[Destruction] It's happening

[Scathbais]

I'm fine to discuss something when people use objective facts and honest observations, not ignoring the points or diverting while spewing ad homs because they don't like the message.




^ This is exactly what Scathbais, Socronoss, and Gaidax have done since I entered the thread. Yes, it is pointless to try to have a discussion with them.

With you Bacon, you tried to polish Legion's reward system, and then tried to separate that from the RNG (which is what a lot of people are pretty pissed about in this xpac), and you cannot separate the rewards from the RNG to make it sound good. If you're going to talk about the rewards, then you have to include the layers of RNG, gating, and grind you must plow through to get them.

You have no objective facts because you haven't played the game and yet you claim we are not being objective? You can't expect us to take you seriously when you aren't basing your arguments on direct knowledge of Legion. I know us pointing out that fact makes you upset, but it is simply the truth.

Calling someone ignorant about Legion (which you admittedly have zero first hand knowledge) is NOT an Ad hominem. I am just pointing out the fact, as have others, that you have to actually experience it to have a valid point of view. You on the other hand, dismiss our point of views as fanboyisms and what ever else insults you attempted to splash all over this thread.

I am done talking to you on this topic, because it is frankly a waste of my time. Good luck to you, but what ever you do, please don't do it here.

[Dastey]

So anybody has an idea why we as warlocks only get 2 new legenberrys while other classes (i´m locking at you mages) get plenty more?

And all we got are multispecc ones? Blizz already shoot their powder in reassembling the speccs?

I think the (unofficial) reason was that warlocks currently have 5 specc specific legendaries where a class like Mage only has 4 and this will bring it more in line

[Caolela]

You have no objective facts because you haven't played the game and yet you claim we are not being objective? You can't expect us to take you seriously when you aren't basing your arguments on direct knowledge of Legion. I know us pointing out that fact makes you upset, but it is simply the truth.

Calling someone ignorant about Legion (which you admittedly have zero first hand knowledge) is NOT an Ad hominem. I am just pointing out the fact, as have others, that you have to actually experience it to have a valid point of view. You on the other hand, dismiss our point of views as fanboyisms and what ever else insults you attempted to splash all over this thread.

I am done talking to you on this topic, because it is frankly a waste of my time. Good luck to you, but what ever you do, please don't do it here.

So you're saying that in order for anyone to have any clue to what Legion is about, they have to, at minimum:

1. Spend $50. to buy Legion.

2. Spend $15. or a token for a sub, more as needed.

3. Grind some indeterminate amount of time and jump through the hoops that Blizz has set up...until when?

...then at some point they magically discover...what? That Legion is actually good? Haha! And what if they're PvP'ers? Hilarious! What if they want their money back because they thought Legion sucks after all? Good luck! And that none of this "secret knowledge" can be found elsewhere, outside the game or at lvl 100 or less? Did you just sail in on a raft from New Guinea? We have things like electricity now, and running water...

Yes, Legion has a lot of new content as I stipulated above. PvE content, but that's about all that can be said good about it. For PvP they only added 2 new arenas, took away gear and char set-up choices and put in RNG and templates where everyone is a clone of the other guy. And that new PvE content is grindy RNG to the max as well. Then the issues with classes and all the rest.

And for the last time: no one has to spend $65.-95. and 1-3 or 4 months to find it out.

Attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself is known as ad hominem. That's you and a few of your fellow travelers here.

[Tabrotar]

I think the (unofficial) reason was that warlocks currently have 5 specc specific legendaries where a class like Mage only has 4 and this will bring it more in line

Ah ok but it just seemed a bit bad that the other classes got more new ones (and with that more choise) and we only got those multispecc ones.

[Grenzstein]

Why would someone, that clearly has no interest and doesn't play Legion, spend their time talking about it here ? Seriously. Just leave us to discuss our game in peace. No need to keep derailing the topic.

[Turturin the Warlock]

Why would someone, that clearly has no interest and doesn't play Legion, spend their time talking about it here ? Seriously. Just leave us to discuss our game in peace. No need to keep derailing the topic.

You realize you are essentially asking why a troll spends time trolling, right? Thought the people responding to him would have figured it out by now.

[Baconeggcheese]

I'm fine to discuss something when people use objective facts and honest observations

The issue is that actual objective facts don't line up with your "objective facts".

The very first point I jumped on was you stating that two xpacs that were literal polar opposites in design philosophy were the same, which is the opposite of objective.

With you Bacon, you tried to polish Legion's reward system, and then tried to separate that from the RNG (which is what a lot of people are pretty pissed about in this xpac), and you cannot separate the rewards from the RNG to make it sound good. If you're going to talk about the rewards, then you have to include the layers of RNG, gating, and grind you must plow through to get them.

The issue is RNG isn't what your gripe was about that I jumped on, you shifted goalposts by making this what the issue was about. Hence why I just dropped it, because I got to the root of what you meant to say as opposed to what you said.

[Caolela]

The issue is that actual objective facts don't line up with your "objective facts".

The very first point I jumped on was you stating that two xpacs that were literal polar opposites in design philosophy were the same, which is the opposite of objective.



The issue is RNG isn't what your gripe was about that I jumped on, you shifted goalposts by making this what the issue was about. Hence why I just dropped it, because I got to the root of what you meant to say as opposed to what you said.

"Literal polar opposites in design philosophy"? That would depend on what 'parts' of the design - WoD and Legion - one wants to cherry pick to support such an assertion. In other words, you know better than that, Bacon.

The fact that as I've said, Blizz started on the Legion-type RNG train in WoD with the Accolade BiS drops through Assran or 3 RBG wins/week that did not exist prior to WoD. Before WoD you simply bought your trinkets with Honor/CQ like the rest of your PvP gear. We also had the pruning of abilities in WoD that continued in Legion.

In a wider sense, WoD showed many similarities to Legion in moving to a much grindier [sic] model, with for example: flying, small but frustrating to traverse zones in Draenor, mostly irrelevant profs, missions that were re-branded into WQs/emissaries for Legion, various time gates, and so on.

So I think anyone who looks honestly at WoW since at least WoD can see the longer-term trend line that Acti/Blizz has decided upon. Crank up your hamster wheels.

[Lucrece]

Release candidate build and virtually not a single change has gone through for the now even more useless cry havoc or the worse magistrike and odr.....

The destro changes are half baked, they just diverted into other specs without finishing the job. You'll still be using wreak havoc 100% of the time on any 2+ target fight, nothing changed with the talent's overbearing dominance in that tier (essentially, you'll depend on that talent even more for cleavin in m+), and soul conduit is in the same position of eclipsing channel demonfire.

ELT is still there. Destro sustain with ELT is still crap. Lord of Flames interaction with the grimoire tier is still shit.

Guardian cd's still cost soul shards. We are virtually at the end of the expansion and they haven't even visually updated 2 of the 3 warlock specs (chaosbolt, green fire, firery aura removed as well; affliction still uses vanilla animations).

[Baconeggcheese]

Release candidate build and virtually not a single change has gone through for the now even more useless cry havoc or the worse magistrike and odr.....

Odr was buffed to 15% a long time ago and magistrike's strength is relative to CB's so nothing really changes there. They don't get worse with the changes.

I would have liked to see big changes happen with destro legendaries since most of them are pretty mediocre and 2 of them are pure cleave legendaries for no apparent reason but eh. It is what it is.

The destro changes are half baked, they just diverted into other specs without finishing the job. You'll still be using wreak havoc 100% of the time on any 2+ target fight, nothing changed with the talent's overbearing dominance in that tier (essentially, you'll depend on that talent even more for cleavin in m+), and soul conduit is in the same position of eclipsing channel demonfire.

So the point wasn't to change that as far as I ever understood. Peoples complaints were that there was too much power baked into that specific talent and wanted power pulled out of it while keeping the row the way it was. That's what this change does, they pulled power out of WH and then buffed the baseline spec so that the spec isn't only capable of pulling numbers on 2 target and nothing else.

It wasn't all the changes I'd like to have seen on my wishlist, but they definitely tackled some of the biggest issues with the spec.

[Maleific]

@Lucrece
Just re:Odr it was buffed to 15%.
Magistrikes should increase Chaos bolt damage so they have some use on ST imo.

I agree with you on the rest, but won't hold my breath. I would be happy if GoSac was made viable and if we got an interrupt.

[Gaidax]

In relation to PTR, Tier 20 4pc needs a buff and very clearly so, I don't know why Blizzard still did not address it.

Other than that things are workable.

[Deleted]

Magistrikes is actually one of our top cleave legendarys again. Especially with T20 4pc.

[Turturin the Warlock]

In relation to PTR, Tier 20 4pc needs a buff and very clearly so, I don't know why Blizzard still did not address it.

Other than that things are workable.

the t20 4pc seems really strong to me and takes the guesswork out of mastery. What is your issue with it?

[Gaidax]

the t20 4pc seems really strong to me and takes the guesswork out of mastery. What is your issue with it?

Mastery is changed massively and it's RNG is reduced a lot, making this bonus weak as exposed by simulations.

[Turturin the Warlock]

Mastery is changed massively and it's RNG is reduced a lot, making this bonus weak as exposed by simulations.

with a 90% mastery value (pretty reasonable) on live you do 0-90% extra damage or 45% on average.

with the same amount of mastery on ptr you will do 22.5% - 67.5% extra damage or 45% on average.

So the 4pc is an average buff to chaos bolt of (1-167.5/145) = 15.5%

If I'm remembering right Chaosbolt does about 60% of damage ST (sorry I'm at work and can't access everything I'd like, please correct if that's woefully innaccurate). 60 * 1.15 = 69.

That seems like it should be a pretty good increase. I'd be interested to see simulations that say otherwise and understand why.

Obviously above is napkin math, but it's logical.

[Gaidax]

with a 90% mastery value (pretty reasonable) on live you do 0-90% extra damage or 45% on average.

with the same amount of mastery on ptr you will do 22.5% - 67.5% extra damage or 45% on average.

So the 4pc is an average buff to chaos bolt of (1-167.5/145) = 15.5%

If I'm remembering right Chaosbolt does about 60% of damage ST (sorry I'm at work and can't access everything I'd like, please correct if that's woefully innaccurate). 60 * 1.15 = 69.

That seems like it should be a pretty good increase. I'd be interested to see simulations that say otherwise and understand why.

Obviously above is napkin math, but it's logical.

First of all mastery is split in 3 if you have 90% live it will be 30%-60% in 7.2.5, the RNG part.

Chaos Bolt is around 35% ST at most, you can SIM it. So what you get is is ~10% benefit on 35% of your damage, i.e. - 3.5% increase, which is nothing to talk about compared to other tiers really and that 35% value is if you go balls to the wall CB spam build - I.E Soul Conduit, Feretory... If you take CDF, then it's much less.

Basically the bonus is weak, especially compared to other sets that give up to 7-8% on 4pc only.

[Baconeggcheese]

@Gaidax Not a good way to buff it any more without reworking it or adding to it.

I'd wager the easier / more likely solution they'll go with is just baking the difference into the base spec.

[Gaidax]

@Gaidax Not a good way to buff it any more without reworking it or adding to it.

I'd wager the easier / more likely solution they'll go with is just baking the difference into the base spec.

Disagree, plenty of easy ways to fix it.

Chaos Bolt always gains maximum benefit of Mastery and deals X% increased damage/has its cast time reduced by 0.5 seconds.

or

Chaos Bolt and Conflagrate always gain maximum benefit of Mastery.

Just the options, we already had tier set resembling (1), where (2) you simply add another spell to the mix.


Unbalanced tier will lead to at least some Destro players being sidelined in tier queue in their guilds, which is not nice. You already have threads like this popping up: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...ibute-T20-sets

[Lumineus]

Stop trying to make Destro into MoP omnipotent version where they had best mobility, best AoE, best ST, best burst.

Well considering MoP Destro had literally none of those things, I guess there's no need to stop?

Sounds more like Affliction players engaging in revisionist history.