Jump to content


Photo

Going Forward: Cataclysm Discussion


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
355 replies to this topic

#21 Makael

Makael

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 05:03 PM

Regarding the haste/crit affecting HoT's in particular, (which we can assume will apply to us the same way it does for Priests) it seems to me this will be a great thing. Us Trees get "auto 4pT9", and the question of Rapid Rejuv. no longer becomes an issue. The way I understand the mechanic is that haste will not affect the duration of the spell, but will simply cause more ticks in the original duration. To me, that's the way I'd prefer Glyphed RR to work anyways; added HPS over the same time period, instead of simply more HPS over a shorter duration.

#22 Royalite

Royalite

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 59 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 05:25 PM

With the warrior preview out, a few things from a Feral Druid standpoint stands out:
Basically it sounds like they are wanting us to be able to do about as much damage as the dps are (so instead of having 16-17 dps dpsing,we now have 19 dpsers). Considering Bears have innated dps stats, we are currently the highest dpsers of between the four tanks (in equal gear level).


I don't know that I'd be jumping to the conclusion so fast that tanks are now a hybird dps capable of tanking. Otherwise everyone could be a dps with insane survivability. I don't think the idea is to have everyone doing hard modes as tanks pushing 10k+.

I think the idea is to close the tanking threat problem when you have overgeared dps. The tank scaling isn't happening on the same level as dps. The different between what dps was pulling in Nax gear and what they are now pulling in ICC gear is a larger scale in comparison to tank damage in Nax and ICC.

I beleive the intent is not to create dping tanking but normalize tank dps around the board between the tanking classes. Also to have a build in mechanic that allows for a progressive increase in dmg/threat without having to do the consistent threat tweeks they have been doing in WOTLK (recent threat buffs to war/dks for example).

While tank dps will improve, I don't predict it will be anywhere near an actual dps spec.

#23 grutak

grutak

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 55 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 05:34 PM

Depending on how things change in Cata, the AP addition is easy to check. Add 7% of your health as AP to an item in Rawr. My 5k dps goes up to 7500dps when adding 7% of my 62k health. Since I have zero heroic gear, you guys could expect to get past that, upwards of 8-9k dps, easily with 277 gear.

Edit: I went back and added whatever Rawr thought was BIS. 72k health, and the dps went from 5500 to 8000.

#24 Malleus

Malleus

    King Hippo

  • Members
  • 626 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 06:39 PM

Basically it sounds like they are wanting us to be able to do about as much damage as the dps are .


You've read them wrong, I think. If tanks had the same damage output as DPSers, DPSers in the tanking classes would be all but strictly inferior to tanks - no better for DPS, but much more vulnerable. The only reason you'd ever bring a Fury Warrior, Ret Paladin etc is if the tree had a unique high-end buff or debuff.

I think it's pretty clear from the statement "ensur[ing] tank damage and therefore threat doesn't fall behind" that Blizzard want to allow better threat generation without providing some high threat move or crazy multiplier that takes all the skill out of it. The easiest way to do that is to up tank damage a bit. In this way, tanks will have to practice a good rotation to maintain a threat lead just as DPS need to practice a good rotation to do their jobs.

#25 Fallenangel

Fallenangel

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 485 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 06:47 PM

Might wanna read the fine print:

"Whenever a tank gets hit, Vengeance will give them a stacking attack power buff..."

You can scrap that 20 tanks raid now.

#26 Promethius

Promethius

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 06:51 PM

There are quite a few knobs to turn with druid tanking and these revealed changes. Assuming Savage Defense isn't reworked, Vengeance can potentially increase the potency of the shield somewhere in the 50-60% range given current ap and health levels. However, that also assumes when ap is removed from gear, bear ap will stay relatively constant in agi gear. One of the potential situations is that bears may only get 1 ap per agi or maybe even none at all and Vengeance would be the dominant method of scaling bear damage.

The rage and maul changes are interesting. The single target rotation currently would devolve to something like maintain mangle then lacerate, then maul unless rage starved where you'd faerie fire or demo roar for rage. I'll be giving Blizzard the benefit of the doubt that they'll readjust bear aoe threat appropriately so that it isn't relegated to simply spam swipe and auto attack and rather something more like occasional integrated abilities like warriors, and hopefully make it so single target isn't just mangle once a min, lacerate once every 12-13.5 sec, and maul as much as possible.

#27 Vyshe

Vyshe

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 07:20 PM

Assuming all or most DoTs become more like a debuff you refresh on your target that does periodic damage at intervals based on your haste, then the only potentially problematic aspect of it I see is whether or not things like +haste/crit procs/pots/dynamic buffs are factored into it every refresh, every tick or every 0.x sec. Probably as much of an technical limitation as a design decision.

#28 Nitz

Nitz

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 278 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 08:39 PM

Their value (and haste, crit, damage components) will most likely be refreshed when... refreshed. As Lifebloom works now.

#29 ttyl

ttyl

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 145 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 09:00 PM

It will be interesting to see if they end up adding a 3rd direct healing spell for us such as how Shamans and Priests have gotten thus far and how they decide to deal with the hot 'downranking' aspect considering we are so based on them for our healing - unless they try and push us further to being more direct heal based. They have to be somewhat cautious with us in the fact when players are not meant to be fully topped off all the time it will make hots very very strong and I would expect a fair increase in cost of them too.

Ideally I am looking for some inter-class synergy between our spells rather than any more new ones especially when Lifebloom has been somewhat abandoned over the expansion after being a fairly core aspect of our tank healing.

I'm curious too. After this statement:

To get there, many healers will need a new spell B or A, except potentially druids, who just need the numbers tweaked on some existing spells so that they have more defined niches.

It sounds like we'll stay HoT-centered. Lifebloom as the quick heal, Rejuv as the efficient heal, and Regrowth as the big heal. Swap the current HoT coefficients of Rejuv and Regrowth and we're basically there.

#30 Hamlet

Hamlet

    Mike Tyson

  • • Guide Author
  • 11,567 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 09:03 PM

There's nothing wrong with that--Healing Touch, Tranquility, and to a large extent Lifebloom were completely dormant for an entire expansion. They don't have to make "new" spells to greatly expand the functionality we have.

#31 Vyshe

Vyshe

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 09:47 PM

There's nothing wrong with that--Healing Touch, Tranquility, and to a large extent Lifebloom were completely dormant for an entire expansion. They don't have to make "new" spells to greatly expand the functionality we have.


I agree - Nourish scaling with HoTs could probably be extended to HT and with some adjustments to cast times/costs we have our synergetic big heal. Changing Tranquility to a shorter CD and making it raid wide or "smart" targetted feels possible too, with shamans getting a hurricane-type heal.

But I almost expect to see a "big life saving cooldown" for Resto since they are moving out of niches a bit. Either way, I'm really excited to see what they've come up with.


(If they do give us a new heal I hope for something really crazy, like letting it refresh all hots on a target.)

#32 Lamente

Lamente

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 09:55 PM

I'm still not very clear on how they'll handle "haste decreases the time between tics, but doesn't lower the full duration" bit. Using the most basic interpretation, Rejuvenation (for example):

At 100% cast time (no haste), you have 5 tics in 15 seconds.
At 83.3% (repeating) cast time, you get 6 tics in 15 seconds.
Between 83.4% and 100%, haste functions like the current rapid rejuv glyph: faster tics, shorter duration.

With the above model, you end up with haste "benchmarks", where a min/maxing raider would shoot for specific exact numbers of haste, and avoid more haste until they can make a significant jump all at once, to gain the next tic.

So what if they try to make haste linear? I can think of two solutions for our Rejuvenation example:
  • at the 15 second mark, a "partial tic" happens, which is worth whatever percentage of a normal rejuv tic is left over due to haste. Example: your tics are 2.6 seconds apart, leaving 2 seconds between your second-to-last tic and the 15 second mark. At 15 seconds, a tic worth about 77% of normal happens.

    But what happens when the HoT is reapplied early, assuming the tic cycle is unaffected due to the stated "no clipping" goal?
    • Having a normal tic at that original 15 second mark means haste isn't scaling correctly when the HoT is reapplied.
    • Adding the "partial tic" combined with a normal tic at 15 seconds seems like a spiky and inelegant solution that would lead our healer a bit back to our "haste benchmark" scenario for consistency.
  • Any "leftovers" are distributed evenly between all tics. Example: your tics are 2.6 seconds apart, leaving 2 seconds between your second-to-last tic and the 15 second mark. 77% of a normal tic is distributed between all 5 tics, so that each tic is over 15% more powerful.

    This creates several more problems:
    • From 100% to 83.4% (for example) you're looking at a shorter duration but harder hitting tics. That's slightly better than the current rapid rejuv glyph, but still a situational benefit.
    • Reapplying with "no clipping" creates further problems: either the next tic doesn't happen until the original cast's 15 second mark, creating a time gap with no tics, or the tics always happen normally and haste scales unreasonably well with reapplications as haste nears (but doesn't reach) each "benchmark".
    Either way, you'd ideally be gearing around those "benchmark" numbers.
I'm just thinking out loud here. Apologies if my math is screwy, but I hope you get the gist of what I was driving at. If someone can poke holes in my logic or propose a better solution I'd love to hear it.

#33 Vyshe

Vyshe

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 10:11 PM

I'm just assuming they will do choose the simplest solution for both HoTs and DoTs: No partial end ticks, let us deal with the haste "tresholds" for getting an extra tick for non-refreshed casts, since the main focus for the change seems to be on HoTs/DoTs being refreshed continuously during an encounter and for those cases haste scaling will be linear.

#34 kalbear

kalbear

    Bald Bull

  • Members
  • 1,161 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 10:32 PM

I think they're going to have to do partial ticks for it to scale properly and meet their goal of being a simple mechanic that everyone understands. If they don't do this, refreshes are going to be the order of the day. The reason I say that they're likely to do partial ticks is that there exist enough external haste buffs or temporary buffs that you don't want to have to figure out what's best depending on whether or not you've got bloodlust, a haste pot, a haste proc or some combination of the above.

And partial ticks aren't that hard to compute. Simply always have it tick at the end and compute the remaining time. This shouldn't be that hard to code, and if it's for all dots/hots it shouldn't require too many special cases.

#35 Murna

Murna

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 149 posts

Posted 09 April 2010 - 12:52 AM

They also said, that we can't clip dots (and probably hots) anymore.
I don't think Blizzard wants "haste breakpoints". They'll probably find another solution.

Imagine a 15 second HoT/DoT that ticks every 3 seconds.
When you refresh it after 13.5 seconds, it will look like this:

0:12: tick
0:13.5: refresh -> new duration: 15 seconds (until 28.5)
0:15: tick
...
0:27: tick
0:28: refresh -> new duration: 15 seconds (until 0:43) (or let it expire, then: )
0:28.5: partial tick (if not refreshed)
0:30: tick

and so on.
That would work with every tick rhythm so you wouldnt have any haste breakpoints at all.

And by the way please don't cry about tanks doing DPS like the Dmg specs - these numbers will be tweaked countless times till Cataclysm. It's just the general mechanics, we should talk about - all of the numbers known now are irrelevant.

#36 Royalite

Royalite

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 59 posts

Posted 09 April 2010 - 01:06 AM

Might wanna read the fine print:

"Whenever a tank gets hit, Vengeance will give them a stacking attack power buff..."

You can scrap that 20 tanks raid now.


Yea I was considering it...although not for all 20 but that it could be abused based on some sort of taunt rotation to maintain stacks. Or however you will... It is all up to speculation but the traditional role for a tank is high defensive in exchange for low offensive. The price you pay for higher offensive is lower defensive capabilities. That whole choice and tradeoff aspect that Blizz enjoys to implement in the game.

The example used was considering the pve abuses but considering pvp if a prot spec keeps its high defenses while keeping large offensive damage, you're going to see pvp dominated by tanks of any sort in cata.

The numbers may be higher for tanks then we're used to seeing but I surmise it is b/c dps will be seeing large increases as well. I do see the numbers they gave to show how they are closing the damage gap but I think it is still a big jump to say the gap will be filled completely.

Although Blizz has been accused of homogenizing the classes/specs, I doubt they would veer from their traditional role definitions. I just don't see tanks becoming as good as even a hybird dps.

#37 Lamente

Lamente

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 09 April 2010 - 01:17 AM

They also said, that we can't clip dots (and probably hots) anymore.
I don't think Blizzard wants "haste breakpoints". They'll probably find another solution.

Imagine a 15 second HoT/DoT that ticks every 3 seconds.
When you refresh it after 13.5 seconds, it will look like this:

0:12: tick
0:13.5: refresh -> new duration: 15 seconds (until 28.5)
0:15: tick
...
0:27: tick
0:28: refresh -> new duration: 15 seconds (until 0:43) (or let it expire, then: )
0:28.5: partial tick (if not refreshed)
0:30: tick

and so on.
That would work with every tick rhythm so you wouldnt have any haste breakpoints at all.


I think I get what you're saying. A free partial tick at every 15 second interval, essentially. For some reason my mind wanted to combine this with either the previous or next tick instead. This still makes the end result less useful since the timing of the extra tick is completely random - doubly less useful since that extra tick has a lower value than all other ticks. Even if they averaged out the tick amount between all ticks including the extra one, you'd still have ticks going off at irregular intervals every 15 seconds, which increases the RNG (and therefore usefulness) of the extra tick. The only time this wouldn't be the case is when "breakpoints" are hit, so the concern that breakpoints are ideal is still there.

It's a better solution than I came up with, but I still wouldn't call it ideal.

#38 Vyshe

Vyshe

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 09 April 2010 - 10:47 AM

I think I get what you're saying. A free partial tick at every 15 second interval, essentially. For some reason my mind wanted to combine this with either the previous or next tick instead. This still makes the end result less useful since the timing of the extra tick is completely random - doubly less useful since that extra tick has a lower value than all other ticks. Even if they averaged out the tick amount between all ticks including the extra one, you'd still have ticks going off at irregular intervals every 15 seconds, which increases the RNG (and therefore usefulness) of the extra tick. The only time this wouldn't be the case is when "breakpoints" are hit, so the concern that breakpoints are ideal is still there.

It's a better solution than I came up with, but I still wouldn't call it ideal.


There's no need for partial ticks as long as you keep refreshing, since that won't reset the tick timer. Hots and dots will simply be like buffs/debuffs that while they are active tick every x seconds, modified by haste.

Also, calculating a partial end tick isn't hard, sure, but I'm still not sure they will bother with it. Some classes have lived with "haste breakpoints" during WotLk, be it cramming casts in between skill cooldowns or getting full benefit of trinket proc intervals. Hopefully I'll be proven wrong though.

#39 Deliverance

Deliverance

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 94 posts

Posted 09 April 2010 - 02:05 PM

Yea I was considering it...although not for all 20 but that it could be abused based on some sort of taunt rotation to maintain stacks. Or however you will... It is all up to speculation but the traditional role for a tank is high defensive in exchange for low offensive. The price you pay for higher offensive is lower defensive capabilities. That whole choice and tradeoff aspect that Blizz enjoys to implement in the game.

For PvE purposes, even if you ignore the Vengeance aspect and assume it can be kept up on surplus tanks, isn't tank dps when the tank is not being pounded upon in general sufficiently much lower than it is when he is being pounded upon that it would be distinctly suboptimal to use tanks in a taunt rotation instead of traditional damagedealers?

I certainly know that, as a bear, if I am dual-tanking a boss together with somebody else (standard debuff-taunt scenario), I deal significantly less damage when I am not the one being hit than when I am being hit as I gain significantly less rage in the first case.

I just don't see how the vengeance mastery talent will affect that situation at all - especially when we have also been told by Blizzard that rage gain will be decoupled from the actual damage inflicted (i.e. bigger hits will not cause a bigger rage gain).

#40 moz

moz

    Get off my lawn.

  • Moderators
  • 4,277 posts

Posted 09 April 2010 - 03:47 PM

On a slightly philosophical note, I hope they don't dumb down feral dps to the point that it becomes like everything else -- the ability to do very competitive dps if you're good/careful enough is an aspect that I think multiple classes wish they had more of. Including the revised mangle glyph should help a bit more with an easier rotation that's still reasonable in terms of DPS however, depending on what they do with clipping and refreshing of bleeds it could remove some of the complexity to the point it becomes too diluted. Tanking on the hand could certainly benefit from some variation, though I'd be interested to see how they balance the Vengeance concept for bears.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users