State of necromancer after the patch

#1 - July 23, 2013, 9:22 a.m.

I have to admit I rarely create topics, but the patch notes made me say whats on my mind. To note, I have been playing necromancer as my main class since BW1 and it was always the only class I used in tournaments and my main spec was and still is a fear necro with stability (0/20/20/0/30).

So lets face it before the previous patch that added burning and torment necromancers were not the first pick in the comp pvp setup, used mostly as rez signet carriers with wells. Was the burning OP? Well adding burning to necromancer in my opinion was unnecessary, because they already gave us torment to cover our main dmg from condition bleed. Did it make the necromancer OP, I would still say no, necro stacking was what made it over the top imho.

Necromancer, as anet said, is an attrition class and it was made to outlast opponent. Yet the reality is different – necromancer lacks stability, regeneration and all the other boons that make a class truly an attrition one. Devs told us that DS is there to compensate these lacks, because it is like a third weapon set, since previous to the nerf you could swap weapons in it, and it has its own HP bar, so you can outlast someone a bit longer. So overall necromancers did not need a buff in damage it needed it in mobility, boon generating, etc.

After the mistake of adding unnecessary fire to necromancer devs instead of doing something with it started changing everything else, so now you would have to run this spec. For example:
- They added a CD to LF generation that was not that easy without the nerf especially at the beginning of the match
- Removed DS protecting our hp from big hits, so now class mechanic is just laughable since it no longer soaks up dmg and no longer allows for weapon swap which was its main purpose.
- Pushed the greater marks further into a tree, thus making builds even more generic.

It looks like devs are thinking that now everyone is running one spec so nerfing it would make necromancer more “balanced”. Well its not true, because not everyone likes to run a generic build that is fotm, but maybe its their idea to force players in pvp to use only 1 build per class, thus making it as easy to balance as possible…

P.S. I have to mention this: I feel sorry for a player named Nemesis, too bad your suggestions fell on deaf ears and blind eyes of anet devs.

TL; DR; IMO anet balancing team:

Allie Murdock

#26 - July 23, 2013, 4:30 p.m.

I’m confused. The title says “State of necromancer after the patch,” yet this was posted before the patch even went live.

Did you have feedback now that you have been playing after the patch, or was this post just made for theory crafting?

JonathanSharp

#27 - July 23, 2013, 4:58 p.m.

People keep asking for mobility on the Necro, and again, by design, this is something we’re going to keep to a minimum. We will continue to make sure they get more attrition tools (Deathshroud is a main point here), the ability to manipulate boons/conditions, and the ability to control opponents.

The current patch is an attempt to do small “shavings” to bring the class into line with these goals, in the same way we tried to “shave” the Ele numerous times, rather than “nerfing it from orbit”. Are all Ele specs equally viable in all game types? No. Is this ok? Yes. Staff can see play in one game type while D/D or S/D see play in others. As we’ve said, we’ll split skills/weapons more and more in the variuos game types, but each time we split a skill, it gives us more update work down the road. We have to be very prudent when we split skills.

Same thing with the Necro. They have a few different viable builds in different types of content, and we’re trying to make sure they continue to see play in various roles spread throughout the various gametypes.

But seriously, OP, wait until you play the patch and THEN update this. I’d love to know what you think….but as Allie posted theorycrafting is pretty hard for us to make informed decisions with. Let us know how they feel in game.

With much love from Chinajoy,

Chap

JonathanSharp

#38 - July 23, 2013, 5:54 p.m.

We want all weapon sets to have their uses, but it’s not necessary that all weapon types be equally viable in all given scenarios. In Starcraft, League, any shooter, etc., it’s not expected that ALL units/weapons/heroes be equally strong in ALL scenarios.

As different game types demand different “tools” from the classes, it stands to reason that some “toolsets” will perform better than others in a given game type.

:)