1. #1621
    Yeah i know Reith, just putting out there some wishful thinking; "channeling that positive energy hopping to hit GC"

  2. #1622
    High Overlord Andron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    In the closet, next to the evil monkey
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Huntingbear_grimbatol View Post
    number one, blizzard doesn't want ret to be top dps or even top half, never have never will.
    number two, ret has never been a spec that relied on dots or multidotting, Censure spreading on up to 4-5 targets yes but not on 10+ targets.

    Censure does roughly 40k damage over 15sec before raidbuffs and inquisition, roughly 65k damage over 15sec. That's 4.3k dps per target before the % SoL buff (if that affects it) Now you still want Censure on unlimited targets? Talk about OP and a reason to get hate and nerfs.

    I said nothing of 10+ targets. 4-5 is what I'd want myself, a bit more than you'd do by target switching today anyway (Wind Lord).
    As for damage tuning ... of course it's OP with it's current damage. That would have to be adjusted. That however would weaken single target, so ... wicked circle - I leave damage tuning to other people. Probably best not to mess with Seals at all and do the AoE damage over buffs to Divine Storm, but that just seems so ... bland. One could just buff SoR more, but again, bland as hell. Whatever, I don't expect much from GC anymore.

    I think Censure is fine as is, which is why all these changes regarding it may not happen, the risk of making Censure worse prob too big.
    Might be the best to leave it alone, yes, and search for buffs elsewhere. I'd be happy if there was an increase, in whatever way, to lackluster Ret-AoE. Just couldn't come up with a better idea ad hoc.

  3. #1623
    The Patient Dmchomerun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Cathedral of Light
    Posts
    241
    The problem with increasing the amount of targets that get hit with censure will only throw off Blizzard's whole, "Make every Paladin Seal viable" crusade. They WANT us to use Righteousness in AoE situations with the 4-5+ mobs like you are describing.
    Exorcising Undead in the name of the Silver Hand!
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...homerun/simple

  4. #1624
    Stood in the Fire Neldarie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    432
    I think different seal idea currently is dumb as it is. Should just make SoT ret only and have seal choices for different effects such as phys dmg reduction / faster movement / resists/spelldmg reduction.

    And yes, main pve concern is: ret AoE capability and tbh w-o some sort of a passive buffer most/all other classes have we will never be in the good spot for obvious reasons being a melee role/class.
    Last edited by Neldarie; 2013-02-27 at 10:56 PM.
    WoW = Retired Main: Ret Alt(s): War , DK

    Diablo3

  5. #1625
    The Patient Dmchomerun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Cathedral of Light
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by Neldarie View Post
    I think different seal idea currently is dumb as it is. Should just make SoT ret only and have seal choices for different effects such as phys dmg reduction / faster movement / resists/spelldmg reduction.

    And yes, main pve concern is: ret AoE capability and tbh w-o some sort of a passive buffer most/all other classes have we will never be in the good spot for obvious reasons being a melee role/class.
    Concerning seals, can they be changed while under the effects of a mind control during a fight like Vizier in Heart of Fear?
    Exorcising Undead in the name of the Silver Hand!
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...homerun/simple

  6. #1626
    Stood in the Fire Neldarie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    432
    Do you mean by AI or you during? (AI yes , you no)
    WoW = Retired Main: Ret Alt(s): War , DK

    Diablo3

  7. #1627
    The Patient Dmchomerun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Cathedral of Light
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by Neldarie View Post
    Do you mean by AI or you during? (AI yes , you no)
    Right AI, was just wondering why I had Seal of Justice active after we downed Vizier, heh... Kindova stupid thing if you ask me...
    Exorcising Undead in the name of the Silver Hand!
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...homerun/simple

  8. #1628
    Moderator Krekko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    4,276
    Quote Originally Posted by Fredzilla View Post
    I wish they would have put in a damn 2h mace for us to use. Two tiers without one. They said they don't like racials, but they're just making it worse by screwing over pretty much everyone that's not a human or orc.

    Don't worry though, they're putting in an INT 2h mace...
    Inside of me has a bit of hope for another weapon/2h DPS mace to be added. Like the ICC str ring was, but then again I wonder how little will they care about it in the long run.

    Put in a Int 2h mace? Awesome, lets not forget that doesn't fufill our 2h quota heh.

    ---------- Post added 2013-02-28 at 02:06 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Dmchomerun View Post
    Right AI, was just wondering why I had Seal of Justice active after we downed Vizier, heh... Kindova stupid thing if you ask me...
    Yeah AI's will change your seal and used to change your aura as well.
    -Retribution, the path of the protector or mender brought to it's natural conclusion; destroying evil before the weak need to be shielded from it, and before it can wound the innocent.
    | [MoP]Ret Paladin Guide | Fix My DPS | Fix My Heals | Fix My Tanking |

    WoW Level Scaling Feature

  9. #1629
    Quote Originally Posted by Huntingbear_grimbatol View Post
    the issue with our aoe abilities spreading Censure beyond the primary target is that it's gonna be absolutely OP for fights where the adds or multiple targets (like counsil of elders) live for a long time. Then there's PvP, if you're allowed to get up 5 stacks of Censure on 2 targets that means alot of preassure and no penalty for target switching. + Once up you have to be horseshit bad to let them fall off again so it's not gonna require any skill (not that multidotting in general use alot of "skill")

    What they could do is add a dot on divine storm or simply increase tha direct damage it does, since it's late in PTR I'm guessing we'll see a +25% or more damage scaling on Divine Storm, maybe on Hammer of the Righteous aswell (or one of them)
    You can already multidot on 2+ targets. Manually I could up to maintain up to 5 targets with 5 stacks, but it's hard and you have to take focus from other mechanics and crap on the floor. I think moonkins also have to multidot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Huntingbear_grimbatol View Post
    number one, blizzard doesn't want ret to be top dps or even top half, never have never will.
    number two, ret has never been a spec that relied on dots or multidotting, Censure spreading on up to 4-5 targets yes but not on 10+ targets.

    Censure does roughly 40k damage over 15sec before raidbuffs and inquisition, roughly 65k damage over 15sec. That's 4.3k dps per target before the % SoL buff (if that affects it) Now you still want Censure on unlimited targets? Talk about OP and a reason to get hate and nerfs.
    Who said Censure would/should stay at the same numbers?? We should focus our talks on mechanics, not numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Andron View Post
    I said nothing of 10+ targets. 4-5 is what I'd want myself, a bit more than you'd do by target switching today anyway (Wind Lord).
    As for damage tuning ... of course it's OP with it's current damage. That would have to be adjusted. That however would weaken single target, so ... wicked circle - I leave damage tuning to other people. Probably best not to mess with Seals at all and do the AoE damage over buffs to Divine Storm, but that just seems so ... bland. One could just buff SoR more, but again, bland as hell. Whatever, I don't expect much from GC anymore.
    That's why I proposed the increase on abilities across the board, not just one. Each separately doesn't have to be overpowered, but used together should provide the much necessary damage increase. As you correctly observed, if you make Censure spreadable, it would affect single target Censure damage, which could be addressed by an increase strictly in single target abilities. That's why I consider the only change to AW duration (and too little SoR increase) to be lackluster and without spec vision.. In fact, Censure auto-spread would be more like a quality of life aspect (multidotting difficulties) besides the long build up in stacks over all respective targets..

    Quote Originally Posted by Dmchomerun View Post
    The problem with increasing the amount of targets that get hit with censure will only throw off Blizzard's whole, "Make every Paladin Seal viable" crusade. They WANT us to use Righteousness in AoE situations with the 4-5+ mobs like you are describing.
    SoR should be worthwhile considering the 2 GCDs lost due to seal changing and really become worthy from 2-3 targets up. And I mean really increased damage compared to Censure multidotting.. IF they want us to ever use SoR, that is..
    Last edited by SirRaven; 2013-02-28 at 08:17 AM.

  10. #1630
    Quote Originally Posted by Sett View Post
    It's not BiS and it's mainly for a little change of pace. A lot of specs/classes are being gifted that 'one' item that they usually wouldn't use to have a different look and feel to it. The int fist weapon, this mace, and the str polearm are all examples of this.
    Well, look at the loot tables. This is MUCH worse for 10 mans than stupid thunderforged crap. Bosses with 40+ Items of which you get 2 a week, and then you have some that are probably just worthless(well, maybe one of the new blood spirits, woo) to your raid. Like a int 2h mace. Or three agility daggers. Or three spellpower daggers.

  11. #1631
    Anyone else is having a (terrible) feeling that they have finished adjusting our AoE damage too through the sol change?

  12. #1632
    Quote Originally Posted by Ulmita View Post
    Anyone else is having a (terrible) feeling that they have finished adjusting our AoE damage too through the sol change?
    No, they haven't.

  13. #1633
    Quote Originally Posted by Krekko View Post
    Yeah AI's will change your seal and used to change your aura as well.
    they will also do stuff like use hand spells on NPC's, cast crowd control on other players and even activate buffs like righteous fury. fun stuff indeed. i've read about a holy paladin on an immortal run saccing kel'thuzad. he was dead instantly.
    Because I want to say this every single day but don't want it to get a drag:
    1) The ingame store will only sell timesaver items. It won't affect balance.
    2) No, getting to 100 in half the time isn't pay2win. raids don't start until the second week, everyone has time to get there.
    4) getting charms faster is also not pay2win. getting those is easy, but not everyone has the time or want for dailies.

  14. #1634
    The Patient Dmchomerun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Cathedral of Light
    Posts
    241
    Quote Originally Posted by SirRaven View Post
    SoR should be worthwhile considering the 2 GCDs lost due to seal changing and really become worthy from 2-3 targets up. And I mean really increased damage compared to Censure multidotting.. IF they want us to ever use SoR, that is..
    I understand that, I am just saying, Blizzard's intention is that Seal of Righteousness is meant for AoE purposes and I agree that if they want us to spend a global changing seals, that the damage should be worthwhile.
    Exorcising Undead in the name of the Silver Hand!
    http://us.battle.net/wow/en/characte...homerun/simple

  15. #1635
    Seals should be off the GCD, IMO.

  16. #1636
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanyn View Post
    Seals should be off the GCD, IMO.
    I wish they would do this as well, but I think it would result in something similar to warrior "stance dancing", where you just macro it in to something and forget about it. Blizzard has already stated they don't like that, and revamped warriors to prevent it, so.

    Sha of Fear Melee hit You 372908 Physical. (766625 Overkill) (Critical)
    Begging us to buff is sometimes easier than trying to beat the boss.(Source)

  17. #1637
    Brewmaster Fredzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    That one place
    Posts
    1,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Revvo View Post
    I wish they would do this as well, but I think it would result in something similar to warrior "stance dancing", where you just macro it in to something and forget about it. Blizzard has already stated they don't like that, and revamped warriors to prevent it, so.
    Well they also said they didn't like the savage roar mechanic right before giving us inq xD

  18. #1638
    I think that was more in regards to the change in Cata where it only affected auto attacks, rather than all physical damage as it was previously, and they then reversed it for MoP. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    Sha of Fear Melee hit You 372908 Physical. (766625 Overkill) (Critical)
    Begging us to buff is sometimes easier than trying to beat the boss.(Source)

  19. #1639
    Brewmaster Fredzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    That one place
    Posts
    1,475
    Well they just said they didn't like the old savage roar because it was a mechanic that punished the people for mismanaging it/not managing it perfectly instead of rewarding them for using the ability well, which is basically always what inq has been. That is, inq is the former like the old savage roar was.

  20. #1640
    Stood in the Fire Neldarie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    432
    Quote Originally Posted by Revvo View Post
    I wish they would do this as well, but I think it would result in something similar to warrior "stance dancing", where you just macro it in to something and forget about it. Blizzard has already stated they don't like that, and revamped warriors to prevent it, so.
    Wrong. They said they had issues with balancing dps numbers with amount of rage berserker stance used to generate in all dmg taken encounters (such as good old Ultraxion). It never had anything to do with macroing things and forgetting it. There is still plenty of that stuff around nowadays. Also try and imagine how op stances w-o GCD would be now in MoP with how potent protection stance is.

    And ye I agree with making seals off GCD. Probably the only safe way to go around and making SoR being used frequently.
    Last edited by Neldarie; 2013-03-01 at 02:42 AM.
    WoW = Retired Main: Ret Alt(s): War , DK

    Diablo3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •