User talk:Isis In De Nile/buildarchive/Build:N/any IV Transfusion

Rate-a-Build
Please test and vote on new builds

Tested (favored):
 * Big, sloppy, wet kiss to the build author. Krowman 16:40, 2 December 2006 (CST)
 * 1) Eww. No kiss from me, but similar appreciation. --Azaya 21:03, 7 December 2006 (CST)
 * 2) Earned a few glad points with this build. Well Done.--RA sim 20:03, 9 December 2006 (CST)
 * 3) Earned a glad point with this last night and enjoy the build, thanks. -- BrianG 12:36, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * Just wanted to add that this is the only build that has allowed me to continue for 3-4 matches in TA without a monk after hitting 10 wins. -- BrianG 20:49, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * 1) My new blood necro build,14 Victorys with a RA team and no healer, with only slight personal varitions.-- Sefre [[image:Prepared_Shot.jpg|24px|]] 16:36, 20 December 2006 (CST)
 * 2) I like it. Creative use of a new elite to instill heavy degeneration. NightAngel 19:39, 26 December 2006 (CST)
 * 3) omg i love this build i played ra 6 times i never got that far ^^ (since i dont have factions i cant use the power and i still do good ) can you please tell me another build just like this one with same elite but with no faction skills cuz i cant use them ( i use blood renewal i like that better than blood bond cuz if you use it on monks they can heal the warriors that need the help )tell me a power from night fall or proph that i can replace Lifebane Strike with and im good &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Inferno (talk • contribs) 12:14, January 5 2007 (CST).
 * Um, Blood Bond is a pretty big part of the build. Blood Renewal can't be cast on monks or warriors, it's a self-enchant. Not too sure about 'the power' you mentioned. Maybe take Blood of the Aggressor or Vampiric Gaze, though neither will be quite as effective as LS. As for Blood Bond, not too sure what you can do about that. Maybe see ? -[[Image:Spiked Eggnog.jpg|19px]] Krowman [[Image:Spiked Eggnog.jpg|19px]] 18:05, 6 January 2007 (CST)
 * 1) w/e i think this build is quite good. the N/D should probably be put as the primary build. blood renewal + mystic regen is great, a self imposed +12 regen. and blood bond w/ awaken the blood is good too. -3 on you is defintely worth +7 on an ally. i used well of blood as well and that worked wonders
 * 2) whoa this build is good i replaced blood bond with blood ritual and it works grea i usually cast it on my monks and eles i favor this build got 2 glad points with it

Unfavored:
 * 1) You got reaper's mark and signet of lost souls, but the rest of your skill selections tend to be poorly thought out at best. -Warskull 12:03, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * ^^You don't seem to explain yourself. The 4 tested seeem to agree that this works, and does the job it tends to do well. It applies massive pressure on an opposing team, with excellent energy management skills, while bringing along a support slot that hangs upon health. Such as blood bond, or Life saccing, the original concept being blood bond. Explain yourself instead of leaving flaming remarks, thank you. Isis In De Nile 16:34, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * 1) teh n/me is better &mdash; Skuld 16:38, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * (moved debate to discussion area below)
 * 1) -- SigmA  12:32, 27 February 2007 (CST)

Discussion
I like the idea of draining enemy life and redirecting it at teammates. Nice support character. I'd probably go with life transfer instead though i dont know how critical the energy management is.--Beomagi 14:52, 30 November 2006 (CST)

The +6 regen is a nice side-support. Some flexibility for RA while the real strength is in the sheer amount of degen and the pressure you can put on the other team. Forcing them all to have -9 Degen while slapping healthy targets for 200 DMG a spike every 8 or so seconds causes the opposing monk, if they even have any, to scramble to keep the team alive. With the excellent energy management, you can go all day if you wish to, applying hex over and over if they happen to be removed. Reapers Mark I think is more offensive than Life Transfer in the long term. Plus, you have -9 Degen with Reapers Mark. You can't really go above -10 Degen. Isis In De Nile 16:15, 30 November 2006 (CST)

I would not have put the runes in the equipment section Cwheeler 10:16, 19 December 2006 (CST)

Questions for the Author
What type of playing is this for, i think its for pvp, but for which category?Th3 pr0s3cut0r

Ah, sorry. I must of didn't put in a category. I thought I did. Oh well, wiki newbie here. This build I found works well in RA. I imagine it can work in a lot of other categories. Isis In De Nile 17:16, 13 December 2006 (CST)

can u help me out i dont have factions i need something to replace Lifebane Strike can u tell me a skill? &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Inferno (contribs) 18:05, 3 February 2007.
 * I'm not the author, but I'd recommend Blood of the Aggressor as a good option to replace Lifebane Strike. Its more spammable but does less damage and has a health sac.  It works nicely though if you are using the Blood Renewal + Mystic Regeneration combo, as that counteracts the sacrifices. -- BrianG 12:28, 3 February 2007 (CST)

It seems there is a conflict of terms in the equipment section "A Hale Staff of Fortitude with a "Have Faith" inscription and a wrapping of Devotion." it appears 2 staff wrappings are suggested and as far as i know, this is impossible. If i am correct, it seems the staff wrapping of devotion would be slightly more desireable considering that the author calls for demonic flesh to be nearly 100%. Thanks for the build, gonna give it a whirl. Kor 67.186.178.174 15:28, 13 March 2007 (CDT)
 * I've edited the page to recommend either of the staff wrappings. -- BrianG 16:33, 13 March 2007 (CDT)

Discussion
This works really well! Reaper's mark is much more effective offensively than Life Transfer because it has a 10-sec recharge instead of 30 and lasts a lot longer, and you do have both life siphon and lifebane/shadow strike if you need healing. I like it ^_^ --Wizardboy777 16:49, 19 December 2006 (CST)

For PvP which build is better this one Reaper Of Humility or IV_Transfusion i like both builds very much and i wana make the perfect build so please someone tell me
 * It matters what you're trying to accomplish. If you're part of a pre-build team and you're trying to hex stack, and your team needs some anti-meel, go with the Reaper of Humility. If you're trying to play in RA, go with the IV Transfusion.Isis In De Nile 00:31, 8 February 2007 (CST)

N/Me Reaper's Humility debate
^^Teh n/me would get trounced. :) It also has a different concept entirely. It can only heal itself via parsitic bond, which is inconsistant and sparse. It relies totally on two hexes to do all its damage. A hex removal elite would absolutely shut it down. It cannot heal or support other team mates. It aims at inhibiting others, such as attack speed or signet of humility. This is not the point of the IV Transfusion build. It's all about raw damage, pressuring, survivability in RA, and directing all that incoming life to others who need it. You are comparing apples and oranges. Isis In De Nile 16:43, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * wtf? the point is to disable the hex removal elite. if you wanna survive and win in RA, use a healsig warrior. but RA is a bad arguement.. &mdash; Skuld 16:52, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * Sorry, I was under the impression we had an RA PvP section. I must of been mistaken. My apologies.Isis In De Nile 17:08, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * Skuld, RA is not a bad argument if thats where the build is intended for. Survivability is important in RA, and this build, although still a bit fragile since it is not a warrior, definitely has more survivability than the N/Me which does not even have a self heal (parasitic bond doesn't count).  What happens if there is no monk?  Do you bail before the match starts?  Or just die before you have a chance to disable an elite?  I played around with this build and similar builds for several days in RA and I can tell you that hex removal was not a major concern.  I did run into blessed light a bit, but I would deal with this by baiting with life siphon, and then quickly using Reaper's Mark followed by Life Siphon to cover.  Expel Hexes is a bit of a problem, but that only came up once I think.  Did you test either of these builds in RA? If so, what were your success rates like? -- BrianG 17:23, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * P.S. Let's keep things civil guys, no need for sarcasm (Isis) or wtfing (Skuld). -- BrianG 18:55, 19 December 2006 (CST)

What happened?
Why was this build removed from the Tested section? It had the required number of votes to be favoured. The unfavoured votes slapped onto it were only cast after this page was removed from the tested section and had a delete tag slapped on it. Even though these votes should be invalid becuase they were cast after the build was vetted, and didn't undergo any significant changes to warrant a re-vote, they are not well explained. The skills do enjoy a level of synergy, and the is different from this build. What happened here? - Krowman  18:47, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * According to current policy it can not be moved back into untested. It could be moved to unfavoured if the number of unfavoured votes outnumbers current votes, but that has not happened, reverting-- Sefre [[image:Prepared_Shot.jpg|24px|]] 19:01, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * Not really sure whats going on. I know this was favored, and then Skuld added a delete tag.  I left him a message on his talk page asking to reconsider and it looks like he has, but at that point I think it was moved from favored to untested.  Now Rapta has reverted your change Sefre, but hasn't left an explanation here.  I'll leave a message on his page and ask him to join the discussion. -- BrianG 21:58, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * Policy states that there has to be 3 votes up for a build to be favored or unfavored. Since this build has not yet stabilized into a category, and voting is clearly still going on, no revote is needed. There are only two more favored votes than unfavored. &mdash; Rapta  [[image:Rapta_Icon1.gif|19px]] (talk|contribs) 22:04, 19 December 2006 (CST)
 * Rapta, this build was originally favored 4 votes to zero (and it wasn't a rush job, votes were spread out over 2 weeks). As far as I can tell, it was moved from favored to untested by Skuld simply because he personally felt another build (of questionable similarity) was better.  Furthermore, he seems to imply in his comments that his opinion was not even based on an evaluation of the build for its intended environment (RA), and hasn't responded to requests to clarify this.  Does this count as a vote?  Doesn't the vote have to be based on testing it (or at least mentally evaluating it) based on its intended arena?  Either way, it doesn't seem enough of a reason to go against policy and move this build from favored to untested. -- BrianG 22:42, 19 December 2006 (CST)

I figured out what happened. See: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/showpost.php?p=2352327&postcount=33 It seems Warskull found my build bad, along with several dozen other builds without giving reason. Such hubris. Skuld quickly took down my build because of this alone and put it up for deletion. Awesome. :| Could we not do this? Isis In De Nile 22:49, 19 December 2006 (CST)

Sure to set a few stones in motion...
The time stamps on the history pages show that after this build had the proper amount of favorable votes and was vetted, new tags were added to it. Only after this did Skuld and Warskull cast their votes. The GWGuru link explains it all. If you see the histroy pages of the the build and its talk page, you'll see:
 * 1) The build was vetted at 10:37 Dec 14.
 * 2) Untested tag added by User:Skuld at 11:07, Dec 19.
 * 3) Deletion tag added by User:Skuld at 11:08, Dec 19.
 * 4) Unfavoured vote cast by User:Warskull at 12:03, Dec 19. *Note the BuildTalk history page says 11:03, although on the talk page it says 12:03. Either one would've been against GuildWiki policy.
 * 5) Unfavoured vote cast by User:Skuld at 16:38, Dec 19. *Note the BuildTalk history page says 15:38, although on the talk page it says 16:38. Either one would've been against GuildWiki policy.


 * With this being said, I am returning the build to the vetted category. The proper vetting procedure was followed to send this build to the 'Tested' section. This is shameless behaviour for an administrator to exhibit. This wiki is a collaborative effort project; no one person (or 2 or 3, for that matter) should have the absolute power to transform the site so that it conforms to their ideas of what it is good or bad, right or wrong. If you followed the link above, you'll see that not only are a handful of people steering the site towards their vision of it, but that these people are not doing it from within GuildWiki; they are doing this from another site entirely. GW:YOU. You are valuable. This does not apply only to those who agree with you. -[[Image:Krowman's_Sig.jpg]] Krowman [[Image:Krowman's_Sig.jpg]]  23:57, 19 December 2006 (CST)


 * Well Krowman, it doesn't look like anyone has anything to say now. I'd also like to point out that I get the distinct impression that neither of the people who have voted unfavored on this build even tested it in the proposed arena.  So it definitely seems like an attempt to just get rid of something because someone didn't like the "look" of it. -- BrianG 08:52, 20 December 2006 (CST)


 * Gasp* I'm valuable XD...Skuld how could you? >_> I know you liked that I added the, no reason to go killing off the other ones XD.--Llednar 19:40, 22 December 2006 (CST)


 * After reading this, I couldn't believe it, I had to check the history myself, but it all adds up. I've lost a great deal of respect for Skuld.  Making these changes after the build had been vetted really grinds my gears.  You can't go Nazi-ing other builds because they don't go by your favored attribute.  Reaper of Humility has a different purpose altogether and doesn't use Blood Magic at all.  That sucks, man.  Doom Music 15:32, 30 January 2007 (CST)

Variant
How about a dedicated support version?

Attributes and Skills
Blood is power can be switched out for another elite from seccondary

Actually, someone saw this build and produced a support version! :) Look for yourself.Isis In De Nile 14:05, 20 January 2007 (CST)

That build requires Dervish secondary and why no life syphon? my build can be a battery too Wanted warior
 * Yeah this general build idea can work without dervish secondary, but the synergy between blood renewal, blood bond, and mystic regeneration is hard to pass on. Even when running the offensive transfusion build, I usually run dervish secondary for mystic regeneration with blood renewal. -- BrianG 16:59, 20 January 2007 (CST)

Name
Every time I look at this build and I think its Icy Veins...and none of those skills have anything to do with 'IV'. Did I miss something? - Entice789  (Talk | Contributions) 19:26, 4 February 2007 (CST) I Think the "IV" in the name is a hospital IV since blood bond is rerouting health to you. Wanted Warior

ah, I get it now...thanks =)  -  Entice789  (Talk | Contributions) 22:26, 4 February 2007 (CST)

should be called blood transfusion to remove uncertancy imo  ~ Soqed Hozi ~  14:50, 13 February 2007 (CST)