Build talk:E/any Elemental Attunement Fire Magic

To what degree has the HM update actually buffed elemental damage? AegisDok 09:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Enemies seem to have like 20 less armor like the Massive Damage flux. casters have 60 ar, although that's how it always was? Meteor hits for printed damage against Shadow Monks with or without cracked armor.-- Relyk 13:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * SCing with different eles these last few days, it looks like +10 to 20% damage on hard foes and little change on squishies. ~100 elemental damage does ~20 more on rangers (~50 up to ~70 damage). Mesmers and necros still have the highest spikes, but at least now eles have pretty decent pressure with less recharge time Fianchetto 06:05, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Weaken Armor mainbar-worthy? Looks like plenty of time (esp. with Meteor (why's it here?)) to fit in 1s cast for +41% dmg. yea or nay? Fianchetto 22:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Optional is good enough and secondary should be kept open on a PvE hero if possible. Weaken Armor can be slotted virtually anywhere on your team. Meteor is there because it's good damage and the knockdown is useful, especially on balls. -- Toraen   confer  22:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Not that this is fun to use (12345-12345) but when everything goes boom with Rodgort's its always such a satisfaction. Amazing build. Chonsy Rulez   19:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

EA vs. SF?
seems like EA has about 80dps and SF 45dps? EA > SF?Illoyon 14:35, 9 January 2012 (UTC) from? Random Weird Guy 14:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Where are you getting the "EA has about 80dps"


 * Killing master of dmg.Illoyon 14:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Bearing in mind SF has nearby range that can be spammed every 3 seconds. The EA build has 2 skills with that range, one with 8 recharge and one with 15 recharge. Random Weird Guy 14:54, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It could also be argued that SF is stronger against higher AR targets, due to the constant 14 dps from burning, which isn't affected by armor. Random Weird Guy 14:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I got 70 dps with my cool new pve bar.

[build prof=E/W air=12+3+1 ene=12+1][Glyph of Elemental Power][Elemental Attunement][Conjure Lightning@17]["I Am the Strongest!"][Ebon Battle Standard of Honor][Shell Shock@17][Frenzy]["Dodge This!"][/build]


 * See how dps isn't everything? probably you meant to mention its AoE @ 70dps :) [[image:Chieftain Alex Sig.jpg|19px|link=User:Chieftain Alex]] Chieftain   Alex  15:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * That build looks awfully familiar... xD Random Weird Guy 15:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Attribute level for Fire is wrong
The skill effects of Fire Magic skills are all given for an attribute level of 18, according to description the level is 16 85.236.68.160 16:13, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * EA gives +2 fire --76.112.33.190 16:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

overrated/hype or not
Not having to take GoEP is a good reason to dual attune (mainly for Rodgort's)? How does EA compare to Mind Blast? Also is plain damage better than (more?) damage + utility (some people need to revote btw)? Fianchetto 04:41, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Mind Blast is a PvP build so I don't know why you brought that one up. Also you'll need to explain more if you want people to revote. -- Toraen   confer  08:00, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Mind Blast can also be used in pve if you really wanted an alternative to dual attuning. Fianchetto 18:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

EA is the very opposite of Mind Blast, as in MB you really need to watch your energy, while you don't do any active e management using EA other than watching out for strips. --Kgptzac 04:12, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * sure, different usage but same function. covering EA needs as much effort as targeting the non-eles with MB. and both are emanagement overkill, but people seem to like the easy way, so whatever. Fianchetto 04:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

AP vs Standard Elementalist Nukers
The single point from that discussion that was relevant to this build: should the player (general) tag be removed since players are more effective with AP as the elite? -- Toraen   confer  12:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * when did AP ele become great? and since when become single target dmg better than AoE? EA is much stronger than gimmick AP builds...especially for real players.Illoyon 13:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Summarized from moved discussion: AP can take AoE (earth or fire), and recharge it faster while also providing energy management. -- Toraen   confer  13:20, 14 January 2012 (UTC)


 * There will probably always be elementalist players running nukers in pve, and this is quite similar dps to Searing Flames albeit more interesting to run - might as well keep it tagged for players. (in pve a build being more effective != the build is run more frequently, i.e. there aren't really many AP nukers in pug groups) [[image:Chieftain Alex Sig.jpg|19px|link=User:Chieftain Alex]] Chieftain   Alex  13:24, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * EA could become meta at some point, because it's easy to run and works in most areas. Doesn't mean it's the best though. Random Weird Guy 15:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't lie to yourself, all meta builds are the best builds.-- Relyk 15:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Probably meta for heroes, but not humans. Although I personally prefer the Bsurge hero, but let's not derail the EA page again. Fianchetto 16:23, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Other Elements
Since EA theoretically should work on other elements... even though they are not as spammable as Fire... any thoughts?
 * if we are speaking theoretically, then earth might be acceptable, theres some like ebon hawk + stoning combo with churning earth might work, but its iffy. Dacookiemaster 01:00, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

12+1+x/9+1/9?
EA already outlasts its recharge and maxes out at +2 att. points, so wouldn't it be better to stick with the standard 3 attributes split as the default? Especially when it's tagged for heroes as well. Also means standard optionals like FB/SYG can be added to the list.90.196.101.248 14:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the whole build needs to be modified for use with heroes. -- Jai .  -  14:49, January 24 2012 (UTC)

Meta
This build is so good and used that should probably go in meta. The SF cant stand so much damage  Chonsy  Rulez   19:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Enchantment removal
Very strong build, really rip stuffs apart. But heroes seem to "forget" to recast attunements while still in a fight if they get removed in the process. Once energy is down it's hard to get it back up. GoLE seems to solve this issue, should be an optional. --Diwo 22:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As mentioned in two sections above, the build needs to be redone properly so it's more general and makes sense in terms of heroes' usage. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.196.101.253 (talk) at 03:11, 30 January 2012‎ (UTC).

Optionals
Tbh I wouldn't be running this with SoH, splinter or gdw. Chieftain Alex 18:58, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
 * energy problems? &#9823;Fianchetto [[Image:Mending.jpg|19px|link=User_talk:Fianchetto]] 19:50, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Lava Arrows
Could it be mainbarred in place of Meteor? I feel this build lacks of a spammable short-recharging skill and Lava Arrows has a little AoE effect (similar to Chain Lightning) with decent damage. --Aria Frost   11:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually should Flare be mainbarred for reasons described above, as it only trades the AoE damage for awesome spiking ability! --Master Elros 12:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It's always better than doing nothing while waiting for Fireball, RI & LF to recharge :) --Aria Frost  [[Image:Energy_Surge.jpg|19px]] 12:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * It would also take 'nuker' out of the name. You can always wand stuff Ritzysig1.jpg  Mugen  Ritzy  16:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ^See the second section. Cɥıǝɟʇɐıu Alǝx  16:54, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Since when wands are hitting three foes for 74 dmg? --Aria Frost  [[Image:Energy_Surge.jpg|19px]] 17:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Since when was 74 armor-respecting damage considered good damage? -- Jai .  -  17:36, May 21 2012 (UTC)
 * /tries to be more...helpful than the typical pvxer: a good guideline is that heroes should spend their off time contributing to team utility rather than dealing mediocre damage. for the player version, echo RI is pretty strong and spammy but the recharge hurts when AoS doesn't trigger. but nobody's stopping you from using whatever you want... &#9823;Fianchetto [[Image:Mending.jpg|19px|link=User_talk:Fianchetto]] 18:36, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The search for the best ele hero
Since I don't have a reddit account I'll do it here. This one actually surprised me a lot when I tested it a while back. As usual, I go into the City of Tor'qua NM because I find it to be a very good and balanced place to test stuff (okay, argument can be made for the QZ uptime there). First it was for testing SF eles (2 of them because they just have nice synergy with eachother that can might be an important thing) and my Invoke ele, which I consider to be the best ele hero build. Was not really surprised that SF was clearly inferior (heroes just dont seem to spam it as often as you'd like, even when they have enough energy to do so). Then I went in with 2 of these EA fire ele builds, and I was pretty surprised that they could go toe to toe with my air ele, as long as their enchant doesn't get removed too often (City has a balanced amount of enchant removal imo), without EA their energy and damage is a bit too bad. I have noticed 1 problem with the current build on here: the hero can easily get his entire energy bar on Overcast, which is a big issue for obvious reasons. I believe the solution here is to take only 1 overcast skill, but I haven't really tested it out. I do think that some improvement is possible here: mainbar Liquid Flame seems to be a good idea, maybe fireball too and maybe go 12 fire 10/11 air and rest in energy storage so you can take teinai's wind (altho I havent really tested these that much). The energy problems I see mentioned here in the discussions I did not notice, but that might be due to me running a Bip (altho I did test in city of torqua, so the QZ would compensate for that). Tl;dr: EA > SF, EA seems to be equal to the air hero as long as there isn't too much ench removal. ZStepmother (talk) 17:47, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The main issue I saw when testing this build was that the hero would frequently wait way too long to renew elemental attunement mid-combat when it had run out, resulting in a quick loss of the entire energy. Seemed to be worse than with the normal attunements, but that might've been just bad luck on my side. But who plays without BiP anyway? Did you test star burst heroes aswell? I was pretty happy with their performance. Two of them with godspeed/fb also help a lot with movement. Pick depending on your team setup. --Krschkr (talk) 17:58, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Strange ratings
How come 4 of the ratings have identical comments? (Sjan12192, Shadow12776, Aludeni, Dacookiemaster) -- kazerniel (talk) 19:48, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * If the comment is valid, which in this case it is, then it doesn't matter if the comment is a repeat or not. They've just copy-pasted each others ratings.
 * Whether they actually individually tested the builds or not is another matter entirely, but then testing builds was never an actual requirement to rate them. After a number of years of playing GW you just get a feel for how a build will perform by eye-balling it. - Chieftain Alex (talk) 23:02, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't completely agree that you can tell whether a build works just by looking at it. The important thing, after all, is how a build works in practice and not in the always a bit too short theory.
 * A couple of PvX members used to copy the wording of other users' votes. While that is legitimate it means that sometimes, if a build is changed, a lot of votes get invalidated at once. That's the price people pay for being lazy. --Krschkr (talk) 13:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Invalid Reasoning in Votes
After reviewing the ratings, I think the below vote should probably be removed because "votes that are entirely based on a false premise, flagrantly misrepresent a build's ability or demonstrate a minimal understanding of in-game mechanics are considered invalid."

See below:

Infin1158's rating from April 2012 states that "Fireball requires line of sight" (irrelevant because Fireball was replaced by Liquid Flame, which does not suffer from LoS) and incorrectly states that "Mob DPS in HM is also less than SF counterpart," which testing has shown is objectively incorrect barring multiple copies of SF.

Anyway, just think some attention should be given to reasoning for some votes.--Devuu ((Yuko Asakura [PhD]))  15:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)15:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I also think it might also merit consideration that one of the most recent votes claims that players running this build "need to bring Aura of Restoration, too, which forces you to toss some of the skills already in the main bar," which is of course wrong (as are the quips about not being able to use PvE skills; EBSoH, EBSoW and AOS are all great with Ele Attune). I would say that comes close to violating the standard of "flagrantly misrepresent[ing] a build's ability" but the rest of his reasoning is OK if based on his personal experience.--Devuu  ((Yuko Asakura [PhD]))  15:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)15:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * A lot of builds have votes from 2012 that don't make sense. I don't know if it's correct to remove all those votes, but I do think that we'll get a better represenation of what is actually great/good/bad if some of them are removed.
 * Have to agree about the recent vote (2 May 2020).
 * Damage output weak compared to other profession - This is just simply not true. This build can easily compete with the top builds of some other professions.
 * The talk about PvE skills doesn't make sense. You don't need to take pve skills to make a good build. You bring them to fill up your bar, or if they have nice synergy. I don't have any problems with my energy when I run Honor (which I would recommend)
 * You definitely don't need Aura
 * "For a party with 7 heroes it is also not great, but neither are any alternatives. Still, AP is properly the better choice." - Simply not true.
 * The reasoning for this vote is 100% incorrect. ZStepmother (talk) 09:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm cautious with removing votes, as votes (and voters) are a rare resource and the removal of votes might easily end up to be vote policing and the persecution of votes based on different experiences or opinions than one's own. The build master policy has been put to rest for good reasons. There's too much room for abuse and too few to gain. I don't want to reintroduce it through the backdoor by removing the many votes that I disagree with. Old votes can be removed when a build page is changed in a way that invalidates them. I don't personally see that given for the vote you're quoting. The fireball note is invalidated, but not the main point of the vote, which is single target perfomance and the comparison with another build. While there seems to be some level of misrepresentation, it does not appear to be sufficiently strong to justify the removal of the vote. --Krschkr (talk) 13:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I understand your point and I sympathize with your position as a moderator. However, I would offer this counterpoint--you must administrate the rules . . . For example, if you look at User:Desertrosedr's rating for Assassin's Promise, that person states "No 5 rating as E/Mo Ether Renewal is even better," which again points to invalid reasoning. Per Wiki Guidelines, the rating for AP should be 5, as E/Mo ER does not have the "same purpose" as AP.  See below: "A build that works but is clearly inferior to another build should get a lower rating than this other build. . . . [However] [o]nly builds that serve the same purpose may be compared in that way.  As such, how can his voting of AP be valid if his comparison point is a build that does not "serve the same purpose"? By wiki guideline his vote ought to be revised to a 5.  To ZStepmother I suppose your best bet is to vote on Ele Attune and the other builds and give it the rating it rightfully deserves.--Devuu  ((Yuko Asakura [PhD]))  19:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Scrutinizing votes that disagree with the the rating you think a build deserves looks a lot like a form of vote balancing to me. Most of the 5-5 votes are just copypasta or don't even have a good reasoning, like "great damage, good energy management. casting attunements can be annoying i think, but its just great." and "Big damage, low maintenance, room for utility. Great, great build". You could turn the whole build into water magic and those votes would be "fine", because they make no specific claims about the build, and an empty skill bar also has "room for utility". -- DANDY ^_^ -- 23:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Believe me, if it were up to me the majority of old votes, including 5/5s with nearly zero reasoning would be gone. However, copy-pasta is apparently a-ok as long as the underlying "reasoning" is valid. No where do the rules stipulate that the review has to be fulsome or thought out; however, it does state that a person can't merely compare it against another build that serves a different purpose.  If I said Ele Attune (or AP, as the guy I am referencing did) was trash because it can't compete with an ST rit, that vote should be revised or removed. Ultimately even if a vote is shitty or not thought out, but is still based on correct reasoning (i.e., big damage) that is fine, even though it is unsatisfying. But if a vote is incorrect per website policy, that is a different story, I would think. Ultimately comes down to discretion for mods, but I would think flagging it is necessary.--Devuu  ((Yuko Asakura [PhD]))  00:01, 14 May 2020 (UTC)00:01, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Desertrosedr hasn't chimed in and is probably not aware of this conversation. Given that their vote was recent, it is generally best to first contact them (on their profile/talk) to politely discuss the points of their vote you disagree with. This may result in them revising the vote on their own, or at least providing better insight into their reasoning for the admins. Jumping right to "admins remove this vote" is a large part of the problems PvX of the past faced with vote removals. The removal of the build master role coincided with a directive to encourage/direct users to attempt resolution without admin intervention first, like with any other wiki content issue. Auron and Phenaxkian (our active bureaucrats at the time) stated in no uncertain terms that admins would be at most impartial mediators in such disputes (ie. make sure discussion stays civil, carry out vote removal only if said discussion unambiguously showed that it was necessary).

Infin11585 is probably not coming back, so removing their vote would be somewhat unfair unless the Fireball portion of the vote is definitively what's dragging their score down. It'd probably have been enough for some past admins to remove even after the BM role removal, but they aren't here and I'm not admin anymore. -Toraen (talk) 12:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed User:Desertrosedr's vote on the assassin's promise build. While I find the E/Mo comment questionable and agree that it does not provide a proper basis to rate the assassin's promise build the 4/5 rating has been explained sufficiently throughout the rest of the vote. Giving a build 4 in effectiveness when it's considered to be a 3.5 build with heroes and 4.5 build with players is the expected result. In fact, if the user had given the build a 5 in effectiveness it wouldn't have been in line with the reasoning throughout his vote. The incriminated part of the vote does not invalidate it. --Krschkr (talk) 15:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think Devuu also disagrees with the 3/5 rating on this build, but regardless Desertrosedr should be contacted if their votes are being disputed. They are entitled to the opportunity to defend their votes and perhaps Devuu and Desertrosedr can come to an agreement on these builds (or just agree to disagree, that's a valid outcome too). Desertrosedr can even remove the E/Mo comment from that rating themselves once made aware that it's not a valid basis for comparison. -Toraen (talk) 15:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Ultimately, even if I disagree with votes, as long as the reasoning is fine I will accept them. I understand there will always been a huge amount of polarity on the efficacy of a standard nuker, and air spike/nuke and an AP bar. People simply can't seem to agree which is best, and they will argue. I think I am one of those rare people who thinks both builds are excellent, and deserve 5 on effectiveness at a minimum, which I have personally tested in high pressure environments (see, e.g., User:Devuu/Elementalist_Damage_Project). I have also performed tests with Starburster and Invoke and found them pretty good too (Invoke great, Starburster OK but clunky) (test results will be uploaded over weekend). But nonetheless, if a person has valid reasoning I can live with a vote that disagrees heavily with mine--even if its a 1/1. If we have concluded that the E/Mo comment/reference is not a point to detract the vote, then by all means, let it stand.--Devuu  ((Yuko Asakura [PhD]))  22:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)20:24, 15 May 2020 (UTC)