You must be very unlucky, or not actually web continually. Why so insistent on ignoring the people who actually have the skills?

Because you've stated that one web disrupts the pattern when you have multiple chances to use infidel/inquisition when someone is marked? If there was only once chance to mark someone with infidel or inquisition, I'd be happy, but considering the time that heretic and infidel lasts and the number of chances you're given to lay on the next one, it is no where near as easy as you claim to stop heretic/infidel/inquisition.

It doesn't directly, but it sets the stage. It lets you heal, and gets them afflicted enough that when you're ready to stop webbing and switch to your instakill or whatever else, they're prepared for it. It can't do the last 10% of the fight... but having something else do 90% of your fight for you while you sit quietly unharmed is an awfully good advantage.

A constant stream of webbings won't completely shut down a knight with good reflexes, but it comes awfully close.

And if you're only looking to get away, not kill, it's a 100% effective method at least against Serenguard. I don't know if the other knights guilds have a "stay here" skill, but all we have is Engage, which only works maybe half the time, is easily countered, and when it does work, does piddling damage.

They have Carcer.

Uhh if they are constantly webbing and waiting for ents to afflict ..there is this magical thing called DIAG...

Shield twice in a row and it ruins inquisition. That's a fact!

It's not all that magical, and not really relevant to the discussion at hand.

More to the point, it doesn't change the fundamental physics of combat: combat is about time. That something can be cured is entirely not the point. The point is the damage rate against the curing rate, and the affliction rate against the curing rate. If you can do more damage in a given period than your foe can cure, you're stealing time from him. Steal enough time from him before he steals enough time from you, and you win.

The ability to deliver afflictions that can be cured can be useful, but only if you can deliver them faster than they can be cured. That's why synergy of afflictions is key.

If your demesne or your loyals can deliver enough afflictions with enough possibility of affliction synergy to get ahead of curing, then webwhoring/stunwhoring/aeonwhoring against warriors is a viable and, at present, almost entirely uncounterable strategy. Even if you can't get ahead of afflictions, if the curing process will use up mana (focus, insomnia, etc.) and you have a mana-based instakill, or use up some other resource (e.g., get someone to run out of choleric), it's still a viable strategy.

Too many people look at their passive attacks and say "this is easily cured" and conclude, erroneously, that that makes them valueless. Including some of the most successful fighters, even some of them whose success depends in large part on those very passive attacks they are so ready to dismiss. "Easily cured" is a necessary but not sufficient condition for an attack to be worthless.

I'm sorry but it is simply false to state that webwhoring/aeonwhoring/etc against warriors is viable and almost entirely uncounterable. With a decent system, aeon should -never- be a problem the same with stun or writhe. For example, I slow Murphy down to nearly nothing if I whore vines/web but that's because his writhing is just terrible. If he would writhe correctly, he'd be able to shrug it off and laugh at my attempts. Daevos, for example, has an excellent writhing system. It is almost completely pointless to waste the time webbing.

The same applies to any tactic you can employ. If said target happens to be a specialist at curing a certain affliction, great. But saying "how can x and y be viable tactics when x person and y person can cure them amazingly!" is an irrelevant point, you could say the same about the most lethal tactic in the game, if your target happens to be a good healer in the area you specialise in, unlucky?

Arrrgh, necro.

WTF? March?

Pssh, then lock it. Bumped threads are nowhere near as bad as people make out.

Oi, my writhing is fine thank you very much, i was an orclach at the time and webbing me really sucked for the writhe time, I'll have you note you were unable to hold me down as a faeling

Hmm, I was under the impression a dreamweaver could attack via burst. The description says something around the lines of allows you to attack other dreamweavers or others in insubstantial forms

Ghost is a separate necromancy skill, rather than something in the dreamweaving skillset. Yes, dreamweavers can attack from dreambodies, but Nihilists can't take that skillset.

He was saying that a dreamweaver should be able to attack ghosted people through using burst.

Which isn't all that viable. You'd have to sleep, dreamform, burst... the ghost might at best get hit once

If said ghost was icewalled in, it's possible. They'd have to be pretty hurt to have wanted to ghost in the first place, never know.

Except that ghosts bypasses through all forms of barriers except doors.

You sure about that? could have sworn Carcer stops ghosts moving, seems so in the recent Murphy log against a Celestine who i forget.