News Round Up: Scroll of Resurrection Changes, RAF for Monks
The Scroll of Resurrection program received some updates today for Mists of Pandaria, in light of players leveling Monks. Low-level Pandaren cannot receive Scroll of Resurrection rewards, all Monks will be ineligible for rewards, and talents will no longer be preselected.
However, Zarhym clarified that Monks will still be able to take full advantages of RAF bonuses as well as remain eligible for realm firsts. In addition there's no news about the mount rewards being removed anytime soon:
Pet lovers should also rejoice, as
will be purchasable for 0
on live servers soon. Blizzard Game Designer Jonathan LeCraft
this image yesterday, along with the message "Just added the fox kit to some vendors... #wow." The grind was very punishing before, so this change is great news--plus, it will breathe some life back into
There's also been an unusually large amount of class feedback on the beta forums. Of particular note:
has been significantly changed: "The net result will be that
stacks by the amount of DPS being thrown at you over 20 sec. There is no cap."
and Shadow Priest changes have led to an extremely impassioned debate in Priest threads.
Tons of 25s heroic testing happening in these upcoming few days--check out our
to learn about all the new bosses.
Scroll of Resurrection Update
With the upcoming release of Mists of Pandaria, the Scroll of Resurrection system will be updated to accommodate the new talent specialization system, monk class, and pandaren race. The following changes will be made in an upcoming patch prior to the expansion’s release:
The Scroll of Resurrection leveling system will be updated to work with Mists of Pandaria’s new specialization and talent system.
Resurrected characters will no longer have their talents preselected for them; however, a specialization will still available to be selected prior to entering the game.
Players who receive a Scroll of Resurrection will not be able to apply rewards (e.g. boost to level 80) to monk characters.
Players who send or receive a Scroll of Resurrection will not be able to apply rewards (e.g. in-game mount, boost to level 80) to pandaren characters that have not yet chosen a faction.
To learn more about the Scroll of Resurrection, visit the support site and read the
We're not making any changes to the way RaF bonuses function, which means monks won't be excluded from receiving the benefits of RaF when Mists of Pandaria is released.
Will they still get realm first achievements?
Click the cut to read the rest of the blue posts in the news round up!
Beta Raid Testing Schedule
Over the next few days, we will be testing quite a number of raid encounters.
Each encounter should be available at approximately the listed times below for all Beta Test Realms, regardless of suggested geographical region.
Friday, August 10th
Feng the Accursed (
) - 25 Player Heroic
10:30 PDT (13:30 EDT, 19:30 CEST)
Blade Lord Ta'yak (
) - 25 Player Normal
12:00 PDT (15:00 EDT, 21:00 CEST)
) - 25 Player Heroic
13:30 PDT (16:30 EDT, 22:30 CEST)
) - 25 Player Normal
16:00 PDT (19:00 EDT, 01:00 CEST)
Saturday, August 11th
Wind Lord Mel'jarak (
) - 25 Player Heroic
10:30 PDT (13:30 EDT, 19:30 CEST)
Protectors of the Endless (
) - 25 Player Heroic
12:00 PDT (15:00 EDT, 21:00 CEST)
Gara'jal the Spiritbinder (
) - 25 Player Heroic
13:30 PDT (16:30 EDT, 22:30 CEST)
Imperial Vizier Zor'lok (
) - 25 Player Heroic
15:00 PDT (18:00 EDT, 24:00 CEST)
Sunday, August 12th
Amber-Shaper Un'sok (
) - 25 Player Heroic
10:30 PDT (13:30 EDT, 19:30 CEST)
Spirit Kings (
) - 25 Player Heroic
12:00 PDT (15:00 EDT, 21:00 CEST)
) - 25 Player Heroic
14:00 PDT (17:00 EDT, 23:00 CEST)
Monday, August 13th
Stone Guard (
) - 25 Player Heroic
10:30 PDT (13:30 EDT, 19:30 CEST)
Will of the Emperor (
) - 25 Player Heroic
13:00 PDT (16:00 EDT, 22:00 CEST)
Lei Shi (
) - 25 Player Heroic
16:00 PDT (19:00 EDT, 01:00 CEST)
As always, this testing schedule is very fluid and subject to the realities of a beta environment. We might have to change the time of a testing session or cancel it entirely, due to bugs, builds, server hardware issues, etc. Keep an eye on this forum for the latest information, and thank you in advance for testing and providing feedback.
Given the breadth of this testing session, it's perhaps more likely than usual that one of these sessions will need to be rescheduled or switched to a different boss. We'll keep this thread updated with any such modifications.
10s vs 25s
As you can see from all the answers you got on this thread, there are many reasons for having so many 10 man raids going on right now.
I would also add that we're in "low season" at the moment, DS has been running for quite a while and a lot of players are waiting for MoP, so there's less people willing to raid right now.
Also, on top of all those facts you still have to take into account the simple personal preferences of players, while for some people, 25 man dungeons might be appealing, for others, 10 man's are just much more enjoyable, and there are many reasons for that to happen, it’s easier to get a better group cohesion, it can be much calmer and less messier, they’re the usual choice for groups of friends, it’s easier to get 10 really good players and coordinate them than 25, provides a visually smoother experience (it’s less cpu and gpu intensive, this is particularly relevant to players without high-end PCs), etc…
I suspect that we'll see an increase in the amount of 25 man guilds when MoP launches, but 10 man will probably still remain as the most popular choice, there are just too many things in its favour.
We just like to give players more options to choose from, that's why 25 and 10 share the same lockout, encounter difficulty (similar but not the same) and rewards, it's fine if we see more 10 man's than 25's, it’s all about giving players freedom of choice.
Blizzard at gamescon2012
You’ll definitely want to stop by the Blizzard booth at gamescom 2012 to try out our newest games and witness the array of entertaining activities on our stage. But you’ll also have the chance to participate in our contests and quizzes to win some incredible prizes from our partners!
The lucky winner of the Blizzard Costume Contest will take home an XMG P502 PRO Gaming Notebook from Schenker, some awesome gaming gear from SteelSeries, and a Mega Bloks Deathwing’s Stormwind Assault set. Charm our judges in the World of Warcraft Dance Contest to win an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 6 Series graphics card, a Mega Bloks Goblin Zeppelin Ambush set, and SteelSeries gaming gear. Runners-up for both contests can also look forward to more SteelSeries gear, T-shirts from J!NX, Cryptozoic loot cards, Mega Bloks packs, and more.
The winners of the Mists of Pandaria Leveling Contest will walk away with a Mega Bloks Sindragosa and the Lich King set, while runners-up could also snag some swag from SteelSeries, J!NX, and Mega Bloks.
In addition to our contests, you could also be chosen to participate in the Blizzard quizzes happening several times each day for the chance to win some novels and calendars from Panini, as well as more amazing loot from our partners.
Head to the Blizzard booth to play our games for yourselves, and you can also try out the latest Blizzard licensed peripherals from Razer and SteelSeries.
for details on the goods up for grabs, and check out our
page for more information on our contests and a full stage schedule.
We’ll see you next week at gamescom!
Silences and Interrupts
I agree with you, it's quite obvious that using silence requires less skill than using normal interrupts but PvP Balance is a very tricky subject to deal with and one that can get extremely complex given the colossal amount of abilities, classes and specs that need to be equalized. I think we have to put a little more faith into development, if silences still exist it's because in a proper testing environment they seem to make sense and be required, if they were to be removed, a lot of other changes would have to follow to make up for the CC loss it opened up on the classes that depended most on them.
For Mists of Pandaria, we’ve tried to reduce the amount of available interrupt abilities across the board, and we certainly don’t intend to increase the amount of silences that already exist.
Old Raid Gold Nerfs
We know that a lot of players enjoy soloing old content and we certainly don't mean to discourage players from continuing to do so but the reality is that there were certain raids or parts of raids that were incredibly lucrative for solo players.
We could do a series of hotfixes to take care of those farming areas one by one, but that wouldn’t make much sense since we’re about to launch a new expansion and we have an opportunity to deal with the situation now in a much more effective way. So to stop the impact that soloing raids has over the economy, we think it makes much more sense to change the formula for the way the gold drops across the board.
Soloing will continue to be quite profitable if you take into consideration AoE looting and vendoring drops (the rates have not changed on item drops).
I do realize this isn’t probably what you all wanted to hear and that it’s hard when a nerf is made to something you enjoy doing, but the fact remains this really did impact the economy in ways we feel we shouldn’t have allowed in the first place.
We realize there are certainly a few other things that might also impact the economy that might still need to be taken care of, but that’s not a rational reason why we shouldn’t be fixing this one if we can.
We really don’t want to kill the fun out of running old raids, why would we undermine an experience (even if unintended) that players enjoy? It certainly doesn’t make sense, so keeping that in mind I really want to make sure you are confident about your feedback being heard and about it getting to the developers.
Also, remember we’re still in Beta, things can still change, numbers can be tuned, etc… so please do continue to voice your opinion and keep giving us feedback in a constructive and collaborative manner, we both share the same goal of improving our game and developers are always open to better ideas.
Is there a chance we are going to completely revert this? Probably not, can it be adjusted? Certainly, make a good case, with some backed up arguments and numbers and hey, devs are reasonable people, they will hear what you have to say.
I can definitely understand how frustrating this must be to some of you and I really appreciate the way you continue to keep this thread constructive and bringing up very insightful observations.
Like I said, we still have plenty of time to do any kind of tuning or changes to the game before it goes live and your feedback might just be that extra factor that can turn the tides on certain decisions. I just would like to emphasize how persuasive careful and thought-out feedback can actually be, so please, if you have anything constructive and new to add to this topic, please let your voice be heard.
While I share some of your concerns on the amount of gold dropping from bosses possibly being a little bit on the low side, and I must say that I haven’t personally tested this myself on the beta, I was wondering if any of you with beta access has already tried to see just how much gold one can make by actually vendoring all the loot that you can get inside a raid, since AOE looting probably made it time efficient enough to kill all the trash packs instead of skipping them and going straight to bosses.
Also, I would like to shed some light on the constant comparison that is being made between playing the auction house and looting gold from bosses. I think this can be one of those fallacious arguments that can easily slip through as a valid argument and needs to be addressed.
There is a huge difference between these two, which is, playing the auction house doesn’t “create gold", looting does.
Just like in real life economics, adding gold to the system creates what is called inflation, prices rise because the amount of goods remains unaltered, while at the same time the amount of gold rises. So if players have more gold, they will be willing to spend more on the same quantity of items, and since prices are totally dependent on the laws of supply and demand, prices will consequently rise.
We can compare looting to doing dailies though, that argument works, since both generate gold, but we can't compare it with the auction house, that’s only a transaction of goods and not a generation of goods (actually this isn’t totally true, since there is an AH cut, so it can actually be considered a soft gold sink).
Consuming Content Too Fast
There's a broad spectrum of players on this game. And the LFR is interesting to some of those players, just as Heroic, soul-crushing bosses are interesting to a different set of players, and then you get everything in between. The community is way more different that what some of you think it is. Even the motivation behind each of us is entirely different in some cases. Some might raid for the loot, some might raid for the lore, others for the achievements, others for the challenge, others for the social experience of tackling content with their friends... and so on.
The only people that don't seem to understand this are either the ones entering this thread and bashing people like me for being "elitist" or a "special snowflake" without me trying to be one, and the other two that deliberately refuses to understand us / avoids the good questions / behave badly - are an MVP and the representative known as Draztal.
I'm not refusing to understand you. But I have the feeling you (and some others) won't feel I understand you until I say "Yes, you're right". I've provided ample answers on many of the topics we've touched on this thread, and I've questioned those things that looked odd to me. And in return I've gotten angry answers from some individuals that just refused to accept that perhaps there's more to consider than just their point of view.
There's no way you can say I'm refusing to understand this topic when I've posted in this thread over 60 times already.
It isn't only that. Back then you had a mountain to climb, with several smaller tops you couldn't skip. No matter when you started, the mountain would be waiting.
But if you started late, some levels of that mountain were completely barren. And actually some guilds were just feeding guilds in the upper side, as some players felt they were encouraged to jump from guild to guild climbing through the raiding progress rather than sticking with their own guild.
Regarding LFR and what some of you guys have suggested about delaying it for more than one week, here're the developers thoughts about it:
Players want to see the content. And is true that some (many?/all?) would stop running it if there was no loot. So something like not giving loot at all is not an option the devs are considering.
The reality is that LFR holds little competitive advantadge to hardcore raiders, especially in Mists of Pandaria. The most hardcore guilds will clear Mogu'shan Vaults on normal difficulty on the first week, and on the second week (when LFR will be open) they'll be able to run LFR and also Heroic. So, after a couple weeks, LFR would offer little benefit to a hardcore guild.
Regarding the delay of LFR furthen than a week, the developers feel it's unnecesarily punishing those players that aren't part of organized guilds. Even more if we keep in mind that one of the reasons to delay it more is to keep hardcore raiders from feeling obligated to run it.
One of the reasons why currently raiders (both normal and heroic) feel "forced" to do LFR is because it's possible to increase your and your guildmates chances of winning items by gaming the loot system. Since Mists of Pandaria introduces personal loot, using the system in this way won't be possible.
Can you point me to this please? I am very concerned about that particular issue.
Something I missed yesterday on my post. Regarding putting LFR on the same lockout with normal or Heroic modes:
It's something the developers may consider, but there're no immediate plans for it. There's plenty of logisitical issues they'd need to sort out first to make it function in a logical way.
i dont want LFR on the same lockout. i want it removed.
if players dont put in enough time and effort, they dont deserve to be rewarded with content.
What benefit would that bring to the game?
How do you explain to John Doe that he shouldn't even think about raiding in World of Warcraft because you feel that anyone that can't devote *this* much time to raiding just should not be allowed in? Furthermore, why would John Doe, the person that can't devote *this* much time to raid but would like to, have any interest in venturing into Azeroth?
Do you feel it's just alright to tell someone "sorry bud, you're interested on this game, but you don't have the time, go play something more fitting to you, like Solitaire"?
If you don't see anything wrong with that, then it's going to be difficult to have any kind of discussion in that topic.
extra mechanics. take rogues and druids, stealth through the dungeon. take a shaman healer, use
or whatever on him / her, they get stealth. run through the dungeon and kill crap.
thats basically your extra mechanics.
Except for the fact that there're requirements through the challenge dungeons that force you, among other things, to kill a set number of creatures on the dungeon to complete the objective, so ignoring pulls won't net you anything.
Also, you want challenging content, and your answer to that challenging content is that, rather than doing it you'd just stealth through it...
Why should "bud" have similar rewards than those that dedicate alot more time into mastering the game?
Its like paying for a vacation while the next gets maybe a day less of the same vacation but has to pay alot less. I would feel like getting kicked in the balls.
Except he doesn't. Hardcore raiders have heroic titles, heroic only bosses/bosses with heroic only phases, heroic mounts, achievements for those heroic kills. "Bud" wouldn't get that on the LFR.
Initially this mode appealed to me. And then it dawned. Let's say I make my A-team for this, run through it, get gold.
What reason is there to go back? In other words, what is the replay value of this extra mode (rehashed nonetheless)?
If noone on your realm ever beats your time, none. If you don't care about getting to the top of the table for that dungeon in your realm, none.
In the other hand, if you want to show that your team is simply the best, you'll probably keep going back many times, as with gear normalization there's just no other way to do it faster than through improving efficiency.
How hypocritical of you, as always.
Challenge mode's purpose is to finish the dungeon as fast as possible. That means that any way to do it is to be taken into account in order to do it asap.
If you go out of your way (not you, specifically) to ask for challenging content and speak about how much you love challenging, difficult content, but then proceed to say that you'd just skip the pulls in those dungeons, then something doesn't add up. Because in fact, what you'd be doing by skipping pulls, is making your way through difficult content by just not fighting it, which doesn't sound (at least to me) like actually wanting to face challenging content.
Honestly for challenge modes I was just expecting and wanting really tough bosses/pulls. Not arcade style speed runs.
I'll reiterate it again: Challenge mode is tuned higher than Heroic, there's additional pulls and mechanics, and there's a criteria you need to fulfill (similar to Scenarios) in order to complete the challenge. In that criteria there's a number of creatures to be defeated inside that dungeon.
WoW Summer Challenge:
Every week this summer, we’re challenging you to get together with a few friends to explore a part of Azeroth that you may not have seen in a while, or perform a feat that you may have never done. We’re calling them World of Warcraft Summer Challenges, and we’re going to be playing along with you as we hunt down rare achievements, get screenshots of amazing bosses, and try to find some rare gear for our transmogrification sets.
This week's challenge:
In this thread, we're talking about
this week's challenge
, posting stories about experiences completing it, and linking to screenshots.
Furthermore, if you've thought of something awesome to do while exploring the troll dungeons (that we didn't include in the blog post), this is the place to say so!
Rep Grinds in Mists
Is there a reason you're FORCING us to do daily quests for rep instead of allowing us to CHOOSE to grind the rep in dungeons?
Essentially because dungeons already reward loot from bosses and valor. Letting them also provide faction seems extraneous. Why not just increase the boss drops or give you more valor to let you buy stuff?
Here's how we got there though:
-- BC had an extensive attunement system. (I'm not passing judgment on that system because I kind of liked it myself.)
-- As part of that system, you were required to acquire a lot of reputation with different factions, which you achieved primarily by running dungeons over and over. This meant you might have a dude that needed to run
3 more times while someone else needed
-- To solve that problem, we let players wear tabards so they could earn whatever faction they wanted while running dungeons.
-- This made things much more convenient for players, arguably too convenient. The factions themselves sort of lost their identity. They were just different bars to fill. Also, sometimes by the time you hit Exalted or Revered with a given faction, you already had better gear from running the dungeon so much.
-- In Mists, we want to provide players alternative content to running dungeons. The dungeons are still there, but even with 6 new and 3 redone dungeons, you're ready for something else after a while.
-- Part of that something else are the Elder faction quests, such as
. We put as much work into these quest chains as we did the level-up zone quests. The stories evolve and new branches unlock. You earn faction by doing these quests and can also earn valor to layer on top of what you're earning from dungeons, or even in lieu of dungeons if you just don't have enough time or aren't interested in a dungeon at that moment.
-- As I said above, I know not everyone loves questing. (For that matter not everyone loves mount collection or pet battles or achievements or raiding). Strictly speaking, you don't have to do the factions to progress your characters, but we figure a lot of players will.
We could have a long discussion, probably beyond the scope of this thread, about how much time you should have to commit to feel like you're keeping up with end game progression vs. how much extra time you should be able to commit if you're interested in doing so. In Cataclysm, we think we steered too far into the zone of telling players to stop playing because there was nothing else to do.
No developer wants to hear "I want to play your game, but there's nothing to do." For Mists, we are going out of our way to give players lots to do. We don't want it to be overwhelming, but we do want it to be engaging. We want you to have the option of sitting down to an evening of World of Warcraft rather than running your daily dungeon in 30 minutes and then logging out. We understand we have many players (certainly the majority in fact) who can't or aren't interested in making huge commitments to the game every week and we hope we have structured things so that you don't fall very far behind. The trick is to let players who want to play make some progress without leaving everyone else in the dust.
LFR in MoP
I think this is an extremely sensitive topic and I would like to approach it very carefully.
First I think we have to realize that WoW is not just any game, it unleashes very passionate feelings on its players. It’s been a part of everyone’s life for so long that it has acquired a status that sometimes can rival many things in real life, it’s an amazing game, it really is, and you know this, otherwise you wouldn’t be here wasting your precious time discussing about how to improve it.
But you do take that time to help us improve our games, and you deserve to be heard, more so, we really want and need to hear what you have to say, you are the reason we have a community department. One of the biggest advantages of having this level of interaction is that we can act as intermediaries between you and the developers, and this is where your feedback comes in.
We realize that LFR is a controversial feature and you can rest assured that we are paying full attention to the impact it has over our community. Some of us do share a lot of your concerns, but as always, we’re all different players, with different perspectives and objectives, so opinions on the matter will vary greatly.
What I really want to emphasize here is that we really do hear all of you.
As a company we obviously need to have a common vision, planning, strategy, and goal, but understand that individually, most of us play our games just as passionately as you do. We all experience what you experience and this includes developers, game designers and project managers, and most importantly, we all have our own different opinions. It’s from the gathering and discussion of these opinions and the ones from our players that together we can reach a common vision with the common goal of making our games the best that they can possibly be.
Still you must realize that game designers can’t take in all feedback and apply it directly to the game, that’s why they were selected as game designers, they are great at making decisions, and these can be really tough to make sometimes, which is why changes usually cause controversy.
When LFR came out I too had quite a few concerns about it, just like I’m sure many of you had, and obviously, still have to this day.
LFR is still considered a new feature, we’re constantly evaluating its receptivity and its role on filling the gap between casual players and raiding without having it ruin anyone else’s game experience, it’s currently being tweaked for MoP and I’m sure it will continue to be adjusted until devs are completely satisfied with it.
Having said that, I would like give a few updates about LFR and its future in MoP.
We know that currently some guilds will feel that they aren’t maximizing their potential if they don’t run LFR to get particular pieces of gear and tier set bonuses when they’re starting to progress through DS, but for MoP you can expect LFR to provide very little competitive advantage (if any) to those guilds and here’s why:
We’re delaying LFR by one week, we don’t think there is a real need to delay it further than that. It would be an unnecessary punishment to players not in organized guilds because chances are that the real hardcore guilds out there will be able to clear
on normal difficulty within the first week of its release, which by the time they will be eligible to run LFR, they will also be eligible to start progressing on Heroic mode.
We must not forget that there is also another reason why those guilds feel that they’re currently “forced” to run LFR, and that reason is, because they can increase their members' chances of winning items by playing the loot system, which they won’t be able to do anymore in Mists of Pandaria with the
changes we’ve introduced
to the looting system.
Also here’s a brief plan about how raids will open on the LFR:
will be split into two tiers, and each tier will have three bosses. Both of those tiers will be available one week after the release of the normal raid, and you will have to clear the first tier before being able to queue for the second one.
will work in a similar way and will be split into two dungeons for LFR, each with three bosses.
will be one single dungeon queue.
Beta Class Balance Analysis
We changed how
is intended to let tanks generate additional damage and threat as content levels rise, despite not gearing for it (or at least not primarily). We're changing the design to let
play better with active mitigation, but the new design has some other advantages many of you will like.
As most all of you know by now, the idea of active mitigation is that the buttons a tank presses directly contribute to mitigation and survival. In some cases, this is timing-centric, such as
. In others, it’s both timing-centric and also involves balancing how you spend your resources among multiple abilities, such as
vs. Shield Barrier. In the latter case, it’s important that both abilities are compelling and compete well with each other. We are changing
to let those abilities be balanced.
I'm going to use
(a short duration large dodge buff) and
(a large instant heal) as examples. Getting the balance between SD and FR right is challenging. We want SD to win on average, but you’re limited on how often you can use it, and it’s not necessarily reliable -- sometimes you really need a heal NOW, and so FR is the right button. SD should win, but FR shouldn’t be too far behind, and they should scale similarly.
SD scales with the incoming damage: if BossA hits you for 60k, and BossB hits you for 120k, then SD is twice as valuable (in absolute terms) on BossB than on BossA. FR scales with your attack power: even a few 5man trash mobs will cap out your
, so your AP will be the same on BossA as on BossB.
isn’t any stronger on BossB than BossA.
On top of that, AP and boss damage scales differently as ilevel rises. We tried a solution to that problem where
scaled exponentially with AP in the last build. That has worked fairly well, but still failed at keeping SD and FR balanced when boss damage was significantly different from the baseline we used as a tuning point. For example, 25-player raid bosses hit twice as hard as 10-player raid bosses, which makes SD twice as valuable.
But wasn’t this post supposed to be about
increases your AP by 5% of the damage taken, stacking up to the cap, which happens quickly. We are changing Vengeance to increase AP equal to 5% of the damage you take for 20 sec. This buff will "roll" so that as it gets refreshed the unused part is added to the new buff, similar to how
work. The net result will be that
stacks by the amount of DPS being thrown at you over 20 sec. There is no cap.
-- Avoidance will not count against you. Avoiding an attack will extend the current
stack back to 20 sec (as if you were hit again for the same DPS).
-- Blocks, absorbs,
will also not count against you. The damage before these effects is used for the
-- To reduce ramp up time, we bump you up to halfway to whatever your average
level would be based on each individual hit. Essentially, we skip the first 10 sec of ramping.
-- Tank damage in 5-player groups will decrease. We think this is a good chance because it is weird and demoralizing when tanks consistently top damage meters in dungeons.
-- Tank damage in 25-player groups will increase. We think this is a good change because it makes tank DPS as relevant in 25-player raids as it is in 10-player raids.
-- With this change, Brewmaster damage will be extremely overpowered. We will fix it, but you may get a build where they are ludicrously good.
The rest of this post is nitty gritty details for theorycrafters. You do NOT need to read or understand this in order to effectively play a tank.
-- Whenever you get hit,
is added based on the damage of the hit before block, crit block, absorbs,
-- Whenever you avoid an attack from a mob where MobLevel>=TankLevel-3, your existing
is extended to 20sec remaining.
-- Based on how hard you’re hit, we estimate how high
e’s equilibrium point will be: DamageTaken / 1.5.
-- If you’re not at least half that high on
, we bump you up to that amount
-- The new
value is calculated as: 0.05 * DamageTaken + Old
SecondsRemaining / 20
and Shield Barrier’s formulae have changed to:
at 60 rage: max(2*(AP-Agi*2), Sta*2.5)
Shield Barrier at 60 rage: max(2*(AP-Str*2), Sta*2.5)
-- Yes, these do mean that it uses your AP without base AP from Str/Agi (but does still slightly include AP from Agi/Str when you’ve got the 10% AP raid buff or other +%AP buffs).
-- Please feel free to ask any questions you have about the mechanical details of this.
We have made several adjustments based on player feedback, raid testing, and fixing some bugs. Some of the changes were made to keep secondary stats scaling appropriately and some were when specs were doing too much damage. Here's a quick cheat sheet for where we are. Even "tuned" does not mean set in stone and ready for ship.
Priest -- Shadow roughly tuned.
Warlock -- roughly tuned except for Sacrifice.
Mage -- roughly tuned except Arcane and
Druid -- Feral and Balance tuned except for
Paladin -- Ret roughly tuned.
Rogue -- tuned (but we'll look at Assassination numbers posted above).
Shaman -- tuned.
Hunter -- tuned.
We are working on monk, warrior and DK next.
When you log into the big rule changing patch, our intent is not for your DPS to change much. Hunters may be in a special situation because of the expertise change -- I'll have to dig into that more.
However, when you jump to level 87, it wouldn't surprise me for your DPS to drop because all of your combat ratings change. This is just one of the unfortunate aspects of the way our gear progression works. The alternative, at least until we come up with something better, is your crit chance just increases each expansion until it hits 100%. It also sounds like you're using quest greens, which might be higher ilevel, but probably can't compete with all the gems, enchants and set bonuses of
gear (assuming you have some). Once you reach 90 and start getting blue and purple gear, your DPS will grow higher than it is currently on live. A lot.
Posting specific numbers (even rounded off ones, like "I do 47K") would help.
An update for Blood death knights: We’re going to try returning the Crimson Scourge passive, with a minor tweak. You have a 10% chance on melee hit against a Blood Plague diseased target to make your next
To add to this: Is it possible to let Crimson Scourge build up charges (I was thinking of up to 2) to carry over between packs?
And does CS reset
's CD as well?
Also, can we assume
's cast with Crimson Scourge will not generate RP so it doesn't mess with the current tank balance?
Nope, no charges; we want sitting on the proc to be a damage loss, but an option when you want to make sure you have one up for a soon to be incoming pack of mobs. It currently has a 15 sec duration. It does not reset
’s cooldown. If it did, you’d almost always use it on
; we want you to use it for a mix of
s. And no, the free ones will not generate RP.
So, with regards to moonkin dots and our new nuke-crit refresh mechanic, I'm assuming that's not an "indefinite refresh" model, so there's no recalculation. What I'm wondering is, when we get 2s, are we getting 2s of hasted dot, or are we merely getting one more tick, no matter our haste? Again, assuming it's 2s of whatever haste you had, so it could potentially be 2 extra ticks at high enough haste ratings.
Related to that, the moonkin 4pc adds 4s to our dots. For the sake of calculating break points, do we add 4s/2 ticks to the dot duration, or is that calculated in a funny way? In other words, will we have to calculate new breakpoints for 4pc versus no 4pc, or will the 4pc dots be calculated something like 14s + 4s (7 ticks + 2 ticks) for the sake of breakpoints?
The Moonkin DoT refresh mechanic adds 1 tick, regardless of haste. The 4T14 bonus adds 4sec to the base duration of the DoTs, so all haste calculations are done as if it started at 18sec.
You were supposed to nerf
not the base spells. Nerfing mastery and the base spell damage coefficents., for Balance, just favors the continuing problem.
The nerfs you see in this build help bring Moonkin down to the right level without
is still on the chopping block, and will be appropriately adjusted soon.
This recent change also makes
a no brainer over
for the same reason. The reduction from 18 second moonfire and sunfire, to 14 second DoTs makes it so you can not transition in one set of dots to a new eclipse. Because of this you will have to choose
to keep dps in pace.
Can you show some evidence of this? We’re seeing it within a couple % (and actually losing to
) of the rest of the row.
P.S. Why are treants even there?
Because they do good damage? And they want to be your friend?
Question about the
Item - Druid T14 Guardian 4P Bonus
Does the 10% to
0.45 * 1.1 = 0.495
0.45 + .1 = 0.55
It was multiplicative, but since that can be read ambiguously, we’ve adjusted it to say that it adds an additional 5% dodge chance (yes, that’s a very slight buff).
I dont know if its intended but the last spell cast in ether
is not buffed when fully cast. For example, when casting
with 15 or less solar energy the spell says its buffed however when the cast completes it uses the unbuffed damage. The same for
in lunar. Its very misleading.
Unintended; we’ll get that fixed.
Feral PvP on the other hand, needs some help. Our defense is almost non existent and the SR situation is just awkward at best. Feral PvP HP looks like a roller coaster... falling and rising fast, it's stressful and isn't very fun to be honest.
back to Feral recently. Not sure if you have that change.
Is there a design purpose in why aimed shot,
all suppress autoshot? It seems strange to me that the 2.0 cast time shots do not and the 2.9 and 3.0 ones do. For MM in particular, it seems to conflict with the design of the mastery, since suppressing autoshot will reduce
procs and long cast time shots mean less chances for
procs as well. It also potentially creates a micromanagement benefit that I thought was intended to be removed when autoshot was changed to work while moving.
should feel different, like you’re distinctly pausing to precisely aim a perfect shot. That’s mostly a kit thing. In terms of gameplay, it reinforces that
should usually be your primary focus dump (but
being a better dump during periods of high haste is cool and something that we do intend to continue supporting).
was in a similar boat, but we changed our mind on that, in order to help balance the talent row; in the new build going up now it no longer interrupts Auto Shot. Barrage still seems weird to allow Autos during, but it does give you more
procs on average so handles the balance concern.
First, this is a great thread. Thank you for both the moderation and responses. I hope you have similar threads even after MoP gets released. A few hunter comments and issues:
based damage scaling was reduced from 0.5715 to 0.3572. That wasn't documented, so I wanted to confirm that it was intentional.
’s attack power scaling coefficient was indeed reduced from 3.2 to 2.0.
- The pet focus regen appears to be 5* the hunter's focus regen multiplier. Is that correct?
Pet Focus regen is indeed 5 base, and inherits 100% of your haste, so its focus regen should be multiplied by the same amount as yours. Or, an easier way to look at it is that since your base regen is 4, and its is 5, and both are increased by the same amount, its focus regen will be equal to yours * 1.25.
doesn't refund focus on a miss/dodge. Because of the same massive dodge issue, it seems like it should (just like other focus-costing shots). What's your plan here?
should be refunding on avoids in the next build.
didn't used to cost a GCD. With a GCD, it interferes with a smooth rotation in BM and is simming as a very poor value CD (~1%). Is the GCD intentional?
We just buffed
further, to 8% per stack, and nerfed
to 8% per stack.
We just did a pass on Hunter pet abilities, and took any that are expected to be kept up the whole time off the GCD. Also, if any had durations equal to their cooldown, we either reduced the cooldown or increased the duration, so that there’s some slush room for overlapping.
was simming fairly low compared to just not using it at all in most specs. This seems partly because it suppresses autoattack so the opportunity cost is high. Are there any plans to change
(and that whole row) has been significantly buffed in the next build you’ll get.
I've been trying to get accurate pet focus regen numbers but it's difficult to test accurately in game given the limits of the display and the fact that none of it ends up in the log. Currently it looks like the base pet focus regen is around 5 fps, but is it possible a blue poster could confirm if that's the correct number?
It would also be extremely helpful if pet focus regen (and crit chance for that matter) were added to the pet display.
Also if I'm testing correctly, it looks like
does not increase pet focus regen (even though it is called haste and not attack speed). Which haste and attack speed bonuses increase regen for pets has never been incredibly clear or consistent. The terminology doesn't seem to be a reliable clue and measuring pet focus regen precisely is difficult. Is there a chance of this getting clarified at some point?
Base pet Focus regen is 5 per second (which is different from base hunter Focus regen, which is 4).
is indeed just attack speed, not actual haste; we’ve fixed the tooltip for the next build.
It was indeed using the old formula for
’s damage in
. This has been fixed for the next build.
Got a quick question about the 3% crit chance reduction against +3 level targets: is it calculated before or after crit multipliers?
Fire: would it be, e.g., 25% * 1.5 - 3% = 34.5%, or (25% - 3%) * 1.5 = 33%?
: 25% * 2 + 50% - 3% = 97%, or (25% - 3%) * 2 + 50% = 94%?
My assumption is that it's subtracted after the other calculations, but as this could have a meaningful impact on simulation numbers, it'd be good to know for sure.
A Frost mage with 23.60% character sheet crit will crit 20.60% of the time normally, or 91.20% of the time with
. ((23.6-3)*2+50 = 91.2)
A Fire mage with 36.71% character sheet crit will crit 50.57% of the time with
buffed spells). ((36.71-3)*1.5 = 50.565)
Any there any plans to change the way
refresh is managed for Brewmasters?
What I mean in regard to this is how
is unable to refresh to the full 12 sec duration unless it is 6.0 seconds or below. At the beginning of a
application you can get it to 12 seconds. However at any point above 6.1 seconds
will never refresh to 12 seconds. This makes it very frustrating because you have to watch the time on
to be below the 6.0 mark to reapply it. I understand a Brewmaster wouldn't want to waste Chi by reapplying
too early or often but even at 6.1 seconds it will just waste 2 Chi without increasing duration to 12 seconds.
I wouldn't even mind if you say had
at 7 seconds and did a BoK that it went only to 12 seconds (the cap right now of time) than simply eating our 2 Chi and that's that. However, I think it'd be best if any reapplication of
above 6 seconds should automatically refresh it to 12 seconds.
In the build after next, you’ll find that
will always add their duration to the existing buff if there is one, instead of just adding an imaginary tick. If you hit
with 7 seconds left on
, it’ll go up to 13 seconds remaining.
Curious about this statement. Given that Brewmasters' damage taken (and therefore
under the new model as I understand it) is highly correlated to their
use, what is it that their damage is going to be tuned around? As is, I can tweak my damage taken by around +/- 30% by just varying my PB usage. How frequently will you assume PB is used when tuning our (Brewmasters') damage?
usage will not affect
. Damage taken from the
DoT does not cause
. When taking damage directly, you get
for the pre-
damage, so you already got "credit" for taking that damage again. You don't get to double-dip when you take the damage as the
While on the topic of
, can it be documented somewhere what the colors (green, yellow, red) of the
stack mean, exactly?
The color is purely for display purposes, to give you a quick indication of how strong the
DoT currently is. The logic for the colors is based on the damage per tick as a % of your max health. Red means >6%, Yellow means >3%, Green means >0%.
Is it your intent that WW monks use
as a part of their single target dps rotation? I'm sure you have read the issues that the majority of monks have with a channeled melee ability in raids. Perhaps a glyph that allowed you to channel it while moving but would also remove the stun would make the move itself more viable?
It is intended. We understand it can be a little challenging to use it, but we’re okay with that. The damage was recently too low to justify using it rotationaly, but that should be better now.
What is the motivation behind taking away Spirit -> Hit conversion for all healing spex except Mistweaver? It's a perk I really appreciated in Cata.
You have bandaided the issue in PvE by kitchen-sinking the abilities healers are expected to use, but the spell-specific bonuses don't help PvP or more specialized PvE situations, where heals need to use their entire control toolkit, not just spam
We want healers to do reasonable DPS, but we’re always wary of healers being able to do damage comparable to their damage specs. With much of the Mists overhaul and the de-emphasis on passives, we were concerned that say a Resto shaman would be able to
as well as an Elemental shaman. Limiting the amount of free hit floating around (which is a stat healers don’t stack) helps to keep their DPS in check. It’s possible now that so many abilities are affected that it would be fine to let all spells benefit from hit, but that’s the concern.
Is there a reason why
has a cooldown?
We rebuilt how
functions under the hood, so it should feel much more responsive. Give it a try in the next build. Unfortunately, it still needs to have a cooldown for technical reasons. We wanted to take the cooldown off, but there were some issues with having multiple
s bouncing around at the same time from the same Monk, so we put the cooldown back on.
We also just retuned the level 30 row,
bounces 7 times, and
does 25% less damage/healing.
Two the changes to
was this fixing the bug? If so that is a pretty significant bug. A lot of recent logs showed
being ahead of every other spell or at the very top of usage. As some suggested this isn't exactly a gamebreaking nerf to the class but it raises a good question I think is that are people going to go back to
's hot was benefiting from Holy Power twice. We want it to be a competitive talent but not mandatory.
The more relevant point I wanted to make though as we continue to test is that having the entire community shift from one perceived best talent to another isn't super helpful. If we fail at our balancing and one talent is the best on live then I certainly won't blame anyone for choosing that talent. (I'll cry into my coffee mug of gin, but I won't blame you.) However, during the beta testing stage, it's much more helpful if players try out every talent rather than just choosing the one that conventional wisdom or the forums or the hardcore raiders say is the best. They may very well be right, but that just limits the exposure, testing and feedback of the other talents. This isn't the time to be the best. This is the time to give us feedback while there is still time for us to react.
I checked a few dps calculators, and it seems that while
is indeed scaling with AP,
isn't. It's only scaling with Base Weapon Damage. Is that intended as well?
I just checked, and both of them just scale with normalized weapon damage.
itself scales with AP.
In the same vein as
for Resto Shamans, can
be added to the
passive for Holy Paladins? Testing it on a Raiding Target Dummy, it misses just enough to be an annoyance, if I wanted to use it as an AoE heal for the tanks and melee.
That makes sense.
What is the vision and role of
? Like many of my fellow Paladins in this thread we are confused as to the direction this spell is going. The spell has previously been an execute and like all the other executes in the game, it was a fun hard hitting ability when we were fortunate to get the chance to use it. My concern is with the relationship with
and it being an execute ability. Is
causing the nerfs to this ability?
I think what you’re really asking is “Can Hammer of Wrath hit harder?” It can, but that means nerfing all of the other abilities to compensate for its damage. It’s still a good button. I’m not sure all execute abilities need to be comparable, and in fact if they are, it’s one of those things that makes classes feel really similar. We wanted to restore the warrior Execute to its original design of basically being able to kill a solo questing target.
Prot Paladin DPS (that phrase alone caused me to lol) seems to have taken a hit as a result of Ret tuning. Judgement and
feel overly weak now. SotR has always felt weak (but is a bit more spammable and has a defensive buff).
That is possible. We specifically were tuning the DPS specs, so it’s possible we threw Protection’s damage inadvertendly low. If so, we can easily adjust it upwards.
is now really hurting compared to
We’re not convinced of this yet.
was broken so of course it felt like a great button (and before that everyone was using
). The tick itself isn’t huge but it ends up being a lot of healing over the course of the spell duration. This is just how hots work – they are the antithesis of burst but still contribute to a lot of healing (and overhealing) without taking up a lot of healer GCDs.
An update for paladins: we're going to buff
and slightly nerf
. We will likely nerf
enough to offset this change, but need additional testing first. For now, we are not changing Ret's
bonus so it will be buffed for them as well.
An update for priests: we're going to reduce the cost of all heals by 10%, reduce the mana gain from
, but buff Discipline to 50%
. We're also making
priest only, for fear that priests will be asked to choose that talent to benefit someone else.
AoE heals that hit more than 6 targets have their total healing multiplied by (6/TargetCount). For example, if you heal 6 targets with a
, it may do 1000 healing to each (total of 6000). If you heal 8 targets, it would do 750 to each (total of 6000). The net result is that AoE heals heal for the same total amount on more than 6 targets, but it is split between all of the targets. Additionally, pets do not count toward the TargetCount. If you heal 8 targets and 2 pets with the same Bloom, all 8 players and 2 pets would each get 750 (total of 6000 to players, 1500 to pets).
Renew seems to be benefiting from 15% bonus when in
-- akin to it being considered a Single Target Heal. Additionally, it also seems to be auto-refreshing (and thus, gaining an additional tick).
The 15% benefit to
is intended. We decided it made more sense to associate
refreshing itself to get that extra tick is not intended and we will fix.
From the simulations I've done, t14h shadow was sitting very middle of the pack post DP nerf. It was really quite acceptable at 109k dps in T14h (Even with some other classes up around the 120k mark)
It might be helpful to mention what are the classes that you believe are trumping Shadow. I’m not saying this is the case here, but what often happens is we nerf A, B and C, and all the B players only really read or understand the B nerfs, so in their mind, their nerfed B is still competing with a pre-nerf A and C.
This is a combination of responses to some points in this thread and a couple of others, such as the "bench" thread.
When we stop seeing posts that rank
priests ahead of
priests, then we'll feel like the talents are in a better spot. Not every priest wants to have to cast nukes as part of their healing rotation, and we are just not going to make
mandatory. If you enjoy the style, awesome. That talent is for you. You shouldn't have to take it though. (When I heal, I tend to play the mana game a lot, because healing just enough without overheating is fun for me. Rather than overheal, I'll gladly sit idle a lot rather than waste a heal.
would work well for me. Other healers, even some I play with, want to stay more active and keep spells queued up and cancel them or just keep everyone topped off. That's cool too. The game supports lots of different healing styles, except for the one where you just spam your highest HPS spell and nothing else, which hasn't been supported since Icecrown.)
We're not noticing a big longevity problem between priests and druids. Shaman seemed a little low so we are examining the impact of the Water Shield and Resurgence chances. We may also lower the cost of Healing Rain. It is definitely a challenging thing to sim out how much mana the various healers use because it has a lot to do with spell choice. You should be able to use your more expensive heals somewhat, but you should also be casting a lot of Heals as well.
We don't feel like mana regen in 5-player dungeons is at all a problem. Mana felt tighter (too tight in retrospect) in Cataclysm launch. If you are running out while healing a dungeon boss, I would suspect it's because you are using Flash and it's equivalents too often or you're just used to the rapid mana regen of full Dragon Soul gear. It's possible mana is tighter in raids, especially 25 player, but we're running a lot of raid tests right now and it's just not a common theme we're hearing from those players, which again leads me to want to understand what is going on for players who feel they are struggling. Again, being as specific as possible would help. Which bosses? How far into the fight are you struggling for mana? How quickly are you having to Shadow Fiend? Are you wearing Mists quest greens, Mists PvP gear, or scaled up Dragon Soul raid gear?
Returning Holy Concentration to a higher value is extremely unlikely. We felt that created more class balance problems than it solved. We are more likely to lower priest and or shaman heal costs if we think it is needed. We just don't want to be in a situation where we improve priest and shaman healing now and are then forced to nerf them after launch. Nobody will be happy with that outcome.
I'll dig into the "Realistic 60 sec Holy priest average" posted. You shouldn't feel, with any mana talent choice, that are you are sitting around a lot too scared to heal. (The example I used for my healing style above is just one play style, not the only valid way to play. I could overheal a lot more and still be fine.) The risk should be that any time you replace a Heal with a
that it's going to hurt a little, but sometimes that is still the right call. A priest casting nothing but Heal should last indefinitely. That isn't true of say a paladin who uses a lot of free spells. PW:Shield for Disc is a little more risky. It has a lot of benefits, but overall you should be rewarded for shielding folks who are taking damage and not just throwing it around indiscriminately on the raid. The former should benefit you through Rapture. The latter should slowly run you OOM.
So I have two questions now. Firstly are Disc Priests really expected to spend a quarter of a fight doing nothing? Secondly, why are some classes, bugs aside, allowed to have the room for a huge percentage of over healing when some of us can barely do our job with minimal over healing?
I'm not sure how you can argue that the Mistweaver being idle is an anomaly but the Disc priest being idle is mandatory because he or she lacks mana. It's hard to know without watching a video of the fight why certain healers were not healing 100%. You should be able to heal 100% though. What concerns me the most are those players who are trying to heal e.g. a Raid Finder encounter and running out of mana very quickly, or at least much faster than say Resto druids. Those are the situations I want to understand.
I keep comparing
because the math is easier.
should be a choice too, but it is about not spending the mana in the first place rather getting it back.
No offence GC but all Priests are having to play the game the way you prefer we are having to stand idle, as in not healing.
I agree, and I believe I said that as an illustration of why
will play well for some healing styles and not others. What I keep arguing is that if too many priests take
because they feel like they must for mana, that is bad for the game. Buffing the crap out of
so that priests feel like they always have enough mana is not a good design decision.
In other words, in
, every point of mana you spend on
buys about 41% fewer hitpoints for your raid than it would if you waited and spent it on PoH instead.
That's intended though. If say 3 people in the group are wounded, then
is the right answer to that. It shouldn't be more efficient to cast
3 times. If you are using
to heal 1-2 players, or even more relevant, if you are casting
when a Heal will do, then you will start to run OOM.
Yet you have made nuking mandatory for Disc even without
. The buff we get from
cannot be ignored as Beta stands right now and even then we are struggling to compete with other healers, even Holy Priests, with the 25% buff from
doesn't provide mana any longer and is on a 30 sec cooldown. I'm not certain that casting all of those
s for the
benefit net gets you ahead in HPS or HPM. If it does benefit your HPS in the long run (it was pretty break even last I looked), then I concede we took the choice away that Disc used to have about whether to use
I want to thank everyone who is arguing intelligently and providing numbers. All of that helps.
Crzed explains far better than I can why
is now mandatory (he's talking specifically about
Yes, that was a good explanation.
lets you stack
veru quickly, which then makes you feel like you're supposed to do so. Probably the right solution is to have
provide only 1 stack (or even none).
Pretty much the same thing I was going to post. You say PoH is the right answer for 3 people and in many fights tested so far in 25 man there is never a shortage of groups with 3 people where PoH can be used with pretty low levels of overhealing. So we're using the spell you say is the correct answer but if we keep using it, even stacked in spirit gear with all spirit gems and buffs, it's not something we can sustain for very long. That's where the idle time comes from. We have to hold back and fill time with
or just passive regen to be able to sustain the right answer over a 6 minute encounter.
Those are two different things though, which is why I'm trying to divorce priest mana from the
discussion. In a world without a five second rule, you aren't helping your regen at all by going idle. The only reasons to go idle are you don't think anyone needs healing at the moment or you literally don't have enough mana to cast anything. (If you can afford to heal a lot when nobody needs it, then you're just overhealing which mana management is intended to discourage.)
Maybe you could clarify if it is any of these situations:
A) You cast what you feel are appropriate spells and run OOM quickly. You then Shadow Fiend and then ultimately go OOM again (at which point priests with
use it to get back in the game).
B) You cast what you feel are appropriate spells but notice that when other healing classes do the same, they end up with far more mana than you.
C) You are so scared to cast anything that you stand around a lot.
Kael and I illustrated all of these situations quite clearly. I am actually now offended that you posted this and did not real this.
You should calm down if you want to keep contributing to the discussion. As I said, we appreciate your passion, but keep it in check. There is no room for offense here.
, that is a terrible idea... As posted above, Penancing the boss is a trade off. You give up three stacks of
for some AoE capabilities to
(not likely, but maybe) and three stacks of
. Making it 1 or 0 stacks makes
even harder to use... If you want us to use
less, because you don't think we are "balanced" around it, either increase the CD to a minute or reduce the bonus to 15%. Else, keep it and let people
for stacks... that's just mean thinking of removing that
We didn't realize the synergistic effects of having
provide 3 stacks plus the possibility of instant
s. All of that means that
is easier (relative to live) to stack, which means Disc really needs to use
on cooldown to benefit from the healing boost. We prefer when Disc can choose to nuke the target. We don't want it to be mandatory. We could nerf
's healing as an alternative.
While it would be nice if maintaining
was not required, I think disc numbers would have to be brought up substantially. At the moment,
is offering an average 15% buff to overall healing and is very easy to stack due to
. You trade off the
stacks to do this, but it is worth it for the buff. Disc just does not feel viable atm, especially in 25's, and this nerf wouldn't help that feeling a bit.
That's fine, but much as with
, we don't want Disc to be balanced around maximizing
. If we need to nerf those mechanics and buff priests, then that's the right call.
Look at the logs I provided, without ~20% time spend solacing I wouldn't have the mana to be competitive.
I did, but I'm unsure what "competitive" means. Would you be out of mana and couldn't heal while other healers could keep going?
Actually they're saying that by not spending that mana on heal and instead idling/solacing, you set yourself up for larger returns later through using other spells. It doesn't make you regen any faster, but you're able to do more healing in the same window of time, increasing your efficiency. This is why
feels required. Nerfing
does nothing to fix the problem with our sustained efficiency, it just brings our burst potential more in line. No one is saying they like spamming
a ton, it just happens to be the most efficient means for us to heal.
Okay, I think I understand the context. You're saying for a given GCD that generating mana through
to afford a more expensive heal is better than spending a GCD on Heal itself, which is slightly mana negative and not awesome throughput. It may be that priests with
don't Heal often, and we could live with that.
I disagree with your last bit though. Nerfing
does help to fix the problem with sustained efficiency, because it's masking a potential problem.
I think many of you guys are here: I need mana.
gives me mana. If you nerf
, I won't have mana.
But, I am here: Priests need to be able to function without
I think now that paladins and monks are hopefully not broken, we'll find that the other healers are closer together. If what several of you are saying is correct (druid > priest / shaman, or even druid > Holy / shaman > Disc) then that will show up pretty quickly.
I guess I have to really ask you a question, how hard is it supposed to be? At BC when I was doing heroic dungeons & kz it was a little challenging (that went away as gear got better). In WoTLK it was a breeze at the start. Cata was almost non-healable at start. So far Mists to me seems harder then BC but easier then Cata. I have not run out of mana doing the dungeons, but I have not hit the heroics yet. I will say I do pride myself on being very mana efficient (ever since the start), I don't cast a f
(even now in DS gear) if a heal will do.
The problem I see is if we are expected to stand idle, it is not fun. Doing nothing in a dungeon during a fight is not enjoyable plain and simple. I do think overall mana regen is an issue, if you want the vast majority people completing dungeons and having fun it needs to be higher. If you want what happened in Cata where people thew up their hands in frustration and walked away form healing then keep it as is. It really is a matter of what you want in your game.
Mana management was a little too hard for healers when Cataclysm launched. It felt better by the 4.1 and 4.3 dungeons. We want it to feel better in 5.0 than it did in 4.0, but we want mana to stay relevant longer, while it largely went away for 4.2 and 4.3 raiders.
You should never have to stand idle, so long as you are healing somewhat intelligently. If you are casting a lot of
s because your group is taking a lot of unnecessary damage then you probably need to change your group strategy. If you are casting a lot of
and overhealing, then you need to change your healing strategy. But you should have enough mana for a 3-5 min dungeon boss fight under almost any circumstances. Nearly all of the dungeon wipes I see are because players failed to understand the mechanic (which is often our fault) or failed to execute, not because the healer couldn't keep up.
I don't understand why it couldn't keep its 1.5s cast time and reduce the mana returns instead.
We are going to try
at a 1.5 sec cast and 0.7% of mana return.
Most people using old tier scaled gear I think have been using t12 set bonuses for healing.
We read this a lot, but we're not actually seeing it a lot in the raid testing. Players doing so certainly aren't helping themselves at all, because you won't actually be raiding with the scaled up set bonus of your choice. :)
If it starts happening a lot, we'll just make those set bonuses not function on beta. We want to balance priests (and all healers) around a baseline case, not a gimmick like an old set bonus or even a mandatory talent.
I know this has nothing to do with
/Mana (well not much), but if you're feeling generous, could you please explain the thought behind our 2pc being 10% reduction to
, a spell even you said should be used sparingly, when, like, Holy Pally gets 10% to
, a very commonly used spell?
We wanted the set bonus to let priests get more benefit out of
, because we thought that would feel cool, because as you point out, it's normally something you can't use often. The paladin benefit is probably more useful, though their 4pc is a single-target heal while it's CoH for Holy. The
set bonus could probably safely go up.
We're trying to get away, a little bit, from the design where every tank and every healer have virtual cloned set bonuses. It will make balance more challenging, but will ultimately help keep the game fresher. Set bonuses are one of the few really different things players have to look forward to in gear.
On the subject of mana returns, we're a little concerned about
as well. It ends up being a tremendous source of mana for Disc, so much so, that the right behavior is probably to macro it to make sure it gets used on cooldown. We'd rather
be a short cooldown with some flexibility (e.g. timing when the boss does a ton of damage) and not a button you have to use every 45 sec (or less with
To be clear, using a macro to use
with one hotkey is fine. You're making the decision when you want to use
. If you're using
as soon as it is off cooldown, essentially turning into a passive, then we think it's dumb.
We would buff Disc, possibly through
, if we made a change here.
Don't just remove it and add to
. Do some innovative with it, if you are going to do anything.
We wouldn't remove it. It's a fun ability and we like the thought of Disc maximizing it with
PoH or in PvP with the glyph. We just want players to be able to benefit more from the throughput portion of the ability and not just have to use it as a short cooldown Evocate.
Sounds good to me. Will
's throughput be buffed at all? It'd be great if the 25% increased critical strike chance was buffed, so that we could choose which heals it would be best to use it on.
We haven't finalized it yet, but we are trying 100% crit chance and 25% mana reduction -- essentially flipping the two values. The risk of overheal with a guaranteed crit would make it optimal not to macro, while not being horrible for anyone who just wants to keep it macro'd.
Out of curiosity, on the average 6 minute fight what are you guys aiming for each of the three healers in a 10m to be putting out in terms of HPS?
Are there going to be more fights this expansion where the dps requirements are too strict to allow 3 healers and they have to go dps (like the majority of DS?) Thanks again!
It's really hard to provide those numbers since healers have so much control over whether they are healing for maintenance or going all out. Healers can drive themselves out of mana quickly if they want to, but provide huge healing as a trade off. Often, it changes depending on what part of the fight you're in. We think having that degree of control is the fun part of the healer resource system. It's also why it is so challenging to tune longevity of healing specs compared to the throughput of DPS specs. As with PvP, we rely a lot on player testing and feedback for how healing feels, since it's hard for us to recreate healing or PvP environments. Harkening back to my oceanography roots, you have controlled laboratory experiments vs. field collection and sampling. Healing and PvP are hard to test well in the lab.
We definitely don't like forcing situations where healers get dropped for DPS. On the other hand, DPS checks are a good way to ensure that the encounters aren't balanced solely around the skill of the tanks and healers alone, and they can be fun for DPS as well. It's a sticky challenge (and again I don't mean to derail).
We gave Disc a lower
for this reason, but so far in actual player testing it's not bearing out, so we wanted to err on the side of being generous with mana. If further testing suggests that Disc now has much stronger regen or longevity than Holy, we can adjust further.
is hitting unusually hard. I took
off my bars because they are no longer necessary. Might want to tune the damage down on this ability.
Good catch. We neglected to lower its damage when we cut the cast time back down. Easy fix.
I really just don't understand what you all are doing with us, and it sure as hell seems like you have no idea either. You want a tip? Stop taking advice from the 1,000,000 casuals that probably don't even theorycraft on beta and get some direct input from players that actually know how to play the spec and see how they feel about the changes.
You might have missed the post where I said class designers are required to take a drink every time we read “the devs don’t know what we’re doing with the class.” It’s hard to tune things when we take too many drinks, so please keep that in mind.
We do take feedback from experienced, intelligent players very seriously. It’s awkward for us to state outright in threads “Yeah, dude, I read your feedback, but you obviously have no idea what you’re talking about, so we’re doing to discount it.” On the other hand, there are brilliant theorycrafters who never step foot in raids, as hard as that might be to believe, and there are plenty of very hardcore raiders who are terrible armchair designers. Ultimately, one of the Blizzard core values is “every voice matters,” and we try to practice it here. Your words will convince us more than your deeds anyway. Stick to the strength of your arguments, not the awesomeness of your achievements.
We are a dot class, and our dots are our worst abilities.
I believe SW:Pain and
do about 25% of Shadow’s damage, which seems fine for a dot class. Your dots don’t need to be your highest damage button in order to be a dot class, and in fact when they are, that leads to ignoring everything but the dots. Multi-dotting is cool, but we're not thrilled with the gameplay that is just dot everything in the room and ignore
. Dotting only is fine for large groups of weak mobs, but in a more traditional multi-dot situation, we want the dot juggling to be layered on top of the nukes, not to the exclusion of them.
Shadow does very well on Will of the Emperor, which is pretty much the best case scenario for multi-dotting. Yes, Affliction does even more dot damage, but that’s partially because Affliction has 3 dots. I’m not sure it’s a requirement for Shadow to do as much dotting as Affliction in order to be a fun spec and still feel like a dot class (and keeping up 3 dots on multiple targets can be harder than 2).
Overall, we do want specs like Shadow, Affliction and Balance to do well when multi-dotting is possible. What we don’t want is for those specs to dominate in multi-dot situations and be at the bottom on every other fight. We just can’t guarantee that every raid tier will have an equal number of single-target to multi-target fights, and unlike say a warlock, the Shadow priest doesn’t even have the option to respec to a different DPS spec to meet the needs of the encounter. All we’re trying to do is bring the extremes closer together.
We have no burst CD. Our burst CD is save orbs and lose overall damage.
I think this is a valid concern. Power Infusion is available as a talent, but there is still some pressure to use it on another character. On the other hand, it’s not absolutely essential that every single spec have the same spells. That's the sort of thing that leads to class homogenization. We’ll consider some options here.
Our damage relative to other classes is low, this really can't be argued with.
I’ll argue with it. Slyck was the only one to try and post numbers in this thread, and those logs show Shadow doing well on Will of the Emperor and less well on
. But there is also a mage and a warrior down there with the priest, and you would have to dig into these logs more thoroughly anyway, since
puts debuffs on casters than can cause them to go stand in the corner for periods of time. I’m not sure what the argument is with the
parse. The priest seem to be in the pack with many other classes. Slyck’s argument is that their damage barely goes up in execute range, but it does go up, and seems to mirror that of the warriors, who have a great execute.
Also keep in mind, many buffs and nerfs have gone out since these parses were made (partially as a response to all of the raid parses we got). We’re going to be doing some more raid tests this week, so we’ll get more data. Please keep an eye on it.
But don't rage over this ^
is supposed to be a baseline ability for Shadow.
I can’t tell if this was intended to be sarcasm or not, but
is what happens when you choose the
talent and go Shadowform.
Item - Priest T14 Shadow 4P Bonus now also increases the damage done by
How in the world does that make sense, work with your desire for Mists of Pandaria nor even not come across as hypocritical?
The original set bonus change is essentially a nerf to the
talent, so the change we made was just to keep it breaking even. We don’t consider, and haven’t seen any evidence, that
is a mandatory talent.
should provide similar DPS over the course of a fight.
is probably the most complex of the talents do to the consuming mechanic, so we definitely don’t want it to be mandatory.
There are several changes coming for shaman in the next build, some of which won’t be easily datamined, so we’d like to let you know about them. We shifted around where damage comes from for both Elemental and Enhancement. The overall damage should be down a bit, but both specializations should still feel strong. Remember, if you’re giving feedback and making comparisons to other classes and specs, please list who you’re comparing to, as it’s quite possible that you’re feeling underpowered compared to someone who is overpowered.
The were stronger than we wanted, so we reduced the amount of spell power that the standard version gets to 40%, down from 55% (Primal: 60%, down from 82.5%). The
talent was also too strong, so we reduced the damage of the
宠物 - 原始火元素
DoT by 65%. Also on the topic of talents,
was too weak, so we increased its damage and stat effects by roughly 17%, but reduced its proc chance with
to 6% for Enhancement (previously it had a 30% chance to trigger an
for Enhancement, which made that talent pair too strong).
Further, on the topic of shocks, we recently reduced the shared cooldown of shocks to 5 seconds for Elemental shaman. More recently, we lowered
’s damage a bit and significantly increased
Specific to Enhancement, we wanted to bring DPS down a bit and also make them feel like more of their damage was coming from their active buttons, rather than passively. The one significant change that you probably won’t be able to datamine is an increase to
’ damage. They now get 50% of your attack power each, up from 30%. And their
ability’s damage has more than doubled. The net result should be that
s are significantly stronger than before, probably somewhere between 70% and 100% stronger, depending on gear.
is a button you have to use every 30 seconds, and
is a button you have to use every 60 seconds. No need to target anybody or do anything other than hit these buttons when the cooldowns are up. Are these abilities OK?
Yes. Those abilities are on the GCD so you are choosing to them instead of something else, and in any event, you can't build a macro these days that just pushes all of your rotational buttons for you.
Abilities off the GCD are more dangerous. An ability like
still isn't typically macro'd because lining it up with other cooldowns (including Bloodlust) is usually more beneficial. However abilities that give you resources, off the GCD, without a risk of wasting that resource are the ones to take a hard look at.
An update for shaman: we're going to make
cheaper and heal for a lot more. We are going to make
heal for slightly more.
mana cost decrease a second one in addition to the one that went live today?
No, we just made one change so it sounds like you already have a build with that change.
was buffed by 25% in the current build. Either the tooltip or the data-mining suggest otherwise.
is currently not causing extra 50% ticks from the
DoT effect, is this intended? The Tooltip for
reads "all your other affliction periodic damage effects", and the dot component of SOC should surely fall under that description.
That seems totally fair, we’ll try to get that in, but it may be a few builds.
i've noticed the
transports you slowly if going from the purple one to the green one. is it indended?
This just in! Huge buff to warlocks! Purple Gateway now transports you just as fast as Green Gateway, a 50% buff.
I was assuming that (roughly), the new
plateau was something along the lines of the damage per second the tank wasreceiving. We could also say it as MeleeSwing/Swing Timer. I've been working on some values assuming this, but maybe I'm wrong then?
Our test wasn't rigorous because we just dumped the bosses into a test scenario. In the actual encounter they would use Rend Flesh and other abilities. Looking at the actual encounter with all of their abilities, the tank in question has 24660 AP and an additional 68450 AP from
. You might take a little more damage if you stood in the pools a lot. Fundamentally, the mechanic should be that it approaches an equilibrium of your damage taken per second as AP.
What Zelix was getting at is that Haste is a low-value stat for DPS warriors, particularly Arms. During Cataclysm, it was worth about 1/2 as much as Mastery and 1/3 as much as Crit; we avoided gear with it. My own beta observation is that for Arms it's up to about 1/2 of Crit's value and 3/5s of Mastery's. Subject to someone telling me my numbers are wrong, that appears to be better, though not great (and it could also be because the removal of Impale and old Deep Wounds has devalued Crit, resulting in a relative increase only).
Our concern is scaling, really.
We hurt haste's value with the Enrage change, but we thought it was still a good change for gameplay reasons. As I posted above, we haven't made a pass on warriors lately. If we have to, we could always make
tick with haste, even though we typically don't do so for melee for reasons I outlined much earlier.
What would you 'expect' a prot warriors
to be sitting around whilst tanking.. Oh let's say Two of the Three stone guards in a 10 player raid. Hypothetical situation, I've been tanking them for 20 seconds.
Would you expect it be higher than our current
cap? Or lower? Or approximately the same?
We just tried this out, and get roughly 25K AP from gear, and 40K AP from
in this situation as a Protection Warrior in 489 gear. That should be roughly similar to what you currently get. As we noted, it will be higher in 25-player raids.
Is enrages while enraged not proc'ing more charges of
It is for the moment at least, but we're not crazy about it. Specifically, using
while Enrage is up doesn't give you more rage or
charges. The concern was that Fury would just macro
into every attack. With the previous design, this wasn't worth doing because once you were enraged being more enraged wasn't valuable. Now it is. It's more intuitive (and probably fun) if
always grants a charge, but we want
to be a button warriors actually use, not macro. Another option would be to put Berseker Rage on the GCD, but we thought this would feel even worse. If we become convinced warriors won't macro
, we'll happily revert the change.
To elaborate, we don't have a problem with macro'ing say
. You are still making a decision about when you are going to use the spell. But if you're using a macro to tell the game that you want to use
on cooldown no matter what, then the ability isn't adding anything to the game and should just be a passive.
Currently is seems like, unless cleaving is part of a bosses mechanics Arms falls well blow Fury. My current theory is simply because Arms doesn't benefit from Haste buffs at all(*). Hero gives 30% Haste for 40 seconds,
gives 10% Attack Speed buff.
We're working on another major balance pass, based on having made several bug fixes. At the moment, we're showing Fury ahead of Arms at 85 but the two specs pretty close at 90 with a variety of gear level. AE needs a bit more work because there are so many different AE scenarios (quick cleaves vs. sustained mass AE burn phases and everything in between).
They have already talked about this and their stance is tanks don't get
from Players. They also said tanks are viable in PVP as flag carriers and defenders as long as their DPS is not the same or higher than a DPSer. Healer DPS will also be lower than Tanks if they chose to DPS as a healer.
This remains our design even with the new
Also, Haste was horrible even before the Enrage changed. 7101 Haste Rating gave you an extra 14 swings over a 5 minute fight. Then it was based PURELY on crit if those 14 extra swings even mattered in the end.
Also, does the +10% Attack Speed count as "melee/range haste", or just attack speed?
I asked this because I didn't include it in my calculations above, because I'm confused as to how it works. (Lowers the Cast Time of Steady/
on my Hunter.)
“Horrible” isn’t very descriptive. Haste was much closer to crit before the
change than it is on live and is now. As I mentioned, the
change, which was a good change overall, did hurt haste. We agree it’s a problem, but we’re not sure yet how to fix it. We don’t think lowering GCD or cooldowns would work well for warriors. I can elaborate if it’s not obvious why.
The melee “haste” buff such as
is just attack speed, not regen.
What actions will be taken to ensure that
doesn't fall victim to being bound to heroic strike and forgotten?
We believe it is sub-optimal to do so.
(for Arms and Fury) doesn't make
free, so it's possible you won't have enough rage to benefit from all of the attacks. Arms needs to watch Heroic Strike use for
and Fury sometimes needs to use it rotationally when
isn't available. If it's convenient for you to macro it, that's fine with us, so long as the best possible DPS is to decide when you use
. (Having a separate HS key and a HS + DC key is totally different.)
, which someone might have mentioned, is more problematic. It is probably always worth using on cooldown for the mana benefits alone.
There may be other "no brainer to macro" abilities, but those are things we want to fix, not templates that it's okay for
(which started this discussion) to be a no brainer.
获取 Wowhead 高级会员
[As little as
less than $1 a month
to enjoy an ad-free experience, unlock premium features, and support the site!]
News Round Up: New Recruit-a-Friend Mount
News Round Up: Mistweaver Changes, New Beta Spellbook, and More
Ask Blizzard Anything: Blizzard's Reddit Q&A
Patch 5.0.5 Notes, Jade Forest Preview
Mists of Pandaria: New Titles, News Round Up
News Round Up: Shorter Raid Cooldowns, Darkmoon Rabbit, 5.0.4 Class Mechanics
[Sign In to Post a Comment]
其他 Fanbyte 站点
Hearthstone Top Decks
Final Fantasy XI
© 2021 Fanbyte