It seems that the second build doesn't make a lot of sense with Sacrifice in it. Aren't you trying to keep your pets alive and 'tanking' as much as possible? When would you use Sac?
It seems that the second build doesn't make a lot of sense with Sacrifice in it. Aren't you trying to keep your pets alive and 'tanking' as much as possible? When would you use Sac?
What's so bad about having pets than can do both? Using Life Link and Sacrifice means that he can quickly choose between being defensive or offensive.
In the first build, using Vision Quest and having 2 of the 4 cooldown skills as your pets seems pointless. If they're already out and alive, what is the point in wasting the mana to resummon them just to gain the mana regen benefit? Vision Quest needs more synergy with the longer cooldown skills like Big Bad Voodoo and Fetish Army.
Now, the second build is very close to what I had in mind. I'd personally sub in something else for sacrifice - like Firebomb, Acid Cloud, or even Locust Swarm. When I first saw in it videos, Grasp of the Dead looked really useless. But, after using it in the beta, it drains enemies like a beast. Granted that's Lvl 13 versus lower level mobs, but it's awesome. Fights would be Grasp (for the slow) -> Soul Harvest while your pets move in -> Bombard enemies with Firebomb/Acid Cloud/Locust -> finish off stragglers with Spirit Barrage to get back some mana and move on.
Firebomb is weak/cost a little too much.
Acid Cloud costs way too much.
Locust is short ranged/short lived/weak/costs too much.
very true. the WD skills are unbalanced because some are just plain better then others based on dmg/range/mana cost. firebats is by far the best because it can do so much dmg with being as cheap as poison dart. corpse spiders is the best range ability because it does so much dmg and you can aim it very well and also isnt too expensive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
Well, a few things are hard to judge right now. First, since some skills aren't in the beta, it's hard to judge their actual usefulness. If the spread from Locust Swarm turns out to be incredible, for example, then it may be the most efficient Physical Realm for the mana/dmg. Second, it's difficult to compare spells with different types of casting - Firebats being channeled, Firebomb being a single cast. That said, I'm not seeing how Fire Bomb is "weak/cost a little too much." Compared to Firebats (which is also relatively short-ranged), Firebomb has a slightly higher damage to mana ratio. It is also a full AOE as compared to only enemies in front of you. I'm not saying Firebats isn't useful (because it is super awesome to use), but in no way is Firebomb weak for its cost.
Well, a few things are hard to judge right now. First, since some skills aren't in the beta, it's hard to judge their actual usefulness. If the spread from Locust Swarm turns out to be incredible, for example, then it may be the most efficient Physical Realm for the mana/dmg. Second, it's difficult to compare spells with different types of casting - Firebats being channeled, Firebomb being a single cast. That said, I'm not seeing how Fire Bomb is "weak/cost a little too much." Compared to Firebats (which is also relatively short-ranged), Firebomb has a slightly higher damage to mana ratio. It is also a full AOE as compared to only enemies in front of you. I'm not saying Firebats isn't useful (because it is super awesome to use), but in no way is Firebomb weak for its cost.
Conflagration does not deal a combined 202% fire damage to all enemies within a 28 yard radius (which is still weaker than Firebats). It actually deals 202% (155+47) to enemies within the original 8 yards and 47% damage to enemies within 20 (20+8) yards.
Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is fact, not opinion.
Well, a few things are hard to judge right now. First, since some skills aren't in the beta, it's hard to judge their actual usefulness. If the spread from Locust Swarm turns out to be incredible, for example, then it may be the most efficient Physical Realm for the mana/dmg. Second, it's difficult to compare spells with different types of casting - Firebats being channeled, Firebomb being a single cast. That said, I'm not seeing how Fire Bomb is "weak/cost a little too much." Compared to Firebats (which is also relatively short-ranged), Firebomb has a slightly higher damage to mana ratio. It is also a full AOE as compared to only enemies in front of you. I'm not saying Firebats isn't useful (because it is super awesome to use), but in no way is Firebomb weak for its cost.
Conflagration does not deal a combined 202% fire damage to all enemies within a 28 yard radius (which is still weaker than Firebats). It actually deals 202% (155+47) to enemies within the original 8 yards and 47% damage to enemies within 20 (20+8) yards.
Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is fact, not opinion.
Well, a few things are hard to judge right now. First, since some skills aren't in the beta, it's hard to judge their actual usefulness. If the spread from Locust Swarm turns out to be incredible, for example, then it may be the most efficient Physical Realm for the mana/dmg. Second, it's difficult to compare spells with different types of casting - Firebats being channeled, Firebomb being a single cast. That said, I'm not seeing how Fire Bomb is "weak/cost a little too much." Compared to Firebats (which is also relatively short-ranged), Firebomb has a slightly higher damage to mana ratio. It is also a full AOE as compared to only enemies in front of you. I'm not saying Firebats isn't useful (because it is super awesome to use), but in no way is Firebomb weak for its cost.
Conflagration does not deal a combined 202% fire damage to all enemies within a 28 yard radius (which is still weaker than Firebats). It actually deals 202% (155+47) to enemies within the original 8 yards and 47% damage to enemies within 20 (20+8) yards.
Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is fact, not opinion.
First of all, calm down. Second, I don't believe I even mentioned runes at all. Third, you said Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is incorrect - Firebomb does indeed cost more mana than Firebats (443 > 295), but Firebomb does MORE damage than Firebats (155% > 100%) per activation. Again, this is difficult to compare since Firebats is a channeled spell and Firebomb is a single cast, but Firebomb has a higher base damage per mana ratio than Firebats. Firebomb does .3499 damage for every point of mana spent; Firebats does .3390. That is a fact. Whether it's a miniscule difference or not, Firebomb is a more efficient spell as far as mathematics goes. In fact, most spells seem to be balanced this way and do a specified amount of damage per mana spent that is in line with increasing cost. If a spell costs ALL your resource, but does 10000% damage, you'd use the shit out of it regardless of the situation. The fact that a spell costs more mana is irrelevant without taking other factors under consideration (again, in most cases). Also, as a side note regarding the range - all numbers and runes aside, you can hit enemies farther away and on different levels with Firebomb - something that will undoubtedly come into play in later difficulties. Last, I said Firebats is still an awesome spell (with arguably MUCH better runes), but each has its advantages.
First of all, calm down. Second, I don't believe I even mentioned runes at all. Third, you said Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is incorrect - Firebomb does indeed cost more mana than Firebats (443 > 295), but Firebomb does MORE damage than Firebats (155% > 100%) per activation. Again, this is difficult to compare since Firebats is a channeled spell and Firebomb is a single cast, but Firebomb has a higher base damage per mana ratio than Firebats. Firebomb does .3499 damage for every point of mana spent; Firebats does .3390. That is a fact. Whether it's a miniscule difference or not, Firebomb is a more efficient spell as far as mathematics goes. In fact, most spells seem to be balanced this way and do a specified amount of damage per mana spent that is in line with increasing cost. If a spell costs ALL your resource, but does 10000% damage, you'd use the shit out of it regardless of the situation. The fact that a spell costs more mana is irrelevant without taking other factors under consideration (again, in most cases). Also, as a side note regarding the range - all numbers and runes aside, you can hit enemies farther away and on different levels with Firebomb - something that will undoubtedly come into play in later difficulties. Last, I said Firebats is still an awesome spell (with arguably MUCH better runes), but each has its advantages.
firebats has a bigger radius and is cheaper so you can channel it to do more damage then firebomb because firebomb is a slow cast. in the time that you cast 2 firebombs firebats has already done 4 seconds worth of damage. so firebats still wins
also firebats can be runed for WAY more damage. and then trumps firebomb by a long shot
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"once the pretty hardcore gamers we had testing inferno found it fairly difficult, we then we doubled it" -trolololol jay wilson
The mass max summoner - enemies are outnumbered, can summon dozens of zombies to fight together with your pets, and mana will not be a problem. http://us.battle.net...kbhY!XgY!bcZYZZ
The mass max summoner - enemies are outnumbered, can summon dozens of zombies to fight together with your pets, and mana will not be a problem. http://us.battle.net...kbhY!XgY!bcZYZZ
First of all, calm down. Second, I don't believe I even mentioned runes at all. Third, you said Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is incorrect - Firebomb does indeed cost more mana than Firebats (443 > 295), but Firebomb does MORE damage than Firebats (155% > 100%) per activation. Again, this is difficult to compare since Firebats is a channeled spell and Firebomb is a single cast, but Firebomb has a higher base damage per mana ratio than Firebats. Firebomb does .3499 damage for every point of mana spent; Firebats does .3390. That is a fact. Whether it's a miniscule difference or not, Firebomb is a more efficient spell as far as mathematics goes. In fact, most spells seem to be balanced this way and do a specified amount of damage per mana spent that is in line with increasing cost. If a spell costs ALL your resource, but does 10000% damage, you'd use the shit out of it regardless of the situation. The fact that a spell costs more mana is irrelevant without taking other factors under consideration (again, in most cases). Also, as a side note regarding the range - all numbers and runes aside, you can hit enemies farther away and on different levels with Firebomb - something that will undoubtedly come into play in later difficulties. Last, I said Firebats is still an awesome spell (with arguably MUCH better runes), but each has its advantages.
Too true. Firebats has lower mana usage as well as lower damage than Firebomb. It's quite clear based upon their respective tooltips, so to disagree would be refuting in-game data. It comes closer with Vermin, but still falls short. Considering the other options for Passive Skills, Vermin is a poor choice. I doubt we'll be able to just stand in one spot for multiple seconds while the bats fly. In reality, you'll see a second or two at most per usage before you need to move. If Nightmare and beyond is as hard as they say, Firebats will be nonexistent in any decent build.
Despite the higher mana cost, the bombs still allow us to be mobile and do serious damage. It's not something we'll be spamming as our main spell, but it'll easily be our best aoe.
I don't believe I even mentioned runes at all. Third, you said Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is incorrect - Firebomb does indeed cost more mana than Firebats (443 > 295), but Firebomb does MORE damage than Firebats (155% > 100%) per activation.
1. My bad if I came across as being aggressive.
2. I.....why the hell would anybody be using Firebats without a rune? I mean...no sh*t Firebomb does more damage than unruned Firebats, but nobody is going to be using any skills that are unruned.
I'm actually kind of surprised that you're basing a skill's usefulness on its unruned counterpart. *cough* fail
The mass max summoner - enemies are outnumbered, can summon dozens of zombies to fight together with your pets, and mana will not be a problem. http://us.battle.net...kbhY!XgY!bcZYZZ
You have DPS problem, there is only one spell that dont cost mana and it's petty weak. Low dmg and no aoe dmg.
I give up on Soul harvest becasue WD may have 1000-2000 INT at lvl60, 127 boost/each emeny and very small area effect will make this spell pretty useless.
My idea is to summon a group of zombies from the WOZ and a pack of slimes from the acid cloud, and you just sit back and watching zombie VS monster movie then pick the loot. Sounds fun to me.
And I see that you want to make a DEF WD, I have ideas for you.
Here is a build base on your thought, I call it " Roach " build.
The mass max summoner - enemies are outnumbered, can summon dozens of zombies to fight together with your pets, and mana will not be a problem. http://us.battle.net...kbhY!XgY!bcZYZZ
You have DPS problem, there is only one spell that dont cost mana and it's petty weak. Low dmg and no aoe dmg.
I give up on Soul harvest becasue WD may have 1000-2000 INT at lvl60, 127 boost/each emeny and very small area effect will make this spell pretty useless.
My idea is to summon a group of zombies from the WOZ and a pack of slimes from the acid cloud, and you just sit back and watching zombie VS monster movie then pick the loot. Sounds fun to me.
And I see that you want to make a DEF WD, I have ideas for you.
Here is a build base on your thought, I call it " Roach " build.
66.4% dmg reduction with 0% risistance gears
73.2% dmg reduction with 20% risistance gears
83.2% dmg reduction with 50% risistance gears
and what? heal 13% HP each cast by fetish saman.
2 mana reg by casting SB , cast 1-2 swarm every 10 sec.
Not even gonna lie, I like the idea of using hex 4 healz.
I also only partially agree with you regarding the usefulness of Soul Harvest. I don't think it's going to very amazing considering the average health of players @ 60 (65,000hp). I guess I'm somewhat on the fence about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
http://us.battle.net...VbhY!ZgY!cYYYZZ
http://us.battle.net...TbhY!Wae!cbaYZZ
one focus on magic and another on pyhsical, none of them have mana problems.
In progress: Barbarian, WD
What's so bad about having pets than can do both? Using Life Link and Sacrifice means that he can quickly choose between being defensive or offensive.
Now, the second build is very close to what I had in mind. I'd personally sub in something else for sacrifice - like Firebomb, Acid Cloud, or even Locust Swarm. When I first saw in it videos, Grasp of the Dead looked really useless. But, after using it in the beta, it drains enemies like a beast. Granted that's Lvl 13 versus lower level mobs, but it's awesome. Fights would be Grasp (for the slow) -> Soul Harvest while your pets move in -> Bombard enemies with Firebomb/Acid Cloud/Locust -> finish off stragglers with Spirit Barrage to get back some mana and move on.
Firebomb is weak/cost a little too much.
Acid Cloud costs way too much.
Locust is short ranged/short lived/weak/costs too much.
very true. the WD skills are unbalanced because some are just plain better then others based on dmg/range/mana cost. firebats is by far the best because it can do so much dmg with being as cheap as poison dart. corpse spiders is the best range ability because it does so much dmg and you can aim it very well and also isnt too expensive.
Wanna know something really funny?
http://us.battle.net...tch-doctor#f!!Z
Read the tool tip closely.
Conflagration does not deal a combined 202% fire damage to all enemies within a 28 yard radius (which is still weaker than Firebats). It actually deals 202% (155+47) to enemies within the original 8 yards and 47% damage to enemies within 20 (20+8) yards.
Firebomb does less damage and costs more mana than Firebats. That is fact, not opinion.
As for Firebomb having more range? http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/witch-doctor#V!!Z
yeaaap. firebats pwns groups and spiders pwn champions/bosses. firebomb is just fail
....pwnz everything ---> http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/witch-doctor#Z!!Y
oooo. that looks interesting. id like to see a video of that
firebats has a bigger radius and is cheaper so you can channel it to do more damage then firebomb because firebomb is a slow cast. in the time that you cast 2 firebombs firebats has already done 4 seconds worth of damage. so firebats still wins
also firebats can be runed for WAY more damage. and then trumps firebomb by a long shot
At lvl1 you reg 60mana/sec, it means you have infinite mana to cast spells.
With the lvl increased, WD have 1625 mana at lvl30 and 3250 mana at lvl60, the mana reg becomes a serious problem.
Here is my build for lvl 1-20:
kill fast only- highest DPS build which makes easy quick exp.
http://us.battle.net...TbhY!ecW!ZYaYZZ
Here is my build for lvl 20-60:
The mass max summoner - enemies are outnumbered, can summon dozens of zombies to fight together with your pets, and mana will not be a problem.
http://us.battle.net...kbhY!XgY!bcZYZZ
*cough* http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/witch-doctor#iZYghb!aXW!bYZcaY <---better than yours
Too true. Firebats has lower mana usage as well as lower damage than Firebomb. It's quite clear based upon their respective tooltips, so to disagree would be refuting in-game data. It comes closer with Vermin, but still falls short. Considering the other options for Passive Skills, Vermin is a poor choice. I doubt we'll be able to just stand in one spot for multiple seconds while the bats fly. In reality, you'll see a second or two at most per usage before you need to move. If Nightmare and beyond is as hard as they say, Firebats will be nonexistent in any decent build.
Despite the higher mana cost, the bombs still allow us to be mobile and do serious damage. It's not something we'll be spamming as our main spell, but it'll easily be our best aoe.
1. My bad if I came across as being aggressive.
2. I.....why the hell would anybody be using Firebats without a rune? I mean...no sh*t Firebomb does more damage than unruned Firebats, but nobody is going to be using any skills that are unruned.
I'm actually kind of surprised that you're basing a skill's usefulness on its unruned counterpart. *cough* fail
Better? I cant see it.
You have DPS problem, there is only one spell that dont cost mana and it's petty weak. Low dmg and no aoe dmg.
I give up on Soul harvest becasue WD may have 1000-2000 INT at lvl60, 127 boost/each emeny and very small area effect will make this spell pretty useless.
My idea is to summon a group of zombies from the WOZ and a pack of slimes from the acid cloud, and you just sit back and watching zombie VS monster movie then pick the loot. Sounds fun to me.
And I see that you want to make a DEF WD, I have ideas for you.
Here is a build base on your thought, I call it " Roach " build.
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/calculator/witch-doctor#diSbTh!Wad!bbcYac
1 very good dmg reduction and healing skills
66.4% dmg reduction with 0% risistance gears
73.2% dmg reduction with 20% risistance gears
83.2% dmg reduction with 50% risistance gears
and what? heal 13% HP each cast by fetish saman.
2 mana reg by casting SB , cast 1-2 swarm every 10 sec.
Not even gonna lie, I like the idea of using hex 4 healz.
I also only partially agree with you regarding the usefulness of Soul Harvest. I don't think it's going to very amazing considering the average health of players @ 60 (65,000hp). I guess I'm somewhat on the fence about it.