Immolate vs. Flare? Why use... - Guild Wars Forums

abomination5 · May 17, 2005, 06:24 AM // 06:24

Why use Immolate? Base damage is about the same and the extra damage from burning doesn't seem that great. Plus immolate is double the energy so with flare you do 2x damage minus the small burning effect with the same energy cost. This is in less time as well since immolate has a cooldown. What am I missing?

Kerus Tel Veren · May 17, 2005, 07:29 AM // 07:29

Armor. Burning is unaffected by armor, -8 health degen for 3 seconds at 12 fire can frequently be more damage than the actual attack. Flaring repeatedly for 10-20 damage on some enemies isn't very useful.

modru2004 · May 17, 2005, 08:04 AM // 08:04

immolate is a great spell and should always be used if your a fire guy me thinks. i generally cast aoe then immolate and then flare while i wait for immolate to recharge then immolate and so on. works very well. does killer damage.

Linkie · May 17, 2005, 10:19 AM // 10:19

why use flare when you have your wand?

Veus Vaim · May 17, 2005, 10:26 AM // 10:26

If you increase your fire stats flare uses a lot more than a wand does.

Currently at level 18 i 'wand them' for just 25 but 'flare them' for 80+

egads · May 17, 2005, 10:51 AM // 10:51

I think I'll pick out a few points from one of Ensign's posts to show why Flare is rubbish.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

First, what the hell are we doing talking about Flare? That's a skill that you should leave in lowbie Ascalon - Conjure + Wand just plain beats it out at higher level.

Second, let's use realistic numbers for these skills - 16 attribute, armor penetration calculated in:

Flare: 48 damage, 5 energy, 1 second, 27.4 DPS, 9.6 DPE.

...

So let's compare the top 3 to my personal favorite: Conjure + Wand. Ignore criticals and convert to the appropriate spell:

Conjure + Wand: 36.8 damage, .143 energy, 1 second, 21 DPS, 257 DPE.

...

But the more fun comparison is Flare against Conjure + Wand. As you can see, Flare does damage 30% faster, but consumes energy 1,643% faster. Is that a fair tradeoff for your energy?

The final thing to mention about Flare is that is does small amounts of damage often, which is easily countered by a monk. What you want from an Elementalist is spike damage, and that's where Immolate is useful. Have a look at the skill effectiveness table.

May 17, 2005, 06:24 AM // 06:24	#1
abomination5 Ascalonian Squire Join Date: May 2005	Immolate vs. Flare? Why use... Why use Immolate? Base damage is about the same and the extra damage from burning doesn't seem that great. Plus immolate is double the energy so with flare you do 2x damage minus the small burning effect with the same energy cost. This is in less time as well since immolate has a cooldown. What am I missing?

May 17, 2005, 07:29 AM // 07:29	#2
Kerus Tel Veren Academy Page Join Date: May 2005	Armor. Burning is unaffected by armor, -8 health degen for 3 seconds at 12 fire can frequently be more damage than the actual attack. Flaring repeatedly for 10-20 damage on some enemies isn't very useful.

May 17, 2005, 08:04 AM // 08:04	#3
modru2004 Ascalonian Squire Join Date: May 2005	immolate is a great spell and should always be used if your a fire guy me thinks. i generally cast aoe then immolate and then flare while i wait for immolate to recharge then immolate and so on. works very well. does killer damage.

May 17, 2005, 10:19 AM // 10:19	#4
Linkie Lion's Arch Merchant Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Norway Profession: P/W	why use flare when you have your wand?

May 17, 2005, 10:26 AM // 10:26	#5
Veus Vaim Ascalonian Squire Join Date: May 2005 Guild: Fellowship Guild Profession: E/Mo	If you increase your fire stats flare uses a lot more than a wand does. Currently at level 18 i 'wand them' for just 25 but 'flare them' for 80+