Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Warstar View Post
    One problem I see with programs like that is that the spam the hell out of the server.
    They do not meaningfully up server load. Even if every keystroke was sent, which would be a ridiculous design (a cat sleeping on a keyboard can send way more than one keystroke-up or keystroke-down every 50ms on average). In practice, the only thing being spammed is your client, which is more likely to send the correct key in the correct window such that the server will (hopefully) do the correct thing.

    But even if every keystroke went to the server, that still means nothing, even on a 40 man Oondasta raid. It's just meaningless compared to the total volume of data, and the total volume of players, and what a server is and does.

    So forget about this. This is you just not knowing a technical thing, and is no big deal.


    the GM does make a good point in that it's not your dps anymore.
    This is a philosophical point, and I disagree with it entirely. When WoW was new, it would only send the message on key UP. Meaning if you pressed and held down a button, it wouldn't fire at all- the button would glow with the white frame until you released the key.

    Because this is stupid, many people used either a Windows setting or a keyboard which snappily transmits keydown/keyup almost at the same time. Many high ranked players- especially melee- invested in this kind of thing. Was it not their dps? Was it not their whateverthefuck? All they (and me) ever wanted was for pressing a button to be that, instead of imbued with some mysterious hardware dependent delay.

    Now it's Interface -> Combat -> Cast action keybinds on key down.

    IS NO ONE'S DPS THEIR OWN????????

    WHAT HAS SCIENCE DONE!!!!

    No. It's fine. This was just removing a garbage hardware limitation. Autohotkey, or the equivalent windows and keyboard feature, just ensures that the client has the move queued up at the correct time- you still have to press the button.

    The GM is wrong. This isn't automation.




    In my opinion a spec should be designed so that under optimal circumstances a good player should be able to reach the max dps of a spec. If the best player in the world can't do what the spec is designed to do then it's a poorly designed spec.
    I disagree with the first, and agree with the second. I think a GREAT player should be able to reach the max dps of the spec. But I think it should involve correct thinking and responses, not hammering a button in a small window and HOPING that the server doesn't lag- and of course, heaven help you if your connection is subpar.

    I travel a lot for my work. When I'm on travel (as I am now) I play from a laptop. It's a gaming laptop, and a good one, but it doesn't compare in power to my desktop. More importantly, at home I have a low latency connection, but on travel I have wildly varying connections- any place with LTE lets me tether, but LTE is super rare over the US as a whole, and I normally have to play on the hotel internet. What is my dps, and what is some old man streaming group sex such that my ability to tell my character to press a button is best described as coaching, and what goes on in the raid switches from raid leading to historical documentation?

    I have very little sympathy for anyone who defends a bad design on the basis of "but it sucks for someone else". Well, make it not suck for them. That's not my job.

    You know what the worst design in this game is? Well, I will tell you.



    It is the loading screen on death.


    Now, of course, there should be a penalty for dying. WoW's version of it is very small indeed, especially compared to older games. I would be fine with a greater penalty for dying than the game has, but it would discourage certain behaviors that are death intensive (for instance, raiding).

    But the part that is awful is this:

    1)- You die inside an instance.
    2)- You see a LOADIGN SCREEN as the game THROWS AWAY ALL KNOWLEGE OF WHAT IS IN THE INSTANCE. This is a really dumb call on the part of the client- it may be coded kind of meh, but most certainly the DESIGN is stupid. This is, defacto, a huge part of the death penalty.
    3)- Now you are loaded, as a GHOST, and you are OUTSIDE the instance. You have to walk TO the instance. Now, this distance that you have to walk could in fact be part of the death penalty- it is clearly intended to be at times. Some instances have a walk of a dozen footsteps, others you have to run around crazy places. But almost everything recently has been in the first camp.
    4)- HO SHIT GUYS, I THINK WE HAVE TO LOAD UP THAT INSTANCE AGAIN the game says internally. MAN IT SURE SUCKS THAT WE WIPED ALL THAT OUT, TRANSFERED THE PLAYER TO ANOTHER SERVER, AND LOADED ALL THAT SHIT HE USED FOR ALL OF 2 SECONDS RUNNING BACK. This completes the death penalty.

    This is awful, wasteful design. Do you pay by the byte in your country? Does your connection temporarily degrade if you have to send through a lot of extra bytes, like at most hotels? Hell, it even wastes power. For whatever reason, there's a burst of communication as it zones you two unneeded times.

    This makes me furious mostly for three reasons. First, it is wasteful. Second, it is uneven- at home on my SSD with my super great connection, load screens are almost instant. Off a hard drive with a fan that always has to try hard with an internet that can go shaky or decide to deprioritize my packets based on my actions, it can be awful. I can get disconnected from the repeated zoning. If the point was to make everyone spend time running back, why do we take the delta between the best computer and the worst one, double it, and add that on top? Third, it doesn't make any sense. It's not like we are buying realism or immersion or verisimilitude with this dumb fucking policy. It's as sensical as if the penalty for a character death varied wildly with whether you paid with Visa, Mastercard, Discover, or prepaid game card. Actually, that MIGHT make more sense- one of those gives Blizzard a better deal than the others, so they could at least incentive it and some fatcat CEO could use it to upgrade his hooker or whatever.

    This doesn't make anyone happy. You should just have a damned res timer, or you should spawn at the start of the instance and have a run-back debuff, or anything at all that is a TECHNICAL solution IN GAME instead of a network and hard drive access based one.

    Ok, shit, sorry. Really a big pet peeve.


    And personally people who say combat is fine I think are absolutely wrong. It really should be that whatever weapons you have access to if you want to play that spec you should be able to respec and have a great time playing it and pull higher dps rather than the current situation of say having 522 daggers and getting a thunderforged combat main hand going combat and then pulling less dps.
    Those are different things. I think combat is fun, but I think it needs to do more damage to justify its current iteration. More importantly, I wish it would play like it did back in icecrown. I dislike that the things that were added to it don't really add too much to its concept.

    I mean, ok, we get bandit's guile. This encourages you to time your cooldowns. Then we get restless blades. This encourages you to spam your cooldowns. These were added in the same patch. That's ridiculous. I thought that we'd sometimes have one favored over the other, but in practice, restless blades almost always wins. And when restless blades doesn't win, it means that you shouldn't even be combat for that fight- and that's in tiers where combat is a little ahead of mutilate single target.

    Second, we have this dumb version of blade flurry. The old version gave us a niche. The new version is just so awful. Do you find yourself topping meters with like five clumped mobs? Not that such an event even happens. I find us way behind ele, and often behind fire, shadow, any lock, and warriors in practical aoe. Combat's blade flurry was so useful and good when it had a job, and now they really shat all over it. We have no niche. And of course, it's totally absurd to take a cleave mechanic and make it apply to more than one extra target. The other abilities that cleave to this many targets are either a circle, a cone (a real cone, not a cone based on where you are standing to melee the first guy), or actually just PICK a goddamned target in range like chain lightning. They don't rely on a bunch of clumped things.

    The blade flurry nerf should be reverted. That would be a good start there.

    Third, we have very little ability to plan. Combat should be able to have dead globals, and choosing where those globals go should be part of the spec. It had this before. I really liked the old fan of knives, because if you were seriously so flush on energy somehow, you'd press fan. Since it cost so much energy and hit so hard, it was better than wasting energy. We were a really well designed spec before Cata, and I was very hopeful that I would get to use bandit's guile cleverly. In fact, bandit's guile has never had a chance to really matter much.

    Also our mastery is dumb. Like, super dumb.

    Restless blades should be deleted. Just like, take it away. Balance us around not having it, please.



    The second part of your thing is mostly, "hey, I'd like the specs to be close enough that top weapons make the difference". Well, that's fine. And a well designed combat spec would give us that. But it's not really related to the spec being fun, the spec being deep, the spec being interesting. They could do that today by shrinking A's damage or growing C's with a hotfix. But my gripes are more fundamental- I think the spec lost a lot of strategy and relative power (not numbers exactly but, if you assume that you'll be balanced to deal X dps on patchwerk, the version of your spec that is deeper is more powerful if you play it correctly because you can line stuff up better) when the addition of bandit's guile should logically have ADDED to both of those things.




    More work for less dps is an absolutely horrible game play design any anyone who argues against that is a glutton for punishment.

    Agreed. And on this note, buff sub :P

  2. #62
    You do realize that the new blade flurry will do more damage than the old blade flurry in a 5-target (or even 4-target) scenario, right? So if we are behind ele/shadow/balance/fury now, we'd be even more so with the old blade flurry.

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    You do realize that the new blade flurry will do more damage than the old blade flurry in a 5-target (or even 4-target) scenario, right? So if we are behind ele/shadow/balance/fury now, we'd be even more so with the old blade flurry.
    True, but I'd rather be first rate cleaving 1 additional target than 5th rate at cleaving 4. There are also not many times this tier where you have enough targets for the new BF to be better that aren't full AE opportunities. Horridon you might get good uptime on enough stuff (then again the part with the wargod at the end with lust and the massive debuff on Hor might make old bf better), but HM Council most of the time 1-2 of them are not in there, Qon you lust and kill the ice dog super fast and spend far, far more time with 1-2 dogs up, etc. Then when it comes to things like adds on Meg, we get blown away bad no matter which state you have BF in so I really don't see why it would matter.

  4. #64
    Stuff about dying and zoning
    I was seriously peeved since i don't know when and now i know why.
    You made a good point and i want someone to fix this. My PC is not up to date so more often then not, the majority of time i waste when dying is spent in loading screens. But this seems to be a standard among MMOs, i know that "come one, gogo loading screen progress bar!!" feeling from many places.


    p.s.
    Yes, please buff sub!
    A witty saying proves nothing.
    -Voltaire
    not quite Batman

  5. #65
    Point out a single fight in the current tier or indeed the up coming tier where there is are 4-5 targets to hit.

    Only one close is council. And the old flurry would eventually churn out more dps by the end of the fight

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Sesshou View Post
    True, but I'd rather be first rate cleaving 1 additional target than 5th rate at cleaving 4. There are also not many times this tier where you have enough targets for the new BF to be better that aren't full AE opportunities. Horridon you might get good uptime on enough stuff (then again the part with the wargod at the end with lust and the massive debuff on Hor might make old bf better), but HM Council most of the time 1-2 of them are not in there, Qon you lust and kill the ice dog super fast and spend far, far more time with 1-2 dogs up, etc. Then when it comes to things like adds on Meg, we get blown away bad no matter which state you have BF in so I really don't see why it would matter.
    The debuff on horridon is completely irrelevant. BF doesn't copy increased damage on debuffed target. If you hit horridon for a 200k eviscerate before the debuff, it would hit horridon for 600k and war god for 200k.

    And I disagree. The old BF was overpowered and had to be knocked down a peg or two. The new one could have it's damage increased a bit, maybe 67% on first target and reduced by 33% for each target after that up to 4 total (so 67% on first, ~45% on second, 30% on 3rd, and 20% on 4th. This is about the same damage it does now, but a little stronger than present on a 2-target cleave without being as overpowered as it was (I think 67% might be a bit much for first target though).
    Last edited by shadowboy; 2013-07-26 at 12:46 AM.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    The debuff on horridon is completely irrelevant. BF doesn't copy increased damage on debuffed target. If you hit horridon for a 200k eviscerate before the debuff, it would hit horridon for 600k and war god for 200k.
    I think you are misunderstanding why I said that. Its not that I think BF works like it use to on say Garalon. For one, 40% BF you better be on the wargod as 40% of your non poison damage is complete crap, so you get 40% x3 cleaved on Hor so (and I'm gonna conveniently ignore poisons) 220% damage with lust and cd's. Old BF you get (again ignoring that the poisons don't copy because I'm lazy even though it is a important chunk of damage) 100% x3 cleaved onto Hor for 400% damage with lust and cds. Also with 100% BF, it wouldn't be too much of a difference if you just cleaved off Hor and therefore got 3x poison damage (by not too much of a difference I mean not enough to allow another cry).
    Last edited by Sesshou; 2013-07-26 at 12:50 AM.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Sesshou View Post
    I think you are misunderstanding why I said that. Its not that I think BF works like it use to on say Garalon. For one, 40% BF you better be on the wargod as 40% of your non poison damage is complete crap, so you get 40% x3 cleaved on Hor so (and I'm gonna conveniently ignore poisons) 220% damage with lust and cd's. Old BF you get (again ignoring that the poisons don't copy because I'm lazy even though it is a important chunk of damage) 100% x3 cleaved onto Hor for 400% damage with lust and cds.
    Cleaved damage isn't buffed on a debuffed target. If you hit war god for 200k, it would hit horridon for 200k too. It's annoying and inconsistent, but that's how it works.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbermill View Post
    Point out a single fight in the current tier or indeed the up coming tier where there is are 4-5 targets to hit.

    Only one close is council. And the old flurry would eventually churn out more dps by the end of the fight
    Quote Originally Posted by Sesshou View Post
    True, but I'd rather be first rate cleaving 1 additional target than 5th rate at cleaving 4.
    These two exactly.

    I thought at the dawn of this tier that even though a 5 target situation is rare, it would still be a niche. But instead it sucks. It's not just that it's worse than, in my example, elemental shaman- it's that elemental shaman have such a much simpler time of it. Because of the uniquely shitty targeting requirements of flurry, if you draw five random targets such that it's possible to flurry them all, you are stuck with only a very few specific spots you can stand- and if you change position, you have to change your TARGET too (you walked out of the green goo, now you have 5 combo points on a target that isn't in melee range, so you have to redirect to the new target that lets you flurry, gotta get RS up on him, NOW you can press evis, but it's three seconds later so hopefully you were ok with that, then predict which dude you can use as your CP target next who also offers a position to flurry over to).

    And if you think "meh, fuck it, it's just aoe", then why make it so hard if you aren't even gonna bother to optimize?



    Now, it could be changed. Here's an example- pretend that when active, blade flurry makes combo points stack on the rogue, AND all attacks hit everything in a cone in front of you for some amount of damage less than 100%. Now it's a real aoe with a cone effect- it doesn't have the cone effect, the target effect, AND the goddamned melee range effect (blade flurry is unique in having these restrictions- other moves that are melee don't have that many targets, or affect a circle).


    BF doesn't copy increased damage on debuffed target. If you hit horridon for a 200k eviscerate before the debuff, it would hit horridon for 600k and war god for 200k.
    Correct. Blade flurry will copy buffs, but not debuffs. You deal X damage, the debuff increases X on the target, but not on the second target.

    Remember, Garalon is special cased. Normally a buff on you will increase damage done in total.

    Cleaved damage isn't buffed on a debuffed target. If you hit war god for 200k, it would hit horridon for 200k too. It's annoying and inconsistent, but that's how it works.
    Are you sure about that?

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Verain View Post
    Are you sure about that?
    not 100% in general, but I'm 100% sure if you hit garalon's body and cleave onto the legs, you do NOT get the damage buff, even if you're standing in the damage buff zone. it'd be easy to test though.

    I will test it after raid time.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    not 100% in general, but I'm 100% sure if you hit garalon's body and cleave onto the legs, you do NOT get the damage buff, even if you're standing in the damage buff zone. it'd be easy to test though.

    I will test it after raid time.
    You talked about Horridon, now this is about Garalon.


    Garalon was special cased. He works like nothing else.


    In general, however, if you have a BUFF that says "deal extra damage to A", and you hit A and cleave to B, both A and B take extra damage. Garalon was hotfixed to be the exception, but this remains the rule.

    If instead you have a BUFF that says "deal extra damage to A" and you hit B and cleave to A, neither A nor B take extra damage. Last time I checked, Garalon was not an exception to this rule.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    not 100% in general, but I'm 100% sure if you hit garalon's body and cleave onto the legs, you do NOT get the damage buff, even if you're standing in the damage buff zone. it'd be easy to test though.

    I will test it after raid time.
    I will admit I never tested it. GC did say that when they nerfed cleaving with the bonus that the intent was now also that your BF hits would benefit from debuffs on their targets. Its entirely possible he was full of crap and they never implemented it.

    Garalon is definitely a special case though. Remember before they did that change, you couldn't cleave off heroic windlord at 1800% damage even though you could cleave off Garalon's leg with the bonus.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Verain View Post
    In general, however, if you have a BUFF that says "deal extra damage to A", and you hit A and cleave to B, both A and B take extra damage. Garalon was hotfixed to be the exception, but this remains the rule.
    WRONG. Garalon was hotfixed to NO LONGER be the exception. Garalon's behavior was UNINTENDED. Blade flurry was changed in MoP such that cleaved damage DOES NOT benefit from damage modifiers.

    Here is how it works: You hit A. The damage is calculated, the damage is then copied to B, then any TARGET SPECIFIC damage modifiers are applied to A and B independently.

    This is easy to verify

    Go to a target dummy: Hit target A, note cleave damage on target B, Target B's should be A*0.4. I just tested and got 13083 SS on A, and 5233 BF on B.
    Repeat, only sunder A but not B: I did that and got 6712 on A, 2616 on B. The expected damage on B was 2684. B did not benefit from the sunder.
    Repeat again, only sunder B but not A: I did this and A took 6181 and B took 2538. The expected value of B was 2472, which means B benefit from sunder, and did more than the expected 40% damage.

    The implication of this in 5.4: glyphed FoK weaving will help BF AoE rotation for combat.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    WRONG. Garalon was hotfixed to NO LONGER be the exception. Garalon's behavior was UNINTENDED. Blade flurry was changed in MoP such that cleaved damage DOES NOT benefit from damage modifiers.
    INCORRECT ON ALL COUNTS.

    Garalot was hotfixed to BE the exception.

    Remember that Garalon has NO target specific debuffs. YOU GET A BUFF. The intended behavior- which they changed their mind on- was that you could cleave the damage over. Once this proved too good, they changed it.

    Here is how it works: You hit A. The damage is calculated, the damage is then copied to B, then any TARGET SPECIFIC damage modifiers are applied to A and B independently.
    Buffs and debuffs work differently. If you have a buff that increases your damage to A, then it will get copied over. If A has a debuff, then it will not.

    This is easy to verify

    Go to a target dummy: Hit target A, note cleave damage on target B, Target B's should be A*0.4. I just tested and got 13083 SS on A, and 5233 BF on B.
    Repeat, only sunder A but not B: I did that and got 6712 on A, 2616 on B. The expected damage on B was 2684. B did not benefit from the sunder.
    Sunder is a debuff. This is consistent. Garalon is the only exception.

  15. #75
    The buff on garalon isn't a buff. It's a "harmful" effect on you. It is NOT a buff. It is a debuff. And it is intended to specifically increase your damage TO THAT LEG AND THAT LEG ONLY. It is very much target-specific.

    BF's behavior on Garalon was NOT intended. Blizzard stated this directly.

    The technical reason for that debuff is because it's based on an area in the field of play. You step out, you no longer deal extra damage to the leg, you step in, you do. That type of mechanic likely can not be implemented as a debuff on the leg. The intention was that the bonus damage to the leg is target-specific--much like a debuff is.

    I'll repeat, Blade Flurry DOES NOT behave as it did in Cata. Extra damage on Halfus will NO LONGER be dealt to the dragons.

    In the event that you have a non-target-specifc buff on you, in the steps I described it would simply apply the damage buff to targets A and B independently, effectively making the cleave damage consistent with old behavior (kinda like how BG is not a target specific damage modifier any more).

    Link
    Quote Originally Posted by Crithto
    With regard to all raid difficulties, after further testing the encounter, we realized that certain abilities were having unintended effects. Blade Flurry, Inferno Blast and Sweeping Strikes were doing double damage to Garalon's body while attacking his legs, which was not intended. We are currently implementing a hotfix, which should take effect after realms are restarted, that will cause these abilities to do normal damage to the body while continuing to do double damage to the legs.
    Last edited by shadowboy; 2013-07-26 at 04:46 AM.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    The buff on garalon isn't a buff. It's a "harmful" effect on you. It is NOT a buff. It is a debuff. And it is intended to specifically increase your damage TO THAT LEG AND THAT LEG ONLY. It is very much target-specific.

    Sigh.

    The difference, "buff" or "debuff" is whether IT IS ON YOU or ON THE TARGET.

    BF's behavior on Garalon was NOT intended. Blizzard stated this directly.
    They can state what they like. It was intended until it was too much damage.


    If it's on YOU it gets forked. Garalon is the ONLY exception. (buff)

    If it's on the TARGET then it doesn't. (debuff)

  17. #77
    And you're not getting it. The weak point is intended to be TARGET SPECIFIC--THAT LEG.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    I'll repeat, Blade Flurry DOES NOT behave as it did in Cata. Extra damage on Halfus will NO LONGER be dealt to the dragons.
    That is because the extra damage on Halfus is a debuff on Halfus.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by shadowboy View Post
    And you're not getting it. The weak point is intended to be TARGET SPECIFIC--THAT LEG.
    Well, after the nerf it was. The point is that if they wanted it to be target specific, they would have put it on the leg, not the rogue.

    The question about how does blade flurry work is:

    IF YOU HAVE A DAMAGE BUFF YOU DO EXTRA DAMAGE TO BOTH TARGETS

    IF THE TARGET HAS A DAMAGE-TAKEN DEBUFF YOU DON'T CLEAVE DAMAGE


    It's that simple... except for Garalon, who is the exception.


    Now, did you want to argue with the plain language there some more, or can we move on? I would be interested in things like "does a damage taken debuff on a second target function correctly in all cases", because those have been inconsistent.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Warstar View Post
    Every simcraft type thing out there will tell you that combat currently sims higher than any other spec especially with the T15 4 pc. bonus. Math doesn't lie. If 1 + 1 = 2 then combat should have some insane parses out there but it doesn't.
    What if I told you...

    Sims are often wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by D3athsting View Post
    Combat was sooo good and strong back in wotlk (with the retarded full ArPen gemming ), then cata came and blizz started to mess with the spec so badly that with 4.0 combat was behind tanks in icc (not joking) and mastery was absolute sh*t and did less than 1% of total dmg, after some months they tuned it up but imho the spec is so bad designed and so much gear-based that a complete overhaul is more than needed.
    Back in Wrath the forums were full of QQ about how Assass did shit damage compared to Combat, now it's the reverse. Probably better this way, let's face it Combat is boring...

    In Cata, Assass was ahead at first but fell behind due to scaling. And in the end perfect play as Sub was actually the top, then Combat, then Assass. By DS you went Combat/Sub (only time you really wanted Sub was burst on Spine progression) and Assass was the bottom on every fight IIRC.

    So in summary, Combat and Assass have been back and forth for ages, this is nothing new.

  20. #80
    Link to datamined encounter journal during beta, FOUR MONTHS before the hotfix.

    Weak points says this: "Close proximity to Garalon's leg allows attackers to see weak points, increasing their damage dealt to the leg by 100%."

    Note the bolded and italicized text. Garalon was INTENDED to be target specific. The hotfix was intended to fix unintended behavior making Garalon NOT be the exception.

    The blade flurry change was intended so that you don't get nonsense such as Halfus and pre-fix Garalon. Even as it is now if it's a buff on you that damage modifier applies to the cleaved target independently of the original so that it doesn't double dip.

Posting Permissions

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