Archive talk:Rt/N Explosive Growth Minion Bomber

Archive 1

Trashed
It is terribly ineffective and has a rating of 2.5, and it is therefore trashed. YuriZahard 09:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Builds are rated after 5 votes, there are now only four. I'll add a vote now though. Dzjudz sig.pngtalk 11:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Even with a perfect 5 it would've been trashed. And fucking well deserved too IMO. People have tried putting it in archive like a hundred times for good reasons but it kept getting reverted back constantly with no good reasons attached. It's at least a solid 3 years past its expiration date YuriZahard 12:28, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Should still be in archive and not unarchived.
See User:Malokai92/Guide Index/analyze. Although armor has been lowered slightly, the increased damage off Putrid Bile, Death Nova, and minions of a higher level will still outdamage the AoE caused by Explosive Growth. Chieftain  Alex  01:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That comparison basically says (Relyk correct me if I'm misinterpreting)
 * "necro's minions are harder to kill" - and thus bomb with
 * "necro's Death Nova does 20 dmg more and Putrid Bile 16 dmg more, which is more than Explosive Growth" - let's be fair and say all skills hit 5 foes (which rarely happens with DN's range but just humor me here). So necro does 180 more (DN 100, PB 80). Rit does 680 more with EG, considering armor let's say 340 worst case scenario. Yikes...
 * "necro's 2nd prof is flexible" - his best point. MM is usually N/Mo anyway, but N/Rt spec 10 splinter/rift is also nice. I absolutely agree with you that this Rt/N bar doesn't do much besides meatwalling; however, there are some a rit primary might also do. Fianchetto 04:26, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The harder to kill comes into play for meatwalling, minions getting themselves killed is the same no matter their health. The update makes the autoattack damage slightly more effective for higher spec not that anyone cares. There's other stuff like: enchantment removal problems, access to soul reaping skills especially IV, higher minion count (which only matters for aotl), infinite energy, runes for blood and curses, and not using rit hero slot. As for the putrid bile and explosive growth thing, both already have putrid bile. The point was the advantages rit offers over just using necro primary. When you get more damage just for being necro primary, you're going to make a really hard argument that the conditional, armor-respecting damage that only hits up to 5, with the condition of needing dead foes on a profession that can't manage energy nearly as easily, especially with it's disadvantages with the actual minions. The only reason for using this is the fun of explosive growth+aura of the lich after the update.-- Relyk 04:57, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sure, soul reaping has IV, spawning power has ST (which also includes usual rit hero stuff and helps with energy, but Rt/N minions are free anyway). Fixing the rit 2ndary in effect frees up the necro's Death spec (for IV resto, smite, nuke, etc.), unless you want double minions and necro's Death Nova. And isn't the whole point that you get more damage for not being necro primary? EG hits 10, not 5, and the nearby range is usually not a problem. Dead foes is a pretty good condition (necro needs corpses as much as rit does). Fianchetto 05:25, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Fuck semantics, it hits 5 enemy twice, not 10 enemies. ST is useless since you can't spec into other attributes. I believe I said the point of rit primary was to get more damage? I followed with the fact that justifying the extra damage is difficult.-- Relyk 08:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * (Who knows if it preferentially hits the same 5 foes.) Yes you can spec enough into, 3-attribute specs are everywhere. I thought you said "you get more damage just for being necro primary." Your best point (at least, the one that most influences the team dynamic) was that Rt/N is inflexible, with which I agree; however, rit heroes are mainly for SoS, SoGM, or ST, and the hybrid bar has plenty of room for all three. You seem like one of the most reasonable pxvers I've debated with, so I'll just attribute this confused discussion to the time of night. I'm off to sleep now. Fianchetto 09:39, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You get Masochism and runes on necro, which you lose when you switch to rit primary. Using Explosive Growth better be worth the loss in damage. For zergling build, the attribute split just means low spec spirits and gimmicky minion bombing, where you can't use defensive spirits at all. That discussion is irrelevant to this build however. You are not going to use ST with this.-- Relyk 09:52, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Generally, it is the lack of need of many minion masters that causes Necros to rule out rits if one MM is needed, because rits are better in SoSing and STing. Besides, Necro MMs have their very good energy and open secondary prof (which usually becomes /Mo for prots) Shadow Honor The Elementalists! 09:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relyk, this whole time I can't make out whether you believe rit or necro can damage more. I think you switched around at least 3 times, can we please clarify your exact position before continuing? Shadow, most areas have ample corpses for 2 MMs, and most setups with MM prot + SoGM achieve a net gain if they fit in some minions on the SoGM, which is very easy to do. (Btw this also solves most of the energy and damage issues because the necro will be doing all the Death Novas). Please don't confuse my support of the hybrid for support of this page's minion-only function. Fianchetto 15:53, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The rit does potentially more damage but it's still complete shit.-- Relyk 16:01, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Eloquent and convincing. Archive this and trash/vet the hybrid? I'm tired of people arguing with me as if I supported this in the first place. Fianchetto 16:07, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If you weren't supporting it, what were you arguing for?-- Relyk 16:14, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Fianchetto 16:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You used the unarchiving discussion on this build to support a random crap build in testing? k...-- Relyk 18:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * And to support its archival. I mean, what's there to really discuss besides "dedicated MMs are bad?" I'm sorry you didn't notice my purpose earlier. Fianchetto 19:38, 14 January 2012 (UTC)