Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
8
9
... LastLast
  1. #121
    I have reordered some of your post so I won't jump from topic to topic, it will be easier to read.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Not true. There's nothing wrong with certain glyphs being optimal for certain situational circumstances.
    Because they both work, as written, without being glyphed. They are obviously more limited, but the same is true of any ability with a glyph that improves performance.
    No, you are taking this the wrong way, again. I agree there's nothing wrong with glyphs being more prefferable in some circumstances, but this arguement isn't relevant at all to mine. What I'm saying is obvious enough after explaining it so many times.

    What is your gauge, when you say they both work?
    Is "working" means, you drop CPT, wait 5 seconds, and oh, it explodes as you expect. Yes it does, this not kind of "working" I am talking about.

    Here's your example:
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    I haven't been saying they're just as effective, unglyphed. I've been saying they have some value unglyphed. It's obviously going to be less than glyphed; otherwise, you wouldn't bother with the glyph. You're arguing that they have zero value unglyphed, and that's simply not true at any reasonable glance. A speed increase still has value, even if it doesn't protect against speed reductions. A stun still has value, even if it's significantly harder to execute, even if you just use it as area-denial or forcing them to target it rather than expecting it to stun anyone. Or heck, if they've burned their trinket and can't break a long-duration CC (as opposed to a 2-second stun), drop Capacitor on them. It'll pop right around when the CC ends, stunning them for another 5 seconds, and there's little they can do about it; they'd need an ally with a Dispel. This isn't "zero value", this is "less value".
    This is a made-up scenario which proves your limited PvP experience.
    You can't prove your point with made-up scenarios in PVP, simply because it is not possible to theorize PvP. Your opponent is not a scripted AI that you would expect to behave the same in certain situations, thus you can't generalize it.

    Also if you think that there's little your opponents can do about a stationary 5 second CPT, I urge you to reconsider. However it works perfectly on mindless NPCs and same-level PvP'rs, if that is your point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    So you ARE saying glyphs should be merely cosmetic.

    You're wrong.
    Back to pre-CPT glyph arguement, you should re-read my Dark Soul example.
    I am NOT saying glyphs should only be cosmatic, it is YOU trying to derail my arguements from its point to prove yourself right.

    I'll repeat; an ability as baseline, should work just fine and do its job. If its job is to function as a DPS increase and be a DPS cooldown, it should provide DPS increase without any glyphs, talents or whatsoever. Glyphs should alter abilities in a way that they provide benefits depending on your situation (this can be a certain boss mechanic, it is not PvE vs PvP) or your preferred playstyle. Another example to support my cause:

    Glyph of Cleansing Waters

    I'm not sure if I have to explain it, cleansing works just fine itself. This is another perfect example of how glyphs should be, they should add something cool and interesting, they can be situational, but they should not complete the spell. This would be another problematic glyph if dispelling was difficult without the glyph. If normal dispelling would allow you to self-dispel, and the glyph made the spell usable on others, it would be mandatory. Like most of the PvP'rs use their Ghost Wolves, Resto would have to take this glyph, DPS wouldn't care. This is not being situational as you state, this is fixing what an ability should do baseline.

    But as you did with Dark Soul, feel free to ignore this part.

    Blue post supports my arguement:

    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    When we say we don't want mandatory glyphs for PvE, what we're actually saying is we don't want a glyph that generally provides a DPS increase in most situations (if you are a DPS spec).
    Source
    This applies to everything, not only DPS. This is just common sense.

    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    In PvP, sustained DPS is only slightly valuable. On the other hand, a glyph that provides burst damage at the expense of sustained damage, or a glyph that provides extra CC or CC immunity looks awfully attractive for PvP. We'll still try and make sure there are no cookie-cutter talent or glyph builds though.Source
    Ghost Wolf provides a sort of snare immunity, Glyph of Ghost Wolf is cookie-cutter, it's awfully attractive for PvP and it is mandatory. It contradicts with the glyph design. Thanks for bringing this up, I was looking for this blues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You are starting from the presumption that the glyphed form is the baseline, and that's just not true. You aren't losing out if you don't glyph. You're gaining if you do glyph.
    That is true.
    Ghost Wolf's whole point and uniqueness has been the two points I mentioned before. Without them, it is not Ghost Wolf, I repeat.
    You are welcome to explain how %30 move speed increase = Ghost Wolf, instead of saying that's just not true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You can't attack me for responding to your own comment. I was merely pointing out that your comment was that it was just another sprint, and therefore useless, while ignoring that sprints do have value. You're the one who made the bad comparison. I merely pointed out how your own comparison didn't support your point.

    What you're talkiing about simply is not the intent of the new glyph system.

    You seem to be acting as if I need to prove that they're just as effective unglyphed, which isn't my claim. You're also pushing the burden of proof to me; you've NEVER proven they have zero value. You've said it, and your response when called out on that is just "oh, you couldn't understand". No, that's garbage. I actually play PvP in other games pretty extensively. Something about WoW's PvP bugs me, but I'm not new to the concept or how high-level PvP gaming works in general. I'm well aware of the value these glyphs would have, and that Ghost Wolf in particular may be a bit too strong.
    Of course I have never proven they have zero value, because I never defended they have zero value. I still have both spells on my action-bars, keybinded, I try to use both of them as much as my skill allows me to.

    You are derailing my arguement to accuse me for not proving anything I'm not defending. If you are looking for garbage, there you have it.
    Also, you playing PvP in other games is not relevant at all, and obviously enough you are contradicting with your previous statements when you are familiar with high-level PvP, and having a starting point in PvP.

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    And for PvE, they tune around raiding.

    That's irrelevant to the point I was making, which is that 3v3 Arenas are absolutely a niche situation, and certain glyphs being optimal for that is perfectly fine.

    But "really good and you pretty much need this for 3v3" is not the same as "mandatory for all PvP". Especially with Capacitor Totem. Nor, as blue posts have made clear, is the "no mandatory glyphs" really meant to factor in to PvP; they're well aware that certain glyphs will become seriously advantageous for PvP based on how PvP works, and they were fine with that.
    "really good and you pretty much need this for 3v3" = "mandatory for all PvP"

    All PvP is 3v3.
    In real world, yeah we have other options like BGs, RBGs, World PvP, 2v2, 5v5.
    This is Blizzard's official view on PvP. Balance and design is made for 3v3, we are talking about game design, our only criteria should be 3v3.
    When you say PvP, it's 3v3, but nothing else. Nobody cares if something is broken for World PvP or even 5v5.

    This not my claim, this is Blizzard's official statement.
    Both my arguements and yours are not universal facts, they are just arguements. Only Blizzard's statements are universal facts, even if they are wrong, they are the developers.
    Last edited by Mithgroth; 2012-11-11 at 11:23 PM. Reason: typo fix

  2. #122
    Stood in the Fire shell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    409
    You keep saying these glyphs are mandatory and yet 9 out of the 30 2200+ shaman, on the best battlegroup in the US, don't take glyph of ghost wolf. That's 30% that don't take ghostwolf. 15 out of 30 of the same group don't use glyph of capacitor, that's 50%. How is that mandatory?

    Conversely, 2 out of the 30 don't use glyph of purge but I don't see anyone around here complaining that that glyph is mandatory.
    Last edited by shell; 2012-11-12 at 01:02 AM.
    These words in my mouth... where did they come from? I don't think I'm the one that put them there...

  3. #123
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    20,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    This is a made-up scenario which proves your limited PvP experience.
    You can't prove your point with made-up scenarios in PVP, simply because it is not possible to theorize PvP. Your opponent is not a scripted AI that you would expect to behave the same in certain situations, thus you can't generalize it.

    Also if you think that there's little your opponents can do about a stationary 5 second CPT, I urge you to reconsider. However it works perfectly on mindless NPCs and same-level PvP'rs, if that is your point.
    So you can't CC somebody after they've used their trinket or escape cooldowns? News to me.

    It's not a made-up scenario. I've literally pulled that move off myself in an arena match. I was running 2s with a druid buddy, he Cycloned an enemy, I dropped CPT and proceeded to nuke his friend. Cyclone ended, CPT went off, stunning them for 5 seconds. By the end of that 10 second lockout, his buddy was dead, and it was easy enough to wrap up the patch.

    My rating may be low (but climbing), and it may be harder to pull this off against better teams, but that's true of anything like this. That doesn't mean it's not possible, which is your claim.

    And that claim is wrong. It's harder. That's it.


    This next bit followed links to your prior examples and the blue post I quoted, which I'm snipping solely for space. I'm also going to let you debate yourself, on this point, because you're not being internally consistent;

    Ghost Wolf provides a sort of snare immunity, Glyph of Ghost Wolf is cookie-cutter, it's awfully attractive for PvP and it is mandatory. It contradicts with the glyph design. Thanks for bringing this up, I was looking for this blues.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    In addition to all this, it's pointless to compare what we used to have and what we have now. MoP had such a huge effect on WoW than any other expensions ever. Blizzard's overall game-play philosophy has shifted
    So, when I pointed out how the talent system changed, and that Ghost Wolf was treated much the same today as before, your response was "the past doesn't matter because MoP changed everything".

    But when I point out how Ghost Wolf is treated now, your response is "Ghost Wolf should act like it always has".

    You are not being consistent in your own arguments.

    Not to mention; you're wrong. Ghost Wolf does not provide snare immunity. Glyph of Ghost Wolf does. Again; you are trying to suggest that the glyph's benefits should be part of the base ability solely because you don't want to use a glyph slot on it, and you've given no argument to support that desire. Plenty of Shaman, as shell has linked, are doing very well in the ladders without Glyph of Ghost Wolf. It's clearly NOT mandatory. A strong option, sure. But not so strong you can't use other glyphs.

    The system is working as intended, as the actual competitive Shaman players are showing.


    Of course I have never proven they have zero value, because I never defended they have zero value. I still have both spells on my action-bars, keybinded, I try to use both of them as much as my skill allows me to.

    You are derailing my arguement to accuse me for not proving anything I'm not defending.
    On reviewing the thread, you're right, you were arguing that they were weak and not working "right" without the glyphs, whereas Chainreactor was the one throwing around "useless" earlier on.

    So I apologize for insinuating that you'd claimed they had zero value. I was thinking of another poster, and that wasn't fair to you. That doesn't mean I think you're [i]right/i], but I can stick to your own arguments. It wasn't intentional.

    "really good and you pretty much need this for 3v3" = "mandatory for all PvP"

    All PvP is 3v3.Ghost Wolf's whole point and uniqueness has been the two points I mentioned before. Without them, it is not Ghost Wolf, I repeat.
    You are welcome to explain how %30 move speed increase = Ghost Wolf, instead of saying that's just not true.
    In real world, yeah we have other options like BGs, RBGs, World PvP, 2v2, 5v5.
    This is Blizzard's official view on PvP. Balance and design is made for 3v3, we are talking about game design, our only criteria should be 3v3.
    When you say PvP, it's 3v3, but nothing else. Nobody cares if something is broken for World PvP or even 5v5.
    Sorry, that's not true. That's what they primarily balance around, but it's not all they look at. It's more "let's make sure the 3s bracket is balanced at least", not "the only thing we ever think about is 3s".

    Both my arguements and yours are not universal facts, they are just arguements. Only Blizzard's statements are universal facts, even if they are wrong, they are the developers.
    The thing is, I'm repeating Blizzard's statements. For instance, to go back to an earlier point in that post I saved just for this;
    Ghost Wolf's whole point and uniqueness has been the two points I mentioned before. Without them, it is not Ghost Wolf, I repeat.
    You are welcome to explain how %30 move speed increase = Ghost Wolf, instead of saying that's just not true.
    So, you very clearly tried to define Ghost Wolf. Now, what does Blizzard have to say about that?



    Screenshot taken literally moments ago. Ghost Wolf = 30% speed increase. As the tooltip says. Them's the facts. That's not even a statement of intent from Blizzard, that's the actual factual data.

    That's why I said it's just not true. Because anyone can log in to their Shaman, and check the unglyphed tooltip, and see what Ghost Wolf actually is. It's an instant-cast 30% speed increase. The snare immunity is a glyphed effect you can add to that.

    What's that? It wasn't that way in Cata or WotLK?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    In addition to all this, it's pointless to compare what we used to have and what we have now. MoP had such a huge effect on WoW than any other expensions

  4. #124
    I'm going to divide this post into two parts instead of direct quote-answering:

    1. CPT and glyph philosophy:

      Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
      And that claim is wrong. It's harder. That's it.
      This is what I'm exactly against for.
      From your point of view, glyphs are like silencers to pistols. In some situations, you have to be quiet and you use a silencer to keep your voice down. You can always choose not to use it, but it will be harder. If a hitman has to eliminate the target without being loud, he has to use a silencer or shouldn't use a pistol at all, it would be inefficient to reach his goal.

      From my point of view (and what I understand from Blizzard's new MoP talent & glyph design), glyphs are like sunroofs. They also have certain benefits in some situations, you would enjoy it on a sunny day. However, a car (original spell) should still function and do what it is designed for, without a sunroof (glyph). It's an enhancement to the car, some find it compelling to their liking, although it makes noise in rainy days.

      CCs should be reliable by default in PvP.
      CPT's original design isn't garbage, nor reliable enough for PvP use, which is what it is primary designed for. It requires too much effort, a mandatory talent (TP), half-mandatory glyph (in order to make it more reliable) and too many conditions, to function as expected. Although I would hate to see a fire and forget design, it's also a new spell, it'll fit better in our arsenal and will improve -and should be improved- in time. Beta was too early to judge, after a few months (it has been 2 months right? Lost sense of time) it can clearly be seen that there are parts of it that can be tweaked. This has been true with many spells before, it is not new. I was expecting this tweaking on 5.1, this is my complaint.

      The glyph isn't only to be blamed here, CPT's current design has to go. My main arguement (CPT's original state being clunky) effects its glyph's design as well. But my point stands, having no changes for 5.1 is unacceptable, CPT is clunky and should be improved (not in a direct buffing way, QoL improvements).

      Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
      So you can't CC somebody after they've used their trinket or escape cooldowns? News to me.
      Yes, it is expected that any sort of CC to be reliable enough to CC somebody after they've used their trinket or escape cooldowns.
      CPT itself isn't reliable enough, it is undependant on your tactic or your opponents responses. It's way more difficult to execute compared to any other CC because of game mechanics itself (explained how it is more difficult to execute in this previous post).

      About your story, well done pulling it off but it's exclusive to low ratings.
      Trinket'ing that cyclone is a better option than leaving your partner to death or also his partner could have destroyed CPT, interrupting your CC chain, freeing his partner. You have succeeded because your opponents were as skilled as daily quest mobs, plus this is only your personal experience, which proves nothing at all by itself, about CPT's current state.

    2. Ghost Wolf, high rating shamans (@shell too) and how has MoP PvP enviroment shifted.

    On shell's post about high rating shamans:

    Quote Originally Posted by shell View Post
    You keep saying these glyphs are mandatory and yet 9 out of the 30 2200+ shaman, on the best battlegroup in the US, don't take glyph of ghost wolf. That's 30% that don't take ghostwolf. 15 out of 30 of the same group don't use glyph of capacitor, that's 50%. How is that mandatory?
    30% shaman don't take GW glyph --> it's not mandatory (your claim)

    Let me ask the same in another way:
    70% shaman take GW glyph --> it's mandatory (based on your claim)

    More than half of that 30% shaman who don't take GW glyph are running with paladins who can Hand of Freedom.

    Either way, picking random 2.2k+ people doesn't prove or help proving a fact.

    Endus, continued:

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    On reviewing the thread, you're right, you were arguing that they were weak and not working "right" without the glyphs, whereas Chainreactor was the one throwing around "useless" earlier on.

    So I apologize for insinuating that you'd claimed they had zero value. I was thinking of another poster, and that wasn't fair to you. That doesn't mean I think you're [i]right/i], but I can stick to your own arguments. It wasn't intentional.
    I wasn't going to include this part to keep the discussion flowing, but thank you.

    Let's keep on.

    First of all, yes this is Blizzard's game. However, facts are only limited to their statements, not actions.
    Again, there is a thin line.
    We have seen countless blue posts saying:

    "We might have overtuned X",
    "Class C has too much Y than intended at the moment",
    "We did Z, but in fact we don't want this, we did it in a wrong way, we are going to make some changes to it."

    What I see as facts are, Blizzard's development philosophy, their view on balance, raid-design, artwork, Warcraft universe, etc.
    BM Hunter damage is too high at the moment. Blizzard was the one who tuned BM Hunters, but apparently they were wrong and they can be wrong on such things. They acknowladged the community complaints and they are going to do adjustments accordingly. Stuff like these are debatable.

    GC's statement on the topic:
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    We don't let players, even expert ones, balance the game for us. We appreciate their feedback, as we do all feedback.
    Source
    All I'm doing and have been doing is providing feedback, and trying to do this in a constructive manner with causes.
    Feedback is the result of Blizzard's actions not being direct facts, feedback causes the change, if Blizzard's actions were facts, there would be no feedback and no changes.

    If 5.1 has no Shaman changes, then there are no actions done wrong by Blizzard. I disagree to this.

    Blizzard is not always right while adding new stuff or changing the stuff. Gag order is a great example and Blizzard admits that they were wrong and will be doing some changes. CPT or GW is no different in my case, I see them wrong, I provide feedback for changes.

    On the other hand as a player, I have the right to disagree with Blizzard's statements, but they are still facts:
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    Q: DPS Shaman and Rogues still aren’t happy in PvP. Why do you thrive on their unhappiness?
    A: In 5.1 we’re focused on stabilizing the PvP environment by addressing major outliers in balance. After we’ve accomplished that, we’ll be able to take a look at where things stand and make the appropriate adjustments from there, rather than sweeping changes all at once.
    Source
    I disagree with this, and even feel bad for having this announcement much later than 5.1 patch notes announced and somebody had to ask it to make them explain how come there were no changes. I disagree the approach they take, but I have to accept this as a fact. All I can do is criticize them, nothing further. However Blizzard never denied that we don't need changes at all, however I still think they should have been on a major patch.

    A bit on MoP and its effects then, I think I'm clear enough by now.

    As I stated above, Blizzard can be wrong on their actions, just like how they turned Ghost Wolf into a %30 speed increase.
    This is where I object. Ghost Wolf has always been an unique shaman spell until now, and its current state is wrong.

    MoP has a simple philosophy: Be active!
    Whatever you do, be active.

    Go explore the world instead of sitting in Orgrimmar.
    Press buttons to mitigate damage as a tank, instead of relying on passive mitigation by stacking mastery.
    [Started before MoP, encouraged the most in MoP] Click to avoid that boss ability, pay the consequence if you fail.

    List goes on, enter PvP - CC - snares:
    Increased amount of CC/snares/utility and way to counter them all.

    Today's PvP works on action - reaction, whereas it depended more on capabilities.
    Dispels have changed because Blizzard doesn't want you to dispel because you can. They want you to dispel because it is a strategic decision you made.

    Everyone has an interrupt now, if we leave the PvE side of it -because we are talking about PvP-, Blizzard wants you to react on healers' casts. Healers increase a team's survivability, and you can break this by reacting with your interrupt spell.

    CC is pretty much the same. It's like a chess game, you are CC'd, you make a counter move.
    There are many snares at the moment and as in all other things you are expected to react. Ghost Wolf is how we react, just like we react silences with totems, but we are designed to be extremely weak against stuns in return and that's obviously intentional and understandable. Removal of pre-Astral Shift is also an example to this. Blizzard doesn't want you to be passive, you need to react.

    What Blizzard did instead is, they turned Ghost Wolf into another sprint for the sake of homogenization, losing its uniqueness and reaction value by default.
    Shaman class hasn't received an overhaul, the basics are still the same, the class requires Ghost Wolf as it always had required, maybe even more than ever with the number of snares today.

    Today's Ghost Wolf has to be glyphed to find its place and fit into today's PvP. This is where it lacks.
    Combined with my arguement on glyphs as they shouldn't aim to fix current spells but enhance them, Glyph of Ghost Wolf is wrong in terms of approach. Compare it to my previous examples, Dark Soul and Cleansing Waters and you can clearly see the difference.

  5. #125
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    20,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    1. CCs should be reliable by default in PvP.
      CPT's original design isn't garbage, nor reliable enough for PvP use, which is what it is primary designed for. It requires too much effort, a mandatory talent (TP), half-mandatory glyph (in order to make it more reliable) and too many conditions, to function as expected.
    The bits I put into bold are qualitative preferences or opinions you hold, not facts. Not reliable enough for your preferences, too much effort for you, too many conditions for you, not up to your expectations.

    These are not facts. Nor have you provided any functional, quantitative rationalization to prove any of them. In any of your prior posts.

    The bits in red are just flat-out untrue. Neither's mandatory, plenty of Shaman get by without either at high ratings, as has already been proven thoroughly. They aren't mandatory, by any measure.

    And seriously, "half-mandatory"? What does that even mean?

    30% shaman don't take GW glyph --> it's not mandatory (your claim)

    Let me ask the same in another way:
    70% shaman take GW glyph --> it's mandatory (based on your claim)
    I don't want this to come off as rude, but do you know what "mandatory" means?

    It means you don't have a choice. 30% of the Shaman in that sample being successful without it means it IS a choice you can do without.

    "Popular" is not "mandatory", and conflating the two is ridiculous.

    Either way, picking random 2.2k+ people doesn't prove or help proving a fact.
    It's factual evidence. You've provided none thus far. It directly contradicts your claims that all high-ranked Shaman have to use these glyphs to succeed. So yes, it proves a lot.

    As I stated above, Blizzard can be wrong on their actions, just like how they turned Ghost Wolf into a %30 speed increase.
    This is where I object. Ghost Wolf has always been an unique shaman spell until now, and its current state is wrong.
    You're again confusing your own preferences and predilictions for fact. Blizzard isn't "wrong", they're just doing things a way you don't personally happen to like. You need to start phrasing your arguments as what they actually are; personal preferences and hopes, rather than facts and universally accepted truths, as you currently are.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    [/LIST]
    The bits I put into bold are qualitative preferences or opinions you hold, not facts. Not reliable enough for your preferences, too much effort for you, too many conditions for you, not up to your expectations.

    These are not facts. Nor have you provided any functional, quantitative rationalization to prove any of them. In any of your prior posts.

    The bits in red are just flat-out untrue. Neither's mandatory, plenty of Shaman get by without either at high ratings, as has already been proven thoroughly. They aren't mandatory, by any measure.
    ok so prove your point with some facts cose in my opinion no other cals have to fight with their cc like us and that is enough reason to say that we have a problem

  7. #127
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    20,411
    Quote Originally Posted by kosajk View Post
    ok so prove your point with some facts cose in my opinion no other cals have to fight with their cc like us and that is enough reason to say that we have a problem
    See the links shell provided.

    Plenty of Shaman are performing at high ratings without the glyphs in question. Elemental probably needs some oomph, but not in this particular regard; their issues are more that Frost Shock can't really be used without a heavier loss of throughput than either Resto or Enh suffer, and that their burst CD is too easily locked down, with relatively low DPS outside of it.

    Which I absolutely agree are issues. But Capacitor Totem isn't broken just because it's relatively hard to use. Nor is the existence of glyphs that make it easier an argument that those glyphs should be baseline.

  8. #128
    Aight Endus.
    Keep picking single sentences from my whole posts.
    Keep excusing the post length to avoid answering to my arguements.
    Keep ignoring every part that I give examples, explain my approach to the logic.
    Keep saying my arguement does not reflect universal facts only as a defense, which I openly declared I never intended to. As players we can only discuss or provide feedback, you are included too. Your arguements are not universally accepted facts unlike you believe, just like nobody's but Blizzard's.
    Keep avoiding what I'm trying to point out, and claiming that I provided nothing for my arguements.

    Yes, these are all my points and my feedback. I'm aware of the fact that this is a discussion and I might be wrong if anyone else can provide cleverly supported counter-arguements. My points are based on my experiences and my observations. The only difference is, my arguements are based on examples and explanations instead of "you are wrong, what I'm saying is the universal truth". I'm sorry, I'm just sick of hearing this without any supplemental arguements.
    These are my points, which you either ignored or just claimed them being falsehoods without supplying your arguements:

    1) CPT is clunky, detailed explanation:
    Which part is universally untrue? The part your mouse pointer turning into TP's AoE pointer or whole this requirement in the middle of the combat is the ability's skill-cap? Or you don't have to be on exact timing to land the stun, it is much forgiving than I described?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    -------***** The most important issue for QoL change *****-------
    - While you are trying to aim it, your mouse turns into TP's AoE pointer, which is a circle about 2-yard radius. When you try to aim it 30-yards away, it becomes too hard to predict 8-yard effect area on a moving target, while in the mean time you have to count for the arming time and hit it exactly on the right milisecond to land it. I don't see how this is "skill-cap" instead of just annoying. In the heat of combat, count to x, place it in the very right spot at the very right time, and try to predict 8-yards AoE, it's just asking too much for an AoE stun which is already balanced by its own long cooldown . It's not reliable enough, hitting with CPT shouldn't be a bonus, it should be one of our tools that we use for control.
    -------***** The most important issue for QoL change *****-------
    2) Your point CPT being fine because the community asked exactly for this after FNT, however the reasoning is irrelevant to your cause. Here is the example and the arguement you ignored:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    Hunters asked for a Trap Launcher every single day before they finally got it.
    However, it was too annoying to use before its final state today. It actually made using traps a lot more difficult than it was, and simply was not fun to use at all. Blizzard eventually improved it and now Trap Launcher is great, finally reliable, usable and enjoyable.

    I don't see how FNT justifies your "we are fine" arguement.
    3) Your contradictions in every post you are trying to make an arguement. It's simply confusing:

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Ghost Wolf is arguably the biggest troublemaker in this regard, and I agree that it could potentially be reworked; the decision on whether to glyph it is a little TOO binary for my liking, and basically boils down to "PvP? Glyph it." CC is too prevalent for this.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    30% of the Shaman in that sample being successful without it means it IS a choice you can do without.
    I would care less about wording and more on the point, unless your aim is to understand my point correctly, which is the first step to produce counter-arguements.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    30% shaman don't take GW glyph --> it's not mandatory (your claim)

    Let me ask the same in another way:
    70% shaman take GW glyph --> it's mandatory (based on your claim)

    More than half of that 30% shaman who don't take GW glyph are running with paladins who can Hand of Freedom.

    Either way, picking random 2.2k+ people doesn't prove or help proving a fact.
    %70 of the shaman use the glyph, which is incredibly high.
    No diversity or no choices, %70 is high enough to think that there is a problem with the design.

    Plus, this is not the right way to base your arguements on. I can find 30 other shamans and come up with %100 ratio or %0 ratio. Regardless of these numbers, a large proportion of PvP shamans are using the glyph. And no this is not "fine", MoP design is aimed to discourage having a certain (nobrainer) choice among your options. If you disagree this is not a nobrainer choice by showing this %30 or even one person as proof, there were people successful with old talents, without using nobrainer-considered talents. So, what is the difference?

    4) The great sacrifice and the way talents & glyphs should work:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    There's no sacrificing now. Only sacrificing is between same-level-talents.
    I'm not going to go one-by-one on your examples because I don't see them as PvP or PvE, CC or non-CC, X or Y glyphs/talents. If any glyph or talent is aimed to fix a spell (making it more reliable to use is fixing, not gameplay enhancing, ability itself should be reliable to use), there should be some changes. Yes, we should have everything indeed, everything to make an ability reliable enough itself. Not all, but a few of the Shaman spells are like a melee Death Grip at the moment. Imagine Death Grip being melee only, and a glyph turns it to a ranged ability. Having Death Grip only usable in melee range doesn't make any sense to the purpose of the spell (ignore spell interrupt, DG's main purpose is to taunt and gap-closing), and the glyph would be mandatory if you want to use Death Grip ever. This design is flawed.

    In addition to all this, it's pointless to compare what we used to have and what we have now. MoP had such a huge effect on WoW than any other expensions ever. Blizzard's overall game-play philosophy has shifted from a system where you unlocked new points and spent those points by tiers to gain effects, which weren't equal and thus cookie-cutter builds, to all equality, no wrong picks, personal choices. It can clearly be seen in MoP and also Diablo 3, there are no wrong choices as before, so while making your choices, you don't sacrifice anything, you just choose what's more compelling to you and all choices should be equal in terms of power.

    It's like choosing a car between a Hatchback, a Sedan and a Coupé. All of them are cars and they are all $20.000 cash and everybody's granted the same amount. If you have a family with 4 children, you wouldn't take a Coupé, vice versa.
    You completely ignored and disregarded this arguement, claiming that "we want everything for free", derailing my point entirely.

    5) Certain glyphs contradict with the current design - Glyphs or talents shouldn't make an ability easier/less clunkier to use, instead should make more interesting to use depending on situation and playstyle:
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    I DON'T want everything for free. I DON'T want all the benefits of glyphs and talents.
    I want the ability to be complete, self-sufficiant and reliable to use.
    Glyphs are supposed to add a flavour to the spell, they shouldn't make the whole mechanism work/work easier. Glyphs are not bugfixes or quality of life improvements. If they are, they become mandatory. Mandatory selection is done with Cataclysm, this is an era where we pick whatever suits us the best. QoL improvements are not choices.
    Your response:
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Not true. There's nothing wrong with certain glyphs being optimal for certain situational circumstances.
    Where you contradict yourself:
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    However, there's a lot of proof in my posts.
    6) Comparative examples for how glyphs should work:

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    Example: Glyph of Dark Soul
    Hypotheticly, I'm a cooldown saver. I don't like blowing cooldowns on cd much, I would rather save them a bit and use them whenever I feel more appropriate.
    This glyph suits my playstyle, it does have a benefit, for my playstyle, so I pick this one.
    Dark Soul does its own work and will continue to be DPS cooldown without the glyph too. I'm just adding a bit flavour, according to my playstyle. Correct.
    In our case, Ghost Wolf doesn't do its own work and depends heavily on the glyph to do its work. Wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    Glyph of Cleansing Waters

    I'm not sure if I have to explain it, cleansing works just fine itself. This is another perfect example of how glyphs should be, they should add something cool and interesting, they can be situational, but they should not complete the spell. This would be another problematic glyph if dispelling was difficult without the glyph. If normal dispelling would allow you to self-dispel, and the glyph made the spell usable on others, it would be mandatory. Like most of the PvP'rs use their Ghost Wolves, Resto would have to take this glyph, DPS wouldn't care. This is not being situational as you state, this is fixing what an ability should do baseline.
    Completely ignored.

    Do I need to go on if I produced any valuable arguements or if you ignored them completely?

  9. #129
    Stood in the Fire shell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    409
    The other post was kinda long so you might have missed it,

    Quote Originally Posted by shell View Post
    And just so people don't say I'm cherrypicking: take a closer look at the US ladder that I linked. That's Bloodlust which has long been considered the premiere battlegroup for serious pvp'ers. Now use the filter so it only show teams with shamans. There are 30 teams with a shaman, in this particular BG, @2200 or higher. 20/30 either don't use glyph of gw(5) or don't use glyph of capacitor (11) or don't use both(4).
    There's nothing random about this that I can see so you'll have to explain that to me. Its an entire battlegroup that I filtered to show just teams that featured a shaman. I then looked at all the teams, all of them, that were 2200+ and counted how many of those shaman either didn't have glyph of gw, glyph of capacitor, or both. 5+4=9; 9/30=30% that don't use glyph of ghostwolf. 11+4=15; 15/30=50% that don't use glyph of capacitor.

    How is this random? I'm not being sarcastic, I genuinely want to know. Did you want me to look at everyone 1550+? Did you want me to go through all the battlegroups? You don't have to take me at my word it's here http://us.battle.net/wow/en/pvp/aren...ompType=filter.

    As for your thinking that 70% is mandatory, there seems to be some confusion on what the word means. So no, I was indeed perfectly aware that the number could be flipped the other way but mandatory means 100%. Even if I were to give you some leeway it would still have to be 90%+. The only glyph that falls under that definition is glyph of purge.

    There's no other way to cut it. You can say 70/30 or you can say 30/70, its still not mandatory.

    If there's another way that you would like me to present the numbers, so that they don't seem random to you, please let me know and I will try to accomodate you.
    These words in my mouth... where did they come from? I don't think I'm the one that put them there...

  10. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by shell View Post
    The other post was kinda long so you might have missed it,



    There's nothing random about this that I can see so you'll have to explain that to me. Its an entire battlegroup that I filtered to show just teams that featured a shaman. I then looked at all the teams, all of them, that were 2200+ and counted how many of those shaman either didn't have glyph of gw, glyph of capacitor, or both. 5+4=9; 9/30=30% that don't use glyph of ghostwolf. 11+4=15; 15/30=50% that don't use glyph of capacitor.

    How is this random? I'm not being sarcastic, I genuinely want to know. Did you want me to look at everyone 1550+? Did you want me to go through all the battlegroups? You don't have to take me at my word it's here http://us.battle.net/wow/en/pvp/aren...ompType=filter.

    As for your thinking that 70% is mandatory, there seems to be some confusion on what the word means. So no, I was indeed perfectly aware that the number could be flipped the other way but mandatory means 100%. Even if I were to give you some leeway it would still have to be 90%+. The only glyph that falls under that definition is glyph of purge.

    There's no other way to cut it. You can say 70/30 or you can say 30/70, its still not mandatory.

    If there's another way that you would like me to present the numbers, so that they don't seem random to you, please let me know and I will try to accomodate you.
    The thing is, It's that I do not have a slot extra for that as elemental. I dont use ghostwolf at all anymore. That's why you see people dropping that shit,Ghostwolf is so useless even with the glyph. Also things like freedom totem and paladin freedoms have impact on glyph choices in high lvl arena play. Take the fact that armory does not update half the time and you can see why your conclusions are off.

    The point I believe is being made: The glyph's could have been so much better.(in a fun way even). Stuff like autowaterwalking in ghostwolf, nice but versus the warlock waterwalking mount not even comparable, the rbg advantage is quite there, while for shamans it's just that, waterwalking it would have been nice if it stayed after casting ghostwolf but no it removes when you leave form.

    More ontopic: Stuff like that really makes me mad as hell, same with 5.1 again no shaman patch notes, because they just dont give a fuck if pvp is balanced, like how an entire season can be dominated by pve weapons/trinekts(s11) and how this season bm hunters have been OP for weeks. How warriors gag order does not get hotfixed. etc etc. it's fucking mind boggeling how they can not see this.

  11. #131
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    20,411
    I apologize for the length, but he's complaining that I'm "ignoring" things.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mithgroth View Post
    1) CPT is clunky, detailed explanation:
    Which part is universally untrue? The part your mouse pointer turning into TP's AoE pointer or whole this requirement in the middle of the combat is the ability's skill-cap? Or you don't have to be on exact timing to land the stun, it is much forgiving than I described?
    "Clunky" is a personal qualitative statement, not a statement of fact. All you're saying here is that you don't LIKE how capacitor totem works, not that how it works is "bad" in some quantitative, provable sense.

    2) Your point CPT being fine because the community asked exactly for this after FNT, however the reasoning is irrelevant to your cause. Here is the example and the arguement you ignored:
    That wasn't my argument, I brought up FNT when people were saying they never listen to Shaman feedback.

    3) Your contradictions in every post you are trying to make an arguement. It's simply confusing:

    I would care less about wording and more on the point, unless your aim is to understand my point correctly, which is the first step to produce counter-arguements.
    You were wrong about what "mandatory" means. It really is that simple. You're using "mandatory" as a replacement for "popular". That's either hyperbole, or it's wrong. Either way, pointing out the facts IS a counter argument.

    %70 of the shaman use the glyph, which is incredibly high.
    No diversity or no choices, %70 is high enough to think that there is a problem with the design.

    Plus, this is not the right way to base your arguements on. I can find 30 other shamans and come up with %100 ratio or %0 ratio. Regardless of these numbers, a large proportion of PvP shamans are using the glyph. And no this is not "fine", MoP design is aimed to discourage having a certain (nobrainer) choice among your options. If you disagree this is not a nobrainer choice by showing this %30 or even one person as proof, there were people successful with old talents, without using nobrainer-considered talents. So, what is the difference?
    I don't see that any of this is true again. You are again taking a personal preference and trying to claim it as quantitative fact. There's nothing wrong with 70% of the community using a glyph in 3s. You have given absolutely NO argument to support that. I can't provide some detailed argument, because it's like asking me to argue against the statement "nobody likes avocado". All I can do is point to people who do.

    It doesn't matter if a glyph is popular. It only matters if it's so powerful/necessary you can't perform without it. And that's demonstrably not true, as there are high-ranked Shaman doing so.

    4) The great sacrifice and the way talents & glyphs should work:

    You completely ignored and disregarded this arguement, claiming that "we want everything for free", derailing my point entirely.
    I didn't ignore it. I didn't respond directly to it like this, but it was covered by the blue post I linked;
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    That's a goal but it's definitely much harder to deliver on. When we say we don't want mandatory glyphs for PvE, what we're actually saying is we don't want a glyph that generally provides a DPS increase in most situations (if you are a DPS spec). In PvP, sustained DPS is only slightly valuable. On the other hand, a glyph that provides burst damage at the expense of sustained damage, or a glyph that provides extra CC or CC immunity looks awfully attractive for PvP. We'll still try and make sure there are no cookie-cutter talent or glyph builds though.
    There are no cookie-cutter talent/glyph builds, for PvP. As checking the ranks shows. Your statement that they didn't want any glyphs to ever be subtoptimal choices is simply not true. As that quote states; they were well aware that certain glyphs, due to the nature of PvP, would tend to be preferred, but as long as they weren't being taken by 100% of the competitive players, a "cookie-cutter" build, they were okay with that.

    5) Certain glyphs contradict with the current design - Glyphs or talents shouldn't make an ability easier/less clunkier to use, instead should make more interesting to use depending on situation and playstyle:

    Your response:

    Where you contradict yourself:
    That doesn't contradict my statement, and my statement is true and backed up by evidence.

    See the blue post in #4. That's the current design. The glyphs don't contradict it. You're making stuff up and claiming that's the design intent, and you haven't given any evidence to do so, while claiming I haven't when I have.

    Physician, heal thyself.

    6) Comparative examples for how glyphs should work:
    Were ignored because your stance on how they "should work" was predicated on the prior statements, which weren't supported and were contradicted by blue posts. If the fundamental argument is demonstrably invalid, I don't need to address the examples. Some glyphs acting a certain way does not mean all glyphs should act that way; that's like saying "here's a couple of people who can sing pretty well, therefore everyone can sing like that." It doesn't back your argument up in the least, when your argument is about all glyphs.



    Long story short; I'm not ignoring anything. I'm skipping bits that are based on parts I've already debunked. And you really need to start providing some evidence that isn't based on what you like, if you're going to call me out like that. I have been linking evidence; the ladder data shell provided, blue posts, etc.
    Last edited by Endus; 2012-11-12 at 03:35 PM.

  12. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarac View Post
    If you are only using GW to run back after a wipe than I feel sorry for your healers/raid.
    Not that GW doesn't have it's uses, but there were times we didn't even have that.
    Yes, those where times where pve mobility was bad, but what's the difference between that and bad pvp mobility now?
    I didn't make it as clear as I probably should have, but my point was basically:
    Pve is just as situational for a pvp nut as pvp is for a hardcore raider, therefor the sentiment:
    "You dont have to have viable baseline abilities/talents, because there're glyphs and glyphs are being fine "fixing" stuff that is broken/horrible without, since it is "only" for pvp, which is situational anyways."
    doesn't hold up.

    Plus if they made the UF sprint usable w/o sacrificing so much dmg from FT, or gave us something like our spiritwolves' leap, we wouldn't need GW as enh in raids at all.
    Even a ret at least can decide between mobility talents for a sprint every judgement, an enhance's equivalent forces to decide between dps talents (which can vary in effectiveness, depending on encounter) and to switch to FB/an FB imbued weapon. What the hell?
    Last edited by Omanley; 2012-11-12 at 04:06 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angoth
    I'm sorry that Blizzard won't just gift wrap awesome in a cup and let you drink your fill.

  13. #133
    Dreadlord zenga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    946
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    See the links shell provided.

    Plenty of Shaman are performing at high ratings without the glyphs in question.
    The armory is not real proof seeing how flexible the current system is to swap talents and glyphs around based on content you do. Zeiyo for instance (first in that list) hasn't played a 3s game in weeks, just sitting on his rating. Not to mention that the mmr bug is totally fucking up the rankings. People take other glyphs to cap out conquest points in rbgs than they would do in a 3v3 game.

    That being said, even if it was proof, players can decide that the cost of needing a talent + glyph is just not worth it, and play without using capacitor totem. That doesn't mean it's working fine (vs a caster setup I prefer totemic restoration over totemic projection for example, nor would I go for ghost wolf glyph, hell it's even depending on your own setup).

    I just checked nuvoz stream for example, the VOD that's currently up (nuvoz is a world class ele shaman in arena for years). Now check how many capacitor stuns that he actually lands during that first game (vs feral spriest rshaman). It's no proof that it isn't working either however. It's a good example that at one point a player might decide to no longer bother with it and go for other talents/glyphs.

  14. #134
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    20,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Omanley View Post
    Not that GW doesn't have it's uses, but there were times we didn't even have that.
    Yes, those where times where pve mobility was bad, but what's the difference between that and bad pvp mobility now?
    I didn't make it as clear as I probably should have, but my point was basically:
    Pve is just as situational for a pvp nut as pvp is for a hardcore raider, therefor the sentiment:
    "You dont have to have viable baseline abilities/talents, because there're glyphs and glyphs are being fine "fixing" stuff that is broken/horrible without, since it is "only" for pvp, which is situational anyways."
    doesn't hold up.
    I don't think anybody is saying that PvE isn't just as situational. You don't see this kind of stance from hardcore raiders over glyphs like Glyph of Flame Shock or Glyph of Unleashed Lightning, however popular they may be.

    Ghost Wolf and Capacitor Totem are fine unglyphed. They work BETTER glyphed. Nobody has given one iota of evidence that either is broken, other than "it didn't used to work like this" or "I don't want to use a glyph slot to get what I want", and neither of those are actually arguments. [/QUOTE]

    Quote Originally Posted by zenga View Post
    The armory is not real proof seeing how flexible the current system is to swap talents and glyphs around based on content you do. Zeiyo for instance (first in that list) hasn't played a 3s game in weeks, just sitting on his rating. Not to mention that the mmr bug is totally fucking up the rankings. People take other glyphs to cap out conquest points in rbgs than they would do in a 3v3 game.

    That being said, even if it was proof, players can decide that the cost of needing a talent + glyph is just not worth it, and play without using capacitor totem. That doesn't mean it's working fine (vs a caster setup I prefer totemic restoration over totemic projection for example, nor would I go for ghost wolf glyph, hell it's even depending on your own setup).

    I just checked nuvoz stream for example, the VOD that's currently up (nuvoz is a world class ele shaman in arena for years). Now check how many capacitor stuns that he actually lands during that first game (vs feral spriest rshaman). It's no proof that it isn't working either however. It's a good example that at one point a player might decide to no longer bother with it and go for other talents/glyphs.
    Yeah, I'm aware that the armory isn't a perfect measure, but unless someone has a better way to go about it, that's what we've got.

    Players deciding that the cost of needing a glyph and talent aren't worth it does not mean the ability is broken. It just means it's not worth glyphing/talenting for. Nor do you actually need to LAND stuns with Capacitor for it to be effective; in a very generic sense, PvP is about outplaying your opponent. It doesn't matter if it's chess or football or WoW. Part of that isn't just the ruleset, it's outplaying the other player, figuring out how they think so you can predict reactions and take advantage. If you know the opponent will react a certain way to you dropping Capacitor Totem and you can see a way to take advantage of that, then that's a valid use. We're probably talking about getting them to back off, or to swap targets briefly and lower their pressure, and in both cases glyphing is probably NOT something you want to do, and talenting is only a maybe; both make it easier to pull off the stun but that's not the intent here. It's a false attack, a feint, a bluff. That absolutely IS a part of high-end arena; that's what fake-casting is all about, for instance.

    I'm not there yet; I've tried to use that in a couple arena matches and my opponents just stood there and got stunned. And then I ate their faces. This is absolutely them being bad and not an argument that Capacitor Totem is awesome.

    If players are deciding that the cost of the talent and glyph aren't worth it, that's exactly what we mean when we say it's not mandatory. You aren't actually contradicting anything I've been arguing, here, you're agreeing with me.

  15. #135
    Stood in the Fire shell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    409
    Quote Originally Posted by zenga View Post
    The armory is not real proof seeing how flexible the current system is to swap talents and glyphs around based on content you do. Zeiyo for instance (first in that list) hasn't played a 3s game in weeks, just sitting on his rating. Not to mention that the mmr bug is totally fucking up the rankings. People take other glyphs to cap out conquest points in rbgs than they would do in a 3v3 game.
    Oh, I agree. Part of the argument when we were having this discussion months ago was that "no serious pvper would ever pass up this glyph." So if the 30% that the armory shows don't use it are swapping ghostwolf in and out, it's just as likely that the other 70% are doing the same. Or if the 50% that the armory is showing don't use glyph of capacitor, it's just as likely that they swap it in or out. Because as you said it's what people are doing given "how flexible the current system is to swap talents and glyphs around based on content you do." I think that statement more than anything proves just how situational these glyphs and talents actually are.

    Moving on from that. I think what's getting lost in this discussion is that some part of people's issue with cpt doesn't have to do with the ability or the glyph, some of it has to do with totemic projection. It's not exactly intuitive. I get why the totems land outside of the reticle(?) but that doesn't mean it should be that way. When you use a reticle for anything else in game whether its shooting cannons, launching traps, or using aoe, the green circle is where the cannon, trap, or aoe lands.

    Imagine how annoying it would be if earthquake landed outside of where you put the circle. Would you adjust? Sure. That doesn't make it a good thing though.
    These words in my mouth... where did they come from? I don't think I'm the one that put them there...

  16. #136
    Dreadlord zenga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    946
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If players are deciding that the cost of the talent and glyph aren't worth it, that's exactly what we mean when we say it's not mandatory. You aren't actually contradicting anything I've been arguing, here, you're agreeing with me.
    It's not my mmo goal to disagree with people Nor did I say that those glyphs are mandatory to be successful in pvp as ele. But if you wanna use capacitor (why on earth do I always write capacitator first btw & having to correct it afterwards?) totem in a reliable way in arena then the glyph+talent are becoming 'way more' mandatory (it's not really black/white). That's a different thing than saying that capacitor (ffs wrote capacitator again) is mandatory for ele shamans.

    Quote Originally Posted by shell View Post
    Because as you said it's what people are doing given "how flexible the current system is to swap talents and glyphs around based on content you do." I think that statement more than anything proves just how situational these glyphs and talents actually are.
    True that.

  17. #137
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    Ghost Wolf and Capacitor Totem are fine unglyphed. They work BETTER glyphed. Nobody has given one iota of evidence that either is broken, other than "it didn't used to work like this" or "I don't want to use a glyph slot to get what I want", and neither of those are actually arguments.
    Well, I disagree (as well as many others as it seems). That kinda "fine" could also be applied to our 4.1 aoe.

    Our stun is like the chubby kid during pe: Everyone sees it as useless because it is slow, and no one wants to have it in their team because losing is no fun.
    Last edited by Omanley; 2012-11-12 at 07:57 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angoth
    I'm sorry that Blizzard won't just gift wrap awesome in a cup and let you drink your fill.

  18. #138
    Moderator Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Waterloo, ON
    Posts
    20,411
    Quote Originally Posted by Omanley View Post
    Well, I disagree (as well as many others as it seems). That kinda "fine" could also be applied to our 4.1 aoe.

    Our stun is like the chubby kid during pe: Everyone sees it as useless because it is slow, and no one wants to have it in their team because losing is no fun.
    You have any rational justification for this, yet, or are you still trying to present your personal preferences as if they were fact?

    "I'd rather it were another way" isn't proof of anything. I don't like the passivity of healing, and while Telluric Currents spam in Cata got me through that a bit, I'm not enjoying Resto in MoP. That doesn't mean Resto's design is "bad", it just means I don't like it.

    You need to provide a factual, quantitative argument that the Ghost Wolf or Capacitor Totem designs are causing issues. And which controls for other factors, like Elemental's low DPS outside of Ascendance, so that THOSE aren't potentially causing the lack of performance. Neither you nor anyone else is bothering, you're just saying words like "clunky" and "not reliable" which are qualitative, not quantitative. In other words, they have as much factual meaning as saying "I like Justin Bieber, therefore he's the best pop star ever."

    Nor are comparisons to other class abilities relevant to such a proof, since you're inevitably comparing them absent the absolutely necessary context that is the rest of the class/spec toolkit.


    If you'd admit you just don't like it, that'd be fine. Nobody's trying to make you like it. But when you say it's "broken" or "clunky", you're suggesting that nobody else could/should like it, and you're trying to force your own personal preferences on the rest of the community. Which is why I'm taking an issue with it.

    Facts are facts, and opinions are opinions. You're welcome to your opinion, but opinions aren't facts, and your opinion holds precisely zero relevance or importance to anyone but yourself.
    Last edited by Endus; 2012-11-12 at 08:34 PM.

  19. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    You need to provide a factual, quantitative argument that the Ghost Wolf or Capacitor Totem designs are causing issues.
    Pvp viability is not about quantity, but quality. The longest stun is worthless, if it never hits. A 5 sec aoe stun sounds impressive, but most of the time you're hard pressed stunning a single enemy in pvp, let alone two. If it's numbers you want, look through all MoP arena videos you can find involving shaman and compare how much CPT actually hits in higher ranked matches vs. Deep Freeze, Cheap Shot and co. We both no you wont bother going to such lenghts just to prove yourself wrong anyway. We both know CPT is hard to make work and close to worthless in high ranked pvp. The higher the demands on an ability, the more worthless it becomes if it is heavily limited in usage.
    I dont really need a factual argument to prove that CPT is at the bottom of the stun-barrel, but if you insist:A look at the tool-tip, the fact that unlike other stuns, CPT has the option of two glyphes and one talent to enhance it (if it were as powerful as you make it out to be, it wouldn't require those to exist, right?) and last but not least, common sense. With common sense, you will notice that CPT requires a baby-sitter. Unlike a Warlock's cataclysm though, it is our only stun.
    Are there glyphs shortening cataclysm's charge up time? No, because it is useless anyways and nobody would bother glyphing it, since warlocks got a shitload of CCs and stuns even without cataclysm.

    Plus it is not really up to debate that enh lacks mobility compared to other melees atm. It is an aknowledged fact. And the steps we need to take to get as near as possible to where others are a many here as well.
    -Required to take UF for mobility, although it is a dps tier => less customisation
    -required to take FP for mobility, having to pass up the critical aspect enh lacks for proper gap closing: freedom accompanied with movement speed (although WWT has to high a cd anyway) => customisation loss the 2nd
    -required to glyph GW to get it to an competitive pvp level => again, customisation loss

    We've been down the "talents and glyphs are band aids for baseline lacks"-road before and it hasn't worked out well. MoP is not much better then previous x-packs in that regard. In fact, we became even more dependant on them, making enh/shamans probably the most/one of the most cooky-cutter pvp class/es.

    These are your facts.
    Last edited by Omanley; 2012-11-12 at 11:08 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Angoth
    I'm sorry that Blizzard won't just gift wrap awesome in a cup and let you drink your fill.

  20. #140
    Stood in the Fire shell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    409
    Quote Originally Posted by Omanley View Post
    These are your facts.
    I couldn't think of a more diplomatic way of saying this but there's so much wrong with your post I don't even know where to begin.

    if it were as powerful as you make it out to be, it wouldn't require those to exist, right?
    What does this even mean? That makes no sense at all.

    Are there glyphs shortening cataclysm's charge up time? No, because it is useless anyways and nobody would bother glyphing it, since warlocks got a shitload of CCs and stuns even without cataclysm.
    Again what does that even mean? That makes no sense whatsoever.

    As far as what you have to say about shamans and cookie cutter specs look through the arena ladders.
    These words in my mouth... where did they come from? I don't think I'm the one that put them there...

Posting Permissions

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