:12

My thoughts on this:
-Book-trick, useful for pugs and grinding.

As I enjoy to grow in experience as a player Not using book trick > book trick.

When I go down to fow and organise we never use the booktrick, much more fun.

-Is it 'wrong' to use it? No
-Can people who do not use it accuse those who do of playing in a way that requires less skill as player? Yes
-Can people who use it say their are more effecient in time/drops? Arguable, but when it is about this why aren't book-trick people soloing spider cave with a warrior?
-Who do I rather PUG with, people who make it clear they are using the book trick, or those who explicitly say they won't? The latter. Every avarage pug wants to use it, only a few are making clear they don't (europe server). Those who are not using it know they gotta think about their team build more and are advertising for specifics (like mesmer, Yay!), this gives me more hope in succeeding in a pug then how most pugs are formed (ah lets invite those bunch of mo/w's there, i spot necro -send invite-, party looking for ele)

Cherno · Apr 11, 2006, 06:24 PM // 18:24

There are some very experience players who can do very effective groupings for these types of environments. But from what I can tell you see them running with the same groups of people all the time (friends, guildies, etc). These teamings are much more effective and usually negate the use of tricks like the book.

However, I have been to FoW too many times with somewhat experienced people who don't know how to keep from breaking agro. The book helps with this. It is also good when you are trying to achieve a very specific goal and don't want to waste even more time with rude party members i.e forgemaster runs.

When I want to get a piece of armor, I am going just for that. I am so sick of having to be down there to find out an ele is using AoE scatters for non-defensive purposes or people not maintaining following distance to allow proper agro control. Then when you dare say anything, they get defensive, start proclaiming their experiece counts, rank, or other silly things. It makes for a bad team environment.

I haven't seen it in this thread but there are others where people will decry anyone using the book as n00bs who have no business being in the area.

I read no attacks in the OPs initial post but also ask that he take the environment of the party makeup into consideration.

As for battery - Perhaps not the true definition of a full battery, but when I advertise myself that way, it means that I am carrying BiP as my elite. In most other cases, I almost always have BR as a just in case, but wouldn't call myself a battery. And the monks who complain about having to use the energy I just gave them to heal me, don't worry about it. Most of the time, a good necro won't need you to heal them from that. I do agree that a dedicated battery is probably a bad use of a slot in FoW. I would rather have another damage dealer.

I would also like you to expand on some of the other roles Strider apart from stance, barrier/bond (or just bond as some call it), and battery.

Another PUG mistake for Eles is bring AoE scatter, even nukers, when not timed right can destroy agro.

I also hate to see it when agro does break, that the new target starts running like a chicken with its head cut off. It makes it hard to heal a constantly running target. In my experience, whenever broken agro comes at me, I just stand and try to take it. At least the mobs have a new target and the monks can concentrate on me until the situation is under control. Either that or try to lead them back to the tank.

Kybos · Apr 11, 2006, 06:41 PM // 18:41

Not to flame the issue even more, but...I would pay to see SMS vs Ira's build. I would pay a lot (GW currency or real USD).

Ira Blinks · Apr 11, 2006, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kybos

Not to flame the issue even more, but...I would pay to see SMS vs Ira's build. I would pay a lot (GW currency or real USD).

wisper me in game (today im busy, but tomorrow - sure thing). If you have necro or monk on european server, we will play fow.
And for the last time: this isnt my build.

dr1zz one · Apr 11, 2006, 07:00 PM // 19:00

W/E seems to work great. Armor of earth...Doylak...i guess you could use wards too.

lambda the great · Apr 11, 2006, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

Yet when I go with people I know we do it all the time. It is not because we dont know how to controll aggro, no - it is because we know it better than you for his enchants.

Is your tank holding the book?

Anarion Silverhand · Apr 11, 2006, 07:52 PM // 19:52

First off, I have the greatest Respect for the things Avarre, Strider and Racthoh have done. 3-manning every quest in FoW is no easy task. However, I do NOT believe that they always are right. (I know you haven't said you are, but I can't express it better)
When I read the first post I was like: Stance tank, bonders, batteries are all mistakes? WRONG! From your view, Strider, not everyone elses.

Just because you have found a better way of doing things, it doesn't mean the "good old fashion way" is wrong. Do not try to say that this is wrong, and that is wrong. It's all your opinion.

I think, like Ira Blinks said, that it's foolish and cowardly to always agree with those who can do amazing stuff. Oh, he's the guy with the "building a better warrior" series, let's agree with him no matter what.
Just because Strider says so, it doesn't make it right.

Ira, I'm with you all the way

Sorry if I have offended anyone, it was not my intent my by this post.

striderkaaru · Apr 11, 2006, 08:23 PM // 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anarion Silverhand

First off, I have the greatest Respect for the things Avarre, Strider and Racthoh have done. 3-manning every quest in FoW is no easy task. However, I do NOT believe that they always are right. (I know you haven't said you are, but I can't express it better)
When I read the first post I was like: Stance tank, bonders, batteries are all mistakes? WRONG! From your view, Strider, not everyone elses.

Just because you have found a better way of doing things, it doesn't mean the "good old fashion way" is wrong. Do not try to say that this is wrong, and that is wrong. It's all your opinion.

I think, like Ira Blinks said, that it's foolish and cowardly to always agree with those who can do amazing stuff. Oh, he's the guy with the "building a better warrior" series, let's agree with him no matter what.
Just because Strider says so, it doesn't make it right.

Ira, I'm with you all the way

Sorry if I have offended anyone, it was not my intent my by this post.

i'm glad you posted this, anarion, and no offense is taken. i have never claimed to always be right, and i agree that people should not just accept what is posted because of who the poster is. if anything, i even asked for people to disagree with me and present their own arguments/proof. i love to be proven wrong, because it means that i would have been corrected and learned something new. it's not a challenge or anything, but it's mainly for my own development.

perhaps these are just my opinions. however, i back these opinions up with valid arguments. why do people bring stance tanks and bonders to fow? it's to reduce the damage taken, isn't it? but if the stances/bonds aren't really reducing the damage by much, then doesn't that defeat the original purpose?

it's not even an issue of the big guys vs. the little guys. it's more like valid arguments vs "you're wrong." yes, you're allowed to tell me that i'm wrong, but present your own arguments.

i've said it once before, and i will say it again. you are more than free to disagree with me, but please explain why. i have presented my arguments, and i would appreciate being respected enough to get the same back. if stance tanks/bonders really are effective, i would love to learn why and how.

minor correction: i was not part of the original sms 3-man fow team.

edit:
here's a little information on why i decided to post this.

racthoh touched upon it briefly, but it's coming to the point where every single pug group for fow requires a stance tank, a bonder, and the book trick. i normally wouldn't have a problem with it, as i believe that you should be able to run whatever build you like (heck, i've even gone in shirtless, much to the chagrin of my leader). however, it does become a problem when every single group is running that build.

it may not be a problem for me or for others with good guilds, but think of that newer player who has ascended his first character and wants to see this place everyone is talking about. he is forced to play a stereotyped role which has inherent flaws in it. if he is a warrior, people will force him to go stances when stances aren't really very effective in fow. it breeds bad practices right from the beginning, and that is what i am trying to prevent.

Anarion Silverhand · Apr 11, 2006, 08:43 PM // 20:43

In fact, I've never played with the "bonder-stance tank" sort of team, so I wouldn't know if it is effective or not. It's just that I see so many groups doing this, so I figured they must be doing something right.

I do agree with you one some things, one being the book trick. After all, doing this trick as a warrior only requires one thing: The ability to type /sit...

But, being able to cut your party size down to 5 or even 3, are sometimes impossible, due to the fact that it's difficult to find skilled players, and that it isn't that easy. I also think that bonders and batteries belong in 8 man teams.