1. #1401
    It's just not possible to have on reforge be "optimal" for every fight; the choice is either to reforge frequently between fights, or to find a compromise. Personally, I'm going with Mastery>=Haste>Crit. That way, not only do I take advantage of the many fights with chances for extra embers, I also have a decent reforge for when I go Demonology (on Council).

    However, as always you should get your priorities sorted based on what is important for your guild. If you're doing progression on Horridon, reforge full Mastery. If you're doing progression on Jin'rokh, go for haste. Every guild is being held back by something else, so adjust your reforges according to that. During farm, doing a few k DPS more or less doesn't matter much aside from vanity, but for a progression encounter it can make or break the fight.

  2. #1402
    We do not rely on dot damage, even though we use them. "Magic number" breakpoints are of little concern, or at least less than the overall values and their relative distribution. You can use SimCraft if you want to optimize your reforges, but there's not threshold values to take care of.

  3. #1403
    at least 20 pages in this great topic are wastet because of this useless "what stat is best?" questions. plz stop it
    the answer is on the first page telling to use simcraft if you have no clue about what stat pulls ahead on which fight (and if you do not know, you porbably play not good enough to make a big difference in your damage output)

    so please reforge for the specific fights or just leave your reforges balanced.

    no matter how special you are, the answer to you statweights is always the same. (Simcraft/useyourbrain)

  4. #1404
    Bloodsail Admiral Liquidsteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    1,037
    People need to actually learn what they actually gain from a certain stat and why it is useful, and why it may be less or more useful under different circumstances. Then they can work out how to reforge/gear by themselves.

  5. #1405
    Quote Originally Posted by Liquidsteel View Post
    People need to actually learn what they actually gain from a certain stat and why it is useful, and why it may be less or more useful under different circumstances. Then they can work out how to reforge/gear by themselves.
    On the other hand, if people are coming to a 3rd party resource like MMO Champ forums and asking questions, that's the first step towards becoming a good player. Sure, lots of them just want to be fed the easy answers and go back to executing the rotation incorrectly, but if 5% of the playerbase is actually willing to learn, then they're in the next 20% who are asking questions. 75% of people are probably just fumbling around blindly with no idea what to do. That's why so many 510 locks in LFR are doing 50k DPS.

  6. #1406
    Bloodsail Admiral Liquidsteel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Manchester, UK
    Posts
    1,037
    True, but the information has been discussed countless times in this thread. Reading the guide, the last few pages of comments, or using the search feature will all accomplish this without clogging up the thread.

    There is also a fix my dps sticky for the countless ' my dps is low on dummy, here's my armoury' posts.

  7. #1407
    The Patient
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    274
    Here's an interesting note from the front page: Probably 5.4 RoF will be taken form single target rotation. Sorry Zum . I'm calling Immolate being buffed to compensate, where FnB Immo's will be left as they are right now. Also, mastery=crit>haste (past 9076). You heard it here first!

    Do you know how embarrassing it is to AoE perfectly on Horridon, and get blown out of the water on add damage by an Ele shaman spamming lightning? It's annoying! GAH!
    After being Medieve the Uberpally for many years, finally shelved in favor of Belledanna, the Uberlock!!! (patent pending)
    W-Th 6:45 PM EST to 11:00 PM EST - Neolutum of Turalyon, always recruiting! http://neolutum.enjin.com/home

    -Retired as of the end of 5.3

  8. #1408
    Quote Originally Posted by Medieve View Post
    Here's an interesting note from the front page: Probably 5.4 RoF will be taken form single target rotation. Sorry Zum . I'm calling Immolate being buffed to compensate, where FnB Immo's will be left as they are right now.
    I'd be surprised, that sounds like it might get into some messy, convoluted situation where it's better to multi-cast single target immolate for embers or some rubbish, seems much simpler to just tie it to conflag / incin - though I'd frankly have preferred ROF being left as is, the rotation feels a tad empty without it.

  9. #1409
    Quote Originally Posted by Nagassh View Post
    I'd be surprised, that sounds like it might get into some messy, convoluted situation where it's better to multi-cast single target immolate for embers or some rubbish, seems much simpler to just tie it to conflag / incin - though I'd frankly have preferred ROF being left as is, the rotation feels a tad empty without it.
    It already is better to multi-cast single target Immo.


    Personally I hope to see another spell added in that's (mostly) exclusive to the single target rotation. Without RoF the single target rotation is pretty boring. It didn't used to be when you had to plan ahead on trinket ICDs to best use embers, but with RPPM and the reactive gameplay of 5.2 there's no planning involved any more.

    I'd still like to see Searing Pain make a comeback, and in the form of a high-mana, high-embergain haste-reduced CD. It should basically replace RoF in the single target rotation (CD is reduced by the same amount as haste reduces RoF duration), and should generate a large number of embers similar to the average output of RoF.

    That way we have similar gameplay to current, but instead of RoF in the single target rotation we have a casted spell at the same frequency and average ember gain, as well as mana cost.

    We'd probably end up casting such a spell in multi-target situations as well, so long as we are not swimming in Embers already. My thought is that in multitarget situations it'd be a slight buff to low-number-of-targets AoE, while not even used at higher amounts of targets as there's no point in gaining extra embers when you already have more than enough.

  10. #1410
    Think RoF is fine with a targetted option, w/ a consistent duration. It's just a bit like HoG was in beta where reticle targetting makes it clunky. No one complains about HoG now. Best of all, can be accomplished via (minor, hopefully) glyph.
    http://darkcontent.wordpress.com/ - blog (updated Oct. 8, 2013). Latest post: T16H Affliction Trinket Rankings in Combination, done in SimC 540-4.

  11. #1411
    Quote Originally Posted by Rustjive View Post
    Think RoF is fine with a targetted option, w/ a consistent duration. It's just a bit like HoG was in beta where reticle targetting makes it clunky. No one complains about HoG now. Best of all, can be accomplished via (minor, hopefully) glyph.
    I don't want a targeted option at all. It makes fights where you have to place RoF optimally and not on a target every once in a while play exactly the same as now. It wouldn't fix the problem of using RoF in the single target rotation whatsoever.

    Bringing back Searing Pain (or w/e they choose to call it) that fills the same role as RoF but that can only hit one target is a much better solution, and allows for more interesting gameplay in certain situations than exists now.

  12. #1412
    Quote Originally Posted by Brusalk View Post
    It makes fights where you have to place RoF optimally and not on a target every once in a while play exactly the same as now. It wouldn't fix the problem of using RoF in the single target rotation whatsoever.
    It sounds to me you don't like the concept of RoF, period. Those two issues are not completely separate (Meg comes to mind), but are not exactly the same issue. Using RoF in the ST rotation is ONLY clunky because of the targeting - otherwise I fail to see how it's different from HoG. Is it an issue of concept that a spell that hits in an area being part of ST that bothers you? Because a targetted RoF in single-target is pretty much HoG/DoT.

    As for the placing the optimally - those are mostly AoE fights, no?
    Last edited by Rustjive; 2013-05-13 at 08:18 PM.
    http://darkcontent.wordpress.com/ - blog (updated Oct. 8, 2013). Latest post: T16H Affliction Trinket Rankings in Combination, done in SimC 540-4.

  13. #1413
    Quote Originally Posted by Rustjive View Post
    It sounds to me you don't like the concept of RoF, period. Those two issues are not completely separate (Meg comes to mind), but are not exactly the same issue. Using RoF in the ST rotation is ONLY clunky because of the targeting - otherwise I fail to see how it's different from HoG. Is it an issue of concept that a spell that hits in an area being part of ST that bothers you? Because a targetted RoF in single-target is pretty much HoG/DoT.

    As for the placing the optimally - those are mostly AoE fights, no?
    I LOVE the concept of RoF and it's a great spell. I'm NOT a fan of using it when there is only one target. I'm perfectly fine using it on >= 2 targets.

    There are a TON of fights in ToT alone where there is a significant portion of the fight spent single target DPSing (Lei Shen, Durumu, Tortos, Twin Consorts, the list goes on) but then there are plenty of times in the same fights where you'd need to place RoF off to the side of a target such that it'll still hit the boss, but also hit adds. (Lei Shen w/ Chain adds, Consorts with adds, Durumu with Color Phase/Eyes, Tortos with Turtles/Bats, etc)

    I don't want to be forced to have to make a choice between a targeted RoF and losing out on those add embers, or a non-targeted RoF and having to place it for the entirety of the fight. It is just bad design to attempt to solve a problem but not actually solve the problem.

    I don't understand why people are so interested in a glyph that makes RoF into HoG. That's just not fun and lowers some of the uniqueness of both specs.


    Having a spell that can only be cast on one target, but has the same net effect as a single-target RoF makes perfect sense to me, and feels like a much better design than a glyph. It also allows for more interesting gameplay in other areas too, which are mostly centered around using it on a target when there is more than one. E.G. Do you use it when there's 3 targets? 5? How many embers are you expecting to generate soon? Will you be able to spend the embers gained from Searing Pain before you'd over-cap?

    Having a glyph forces an un-fun decision, while having a spell that fits a similar role, but is limited to damaging one target only allows for more interesting gameplay in all areas.


    __________

    An additional thought too, is that it would allow us some on-demand embers when we absolutely need them NOW. I can think of a lot of times where I'd love to have those 3-4 emberbits to be able to cast a Shadowburn but can't generate them fast enough.

  14. #1414
    Quote Originally Posted by Brusalk View Post
    I LOVE the concept of RoF and it's a great spell. I'm NOT a fan of using it when there is only one target. I'm perfectly fine using it on >= 2 targets.

    There are a TON of fights in ToT alone where there is a significant portion of the fight spent single target DPSing (Lei Shen, Durumu, Tortos, Twin Consorts, the list goes on) but then there are plenty of times in the same fights where you'd need to place RoF off to the side of a target such that it'll still hit the boss, but also hit adds. (Lei Shen w/ Chain adds, Consorts with adds, Durumu with Color Phase/Eyes, Tortos with Turtles/Bats, etc)

    I don't want to be forced to have to make a choice between a targeted RoF and losing out on those add embers, or a non-targeted RoF and having to place it for the entirety of the fight. It is just bad design to attempt to solve a problem but not actually solve the problem.

    I don't understand why people are so interested in a glyph that makes RoF into HoG. That's just not fun and lowers some of the uniqueness of both specs.


    Having a spell that can only be cast on one target, but has the same net effect as a single-target RoF makes perfect sense to me, and feels like a much better design than a glyph. It also allows for more interesting gameplay in other areas too, which are mostly centered around using it on a target when there is more than one. E.G. Do you use it when there's 3 targets? 5? How many embers are you expecting to generate soon? Will you be able to spend the embers gained from Searing Pain before you'd over-cap?

    Having a glyph forces an un-fun decision, while having a spell that fits a similar role, but is limited to damaging one target only allows for more interesting gameplay in all areas.

    Agreed. Spells with a targeting reticule do not belong in a single target rotation. "Fixing" that with a glyph and having to switch it out on a per fight basis is almost worse.

    They should only have it gen embers if it hits more than 1 target, and buff ember generation for other spells (like immo crit gives you +3 emberbits instead of +2, immolate direct damage = 1 emberbit + 2 on crit, conflag CD reduced by haste and double the ember gen, etc).

  15. #1415
    Quote Originally Posted by jason1975 View Post
    Agreed. Spells with a targeting reticule do not belong in a single target rotation. "Fixing" that with a glyph and having to switch it out on a per fight basis is almost worse.

    They should only have it gen embers if it hits more than 1 target, and buff ember generation for other spells (like immo crit gives you +3 emberbits instead of +2, immolate direct damage = 1 emberbit + 2 on crit, conflag CD reduced by haste and double the ember gen, etc).
    I'd thought about that solution but that would be a huge buff to our AoE, and more specifically how many targets we are good at AoE at. Limiting the solution to a replacement spell for ST RoF means they don't have to do a huge rebalance of all of our abilities.

  16. #1416
    Quote Originally Posted by Brusalk View Post
    I'd thought about that solution but that would be a huge buff to our AoE, and more specifically how many targets we are good at AoE at. Limiting the solution to a replacement spell for ST RoF means they don't have to do a huge rebalance of all of our abilities.
    I guess I'm in the minority; I always thought that Rain of Fire was the most fun part of the single target destruction rotation; especially given the high mana cost. I thought since you could bring out the targeting reticle and queue up the spell during a previous cast that it wasn't difficult at all to do it properly, and it required increased awareness of movement on the fight by knowing whether or not something would take all the ticks of not. The only thing that ever bothered me about it was the fact that the range was not 40 yards so you would have to be closer than max range to place RoF properly.

    If they don't like targeted abilities in a single target rotation I guess my preferred solution for increased ember generation would definitely be something active rather than just 'more embers from immolate' etc. While I don't want to turn RoF into Hand of Gul'dan, I do think that a 2nd short-duration DoT with less than 100% possible uptime would be interesting for extra ember generation. If it used enough GCDs to make us only cast incinerate with backdraft when the rotation is executed 'properly' it could be interesting as well as that would bring mana management into play more frequently (something I enjoyed regarding RoF).

  17. #1417
    Quote Originally Posted by Gremory1 View Post
    I guess I'm in the minority; I always thought that Rain of Fire was the most fun part of the single target destruction rotation; especially given the high mana cost. I thought since you could bring out the targeting reticle and queue up the spell during a previous cast that it wasn't difficult at all to do it properly, and it required increased awareness of movement on the fight by knowing whether or not something would take all the ticks of not. The only thing that ever bothered me about it was the fact that the range was not 40 yards so you would have to be closer than max range to place RoF properly.

    If they don't like targeted abilities in a single target rotation I guess my preferred solution for increased ember generation would definitely be something active rather than just 'more embers from immolate' etc. While I don't want to turn RoF into Hand of Gul'dan, I do think that a 2nd short-duration DoT with less than 100% possible uptime would be interesting for extra ember generation. If it used enough GCDs to make us only cast incinerate with backdraft when the rotation is executed 'properly' it could be interesting as well as that would bring mana management into play more frequently (something I enjoyed regarding RoF).
    I'm sure it's not that people don't find RoF fun in the single target rotation, but more that it is a PITA to use in the single target rotation. You can't queue a RoF after an instant spell. You can't even get the reticule up until after the GCD has already finished. It has that stupid range limitation that's not 40 yards. (And so on)

    My idea is basically a spell which does what RoF does, but which can only be cast on one target and has a CD that matches what the RoF duration would be a the time of use. It would have the same mana cost, execution time, average ember generation, and damage as if you'd cast RoF on single target. The single target rotation would be roughly the same as now (which is more exciting than in 5.1 solely because of RoF), low # of enemies-AoE would be more interesting, and high # of enemies-AoE would be the same.

  18. #1418
    well they could just make a glyph that functions like a reversed glyph of hand of gul'dan, where it changes RoF from being targeted at a location to targeting a specific target. it will give ppl the option of going with current RoF or a "hand of gul'dan" version of RoF.

  19. #1419
    Quote Originally Posted by almara2512 View Post
    well they could just make a glyph that functions like a reversed glyph of hand of gul'dan, where it changes RoF from being targeted at a location to targeting a specific target. it will give ppl the option of going with current RoF or a "hand of gul'dan" version of RoF.
    My response to that idea is up a few posts.

  20. #1420
    The Patient
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    274
    Quote Originally Posted by almara2512 View Post
    well they could just make a glyph that functions like a reversed glyph of hand of gul'dan, where it changes RoF from being targeted at a location to targeting a specific target. it will give ppl the option of going with current RoF or a "hand of gul'dan" version of RoF.
    Except most times you need to be able to place RoF, so really, that glyph is usable for maybe 3 fights this tier. The rest of the time you're gimping yourself, which solves absolutely nothing overall.
    After being Medieve the Uberpally for many years, finally shelved in favor of Belledanna, the Uberlock!!! (patent pending)
    W-Th 6:45 PM EST to 11:00 PM EST - Neolutum of Turalyon, always recruiting! http://neolutum.enjin.com/home

    -Retired as of the end of 5.3

Posting Permissions

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