"Necromancer is still a meme"

[Aetatis.5418]

> @Umbramare.9156 said:

> I really enjoy Necro gameplay. I really love my necro (the only character i have mapcomp with).

>

> But as someone who fullclears on a monday in 2-3 hours, does cm 100 daily and expects some quality from my squad/group, i just cant accept a necro dps in my squad/group.

> The dps difference is just too much. I havent touched necro since the scourge nerf and i'm playing chrono/mirage/weaver rn. Even as a rather crappy weaver I could outdps scourges without a problem. simply because their dps caps at like 70% of what a weaver can do (not even counting in the burst vs condi ramp up).

>

> Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

>

> And unless the (somewhat bad and extremly casual) necro player base understands that, necro will be the bottom of the barrel. If you guys always voice how you're okay with "being able to kill bosses" and being mediocre, well then go ahead. Dont expect people to carry your terrible dps tho.

>

> oh yeah btw, that awesome power reaper buff (that came with condi reaper nerf), nerfed the best dps option reaper had.

 

i dont like your attitude - BUT i do understand it very well. and it is straight forward and... honest (!). one of the very few opposing comments on the necro forums.

usually if (e.g.) polls are being made, the majority of people that would not kick somebody from a fractal group (due to being an unwanted/underperforming elite-spec) gather on that poll - and the ones that go "kitten them all" dont speak up at all. which made me think if all the "hate" people are experiencing is real.

and partially the quality seeking players are not to blame; when a game offers the possibility of such a big dps difference it is only natural that the best performing things are requested the most.

in a perfect world, the developer would streamline the dps/quality better (lets say roughly 20% dmg difference max. .. which is still a gap, but not as big as our reality (50% on golems and 30-50% in real fights)) and players would discriminate less vs. unoptimized classes/professions/specialications.

 

 

so atleast the many complains from necro players (being kicked and so on) were not made up entirely. thanks dude

[Umbramare.9156]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > @Umbramare.9156 said:

> > Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

>

> Except that is exactly how performance of classes are judged, by Anet. They have said it themselves, they aren't trying to make things optimal, just viable. The very definition of viable, is that it something is capable of working successfully; feasible. By that definition, Necromancer fits.

>

> Most people that play this game don't care about 5 manning bosses, being able to clear it 20 seconds faster, or even without weapons. Being able to kill the boss, is perfectly acceptable to judge a class by. So tell me, which does Anet care more for developing this game for, the casuals or the tryhards? I'm going to go with the casuals.

 

Well you must be fullclearing in 2 hours and oneshotting everything then.

 

Because that's what people want. Not some 10k dps necro holding back the group

[Fatalyz.7168]

Also, for what it's worth, I took Phant Mirage build from qT's site (34062) and compared it's numbers to Condi Scourge (29601). There is a difference of 4461, or 15%. I don't know much about that particular build, but I do believe it is mostly single target (obviously useful on the boss). Where Scourge has shades that it can place and Epi (obviously not so useful on boss, unless able to bounce), both of which can help with controlling adds and area. Which is why even qT has them listed as meta on Xera (shard and add clearing), but also useful on Sab and MO. There is a place for Necros, it could be a better place, but there is still a place. Namely right now, how much add control do you need.

 

- Disclaimer: I only used small hitbox numbers and excluded the Clone Mirage build. Reason for leaving out Clone Mirage build is that it seems to me that it is way over performing at the moment.

 

Here is a link to qT's latest benchmarks, for reference:

https://qtfy.eu/guildwars/benchmarks-11-07-17/

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @Umbramare.9156 said:

> I really enjoy Necro gameplay. I really love my necro (the only character i have mapcomp with).

>

> But as someone who fullclears on a monday in 2-3 hours, does cm 100 daily and expects some quality from my squad/group, i just cant accept a necro dps in my squad/group.

> The dps difference is just too much. I havent touched necro since the scourge nerf and i'm playing chrono/mirage/weaver rn. Even as a rather crappy weaver I could outdps scourges without a problem. simply because their dps caps at like 70% of what a weaver can do (not even counting in the burst vs condi ramp up).

>

> Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

>

> And unless the (somewhat bad and extremly casual) necro player base understands that, necro will be the bottom of the barrel. If you guys always voice how you're okay with "being able to kill bosses" and being mediocre, well then go ahead. Dont expect people to carry your terrible dps tho.

>

> oh yeah btw, that awesome power reaper buff (that came with condi reaper nerf), nerfed the best dps option reaper had.

 

BAM, THIS! Nothing to add here! Reality check!

Hope ANet DEVs will see this as well!

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @Umbramare.9156 said:

> > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > @Umbramare.9156 said:

> > > Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

> >

> > Except that is exactly how performance of classes are judged, by Anet. They have said it themselves, they aren't trying to make things optimal, just viable. The very definition of viable, is that it something is capable of working successfully; feasible. By that definition, Necromancer fits.

> >

> > Most people that play this game don't care about 5 manning bosses, being able to clear it 20 seconds faster, or even without weapons. Being able to kill the boss, is perfectly acceptable to judge a class by. So tell me, which does Anet care more for developing this game for, the casuals or the tryhards? I'm going to go with the casuals.

>

> Well you must be fullclearing in 2 hours and oneshotting everything then.

>

> Because that's what people want. Not some 10k dps necro holding back the group

 

That's what some people want, true. That is not what everyone wants, or is even looking for. We don't full clear in 2 hours, we don't full clear most weeks, but we still have fun, enjoy the content, and just hanging out. There are people of all different tastes in this game. To tell some that their experiences and their "fun" is invalid, because it isn't your "fun", is argumentative for the sake of being combative. If you want to make a point, use actual valid/factual numbers to make your case, otherwise you are just here to argue, and if that's the case, Good day.

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > @Umbramare.9156 said:

> > Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

>

> Except that is exactly how performance of classes are judged, by Anet. They have said it themselves, they aren't trying to make things optimal, just viable. The very definition of viable, is that it something is capable of working successfully; feasible. By that definition, Necromancer fits.

>

> Most people that play this game don't care about 5 manning bosses, being able to clear it 20 seconds faster, or even without weapons. Being able to kill the boss, is perfectly acceptable to judge a class by. So tell me, which does Anet care more for developing this game for, the casuals or the tryhards? I'm going to go with the casuals.

 

... The REAL definition of viable is that it's completely dependent of the context/setting it's used in. If we're talking about speedclears, (fast) fullclears, etc., the Necro is simply not viable ...

If we're talking about defeating a certain boss or doing a fractal without any time-constraints etc. ... every single class is viable even if you wear all greens with it and forget to equip your elite ...

[Fatalyz.7168]

> @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > @Umbramare.9156 said:

> > > Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

> >

> > Except that is exactly how performance of classes are judged, by Anet. They have said it themselves, they aren't trying to make things optimal, just viable. The very definition of viable, is that it something is capable of working successfully; feasible. By that definition, Necromancer fits.

> >

> > Most people that play this game don't care about 5 manning bosses, being able to clear it 20 seconds faster, or even without weapons. Being able to kill the boss, is perfectly acceptable to judge a class by. So tell me, which does Anet care more for developing this game for, the casuals or the tryhards? I'm going to go with the casuals.

>

> ... The REAL definition of viable is that it's completely dependent of the context/setting it's used in. If we're talking about speedclears, (fast) fullclears, etc., the Necro is simply not viable ...

> If we're talking about defeating a certain boss or doing a fractal without any time-constraints etc. ... every single class is viable even if you wear all greens with it and forget to equip your elite ...

 

My point is, that Anet balance devs, are going by the literal definition. Anet balance devs have stated (can't remember if it was the balance AMA or on one of the live chats) that they are going for viable, not optimal. The whole speedclear requires optimal, which automatically removes it. Fast full clears, while not requiring optimal, do require it within a certain percentage of the most optimal. But there is that whole thing where Anet said that any class in any role was viable to clear raids, clearly they weren't talking about optimal. Heck, they were surprised that the community settled on Chrono as the accepted tank. Because again, they designed the encounters in such a way, that all classes are viable, in the context of being able to clear the encounter. So, it's not me pushing against the community, it's me using Anet's own description.

[Agrippa Oculus.3726]

> @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > @"Agrippa Oculus.3726" said:

> > > @Fatalyz.7168 said:

> > > > @Umbramare.9156 said:

> > > > Necro is still a meme and I wont accept necros in my squad until people understand that being "able to kill bosses" is not good enough. After seeing bosses getting 5 maned or killed completly without weapons, you should take the hint that "being able to kill a boss" isnt what you should measure the performance of a class with.

> > >

> > > Except that is exactly how performance of classes are judged, by Anet. They have said it themselves, they aren't trying to make things optimal, just viable. The very definition of viable, is that it something is capable of working successfully; feasible. By that definition, Necromancer fits.

> > >

> > > Most people that play this game don't care about 5 manning bosses, being able to clear it 20 seconds faster, or even without weapons. Being able to kill the boss, is perfectly acceptable to judge a class by. So tell me, which does Anet care more for developing this game for, the casuals or the tryhards? I'm going to go with the casuals.

> >

> > ... The REAL definition of viable is that it's completely dependent of the context/setting it's used in. If we're talking about speedclears, (fast) fullclears, etc., the Necro is simply not viable ...

> > If we're talking about defeating a certain boss or doing a fractal without any time-constraints etc. ... every single class is viable even if you wear all greens with it and forget to equip your elite ...

>

> My point is, that Anet balance devs, are going by the literal definition. Anet balance devs have stated (can't remember if it was the balance AMA or on one of the live chats) that they are going for viable, not optimal. The whole speedclear requires optimal, which automatically removes it. Fast full clears, while not requiring optimal, do require it within a certain percentage of the most optimal. But there is that whole thing where Anet said that any class in any role was viable to clear raids, clearly they weren't talking about optimal. Heck, they were surprised that the community settled on Chrono as the accepted tank. Because again, they designed the encounters in such a way, that all classes are viable, in the context of being able to clear the encounter. So, it's not me pushing against the community, it's me using Anet's own description.

 

Fatalyz, not really addressing you here, but maybe you or anyone else can help me here, but what was ACTUALLY said by ANet back then? And I mean quoted! Because if they used the word viable very loosely as a single word in a furthermore useless sentence, it's completely useless as is, they might have even meant the very first boss you __encounter__ when you create a new character (the one that levels you to level 2 :) ). Joking aside, but if they really only mean clearing Raids and Fractals, etc. ... yea, then every class is viable. But again, just like clearing raids is a thing, speedclearing raids is also a thing ... and that's where the Necro is definitely not viable ...

It really is just that ... context!

[Anchoku.8142]

This thread has been subverted into the same old argument on raids; i.e., _"Other players owe me the right to play how I want in group play. They can't tell me what to do but I certainly can tell them. I have the right to play any profession and build I want and the right to kick anyone who does not bring the build and experience I want, too. Either you leave or I leave because I cannot stand to play with your type. Arenanet said I could play any way I like. If you do not like it, tough."_

 

Because Arenanet designs the raids, dungeons, fractals, PvP, WvW, etc., and allows full player control over grouping, all "balance" and grouping issues are their fault. This is Arenanet's game, not the players'. If they feel like they are happy with how players view their product, there is no reason to spend more development money on it.