what i think bloodsurge should be

[jones904]

I personally think wild strike is fine as a rage dump when at excessive rage, but i do think that the bloodsurge proc could be better. Heres what i think blizz should do with the proc.

Bloodsurge: Bloodthirst has a 20% chance to cause your next Wildstrike to strike 2 times, Cost no rage and also proc enrage.


edit: i actually thought i put this but i meant this ^

[Batousai]

The current bloodsurge is already better than that. 3 wild strikes for the cost of one each with a one second global. 5.2 build is slighlty better still by removing rage cost completely. As for the enrage if bloodthirst crits it'll enrage you making your next wildstrike enrage last only 1.5 seconds longer. If you crit again with bloodthirst it would never have mattered if the wildstrike enraged you at all. Now for it proccing ragingblow... could be interesting to see and would make you think about not over capping ragingblow stacks.

[Thundertom]

Personally I would like WS to be a filler move, when there's really nothing else to push (DR / HT / anything else on CD).

I was thinking it would cost 0 Rage, but do slightly less damage. When BS procs, the damage would be the current damage and the current rage cost. also lowering the GCD as it does now.

That gives you something to push when there's nothing else to push, still keep HS/Cleave as a rage dump.

[Jaja]

Personally I would like WS to be a filler move, when there's really nothing else to push (DR / HT / anything else on CD).

I was thinking it would cost 0 Rage, but do slightly less damage. When BS procs, the damage would be the current damage and the current rage cost. also lowering the GCD as it does now.

That gives you something to push when there's nothing else to push, still keep HS/Cleave as a rage dump.

Couldn't agree more, it just doesnt feel right leaving globals empty. I would love WS 0 rage less dmg unless Bloodsurge procs. Means we would never have an excuse to have an empty global.

[Anuibus]

Couldn't agree more, it just doesnt feel right leaving globals empty. I would love WS 0 rage less dmg unless Bloodsurge procs. Means we would never have an excuse to have an empty global.

We would also never have an excuse to manage rage properly if we don't care about min maxing.

[Darkfriend]

Personally I would like WS to be a filler move, when there's really nothing else to push (DR / HT / anything else on CD).

I was thinking it would cost 0 Rage, but do slightly less damage. When BS procs, the damage would be the current damage and the current rage cost. also lowering the GCD as it does now.

That gives you something to push when there's nothing else to push, still keep HS/Cleave as a rage dump.

If you still have cleave on your bar, you're doing something wrong. I can think of like 1 good time to use cleave ever, and that's as Arms (When there are 2 mobs and one is about to die, and you have 3+ stacks of TfB where using SS isn't worth it due to imminent death.)

[Thundertom]

If you still have cleave on your bar, you're doing something wrong. I can think of like 1 good time to use cleave ever, and that's as Arms (When there are 2 mobs and one is about to die, and you have 3+ stacks of TfB where using SS isn't worth it due to imminent death.)

This isn't about cleave, but I'll admit that I probably use it still on AOE situations. I'm not perfect.

[Kaljurei]

I personally think wild strike is fine as a rage dump when at excessive rage, but i do think that the bloodsurge proc could be better. Heres what i think blizz should do with the proc.

Bloodsurge: Bloodthirst has a 20% chance to cause your next Wildstrike Cost no rage and also proc enrage.

I don't see why you need even more Enrage uptime as Fury.

Personally, I'd see it converted into reducing the Rage cost and buffing Wild Strike by 50%, and keeping the same GCD. 1s GCD is a bit clunky.

[Deleted]

I think Bloodsurge should stay the same, but to Wild Strike should have a higher priority than Raging Blow when under the effect of Bloodsurge. Example: Each time you hit the target with Wild Strike, you build up a charge of "Frenzied Berserker". Each charge lasts like 3 secs, duration refreshed with each stack. When you get to 3 stacks, your next Bloodthirst is a guaranteed critical strike.

It would take out some of the pain if you're running Fury as a new level 90 with low crit. If you get a Bloodsurge, and then use all three Wild Strikes, you'll get a guaranteed Enrage and Raging Blow off your next BT. I dunno, just thinking out loud.

[jones904]

the enrage is about proccing another Raging blow. Extra raging blow plus free WS = about the same as 3 wild strike but ur using 1 less gcd. makes it feel less clunky. and because WS is 220 wpn dmg and raging blow is 215 giving a little increase of enrage will hopefully balance out. look at the entirety of what the skill does.

[Deleted]

"Bloodsurge: Bloodthirst has a 20% chance to cause your next Wildstrike to strike 2 times, Cost no rage and also proc enrage."

So from a bloodthirst proc you get a free double damage wildstrike, and a raging blow. How is that not an incredibly large and unnecessary dps buff?

Wild strike is 230% off-hand weapon damage, Raging blow is 190% from both hands. So a raging blow hits roughly twice as hard as wild strike for SMF, closer to three times as hard for TG. So your suggestion is basically to give 4-5 wild strikes worth of damage per bloodsurge proc, plus extra enrage uptime. Not going to happen.

[Rorke]

Wild Strike is a joke in itself in the first place. I'm not sure why they couldn't keep Slam for Fury with its Bloodsurge proc.

[Video Games]

They really just need to make fury less rng anyway. So frustrating.

[Kaljurei]

They really just need to make fury less rng anyway. So frustrating.

I doubt they're ever going to do that. Fury was designed with the intent TO BE AN RNG SPEC.

Blizzard is going about it the wrong way for Bloodsurge. Removing the rage cost isn't really going to make WS better than RB. They just need to buff the Wild Strike's damage when Bloodsurge procs.