이 사이트는 자바스크립트를 사용합니다.
을(를) 해 주십시오.
News Round Up: Shorter Raid Cooldowns, Darkmoon Rabbit, 5.0.4 Class Mechanics
2012/09/03 시간 14:16
에 의해 작성됨
Now that 5.0.4 is live and players have had time to try out the new abilities, there's been many blue posts over the long weekend clarifying class mechanics and procs for abilities, weapons, and trinkets. You may also have noticed that some long cooldowns in 5.0.4 reset between raid encounters like
: there are plans to have even more 5+ minute cooldowns function this same way.
Also of particular note:
The Darkmoon Faire is back in town and brings with it
. This ferocious rabbit requires a large raid to take down and drops
one lucky player can win. Everyone in the raid is awarded
누구든 작은 토끼를 건드리면...
Most long-term cooldowns are not reset when a raid encounter ends. The ones we specifically wanted to hit were the battle rezes and the big, raid-wide cooldowns like
. The question we asked ourselves was: would a reasonable, progression-oriented but not world-first guild delay their next pull by several minutes to wait for X to come off of cooldown? For
, we concluded the answer was yes. For
룬 무기 강화
, we concluded the answer was no.
Alright, this post caused a knockdown, drag out in my office. Weapons were recklessly pulled down from walls, etc. I mumbled something about how I'm the boss and what I say goes, but that didn't work either.
After the dust cleared, we decided that we would allow any cooldown that lasts 5 minutes or longer to be reset on raid encounters. The one exception is shaman
, because we don't want to have to include it as a true battle rez, but think it would be too valuable if you could use it every single attempt. Most fights (we hope) aren't planned around the shaman dying.
We'll implement this change as soon as we're able.
Click the cut for all the blue posts!
You have to consider that WoW is a multiplayer game in which players are very often competing, whether comparing damage meters in a raid or out and out trying to kill each other in PvP. Changes to your your character end up affecting everyone who comes into contact with your character. If you can order up exactly what you want, you're affecting a bunch of other people.
In your hamburger analogy, you're telling the restaurant "You should make sure that nobody can have mayonnaise because I don't like it."
I've actually used the restaurant analogy myself, because few restaurant patrons have the impression that they're going to be able to go back into the kitchen, give the chefs pointers, rearrange the menu and so on just because they think highly of their own opinions on food. Restaurants may honor your request to hold the salt or put the dressing on the side, and many chefs are probably thrilled to get feedback on the dishes they prepare to get an idea of what their customers like or not, but ultimately if you don't like a restaurant's food, you should probably go to another restaurant, not try and change the menu.
As far as class complexity, that's another attempt to serve a very diverse player base. Some players like a few buttons and some like to have a lot. If the restaurant required every dish to have the same number of ingredients, that doesn't improve the quality of the food. I only think it's a problem if some classes are so much more challenging to play that those players expect to do higher DPS as a result, or I guess if the number of buttons is truly stupid.
Also, remember that there is a huge difference between reasonable and optional. If adding an ability to your rotation improves your DPS by 1% then it might not be worth worrying about. I actually wish guides would focus a little more on describing both the "90% rotation" as well as the "theoretically highest rotation."
I think there are a couple of points here worth addressing that either came up since my initial post or I missed the first time.
I think part of what the OP is asking for is alternatives to the hunter (IIRC) rotation with fewer buttons. That's a reasonable request. We tried in the talent trees overall to make sure there was always a passive option for every tier so you didn't need a button. The level 60 tier has 2 active buttons and one that is somewhat reactionary, and the level 75 tier has 3 active buttons. We like the hunter tree overall and are unlikely to change it at this stage, but I think it's a fair criticism for players who like fewer buttons.
Second, there is a lot of supposition that we somehow baited and switched players by changing the game. We have to change the game. Many of the rules and mechanics in vanilla wouldn't be acceptable to players these days. So I think we're just arguing about degree of change. Some warlocks are saying their class changed too much and some rogues are saying their class didn't change enough. Those are all valid opinions and the kinds of things we try and take into consideration when we're deciding on class changes going into an expansion.
I hope you take my word though that every change we make, even the ones that end up not working out again, are made because we are ultimately trying to make the game more fun for the players, and not because we're bored designers trying to entertain ourselves by experimenting with your characters. We weigh every change. You still may not agree with them all, but I want to reassure you that they aren't made on a whim, and nearly every one began with player feedback at some point.
Finally, it has been mentioned a few times in this thread that when most players feel a certain way, that the developers should absolutely take action. I'd generally agree with that statement. The main problem with that strategy is that we don't really have any idea what most players want. (And no, you can't just extrapolate that if 4 forum posters feel one way, then 400,000 non-posters must as well).
Instead, we fall back a lot on logic, common sense, professional experience and a lot of gut instinct. We do use a lot of ways to capture player feedback, and the forums are one of those tools. They're good for pitching ideas or points of view, but bad for trying to figure out how many other players agree with you.
What happens nearly every time is some group of players advocates position A and another group advocates position B. What sometimes happens after that is the A players try to argue that they are smarter, more experienced, or more important players, therefore their opinion should count more. :) As you have all experienced, it can escalate into an argument quickly. We try to take both positions under advisement, consider what A or B would mean for the game, maybe try some things out internally, and eventually come to a conclusion. Sometimes we do A, sometimes B, sometimes nothing, and sometimes C. None of that means we ignore player feedback. It definitely does not mean that we ignore these massive groups of sensible players who are unified on a given position that is so self-evidently correct that we're obviously derelict in our jobs for not implementing their changes immediately. Those scenarios just don't exist. It would make our lives much easier perhaps if they did.
Just my 2 copper here but in my opinion the problem is not the analogy so much as it always feels like anytime GC responds to any criticism over the years he consistently degrades the "way" you post be it bad analogy or "not constructive" etc. I may have missed a few posts over the years but he always seems to find a way to deflect from the intent of how a critical poster "feels" about an issue and rarely ever acknowledges that a critical post could have merit.
I do that a lot because it's in our (the developers') best interests to have clear, concise and specific feedback. Improving the tone of the discussion pays far larger dividends to me personally that turning the forums into an ask the devs Q&A. I don't personally (and neither does Blizzard as a company) have the bandwidth to answer even a fraction of the questions we receive. Therefore, trying to get the community to understand how to improve the efficiency of their messages can in turn improve the efficiency of our game design.
The second problem is, sometimes C just doesn't make sense. Literally, no sense. Example: What was the reason given for "homogenizing" Rogues? To paraphrase: "We wanted Rogues to feel like Rogues, and not have 30+ classes in the game to balance." After which we see Monks with three separate specs, Druids with four (4!!!), and even a complete change to one of Warlocks.
In this specific case, it's because rogues are a pure class with 3 DPS specs. If for example Combat had superior damage and Subtlety had superior control, then one is the PvE spec and one is the PvP spec and Assassination is probably dead. We thought the only reasonable way to let rogue spec be a choice was to share the utility and the damage, and make the spec choice about the way you do damage. Warlocks, mages, hunters and even the DPS specs of warriors and DKs follow a similar pattern.
I'm sure they must have statistical tools.
- How many people spec X v. Y v. Z?
- How many people use glyph A, B, C...?
- How many people talent D, E, F...?
- How many people use ability G, H, I...?
- In what parts of the game do they use A-Z?
- How do spec/glyph/talent choices and ability use correlate with time played in game?
Yes, we do all of that. I'd wager we collect more information than most players realize.
What it doesn't provide us is context. Do more players spec X because the guides tell them to? Because X does higher damage? Because it's harder to screw up the X rotation? Because X has prettier spells? Because X is more fun? Because they've just always played X?
Even more important, how much change would it take to get some players to go Y? How much change can we risk before everyone goes Y? We've caused that several times, and I hate it when that happens. It's a failure on the part of me and my team when it does.
A question to consider: Is there any real evidence on Blizzard's side that the majority want their chosen playstyle changed so much each and every expansion that they essentially have to relearn it?
We can't measure majorities for the reasons I mentioned above. Instead, we look at what players are complaining about, and try to evaluate the passion, legitimacy, and logic of what they say. To use just a few examples, players complained that warlock rotations were convoluted, that rogues had too many ramping mechanics, that rage was too boom or bust, that hunter minimum rage sucked, that mages had to be Frost for control, that totems were just group buffs with too many drawbacks, that Presences didn't match spec, and so on. Those are just a few examples, and I know not every player agrees with them.
As I mentioned before, you also have the cases (I see this the most with rogue and maybe shaman) that while the rotations aren't necessarily broken, the players are just tired of them and want something new. It's very hard to balance "Give me something new" with "I like my character exactly as they are."
Darkmoon Faire Reset Issue
We are aware of an issue in which the Darkmoon Faire quests did not reset properly. We are currently working on a hotfix that we will apply to all realms as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience.
As you can imagine, things have been pretty busy, so forgive us for not getting to these questions sooner.
We first wanted to update you with several tuning tweaks that we made recently that are not showing up correctly on your client tooltips (either beta or live). We wanted to document these so-called "stealth" buffs and nerfs to aid theorycrafting and avoid any confusion. We hope to get updated tooltips to the client soon (tm).
I should also note that these are very typical of the kinds of changes we make at this stage in development now that everything else has stabilized. We're not making more changes than normal, but just trying to document them better.
AoE damage adjustments
-- Sweeping Strikes now deals 50% of the triggering hit’s damage to an additional nearby target, down from 100%. Arms’ cleave damage was extremely high.
-- We reduced the damage dealt by Glyphed Ice Lance to a second target to 40% of normal damage.
-- Warlock sustained AoE damage was significantly too high, across the board. We reduced the base damage multiplier on Fire and Brimstone from 45% to 35%, and reduced the damage of Seed of Corruption, Felstorm, Wrathstorm, Harvest Life, Hellfire, Immolation Aura, and Void Ray by 30%.
-- We reduced the damage of Divine Storm by 25%. Retribution Paladins were significantly too high on sustained AoE damage.
-- Frost Death Knights needed a boost, so we increased the damage of Howling Blast to secondary targets up to 80% of the primary damage, from 50%.
-- Chain Lightning now deals 17.5% less damage to the primary target, but chains 80% of the damage to each successive target, up from 70%. This should help spread the damage better, and also reduce the damage against a single target. The total damage remains the same, when glyphed.
-- We increased the damage of Hurricane by 7.5%. Moonkin sustained AoE damage was too low, and we also wanted to emphasize Solar’s dominance over Lunar for AoE.
-- We increased the damage of Mind Sear by 30%. Shadow sustained AoE was significantly low. It should still be preferable to multi-DoT on a few targets, but this should make Mind Sear a more attractive option against larger groups.
-- We increased the damage of Swipe and Thrash by 6.5% in Cat Form. Ferals were a bit low on AoE damage.
-- Rogues needed a rather significant boost to their sustained AoE damage. We opted to give that to them in the form of buffing something that was previously primarily there for utility, not damage, by a very large amount, turning it into a major damage button. We increased the damage of Crimson Tempest’s DoT by 700%.
-- Beast Master AoE-focused pets were extremely overpowered for sustained AoE. We reduced the damage of Froststorm Breath and Burrow Attack by 50%, and increased their costs from 20 to 50. These pets should still be a sustained DPS gain to use, but not quite so absurdly so.
-- We increased the damage of Spinning Crane Kick, Rushing Jade Wind, Crackling Tiger Lightning, and Chi Torpedo by 10%. We also reduced the period and duration of Spinning Crane Kick by 25%, and made it affected by melee haste.
Single target damage adjustments
-- We increased the damage of Ice Lance by 12.5%.
-- We reduced the damage bonus to Frost Strike on Threat of Thassarian from 50% to 40%. Dual-wielding Frost was a bit higher than two-handed Frost.
-- We fixed a significant bug that was affecting Frost Mage damage. Frostfire Bolt was not benefitting from Frostburn (Mastery). After fixing that, we brought their DPS back down by reducing the damage boost that the Frostbolt debuff provides from 8% per stack to 5% per stack.
-- We reduced the damage increase to spells from Dream of Cenarius from 65% down to 50%.
-- We reduced the attack power buff of Rabid from +50% to +25%. BM hunters needed to come down a bit, especially in burst.
-- We had previously buffed Snake Trap's appalling damage, but it was high enough that hunters might have started using it in single-target rotations, which wasn't intended. We reduced the melee damage of the snakes by 75%.
Tank survivability adjustments
-- We were concerned that Blood DKs were too susceptible to spike damage. Blood DKs rely on being able to take damage and then heal it back, despite taking the largest hits of any tank. This works fine most of the time, but strings of unavoided hits or really large hits in a row might have presented a problem. We chose not to reduce damage taken, but to increase their maximum health instead. The stamina buff from Blood Presence from +8% to +25%.
-- Brewmasters were proving extremely strong because they could maintain Shuffle as much as they wanted and Purify a very large amount of Staggered damage. Additionally, despite being very avoidance-heavy, they also were taking very smooth damage, since Stagger blunts so much of the attack’s damage. We reduced the base Stagger amount from 30% to 25%, and reduced the bonus energy regen provided by Stance of the Sturdy Ox from +30% to +10%.
-- We increased the duration of Glyph of Mind Spike from 6 sec to 9 sec.
-- We increased the healing of Chi Torpedo by 25%, but Chi Torpedo and Expel Harm no longer cause Eminence. As mentioned before, the general principle here is that spells and abilities which do both damage and healing are balanced around the healing they do, and don’t need to do additional healing through Eminence.
-- While we feel the damage of the warrior's Dragon Roar is balanced with the other two talents, the length of the stun feels gratuitous and helps prevent targets from being able to use defensive abilities. We're reducing the duration of the Dragon Roar stun to 0.5 sec, but changing its diminishing return category to the random / proc stun.
-- Finally, we were worried about mage mana regeneration at level 85. Arcane in particular works better when it has the advantage of the level 90 talents. Once Mists is released, Arcane will be able to perform fine while leveling up and running the occasional dungeon. However, we're in this rare "lame duck" period where players are still actively running what will very soon be lower level content (i.e. Dragon Soul and the 4.3 dungeons). As a temporary measure, we've doubled mage mana regen across the board to 2% per sec up until level 85. This bonus will start scaling down by 20% per level between 85 and 90.
There may be additional band-aids we need to apply (to any class) to account for the fact that the game is now largely balanced around level 90. The game systems need to function at all character levels, and they will, but most players will care a lot less about level 85 balance in a few short weeks.
If you believe any of these buffs, nerfs of changes to be inappropriate, you're welcome to share your feedback, but you will likely need stronger evidence than a link to the latest output from Simcraft or other simulations. :)
Secondly, we posted details on several weapon enchant procs previously, which seemed particularly useful. With that in mind, here are some more:
-- Lord Blastington’s Scope of Doom – 1 PPM, no ICD.
-- Vision of the Predator – 15% chance on direct/periodic spell damage dealt, 105 sec ICD.
-- Carbonic Carbuncle – 15% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell landing, 105 sec ICD.
-- Windswept Pages – 15% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell landing, 65 sec ICD.
-- Searing Words – 45% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell crit, 85 sec ICD.
-- Light of the Cosmos – 15% chance on periodic damage, 45 sec ICD.
-- Essence of Terror – 15% chance on harmful spell landing, 105 sec ICD.
-- Terror in the Mists – 15% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell landing, 105 sec ICD.
-- Darkmist Vortex – 15% chance on direct white/melee/harmful-spell landing, 105 sec ICD.
-- Relic of Yulon – 20% chance on direct/periodic spell damage, 50 sec ICD.
-- Relic of Xuen (STR) – 20% chance on white/yellow melee landing, 45 sec ICD.
-- Relic of Xuen (AGI) – 20% chance on white/yellow/ranged crit, 55 sec ICD.
-- Killing Machine – 6 PPM on white melee landing, no ICD.
-- Sudden Doom – 3 PPM on white melee landing, no ICD.
-- Fangs of the Father
---- Assassination: 23.139% chance on white/yellow melee landing, no ICD.
---- Combat: 9.438% chance on white/yellow melee landing, no ICD.
---- Subtlety: 28.223% chance on white/yellow melee landing, no ICD.
---- These chances are multiplied by 0.9 for lvl 89 targets, 0.8 for lvl 90 targets, 0.7 for lvl 91 targets, 0.6 for lvl 92 targets, and 0.5 for lvl 93+ targets.
---- After adding a stack, if you have >30 stacks, you have a chance to proc the Fury buff.
Since Mistweavers heal from such a significant variety of spells, some of which tick very fast, it’s not purely a raw chance per heal event. The chance displayed on your Mastery tooltip is the base chance, but there’s a multiplier on ticks from various overly frequent sources:
-- Renewing Mist: 0.25
-- Zen Sphere (Periodic): 0.25
-- Soothing Mist: 0.3
-- Soothing Mist (Statue): 0.15
-- Enveloping Mist: 0.2
-- Eminence: 0.2
-- Eminence (Statue): 0.1
-- Chi Torpedo: 0.1
-- Spinning Crane Kick: 0.1
Updated Gift of the Serpent proc scalars:
• Renewing Mist: 0.15
• Chi Wave: 0.25
• Zen Sphere (Periodic): 0.25
• Zen Sphere (Detonate): 0.15
• Chi Burst: 0.15
• Soothing Mist: 0.3
• Soothing Mist (Statue): 0.15
• Enveloping Mist: 0.2
• Uplift: 0.25
• Revival: 0.15
• Eminence (Self and Xuen): 0.2
• Eminence (Statue): 0.1
• Chi Torpedo: 0.15
• Spinning Crane Kick: 0.1
A few more trinket procs. We probably won't go through every quest and dungeon trinket unless that information is really needed.
-- Bottle of Infinite Stars – 15% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell landing, 45 sec ICD.
-- Vial of Dragon's Blood – 15% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell landing, 45 sec ICD.
-- Lei Shin's Final Orders – 15% chance on direct white/melee/ranged/harmful-spell landing, 45 sec ICD.
-- Qin-xi's Polarizing Seal – 15% chance on direct/periodic spell heal, 45 sec ICD.
-- Spirits of the Sun – 15% chance on direct/periodic spell heal, 105 sec ICD.
Mana at 90
There is a two part answer here, and it's a big discussion. First, mana might feel tighter at 85 than it will at 90. As I said above, we spend most of our effort making sure raiding at 90 feels good because after a few more weeks, the number of raids below level 90 will be a very small number. Part of the reason we made sure Dragon Soul was good and nerfed was so that nobody's progression would be unduly affected by the level 90 numbers.
Second, mana was a non issue for many raid healers, especially those in heroic gear due to the way Intellect provided so much longevity by increasing the mana pool. Those healers who didn't pay a lot of attention to Spirit (say you had Power Torrent instead of Heartsong) might definitely notice lower regen. So I don't want to suggest that you'll soon be back up to endless mana. Our goal for Mists was to make mana when undergeared not as punishing, but to make mana when well geared not as trivial. We just needed to reign in both extremes.
We didn't see healers struggling with mana on the level 90 raids to the point that we'd worry about it, but those characters weren't wearing the actual gear they'll acquire in Pandaria, and despite the many volunteers we had, it's still a small sample size.
So, we'd like to see how it feels at 90 before making any regen changes. If the next few weeks are unbearable for healers, then we'll do some sort of band-aid the way we did for Arcane mages above.
This isn't the appropriate thread to get back into the discussion of whether healers should ever be mana limited, or whether static mana pools are a good idea, etc. Feel free to bring those up in other threads. In this thread, the most helpful responses on the topic would be along the lines of the degree of the change. How much sooner are you using Mana Tide? Are there some fights you could defeat last week that just feel impossible this week? Is it something healers will adjust to after another week of Dragon Soul?
We're talking about 5 different numbers here.
1) Mana at 85, pre-geared.
2) Mana at 85, post-geared.
3) Mana at 85, post-geared, post patch. <-- You're probably here right now.
4) Mana at 90, pre-geared.
5) Mana at 90, post-geared.
Our expectation is that things look like this:
2 > 5 > 4 > 3 > 1
-- Mana for a Dragon Soul geared healer (2) is too good, but not dramatically so.
-- Mana for a new level 85 (1) is too punishing.
-- For Mists, mana for a raid-geared character (5) should feel good, but not as good as 2.
-- For Mists, mana for a new level 90 (4), should not feel as punishing as 1.
-- For the current "lame duck session" you're playing a level 85 character using Mists numbers (3). This is NOT the same number as 2 or 5. We knew this would be the case, so we nerfed Dragon Soul by an additional 5% to make sure nobody started stumbling where they had smooth sailing the week prior.
In other words, 1 and 2 no longer exist, so we're looking at 5 > 4 > 3.
Value 3 will be irrelevant to most players in a few weeks, at which point the only relevant thing is 5 > 4 (meaning geared characters have more mana than ungeared characters).
Beta Class Balance Analysis
That’s exactly how we feel as well. We had been balancing BM AoE with Beast Cleave as the primary AoE method, and were thinking that the AoE pets would be a small boost on top of that if you went with them. However, as we recently noticed, the AoE pets over doubled your AoE DPS. The sheer damage that a Stampede of five Rabid Chimaeras were able to put out was, in a word, absurd. These changes should bring them back in line with where we intend them to be; a small boost over the other pets for AoE damage.
Additionally, we’re going to revert the more expensive focus costs of Froststorm Breath and Burrow Attack and instead go with 10 focus +5 focus per sec, and change Froststorm Breath to scale with the pet’s melee haste and crit, instead of spell haste and crit.
It’s true that monks have many resource-consuming "fun buttons," but they’re not unique in that regard. Bears, for example, are limited by both rage and time (which converts to rage). They have Maul to consume rage (at a very poor rage to damage conversion rate, but stackable), and many fun/utility abilities which are on the GCD, so effectively cost rage, or require shifting out of form, which can’t be done while actively tanking, and reset your rage. Paladins can continue using SotR and drop WoG completely for more damage, and are somewhat GCD limited. DKs have Army of the Dead, Chains of Ice, Control Undead, Dark Simulacrum, Glyphed Death Coil, Necrotic Strike, Path of Frost, Raise Ally, and Strangulate.
For Monks, you mention Guard, which is just as important as Blackout Kick and Purifying Brew, not some auxiliary fun/utility button, and Rushing Jade Wind, which is effectively free because it replaces a Blackout Kick. Breath of Fire and the level 30 talents are available to use for more damage, similar to Maul or SotR or Heroic Strike, or for group healing. If Healing Sphere were free, it’d replace Tiger Palm rotationally, and make them defensively GCD-limited. Dizzying Haze, Path of Blossoms, and Transcendence: Transfer are intended to be used at range, or to get to range.
As a Brewmaster, you shouldn’t be using the level 30 talents rotationally, other than perhaps against sustained magic damage, or where their group healing utility is more useful than your own survivability. We fully intend you to maximize your survivability and damage reduction while actively tanking, unless the utility provided by them is especially useful.
The TLDR of all this is something we try and state frequently: you can't just compare classes without evaluating the entire package. Lists of "these all work this way so my thing should work that way too" usually don't present super compelling arguments (for us at least).
So we've been discussing your changes.. you mentioned dropping stagger by 5%, but the new beta build is at 10%.
Yes, you are correct. We ended up reducing it all the way to 20%, not 25% as I said before. I mentioned in another thread that we're looking a lot at tank survivability and will have some more changes for you soon (tm). These are numbers adjustments, not mechanics changes.
The new rotation keeps about the same optimal usage of Purify - 85%. The difference is instead of 80% uptime of Shuffle with that, you have 75% uptime and simply never use anything but PB and BoK. Level 30 talents are never worth using for self-healing purposes, since you would be better off pushing back to 85% shuffle uptime given additional chi.
Sounds perfect. Thanks! We want Brewmasters to use the level 30 talents, but they shouldn't be rotational as they are for Mistweavers.
We said MULTIPLE times that if you limit how much chi we can have, what we are going to do? trim the fat and focus 100% of our chi on shuffle and purefying brew. Christ we been there at least half a dozen times on beta.
Every. Single. Time you guys mess with our energy regen, we left our other skills out of the rotation and focus 100% of our effort on shuffle/PB.
Great, then we’re on the same page. Other than niche situations, Shuffle, Purifying Brew (and Guard, which I assume you also are including) should be where you spend your Chi, just as a Guardian Druid uses nearly all of their rage on Savage Defense or Frenzied Regeneration, or a Protection Paladin uses nearly all of their holy power on Shield of the Righteous or Word of Glory.
The thing that has changed significantly since you last tried 11 (or 10.4) energy/sec base, is that Tiger Palm is free, so you have something to do with the extra time.
- 100% uptime on shuffle for 5 mins require 50 BoK uses or 100 chi.
- that leaves us with 55 chi to spend on other things.
If we use PB every 8 seconds that would cost about 38 chi, leaving 17 to spend on other things.
Long story short we can produce 155 chi and need 138 to keep shuffle up 100% and use PB very often.
You shouldn’t need (or usually want) to keep Shuffle up 100% of the time. You should have a limited amount of resources, that you need to intelligently distribute between Guarding, Shuffling, and Purifying. It shouldn’t be as simple as “Everyday I’m Shuffling”. :)
Now that actually does some dmg could we get the rolling dot mechanic put in this? It currently works like hemo (could we get that on this too) if you use it again with a smaller one it overwrites the bigger dot. Both dots already can't crit just like ignite I would hope they could at least get the rolling mechanic it has.
It’s currently intended to not do that, though it’s something we’re considering.
Echo of the Elements appears to duplicate Unleash Flame casts, but not Unleash Frost. Intended?
This should also be fixed soon. Unleash Frost should be able to Echo.
Searing totem is still a 35yd range for Elemental. Could we please see it bumped up to 40 yds? Thanks!
Sure. We recently changed Searing Totem to 25 yard range base (so 40 for Elemental).
Healing Stream and Healing Tide totem pulse speed is based off of only spell haste right? or does it vary by spec?
Only spell haste.
Also is Fire Elemental's attack speed based off of spell haste or melee haste?
Only melee haste.
I'd really like to know exactly how Stormlash functions.
There is a quote from Bismark or Saxe or someone about how laws are like sausages and it's best not seeing them getting made. I used to work with Bruce Shelley, and he said the same thing about game design.
Stormlash is complicated. You do not need to understand or remember all of this to benefit from the spell. We're just sharing the insides of the sausage because it was asked for theorycrafting purposes.
Stormlash. Chapter One...
-- The base damage is 20% of AP or 30% of SP, whichever is higher.
-- That amount is multiplied by 0.2 for normal pets, and by 0 for guardian pets.
-- Next, if it’s an autoattack (or spell that we count as an autoattack such as Wind Lash or Shadow Blades or Tiger Strikes), then it’s multiplied by 0.4, and then by WeaponSpeed / 2.6. And if it’s an offhand attack, it’s then multiplied by 0.5.
-- If it’s periodic damage, it doesn’t Stormlash, unless it’s Mind Flay, Malefic Grasp, or Drain Soul.
-- For all other spells, it’s then multiplied by BaseCastTime / 1.5 sec, with a floor on the BaseCastTime of 1.5 sec.
-- And then there are multipliers for certain spells: 2x for Lightning Bolt, 2x for Lava Burst, 2x for Drain Soul, 0.5x for Sinister Strike.
-- Finally, that’s the average damage it deals. It will actually deal that +/- 15 %.
-- It also has a 0.1 sec ICD on triggering, and can miss based on spell hit.
When I use the Unleashed Elements attack with Frostbrand Weapon and the Unleashed Fury talent, I go up to 150% speed (according to my character sheet). However, when I switch to Ghost Wolf while in this form, there is no additional speed increase; it stays at 150%, and then after 4 seconds it goes down to 130%. They don't stack. Is this intended?
Is Ghost Wolf's speed increase intended to stack with anything?
This should be fixed soon. Ghost Wolf should stack with other speed increases.
We felt like the uptime that a warrior had on a target in PvP was high enough without changing Heroic Leap to be a snare breaker.
We considered a variety of ways we could lower uptime, but ultimately settled on the PvP set bonus. One reason was because nobody actually had it yet, so it would feel like less of a nerf than changing something like the Charge talents. The other reason had to do with clarity. As I have said recently, one of my biggest concerns about the talent changes effect on PvP is that it makes it so much harder, perhaps even unreasonable, to learn the toolbox of every potential opponent. As a caster, a warrior that is at range and immobilized should be the visual trigger that it's okay to start casting, but you already have to mentally account for so many things, from trinkets to Spell Reflect, possibly Storm Bolt and perhaps even Disrupting Shout depending on range. Having to also mentally keep track of the warrior's Heroic Leap cooldown erodes clarity even further.
We don't find the argument that you need a dispeller to handle roots and snares to be compelling. You're not supposed to be a one man army. You're supposed to be glad that you have teammates to help you out. We don't think this one change is going to mean warriors don't have sufficient time to perform melee attacks (even sans dispeller).
I'll admit it was a very cool bonus and one I was looking forward to on my warrior, but on top of the overall package that warriors have, it looked like it was going to become a problem.
I don't expect many warriors to agree with our logic, because that would ultimately mean admitting that you were too powerful in PvP, but you asked for it, so there it is.
That said, I DO think what GC said about Stormbolt is silly because of course you'd want to use it in your rotation as a PVE DPS Warrior if you spec'ed into it. Otherwise it'd be nearly useless in PVE situations.
Yeah my comment was unclear. Storm Bolt doesn't reset the swing timer because we don't want warriors to have to worry about when it's okay to use or not. Use it. We let Heroic Throw not reset the swing timer because it's a small source of damage you can use when nothing else is available if you hate having empty GCDs. It will be a very small percent of total damage.
You honestly think Warrior mobility was higher than other Classes ? I think you should go look at Druids then because ours is about half as good as their is right now.
That's not the issue. The issue we were concerned about was warriors being too good in PvP, and that the leading contribution to that was that they were almost impossible to control. Warriors have a lot of mobility and a lot of answers to being controlled. Nerfing a set bonus that nobody actually has on live and few players have gotten used to seemed like the appropriate place to address that.
If we conclude that druids are too dominant in PvP, then we can look at whether their mobility is the main contributing factor, or whether it's something else like crowd control or healing.
If you think that warriors are weak in PvP or that other classes are too powerful, then that's an appropriate thing to bring up, but I don't expect to see a very diverse set of opinions in a thread that has been about warrior issues for 46 pages. I know it's not fun to be nerfed, and I don't honestly expect many players to say "Yeah, it's true, we were probably too good." That happens, but it's very rare. It's easy to look at a toy you almost had that slipped away and be disappointed. I get that.
We applied a healing nerf to Arenas and BGs because it was getting impossible to kill anyone. We hope this is just a temporary 85 measure.
Based on some of these reports, it sounds like percentage heals like Second Wind were affected. They probably shouldn't be. Percentage heals aren't boosted by PvP Power, so they shouldn't be nerfed by the blanket PvP healing debuff. We'll discuss and likely fix it.
Our stance on Second Wind hasn't changed. Under some circumstances, especially duels, it can account for a tremendous percentage of your health healed, but usually in group PvP (where we spend far more balance emphasis) you're unlikely to stay below 30% health for very long -- you'll either be healed up or killed.
Does heroic throw reset the swing timer anymore?
If not, please make it do that again, or attach a very minimal rage cost to it. Due to the ability costing 0 rage and not resetting the swing timer (So we think.), it has snuck its way into our single target rotation to fill up empty-gcds.
We purposely left Heroic Throw (and Storm Bolt) not resetting the swing timers for warriors who absolutely can't stand to have idle GCDs. As long as Heroic Throw doesn't push other abilities out of your rotation, we don't have a problem with it.
cleave is its not worth using cleave at all as SMF as the damage of heroic strike is 17645 and cleave on two targets is 17643 which is 11 damage difference, although it isn't much at all it still isn't worth using cleave at all, maybe add the do more damage when using one handers like heroic strike has.
We recently made Cleave do 1.4x damage when using a 1H weapon, just like Heroic Strike.
와우헤드 프리미엄 이용하기
한달에 $1보다 적은 값
으로 광고를 보지 않고, 프리미엄 기능을 해금하고 사이트를 후원해 보세요!
Patch 5.2: Ghostcrawler Class Reviews and Darkmoon Faire Changes
Mists of Pandaria: New Titles, News Round Up
News Round Up: Beta Raid Preview, Ghostcrawler Class Feedback, Tides of War
News Round Up: Account-Wide Mounts, Beta Raid Preview, No Level 90 Premades
New Mists of Pandaria Quests and News Round Up
Pandaren Dances and News Round Up
댓글을 달려면 로그인하세요
로그인이 되어있지 않습니다. 댓글을 남기려면
을 해 주세요.
« 다음 게시물
이전 게시물 »
다른 Fanbyte 사이트들
Hearthstone Top Decks
Final Fantasy XI
© 2021 Fanbyte