MoP adding Resilience as a baseline

[AutomaticBadger]

Correct me if I am wrong but if they really add Res to be a static buff on the character that scales as you level... Wouldn't that then make PvP gear trivial?

[Arcangnom]

Well, if everyone gets a somewhat low amount of resilience (say 10%) baseline, it would certainly make it less annoying to enter random BGs to start farming some gear. Still, 10% is (currently) nowhere near enough to play competitively. The pvp gear could have a lower amount of resilience in MoP, so that you end up at roughly the same percentage reduction as you currently are. In turn, more gear points would go towards dps. This way, both throughput and survivability in pve vs pvp gear will be closer. So in the end I imagine the end result will be that it will be easier to start doing random BGs without having any PvP gear, and using some PvP gear in PvE will be less punishing.

[Srg56]

Correct me if I am wrong but if they really add Res to be a static buff on the character that scales as you level... Wouldn't that then make PvP gear trivial?

Yes and no. Yes because you would not have an upper hand on someone who does not sport PvP gear and No because this strengthens the presumption that each player is free to play the game as he/she deems worthy of spending their time. Which means that PvE and PvP gear should be equal in stats, in theory. I don't know how they will pull that off, since up untill now, PvP gear sacrificed damage for survivability. Now that allegedly they will make resilience baseline, this limitation should no longer exist, as there is no reason for it still being there, bringing PvP gear on par with their PvE counterparts. Same goes for the bonus stamina on PvP gear.

You will probably have the choice of what to wear depending on what tiers you enjoy looking at, and don't forget about transmogrification. We shall see how this turns out.

[theArcaneBagel]

I believe what's going to happen is the first responder's answer. Through leveling, our resilience will go up to a point at level 90. That way when we go into BGs as a fresh 90 without any level-appropriate PvP gear, we have SOME kind of survivability increase so we aren't roflpwnt the moment we jump into the fray. Then, once we have acquired PvP gear, it will have more resilience, allowing us to build up to the amount we should have for PvP.

It's just a way to help you get your foot in the door in PvP, not replacing resilience on gear completely.

[lilisk]

Besides all of what was said above, this change is only benefical to the pvp community in the way that I see it. Pvp has always, atleast in my eyes, been a secondary objective for blizzard, this change will make it easier for more people to get into pvp, and some may actually find it fun, the larger our playerbase the better for us.

[Stanton Biston]

There's other threads on the topic, but yes, the stated idea in the Blizzcon slide was to have the same amount of total endgame resilience as now (40ish percent) but have it be broken up between gear and a baseline player damage reduction. So PvP gear is ideal for PvP, but PvE gear doesn't mean you're going for glass cannon (or in the case of a healer, just glass).

The other thing to consider is that if the new system gives resilience rating during level up, they could make it to where low level players get more of a percentage damage reduction since resilience at low levels is so rare.

---------- Post added 2011-11-09 at 02:43 PM ----------

Pvp has always, atleast in my eyes, been a secondary objective for blizzard

Then you need to get your eyes fixed.

If PvP was a 'secondary' objective, there would be less than a 10% variance in hps and dps between specs.

More class balancing is done as a result of pvp than pve.

[Sunslayer]

All of the conjecture is irrelevant. Blizzard has stated exactly why they are adding it.

Reason 1: So that PvE'rs can do PvP without being one-shot.

Reason 2: So that entry level players can gear up without being farmed for weeks of frustration.

[Blackmist]

Yeah, it means PvE players or freshly levelled toons can do actual PvP for gear, rather than just running AV for HPs, seeing as that involves as little contact with the enemy as possible. You maybe wave to each other on the way past the middle, and somebody will always make a token effort to retake a tower on their own.

They could have also solved it by giving out PvP gear as quest rewards alongside the PvE gear. Now they've made a lot of player requirements the same, there's a lot of duplication in quest items. There's only so many green staves a toon needs... :/

[Deleted]

User Infracted for this post.

[Deleted]

This is an really bad it's a base stat! If they wanna do PvP then farm Honor points and get PvP gear like the rest of us!

[Dayn9]

Then you need to get your eyes fixed.

If PvP was a 'secondary' objective, there would be less than a 10% variance in hps and dps between specs.

More class balancing is done as a result of pvp than pve.

I doubt that. Sub rogues, frost mages, feral druids are only so strong damage-wise because of PvE, but when blizz buffed their dmg they didnt think of what would happen in PvP, it was obvious if it stayed the way it was (no nerf on cc's, ability to peel, survival, or utility), those classes would be overpowered.

And they currently are. I left affliction warlocks out of this small list because I'm not really sure if they were buffed for pve reasons or not in Cataclysm, or if they were even buffed at all to start with.. they're just overpowered as they've always been.

[Deleted]

That is passive resilience buff to all characters. (like 500 resilience rating to everyone, no matter what gear)
Resilience gear will still be useful.

[Khathrok]

Correct me if I am wrong but if they really add Res to be a static buff on the character that scales as you level... Wouldn't that then make PvP gear trivial?

No less trivial then if someone wears honor gear, while you PvP your little Uberleet heart out gaining conquest gear for a meager extra bit of stam, Primary attribute, and oh wait MORE resil, to make you still better in PvP.

More class balancing is done as a result of pvp than pve.

Which is one of the most outstanding flaws of this entire game since the inception of "competitive..lol" PvP.

[Bllets]

I doubt that. Sub rogues, frost mages, feral druids are only so strong damage-wise because of PvE, but when blizz buffed their dmg they didnt think of what would happen in PvP, it was obvious if it stayed the way it was (no nerf on cc's, ability to peel, survival, or utility), those classes would be overpowered.

And they currently are. I left affliction warlocks out of this small list because I'm not really sure if they were buffed for pve reasons or not in Cataclysm, or if they were even buffed at all to start with.. they're just overpowered as they've always been.

Taking out a single example out of thousands of buffs and nerfs does not show anything at all.

Ever since the introduction of Arena, i have by far seen most nerfs happen because of arena and were buffs is also favored towards pvp, but not as much as nerfs.

While it is very easy to find examples of the opposites, that does not prove otherwise. Regarding sub, frost and feral it really isn't as bad as it seems in 1vs1 situations, these spec just favor that because of their playstyle.
Mages are 'only' the 4th most represented class.
Druids are 'only' the 3th most represented class, and there a fair share is resto.
Rogues are only the 6th most represented class.
With priests and paladins being the 2nd and 1st, with priest in 8 out of 9 most popular setups (3 from each bracket), were mages are 2nd with being in 6 out of the 9 most popular setups (Palas at 3, rogues at 3, druids at 2 and warlocks at 3).

The classes you mention (Except rogues) are without good classes in pvp right now, but it really is not because they are completely overpowered (There are certain abilities, but they doesn't make the whole class superior). Generally the problem is that certain class/specs just perform completely bad in Arena because of their playstyle and i believe really a overhaul like there is coming in MoP is what's needed to change that.

RBG's are another completely matter, but i haven't been doing that much so i sadly can't comment to much on it. Though smoke bomb is a very interesting ability..

[Deleted]

If PvP was a 'secondary' objective, there would be less than a 10% variance in hps and dps between specs.

More class balancing is done as a result of pvp than pve.

Not true whatsoever.

Frost mages have needed damage nerfs (atleast mastery nerfs) for ages, instead they buff their damage because they aren't competative PvE wise.

Just one example.

why are resto druids not getting buffs? It would make them way too good PvE wise, not that it would be hard to buff them somewhere so that it doesn't affect PvE, but not like Blizzard is putting a lot of effort into it.

[Stanton Biston]

So people are still upset about Frost Mage and Sub Rogue CC when they're getting an overhaul in MoP and losing something. (Rogues have to pick between ShS and Prep. I mean, c'mon.) Resto Druids are getting massive PvP buffs in MoP. The dispel system is being restructured and restos look to get like a million different escapes. And a shield.

But-

The point remains. If PvP was such a 'secondary' point, there would be no variance in DPS at the very least between specs. That variance exists because of PvP, not for some arbitrary reason in PvE. And if people are really so frustrated by Feral Druids, they should just roll Dwarfs.

[Caiada]

Making resilience baseline doesn't mean it won't be on gear. It just might be lower, with a percentage of the stat budget allocated to resilience on PvP gear moved instead to another secondary stat. I posted a theoretical example before but I don't feel like finding it.

[Oragan]

Wont make much difference if your full pvp geared you still rape someone with pve gear and abit of baseline resi. Just gives people with no pvp gear a chance in bgs. One of the most annoying things atm is when you ding 85 and start farming pvp gear you just get butt fucked and this will help that abit, but wont make pvp gear trivial.

[Dayn9]

Taking out a single example out of thousands of buffs and nerfs does not show anything at all.

Ever since the introduction of Arena, i have by far seen most nerfs happen because of arena and were buffs is also favored towards pvp, but not as much as nerfs.

While it is very easy to find examples of the opposites, that does not prove otherwise. Regarding sub, frost and feral it really isn't as bad as it seems in 1vs1 situations, these spec just favor that because of their playstyle.
Mages are 'only' the 4th most represented class.
Druids are 'only' the 3th most represented class, and there a fair share is resto.
Rogues are only the 6th most represented class.
With priests and paladins being the 2nd and 1st, with priest in 8 out of 9 most popular setups (3 from each bracket), were mages are 2nd with being in 6 out of the 9 most popular setups (Palas at 3, rogues at 3, druids at 2 and warlocks at 3).

The classes you mention (Except rogues) are without good classes in pvp right now, but it really is not because they are completely overpowered (There are certain abilities, but they doesn't make the whole class superior). Generally the problem is that certain class/specs just perform completely bad in Arena because of their playstyle and i believe really a overhaul like there is coming in MoP is what's needed to change that.

RBG's are another completely matter, but i haven't been doing that much so i sadly can't comment to much on it. Though smoke bomb is a very interesting ability..

In Cataclysm, I think there has been only one nerf that was done because of PvP, and that was the damage nerf on warrior in 4.2, 8% or smth like that, and I even wonder if that wasn't a PvE nerf, as warriors were clearly strong in PvP at that time, but not quite overpowered.

Changes due to pvp that affected pve in some way in Cataclysm per class :

Shaman : ... ? none, there were only PvE buffs that affected and still affects PvP (spirit link totem says hi)

Hunter :mmh.. here i'm not sure whether or not those 4.0.6 marks buffs were pvp or pve changes.. i'll give you that one. Potentially one change here

Warrior : As I said above, this 8% dmg nerf in 4.2 potentially was a pvp nerf, even tho I doubt that (I might be wrong indeed). Potentially one change here

Mage : better not talk about it, it's the other way around..

DK : Damage nerf (hotfix) like 2 days after 4.0.6 were said to be PvE but I know some people thought it was due to pvp, so we might consider it was. Potentially one change here

Paladin : none

Warlock : none

Priest : I actually think those 4.0.6 buffs were intended to be PvP buffs mainly, even though disc wasn't that good in raids either. Potentially a few buffs here

Druid : same as mage

Rogue : Same as mage

More or less 5 changes that affected/still affects PvE were due to PvP, I'm pretty sure I could easily find 20 PvE changes that had huge impact on PvP..

PS : I'm not saying they favour pve etc (I don't care), but people saying pvp changes destroy pve piss me off really hard

[Thallidomaniac]

Paladin : none

I would say that the Word of Glory nerf by adding it's 20 second based CD was caused by PvE and affected PvP, and also strangely vice versa being a PvP nerf that affected PvE.