Curse

Quebec Osti · Aug 15, 2005, 02:15 AM // 02:15

Necros useless other than putrid??? How about this?

Nec/Mes

-Signet of humility
-Leech signet
-Mantra of inspcription
-drain enchant
-rotting
-tainted
-putrid
-res sig

With this setup, other than putrid, u can:

1)Totaly shutdown a spirit spammer:

Put mantra of insciption on, signet of humility him constantly so he never use oath shot... and interupt spirit casts with leech signet (both recharge super fast with insciption)

2)Desease an entire group for the whole fight even if they have martyr:

Start with tainted/rotting and spot their martyr... With mantra on, keep signet of humility on him so he never use martyr, keep casting tainted on ur martyr and rotting on random ppl of the other team that are close together betwen ur signet of humility casts.

3)Interupt "claim ressource" on altar matchs or whatever spell/skill often with leech sig/mantra.

4) Drain an enchant once in a while if really needed (can also be used as back up mana managment if not many corpses fall)

AND... u can still putrid

Useless???

White Designs · Aug 15, 2005, 02:56 AM // 02:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thanas

I think you are quite mistaken. I play tombs and find it very difficult to find my way into a team. I rarely get picked for a team as a necro. This is because there are players like you, with little to no imagination when it comes to the necro skill tree. This post has been prejudiced against necros from the start. Don't give me any of that twoddle about putrid. Nearly every time you mention necros you fell the need to put them down. I have read your comments on the putrid skill. In all fairness when I have used this skill it rarely does enough damage to do any permanent harm. Its a good as a finisher if theres a corpse lying around but thats it. If you encounter this skill spread out the team. Simple as that. Warriors hit with it should be fine anyway. A little healing, no worries. Its not as though the effects of this spell are long lasting like condition/hexes. Its just instant damage. And if you think there is no skill in putrid. You'd be wrong. Do you think necros spend all their time waiting to spam this skill. I don't think so. It requires careful energy management and constant observation of the dead to utilise it properly. IMHO you've no idea what skill it takes to play a necro, so you cannot comment.

Wow..just wow. You have the audacity to say 'people like me' are the reason you have trouble getting groups. You say this even though I repeatedly say I always take a Necro on my teams. Just wow.

And I know it takes no skill to use putrid. Even people disagreeing with me have admitted that the proper way to use Putrid is to mash the button. Either you didn't bother to read my posts or you are just plain stupid, since no matter what else you might disagree with me on, its very easy to see I spent a lot of time determining how to play a Necro and how to exploit Putrid effectively.

Skyro, you didn't respond to my last post at all. You just went and covered side topics. This isn't about NR, and even if it was I mentioned it in my very first post that Putrid is not as bad as NR. And quite frankly, I don't know why you're saying 'But I don't complain or make topics about it' like its a good thing. You've just admitted its broken...so why are you not addressing it and bringing it up in topics?

Yes, I think the Necro sucks besides Putrid. Well then, so what? That is altogether besides the point. The point is that I am forced to take a Necro just for Putrid Explosion. Versatility? What on earth are you talking about? What's more versatile, having the option to ignore the class or having to take the class no matter what?

Kaylee Ann · Aug 15, 2005, 03:01 AM // 03:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

Yes, I think the Necro sucks besides Putrid.

Any credibility you had what-so-ever in this post just went out the window with that comment. GG.

Skyro · Aug 15, 2005, 04:31 AM // 04:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

Yes, I think the Necro sucks besides Putrid. Well then, so what? That is altogether besides the point. The point is that I am forced to take a Necro just for Putrid Explosion. Versatility? What on earth are you talking about? What's more versatile, having the option to ignore the class or having to take the class no matter what?

Oh... my... god. Are you seriously suggesting to me that having a whole other class, with 3 whole skill lines to play with, is actually LESS versatile than just completely removing/ignoring it? I... can't... even respond to such a statement. It is just plain silly!

And wow I guess there's alot of versatility in having to always have 2+ monks? Sure, you can do E/Mo or whatever but you still would need at least 2+ primary monks to go with the E/Mo because the E/Mo is really just a replacement for the third monk. If you don't, in your own words, you'd be at a 'severe disadvantage'.

I don't even know where to poke holes in your logic anymore because you have none. You're either arguing you are forced to take a primary necro in tombs (yet you also have to take 2 primary monks), OR, you are arguing necros suck other than putrid and have no versatility in their skills. It is one or the other. The first one I already disproved, and if you just think necros suck, well, that's your opinion, sucks to be you I guess. Live with it or don't play tombs (or pray there is a change to putrid, which there won't).

And I mention NR sure, but I always argue whatever you want me to argue in my responses in addition to that. Here, let me put it in bold letters for you, I've already mentioned it I believe 3x, yet you always seem to ignore it. So here it is. You ready? As it stands, the game design of tombs is fundamentally flawed. It is not putrid that is overpowered, it is simply because of the nature of the altar on the HoH map.

And I guess I'm just a glutton for punishiment for continually debating this topic with you because it is so obvious now that really you are just a biased, non-necro player, with no real knowledge of their skills who just wants to nerf putrid so you can ignore the class completely. I could sit here and really breakdown the necro class for you but frankly I have no desire to. I'm out.

White Designs · Aug 15, 2005, 05:07 AM // 05:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyro

Oh... my... god. Are you seriously suggesting to me that having a whole other class, with 3 whole skill lines to play with, is actually LESS versatile than just completely removing/ignoring it? I... can't... even respond to such a statement. It is just plain silly!

You need to consider learning how to read. Apparently bold doesn't even do anything for you. I repeatedly emphasized that what kills versatility is that a team is forced to take the necro. Its not, "I have 3 more skill lines to choose from", its "take a character with these skill lines because you must have them." Honestly, I've already given more than enough examples, the most notable being how I mentioned that a warrior would be ludicrous in a all Ranger team. Yes! Its actually *5* more skill lines to bring a warrior, but it'd be a stupid thing to do since its a all ranger team. For the very last time, if Putrid didn't exist, some teams could use a Necro, some could not. Just like right now, some teams use rangers, some don't. Some use Mesmers, some don't. That's versatlity. With Putrid, you *have* to take the Necro, that's not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyro

And wow I guess there's alot of versatility in having to always have 2+ monks? Sure, you can do E/Mo or whatever but you still would need at least 2+ primary monks to go with the E/Mo because the E/Mo is really just a replacement for the third monk. If you don't, in your own words, you'd be at a 'severe disadvantage'.

Because its not one skill! You don't take a monk on the basis of one skill. Sure, Necros have certain other skills that are decent (rend, lingering, rigor mortis, etc.), but all of them work solidly with a /N, most notably on a Me/N as fast-casting really helps Curses. The reason to take a primary necro is putrid.

Quote:

I don't even know where to poke holes in your logic anymore because you have none. You're either arguing you are forced to take a primary necro in tombs (yet you also have to take 2 primary monks), OR, you are arguing necros suck other than putrid and have no versatility in their skills. It is one or the other. The first one I already disproved, and if you just think necros suck, well, that's your opinion, sucks to be you I guess. Live with it or don't play tombs (or pray there is a change to putrid, which there won't).

You disproved that you're forced to take a primary necro? Oh please! Show me where. Every post you've made has been for praising a Necro. In fact, you directly suggested that every decent team has room for a Necro. Please show me where you've suggested that a Necro is not needed on a team, and therefore the team is not forced to take a Necro.

Quote:

And I mention NR sure, but I always argue whatever you want me to argue in my responses in addition to that. Here, let me put it in bold letters for you, I've already mentioned it I believe 3x, yet you always seem to ignore it. So here it is. You ready? As it stands, the game design of tombs is fundamentally flawed. It is not putrid that is overpowered, it is simply because of the nature of the altar on the HoH map.

There's a rather large reason why I ignore that. Because you continually argue against my other statements. To say that it is a flaw in tombs is only valid if you also agree that forcing every team in tombs to take a necro is unfair. But you seem perfectly happy with limiting the versatility in potential teams, so where's the flaw? You seem perfectly happy with the current setup, which ensures a necro on every decent team.

Quote:

And I guess I'm just a glutton for punishiment for continually debating this topic with you because it is so obvious now that really you are just a biased, non-necro player, with no real knowledge of their skills who just wants to nerf putrid so you can ignore the class completely. I could sit here and really breakdown the necro class for you but frankly I have no desire to. I'm out.

I really am a nice person. You know, I have listened to you insult me over and over again and have tried my best to respond only with constructive information concerning the game. But even I have a limit. So here's my response. You stink, and really have no idea what you are talking about. Whenever I make points to refute you, such as the Warrior on Ranger example, you deflect the issue and try to bring it elsewhere. You call me shortsighted when nearly every example you give is based of of flimsy circumstantial evidence, such as saying you particularly were able to do something. Well heck, there are loads of other people playing this game, and one random example doesn't mean much. Whereas I seem to be a biased non-necro player, which I do agree with, you are a very biased and dumb Necro-only player who probably fell in love with the class because it looks cool and plays great in PvE Fissure runs. Your eerie fetish with the Necro is beyond me, as you never even once admitted that there exist some good team builds which have no use for a Necro besides Putrid. That is the height of narrow-mindedness. I say good riddance.

Skyro · Aug 15, 2005, 06:05 AM // 06:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

You need to consider learning how to read. Apparently bold doesn't even do anything for you. I repeatedly emphasized that what kills versatility is that a team is forced to take the necro. Its not, "I have 3 more skill lines to choose from", its "take a character with these skill lines because you must have them." Honestly, I've already given more than enough examples, the most notable being how I mentioned that a warrior would be ludicrous in a all Ranger team. Yes! Its actually *5* more skill lines to bring a warrior, but it'd be a stupid thing to do since its a all ranger team. For the very last time, if Putrid didn't exist, some teams could use a Necro, some could not. Just like right now, some teams use rangers, some don't. Some use Mesmers, some don't. That's versatlity. With Putrid, you *have* to take the Necro, that's not.

Actually right now most teams run at least 1 warrior. And most teams run least 1 ranger. And most teams run at least 1 necro, but ALL teams run 2+ monks. If you want to run an all ranger team (you're still going to need 2+ monks in that "all ranger team" btw) for the sake of being different or something and put all your eggs in one basket go ahead, but you won't get very far for very long. By working with less lines and less skills your offense and defense become less varied, and more easily countered. You'd be uh... 'severely disadvantaged'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

Because its not one skill! You don't take a monk on the basis of one skill. Sure, Necros have certain other skills that are decent (rend, lingering, rigor mortis, etc.), but all of them work solidly with a /N, most notably on a Me/N as fast-casting really helps Curses. The reason to take a primary necro is putrid.

See this is where you seem to argue two differet points. First is you seem to argue being forced to take a necro primary in tombs is somehow wrong. But then what about monks? You're not going to run a full entourage of E/Mo's in place of 2-3 monk primaries now are you? Well you could, but you'd be 'severely disadvantaged'. What about spirit spammers? I could also easily say something like "you dare not make a secondary a spirit spammer. If you do, you'd be 'severely disadvantaged'. In actuality though, all these things would just make that aspect of your build less effective.

But then yet you could also run putrid on a secondary, but it too would be less effective. And even add to the fact that I even believe you overexaggerate the effect of putrid between a primary and secondary necro. What is it exactly? The high spec? I've never run a putrid for more than 10+1. Soul reaping? I love soul reaping, but in reality I don't think I've ever casted more than 4 or 5 putrids in a row, and it's a rare occurance at that. The actual mana problems of chain casting putrid can be worked around. Try a Me/N or something if you despise necros so much. They will hit those corpses faster than a necro.

Now on the otherhand, you then say "but monks have versatility." So with this you try to justify your first point and begin to argue another. Yet I then argued necros are versatile enough to greatly contribute to nearly any team. Sure you can think of it as "putrid + gravy" but really, that is just simply your opinion. A glass half-full/half-empty sort of thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

You disproved that you're forced to take a primary necro? Oh please! Show me where. Every post you've made has been for praising a Necro. In fact, you directly suggested that every decent team has room for a Necro. Please show me where you've suggested that a Necro is not needed on a team, and therefore the team is not forced to take a Necro.

I'm not arguing that necros putrid isn't good or you shouldn't take a necro primary. And I've said before if you were to ask me I'd recommend you take it (in tombs). I disproved you in the fact that you find it troubling to bring 1 necro when in actuality a lot more than just 1 necro is taking up those 8 spots. It is not as though you have 8 blank spots to work with and then the necro is the only "forced" slot. You actually have 2+ monks, most likely 1-2 warriors, one spirit spammer ranger, etc. etc. Yet you have no problem with this, just necros!

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

There's a rather large reason why I ignore that. Because you continually argue against my other statements. To say that it is a flaw in tombs is only valid if you also agree that forcing every team in tombs to take a necro is unfair. But you seem perfectly happy with limiting the versatility in potential teams, so where's the flaw? You seem perfectly happy with the current setup, which ensures a necro on every decent team.

Fair and unfair is an objective thing. In a perfect world, you could go in, with any class combination with any skill set and be on equal footing. But this is a competitive strategy game and some things are better than others. People complained that every team needs monk(s), but that simply is the way it is. Is being forced to have twice as many of another class in every decent team "fair"? Tombs is simply constructed in a way that promotes putrid use. I guarantee you, for instance, that if the last map to win was rotated (sometimes relic, sometimes hill, sometimes just a straight out brawl) you'd see less putrid use.

And if you really want to know if I personally think if it is fair or not? I don't know, because I've never really thought about it, because I never really cared. And even now I'm just neutral about it because whether I think it's fair or not doesn't change a thing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

I really am a nice person. You know, I have listened to you insult me over and over again and have tried my best to respond only with constructive information concerning the game. But even I have a limit. So here's my response. You stink, and really have no idea what you are talking about. Whenever I make points to refute you, such as the Warrior on Ranger example, you deflect the issue and try to bring it elsewhere. You call me shortsighted when nearly every example you give is based of of flimsy circumstantial evidence, such as saying you particularly were able to do something. Well heck, there are loads of other people playing this game, and one random example doesn't mean much. Whereas I seem to be a biased non-necro player, which I do agree with, you are a very biased and dumb Necro-only player who probably fell in love with the class because it looks cool and plays great in PvE Fissure runs. Your eerie fetish with the Necro is beyond me, as you never even once admitted that there exist some good team builds which have no use for a Necro besides Putrid. That is the height of narrow-mindedness. I say good riddance.

I'm not intentionally trying to deflect anything, as I'm sure you aren't either, yet you are. As for myself I feel I'm standing on stable ground. But it should be obvious that yes I am biased toward necros as they are my primary class (not my only class mind you). But you must realize that to argue something you have knowledge about is very different than arguing something you know very little about. You are an outsider looking in. I would not go to a rocket scientist and try to argue to him how rocket science works just because I saw a rocket take flight! It is like a verbal slap to the face, so naturally I'd be riled up. To say I have no idea what I'm talking about, about my own class, well... that's some audacity right there.

And sure there are great teams builds that don't have necro primaries, but the majority of them not in tombs. The current GvG build my guild is running right now doesn't have a necro primary for instance. GvG is more balanced, more varied. And there is no such thing as a good monk-less team.

Sir Aurik · Aug 15, 2005, 07:42 AM // 07:42

i love playing necro/mes, strip enchantments are very usefull for any team......

Nazutul · Aug 15, 2005, 07:49 AM // 07:49

The moral of the story is:

Skyro smart. White Deisgn not so smart.

GG.

Nightwish · Aug 15, 2005, 11:04 AM // 11:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

Yes, I think the Necro sucks besides Putrid. Well then, so what? That is altogether besides the point. The point is that I am forced to take a Necro just for Putrid Explosion. Versatility? What on earth are you talking about? What's more versatile, having the option to ignore the class or having to take the class no matter what?

White Design, you not bringing up the right point of arguement. From your statement above, anyone can also say that necro is underpowered except one skill. Thats equally saddening isnt it. You support your view with a counter-productive point.

Now back to putrid. Its recharge and cast time is faster than other skills using corpses. Can anyone tell me that its damage effect is weak enough to balance out its fast recharge and cast time in such a way that a necro can contribute just as effectively using other skills such as wells?

If someone can answer this question with good supportive reasons, we are one step nearer to knowing whether this skill is overpowered.

Kai Nui · Aug 15, 2005, 11:28 AM // 11:28

Can a Me/N be of use with high fast casting and another death magic spell...?

Thanas · Aug 15, 2005, 11:38 AM // 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Designs

Wow..just wow. You have the audacity to say 'people like me' are the reason you have trouble getting groups. You say this even though I repeatedly say I always take a Necro on my teams. Just wow.

And I know it takes no skill to use putrid. Even people disagreeing with me have admitted that the proper way to use Putrid is to mash the button. Either you didn't bother to read my posts or you are just plain stupid, since no matter what else you might disagree with me on, its very easy to see I spent a lot of time determining how to play a Necro and how to exploit Putrid effectively.

Skyro, you didn't respond to my last post at all. You just went and covered side topics. This isn't about NR, and even if it was I mentioned it in my very first post that Putrid is not as bad as NR. And quite frankly, I don't know why you're saying 'But I don't complain or make topics about it' like its a good thing. You've just admitted its broken...so why are you not addressing it and bringing it up in topics?

Yes, I think the Necro sucks besides Putrid. Well then, so what? That is altogether besides the point. The point is that I am forced to take a Necro just for Putrid Explosion. Versatility? What on earth are you talking about? What's more versatile, having the option to ignore the class or having to take the class no matter what?

I think it you who fail to undertand me. You take necros for putrid only. You say necros suck besides this. This attitude is very bad. You have no idea how a necro plays. This is self evident from your comments. You don't take necro for skill. This attitude is passed on and those who decide oh we dont want putrid will completely ignore necros. Thus it is people like you who reduce my chances of finding a party!

Oh and what kills versatility is choosing not to take a class all together. That effectively reduces team combinations. Do the math!!!

manveruppd · Aug 15, 2005, 02:18 PM // 14:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kai Nui

Can a Me/N be of use with high fast casting and another death magic spell...?

No, even high fast casting won't reduce the casting time to less than half (ie. 1.5" for a 3" Well or Animate compared to Putrid's 1").
However, that's not the point, as you can already take Necrotic Traversal if you want to deny Putrids. As I said above though, since Putrid is likely to start a chain reaction, if you START casing a Well when there's still a corpse on the ground (ie. before the Putrid necro has finished casting), then there's a very good likelyhood there'll be another one when you finish casting, thereby avoiding that annoying "Invalid Target" message.
I don't see why this thread is still going on! As I said, yesterday, in the 8 matches I played on Saturday (several of which were multi-team matches), I only came up against ONE Putrid Necro! Even then I managed to get a Well up during that match. Nobody's forcing you to take a Putrid Necro at all. Putrid is a good skill, and can be devastating in some situations, but that's the case with other AoE skills from several proffessions in situations such as altar matches where teams are bunched closely together. The lesson is simply to position yourselves carefully to avoid causing chain reactions, not to include an obligatory Putrid-spammer solely to deny the enemy spammer of his corpses!

And White I'm sure you can see you've ruffled a lot of feathers with your comments about Necros being useless except for Putrid. However, you're entitled to your opinion, and nobody can convince you otherwise. If you hate Putrid, then learn to position your team to avoid it (or at least avoid getting several people caught up in it), rather than forcing yourself to bring a putrid masher yourself to deny the enemy. I'm sure you'll be doing better at matches if you stop taking along a Necro just for one skill when you can instead take along someone who fits a lot better into your plans.

However, take this as a friendly warning: eventually, you're bound to come up against a team that includes a highly skilled curses or blood necro, and your team WILL be torn apart, and, because necros don't usually deal direct damage, you won't even know WHAT hit you!

Until then, I suggest you play the game the way you like and stop taking necros in your team altogether if you don't like playin with them.

arredondo · Aug 15, 2005, 05:28 PM // 17:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kai Nui

Can a Me/N be of use with high fast casting and another death magic spell...?

As I showed earlier (twice even), a Me/Ne is perfect for this problem if it is indeed a problem. If it rarely comes up as an issue, who cares?

- Cast Shame before a death, then Fast Cast points let you defile a corpse with any Death spell you wish.

- Same with Archane Conundrum

- Same with Migraine

- Same with Black Out

- Same with Diversion (to stop spamming Putrid)

Use class diversity skills to solve problems, not nerf requests to the developers. Only Necros can manipulate corpses (besides the rez), so if you choose not to bring a Necro Death class, controlling corpses is your team's weakness, just like if you choose not to bring any Monks, team healing can possibly be a weakness. As long as you accept the pros and cons of your team makeup, why complain? Switch in specialized talents for specialized problems if they concern you so much.

White Designs · Aug 15, 2005, 05:50 PM // 17:50

Quote:

Actually right now most teams run at least 1 warrior. And most teams run least 1 ranger. And most teams run at least 1 necro, but ALL teams run 2+ monks. If you want to run an all ranger team (you're still going to need 2+ monks in that "all ranger team" btw) for the sake of being different or something and put all your eggs in one basket go ahead, but you won't get very far for very long. By working with less lines and less skills your offense and defense become less varied, and more easily countered. You'd be uh... 'severely disadvantaged'.

You are simply missing the point. First of all, all-ranger teams (which are usually 4 ranger/1 necro/3 monk) have had considerable success in Tombs. Spirit Spamming is quite popular, and to dismiss such teams is pretty narrowminded. Secondly, by your logic, the more lines and the most skills you have, the better your team is. Well then, I suppose your ideal team is 1 Mesmer/1 Necro/1 Ele/1 monk/1 warrior/1 ranger/2 XX? That's absurd. Like I said before then you only have two variable slots. That kills versatility.

Quote:

See this is where you seem to argue two differet points. First is you seem to argue being forced to take a necro primary in tombs is somehow wrong. But then what about monks? You're not going to run a full entourage of E/Mo's in place of 2-3 monk primaries now are you? Well you could, but you'd be 'severely disadvantaged'. What about spirit spammers? I could also easily say something like "you dare not make a secondary a spirit spammer. If you do, you'd be 'severely disadvantaged'. In actuality though, all these things would just make that aspect of your build less effective.

Alright, let me explain this more clearly. Generally, you have three elements in a team: Defense, Offense, and Support. You take monks normally for defense, (not healing, there is a large difference.) You have options besides the normal healing monk or the protection monk. You can use a E/Mo Prot or a E/Mo Warder. You can use a Ranger with healing spring and a high fertile season or Conflag. All of those are options. For offense you can choose warriors, rangers, or eles. Most good teams know its dumb to mix the offense like that. That's the reason the offense on most teams is composed primarily of 1-2 classes. Common examples are all-ranger offense, 2 e/mo-2 warrior smiting, all-warrior, air-spike, etc. For support you also have options, including Conditions Monks, Conditions Necro, Enchant-Removing Necro, Denial Ranger, Denial Warrior, Shutdown Mes, etc. In every category you have several characters to work with. It doesn't really matter that you usually run monk primaries since different monks on different teams may have completley different skill sets. A monk on a Ranger team with GC might run Storm Cha[ser, Healing Spring, and some spirits, whereas a monk on a denial team runs drain enchant/edrain/etc. There are skills that likely every team has, like Orison, but its not very sensible to say your taking a monk just so you have Orison on your team.

The problem with the Necro is that its primary non-putrid functions, (Enchant Removal/Fueling/Order of the Vampire/Pain, etc.) do not fit into every team, as well they shouldn't, since as I said before, a Warrior's functions do not fit every team. If Putrid didn't exist, how could you justfiy running a Necro on a Energy Denial Team with spamming Fertile/QZ/NR? The Necro has no use on this particular team (which by the way, is a very solid setup.) And yet, if I made that team now, I would have a Necro for Putrid.

Quote:

But then yet you could also run putrid on a secondary, but it too would be less effective. And even add to the fact that I even believe you overexaggerate the effect of putrid between a primary and secondary necro. What is it exactly? The high spec? I've never run a putrid for more than 10+1. Soul reaping? I love soul reaping, but in reality I don't think I've ever casted more than 4 or 5 putrids in a row, and it's a rare occurance at that. The actual mana problems of chain casting putrid can be worked around. Try a Me/N or something if you despise necros so much. They will hit those corpses faster than a necro.

When I say Necro, I mean primary Necro. Next, chain Putrids due to Soul Reaping is the only reason why a primary is needed for Putrid. On the altar, that is a very real threat that you have to deal with, a Me/N can't really deal with that.

Quote:

Now on the otherhand, you then say "but monks have versatility." So with this you try to justify your first point and begin to argue another. Yet I then argued necros are versatile enough to greatly contribute to nearly any team. Sure you can think of it as "putrid + gravy" but really, that is just simply your opinion. A glass half-full/half-empty sort of thing.

No, you haven't done that. You've simply said they're useful on any team. You've made decent points about WotP and I agree some of the curses are nice, but really just think about it carefully: How many team builds are possible in GW? How many function well without a warrior? How many function well without a Mesmer? How many function well without a Necro if putrid didn't exist. Obviously, there will be many teams which don't need a Necro's particular services.

Here's another example in hopes that you can understand. Generally, we can agree that Necros besides Putrid are good at Conditions/Enchant Removal/Occasional Damage with Blood/Nice Curses. Its not like I take a Necro for Putrid and ignore the rest of this. I try to work the rest of it in so the Necro helps the team. But I am forced to do this. Compare this to say, a Mesmer. A Mesmer is good at shutdown, prolonged energy denial, and most people agree it is best after the battle has progressed a certain length. Well, what if for some reason, every team had to take a Mesmer. Well, then you are forced to use its other features. Why is this a problem? Because suddenly teams that rely on killing fast, like spike teams, become a lot less viable, since they have a slot on their team which is good, but not good at what they do.

Quote:

I'm not intentionally trying to deflect anything, as I'm sure you aren't either, yet you are. As for myself I feel I'm standing on stable ground. But it should be obvious that yes I am biased toward necros as they are my primary class (not my only class mind you). But you must realize that to argue something you have knowledge about is very different than arguing something you know very little about. You are an outsider looking in. I would not go to a rocket scientist and try to argue to him how rocket science works just because I saw a rocket take flight! It is like a verbal slap to the face, so naturally I'd be riled up. To say I have no idea what I'm talking about, about my own class, well... that's some audacity right there.

And sure there are great teams builds that don't have necro primaries, but the majority of them not in tombs. The current GvG build my guild is running right now doesn't have a necro primary for instance. GvG is more balanced, more varied. And there is no such thing as a good monk-less team.

Thank you for keeping it clean, I really do not want to resort to insults. However, I must say that just because I don't play a Necro does not mean I don't understand what its designed to do. I just mentioned above that jobs a Necro is good for. If there is anything large I missed, please say so. Most everything about GvG I agree with, but then again I did entitle this with the word 'Tombs.' Yes I am an outsider looking in, but my point is that I am considering this from the team perspective. When designing a particular team, there simply are those that don't need the services a Necro provides besides Putrid Explosion. Well then, the other 7 slots are largely wasted, making the team weaker, and often to the point of being inviable. Thus, the number of potential builds and teams is cut down by Putrid Explosion.

Thanas, I...just don't understand you. Do the math? I've said over and over again its about choice. Anytime you lack a choice, such as whether or not to take a Necro, you have less options, its not hard to understand.

And not getting a group..that's just BS. I don't take Necros for Putrid only. I'm not dumb enough to run a group where one member of my team is only using one skill. I am frustrated though that every group I make has to use the particular uses of a Necro, (which I still maintain are limited.)

And everyone in this topic has agreed most teams take a Necro. Besides monks, you are the most commonly needed class. And you're blaming me for some reason?

Ollj · Aug 15, 2005, 08:17 PM // 20:17

i like necrotic traversal MUCH more than putrid explosion!
mostly because it casts 4 times faster and its more tactical.

-Hi, I'm Misinformation!
-Scaphism

ringking · Aug 15, 2005, 08:26 PM // 20:26

There's nothing at all wrong with a team with 1 of each class and 3 monks.

Moskel · Aug 15, 2005, 08:31 PM // 20:31

We made it to HoH yesterday using a team with no putrid necro and no monks

Let me draw a little picture.....

Outside
-------
| Box | Outside
-------
Outside

-Hi, I'm anecotal and irrelevant information that's already been covered in this very thread!
-Scaphism

Scaphism · Aug 15, 2005, 09:15 PM // 21:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

As I showed earlier (twice even), a Me/Ne is perfect for this problem if it is indeed a problem. If it rarely comes up as an issue, who cares?
- Cast Shame before a death, then Fast Cast points let you defile a corpse with any Death spell you wish.
- Same with Archane Conundrum
- Same with Migraine
- Same with Black Out
- Same with Diversion (to stop spamming Putrid)

Arredondo, I explicitly answered my this in an earlier post. Let me repost it here for those who have forgotten:

Quote:

Originally Posted by me

The point isn't that other professions have no way to stop Putrid Explosion chains- it's that that one skill A) Eliminates corpses from all other necros B) Doesn't require skill to use, either in planning or execution, and C) Is a powerful effect that can and does singlehandedly change the outcome of matches.

And...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Me again

In the current situation where Putrid exists, the possibility for someone else to discover a different creative use for corpses is gone.

If anyone doesn't understand the reasons behind this, speak up now. It will be the best chance to bring everyone up to speed.

Let me quote myself in the same post again:

Quote:

Wouldn't you be better off running putrid explosion yourself, rather than spending the resources trying to shut him down with stopgap measures?

Guilt, as I said, will not stop him. If you've ever had it used on you, you'll know that all it does is steal energy and delay you for a split second. It does not send the interrupted spell into the recycle phase. Even if it did it wouldn't matter for Putrid- it has no recycle. Since a necromancer is gaining energy from every death, and can easily quick swap to a focus with more energy, the energy loss is still not an issue. He will still have the energy and the time to get his putrid explosion off before your well/animate.
All that is assuming you have the requisite skill to cast Guilt and have it land at the exact moment someone dies- remembering the 2s cast time on Guilt. If you mess up slightly, he will be mashing the putrid button well in advance of the death, setting off guilt prematurely, making the energy loss even less consequentual because Soul Reaping has not yet activated. In other words, he will mash through your guilt without a second thought, and it will not matter in the least.

#2-Migraine/Arcane Conundrum: I encourage you to use your elite against my Putrid Explosion necro. If that's too costly (i.e. a bad trade in resources), feel free to use AC. In both cases, Putrid Explosion will still go off faster than your Well or Animate spell of choice. That is, of course, assuming you can get a hex off and make it stick in the age of Nature's Renewal. But no skills ever need to be changed, right? Everything is fine how it is.
#3- Blackout. This will stop anyone from using any skills for ~5-7 seconds. It's a universal counter. I encourage people to use it, and find out how difficult it is to get a touch range skill off on a Dais map with 24 players + 3 heroes + who knows how many spirits clogging the altar. That assumes the necro doesn't scream over vent the first time you black him out, ensuring you become a priority target. But let's say you're supremely skilled as a blackout character and you can get into range, untouched, and you know the exact moment you need to use Blackout (remember- you don't know when someone on the other team is dying- a corpse could fall at any moment.) Even in this situation, where there's a clear imbalance in skill (you=supremely skilled mesmer, him=button mashing newb playing a broken skill) your team still needs a second character dedicated to actually exploiting the corpse, because using blackout prevents you from using skills just like the person you're using it on. If this feels like a balanced trade to you, please speak up. Normally, if I put that much effort into a counter, I want it to DEVASTATE the other team. Instead you've allowed yourself the breathing room to...animate a bone fiend? Or maybe you're really just worried about stopping him from chaining his Putrids together, which brings us to...
#4- Diversion. Congratulations again, another universal counter to spam skills. This, of all the things you've listed is probably your best option- but he will still get his spell off. It prevents the chain casting of putrid after putrid. Is that what you were after? Saying as much is an admission that the chain effect of putrid after putrid (with no recycle) is a problem worthy of fixing. But you weren't saying that, were you?

I ask again, in which of these cases are you not better served by just running a button-mashnig putrid bot yourself?

Quote:

Originally Posted by arredondo

Use class diversity skills to solve problems, not nerf requests to the developers. Only Necros can manipulate corpses (besides the rez), so if you choose not to bring a Necro Death class, controlling corpses is your team's weakness, just like if you choose not to bring any Monks, team healing can possibly be a weakness. As long as you accept the pros and cons of your team makeup, why complain? Switch in specialized talents for specialized problems if they concern you so much.

Class strength is not the issue here, but every time the issue is brought up the defenders of the necromancer profession rush in to protest. "Necros don't suck, you just don't know how to use them!"
Let me say it very clearly: We know how to use necromancers. We use them. In a team designed to hold the hall, we know to fear a well timed Well of the Profane, or a chain of Putrid Explosions going off. Knowing that, we bring something designed to counter it- a one trick wonderbot.
Not bringing one to tombs isn't just a weakness, it's a liability if you have any plans of holding the Hall of Heroes. The problem is that Putrid Explosion is fundamentally more powerful than all the other corpse exploitation skills in the Hall- so much so that it precludes the use of all other skills. You are best served running a copy of it yourself, instead of thinking up elaborate counters which do not give you an advantage- instead they *might* put you on even ground, if you're lucky. The only other corpse skill that can hope to compete is Necrotic Traversal, which I'd argue needs a slight tweak as well. Not putting a recharge time on a skill is asking for it to be abused.

Both Necrotic Traversal and Putrid Explosion are extremely efficient corpse-denial tools. I dare anyone to argue otherwise. Which one has an unbalanced and powerful effect in the Hall of Heroes?

Let me put it this way: If you're running Necrotic Traversal, the only corpse spell with a faster cast than Putrid, for the purpose of denying an enemy necro his Putrid Explosions, then you're doing his job for him. He no longer has to worry about blowing up the bodies before they hit the floor- you've taken care of that. He doesn't have to worry about a Well of the Profane going up. Or are you still using bodies to raise minions in the hall? Well of the Profane already has a hefty cost- 25 energy and requires a body. It has a poweful effect- you probably shouldn't be able to get one off whenever you want. But in an atmosphere where Putrid sweeps away all corpses, and Necrotic Traversal has to be played as a counter, WotP just wont see the light of day.

That's where the issue about restricting versatility comes in.

zehly · Aug 15, 2005, 09:51 PM // 21:51

If you're such wise and almighty, knowledgably players, don't you think that you could do a little bit better than "nerf the skill" or "this class sucks"?

I mean, come on people, you are intelligent, aren't you? I'm not saying I know the answer, but I'm saying that mathematically, with all the combinations of classes, attributes, skills, and players, you should be able to do anything you want in this game. It just takes a little inginuity [sic].

What one of you says "sucks" the other "exploits." Enjoy the game for what it is, not what you think it lacks. If changes need to be made, wait for them, and deal with what you have.

If a solution cannot be found in this game, it is not because it doesn't exist, it's because YOU haven't found it yet, which means keep searching. While I'm sitting here at work, I'm going to come up with some statistics and throw them into a forum for people to be boggled by.

Now please, quit with the pissing contest and enjoy the game for what it is. If you can't do that.. DON'T PLAY.

Bast · Aug 15, 2005, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Yeah, mindless platitudes and ignorant musings really help the issue.

The point, made very well by the members of IQ, who obviously know more about Guild Wars than you do, is the following:

Putrid overrides any other corpse skills. Putrid requires someone mashing the putrid button. The best counter to Putrid is... Putrid!

The point isn't that Necros suck, or that it's an "exploit." It's the same problem as with Nature's Renewal: It makes far too many skills useless, and is therefore broken.

Vomiting out senseless platitudes like "Enjoy the game for what it is" or "deal with what you have" or "YOU haven't found [a solution] yet" or "quit the pissing contest" or "DON'T PLAY" is not the answer. Discussion of skill imbalances is the only way to get it to ArenaNet's attention. If they investigate the things we've been pissing and moaning about for so long and find a problem, hopefully they'll fix it. It seems like they are working on it on the test server.

Agreed, balance changes should not be rushed. A massive nerf to the 4 or 5 really broken skills is not the answer. Balance requires small and carefully considered adjustments.

Re: fixing Putrid: What if Putrid had a recharge that only triggered if it didn't explode a corpse, but had no recharge if it did explode a corpse? Wouldn't that prevent the mindless button smashing and require at least a little bit of paying attention? Something like this:

Spell. The corpse nearest your target explodes, sending out a shockwave that deals 75 damage to nearby foes. If Putrid Explosion fails to explode a corpse, this skill will be disabled for 15 seconds. (Attrib: Death Magic)