Why Ram is underrepresented

compare 2 sparkling healers (61 AP in total with elusive) with a lvl 3 necro healer (arcana mastery) at 85 AP.

the advantage i can see is: a potential long range output of 20 heal by the necro + puppets.

the disadvantages i can see are:

-Sparkling have higher MOV and flight
-Sparkling cost less AP
-Higher DOD / parry
-Flexible role as they can be really annoying on archers
-their heal cannot fail damaging your units + 2 sparkling can have an output of 20 heal per turn
-Elusive skill can allow tactical easy disengages (high DOD)

i also add that with the necro at a certain point in the battle you can either summon or heal, both are out of the question with regen +3 per turn. Recovery if you want it as a healer is very dangerous has you have a potential 15% chance to fail at full life...which gets much worse once damaged.

give us too a counter example on how the necromancer can be more valuable than a skull warrior.

You're thinking about this the wrong way. A high level necromancer is a unit that's made to support, increasing the power of other units. I'm not saying it's there to replace a skull warrior, but this sentence:

I cannot think any initial situation where having 1 more necro is better then having 1 more skull warrior.

Made me think you were considering between adding a necromancer and an additional skûll warrior. I listed all that the necro could provide that the raw strength of the Skûll can't.

A Necro that spawns two skeletons next to a PoB that the skull has engaged is just as tactically interesting as an additional Skûll, especially since it provides a bigger HP pool to attack before going to your Skûll.

It's all in the combination,. The Necro is a force multiplier.


Because a B52 can't dogfight doesn't mean it's a bad plane.

You mis-quoted me. I said I would rather take a priest of salauel over necro if I needed dmg/utility, and if I needed the puppets for road-blocking, 7 skeleton warriors sounds much better to me than 2.

Blue - remember that Necro is only healer able to heal himself

Blue - remember that Necro is only healer able to heal himself

at a risk of killing himself.

Also remember that necro cannot heal himself if a rune guardian has middle way but a sparkling can use its heal.

With the current meta, exists a team setup having more chance of losing the game against a necro + X than against a skull warrior + X?

Ok, that was quite an odd way of doing the question that I think is the key for everyone to understand if the necromancer is or not balanced, so let me try to put this question in a more easily understandable way:
"Considering the current gameplay; suppose you are starting a game with a generic "your team X + necro OR skull warrior", and suppose, somehow, that before you chose your units for the game you see the composition of the enemy team Y (generic).
Is there any Y that would make you prefer having the necro in the X team instead than the skull warrior?
If yes, can you describe how Y should be?
Can you describe how you would use the necromancer during the game?".

In a more logic way, using the same definitions for X and Y:
For every X. Exists Y. ChancesOfWinning(X+necro VS Y) > ChancesOfWinning(X+skull VS Y)?
If not, considering they have almost same AP cost the class necromancer has no reason to exists.

I hope this time I made my point clearer since none still answered my question I wanted ask this again.

A Necro that spawns two skeletons next to a PoB that the skull has engaged is just as tactically interesting as an additional Skûll, especially since it provides a bigger HP pool to attack before going to your Skûll.

I think it is not, let's analize it.
1 Generic Predator Of Blood vs 1 Generic Skull Warrior + 1 Generic Necromancer who is (your example close enought to summon 2 additional minions engaging the Predator).
Morbid Puppet Stats:
4 6
2 4
4 2
Necro:
4 6
4 6
5 14
Skull:
14 15
12 13
11 10
Let's start the simulation:
Initially the POB is engaged by 3 its his turn, what i would do is to pop my defensive stance and run on the necromancer who is close enought, for sure in your example, for engagement then I would pass.
POB parry chance from skull = (14 + 6 - 14) * 5 % = 30 % of disengaging without damage from the Skull,
POB parry chance from Morbit Puppets = (14 + 6 - 4) * 5 % = 80% two times,
since the damage taker in our example is always the POB i wont consider damage reduction for toughtness, I will just consider base damage of each creature.
20% of taking 6 damage + 20% of taking 6 damage + 70% of taking 15 damage.
in the worst simulation If the predator of blood take everything he will have 8 health so a + 3 debuff on every stat, but it will be on the necromancer and ready to oneshot him with natural selection on the next turn and having to face just the other skull warrior.
And thats in the worst of the hipotesis... in a mid-luck simulation (Mid-Luck situation means that i lose every roll minor equal 49% and i win every major equal 50%) I would have been able to kill the necromancer in the same turn he pop the morbid puppets having still 15 health... 15 from the 70% from skull (wouldnt even use defensive stance to disengage)..
Since in a mid-luck situation I am able in your scenario to kill the necromancer with the PoB and still having him between 2 Health and 25 (25-31 roughtly considering toughtness) depending on the rolls I d say that since that necro could have been another skull warrior so a unit of the same tier of the PoB (so a 50% chance of winning 1 vs 1) for sure in this scenario 1 necro and 1 SW have less chance of winning than 2 SW.

This demonstration miss a lot of damage calculation that I semplificated for not to making the text too long,
but yes it works quite well and for sure shows that the situation you are describing has the POB having more chances of winning against necro + skull than against 2 skulls.
(also consider that I did not calculate damage reduction due to toughtness and even so I was able to kill the necro with the morale roll on my side(thing that is quite normal against ram), and still be alive).

That said, you are committing an error if you try to search for a particular situation where the necromancer is better than the skull warrior, infact I did this demonstration just for fun. What you have to try demonstrate is that exists a GENERIC situation or team composition where it is better.
This would demonstrate the usefullness of this unit, not just thinking a particular situation that may happens where it's better than skull warrior.