Necrotic Strike Removal

[Challenge]

Unholy is the new frost. Two buttons. Next expansion and WoW is being changed into Diablo 3 ..

Stop. No one wants to hear your QQ. Instead of NS being the main strike dump, its scourge strike now.

[Schizoide]

So far, I've been three valid concerns about Necrotic Strike being removed.

1) Feel/kit. It's an iconic PvP attack.

2) Necrotic Strike is used to "defend" the Soul Reaper debuff, and that gameplay is lost when you deal damage instead of a heal absorb.

3) The Necrotic Strike heal absorb bypasses damage absorb effects like PW:Shield. This gameplay is also lost when you just deal damage.

For #2, while that's true enough, wouldn't pure damage also keep health below 35% and have the added advantage of being able to kill your target?

And for #3, while also true, I can only see that being useful (as opposed to pure damage) when the damage absorb shield is about to be dispelled. Is that a real concern?

[Ampere]

Necrotic Strike is redundant. The only advantage (damage tuning aside) it has over Scourge Strike is that you could "trick" an inexperienced player into not realizing there's a healing absorb on someone and therefore catching them off guard.

Maybe that advantage is worth keeping the ability to some, but I understand why it's being removed.

edit:
Hm, post above mine has some valid points.

[Raugnaut]

There was no difference between healing up a 10k damage SS, and a 1k damage/9k absorbs NS. Thats basically why NS was removed. (Also the fact that the only reason NS actually gets used in higher ranked PvP is that the absorb+damage portion of it is slightly larger then the damage portion of SS.)

[Challenge]

So far, I've been three valid concerns about Necrotic Strike being removed.

1) Feel/kit. It's an iconic PvP attack.

2) Necrotic Strike is used to "defend" the Soul Reaper debuff, and that gameplay is lost when you deal damage instead of a heal absorb.

3) The Necrotic Strike heal absorb bypasses damage absorb effects like PW:Shield. This gameplay is also lost when you just deal damage.

1. I 100% agree with
2. Its not really lost. If a guy is sitting at 35%, whether you throw a 500 absorb or push 500 more damage out there, it doesn't matter.
3. Necrotic strike also can't crit, or multi strike or scale with mastery. Thats why mechanically scourge strike is better. While NS bypasses damage reductions, scourge strike has the theoretical potential to be stronger with those factors, and also helps value other secondary and not just stack strength for necrotic strike which doesn't scale with any secondary.

Imagine people who want to play crit/multistrike for maximum scourge strike hits
Or people who want to go full blown mastery/crit for maximum necortic plague rotting in bgs, or mastery/haste and actually make real use of festering strike in PvP (arena)
People are not tied to blood tap anymore
Etc.

The options for how you want to play is a lot more open now, not being tied to NS

[Deleted]

The options for how you want to play is a lot more open now, not being tied to NS

Exactly. This is the point I was trying to make. Now other options which had interesting gameplay but were subpar to Necrotic Strike + Conversion may see some spotlight and get beefed up a bit.

[sizzlinsauce]

really they are getting rid of the only reason to bring a DK to pvp? seriously glad im going to change classes i play come wod. fucking blizzard needs to actually play it's own game before saying shit like it's a MS effect. MS doesn't absorb healing done.

[Challenge]

really they are getting rid of the only reason to bring a DK to pvp? seriously glad im going to change classes i play come wod. fucking blizzard needs to actually play it's own game before saying shit like it's a MS effect. MS doesn't absorb healing done.

Can you not read or what.

Doesn't matter why we CURRENTLY bring DKs to PvP. This is a wod discussion.

[Tyrean]

Can you not read or what.

Doesn't matter why we CURRENTLY bring DKs to PvP. This is a wod discussion.

There are a couple of things at play here....

1.) You guys are talking about NS wrong. You are thinking about NS in terms of effective damage all the time. I think you must be used to playing bad DKs who do nothing but spam NS, sit in blood presence with conversion and do nothing else. Under those circumstances, yes I totally agree that the effective damage of SS will be the same as NS. That is not why NS is iconic, useful, or desired... NS is our iconic ability and one that makes us desirable because it ignores damage mitigation. The reason DKs are traditionally thought of as high pressure is because they can maintain that pressure through defensive CDS.

Let me give you an example... let's say we are trying to kill any class with some sort of damage mitigation. We start off and they are taking tons of damage so they pop shieldwall/disperse/brew/astral/whatever... If you are only dealing straight damage then all your damage gets reduced and you effectively lose all your pressure. Now, add in a DK who puts an absorb shield whose only mechanic that dictates the size of that shield is the DK's current AP. That spriest who was about to die and popped disperse ate 6 NS stacks. Sure the NS itself did 90% less damage, but the absorb is still max value. So with NS you basically negated that spriest's big defensive CD because the healer still has to make up that "damage" or the priest has to kite long enough to drop the stack.

NS is WAAAAAAYYYYY more damage than anything else when used for the intended purpose. The whole reason NS stacks "fall off" in the first place is to balance out how ridiculously strong it is. CC the DK, or just run away long enough for it to drop and you are okay.

2.) The other thing no one is talking about is not what we lose in WoD compared to now, but why would you bring a DK in WoD? I can bring a warlock and do the same thing a DK can do but gain spammable CC, buffs, bigger defensive CDs, etc.

So to sum up, yeah if you are just beating on a guy who is not playing defensive at all, then use SS and it does more damage than NS. You choose when to do damage and when to punish defensive CDs by using NS right now. Oh, and NS is not reduced at all by armor, passive reduction, etc. The only thing that reduces NS currently is resilience, not even dampening reduces it.

Losing NS is big for all DKs who don't mindlessly spam it, but instead use it to continue pressure through defensive cool downs.

[Schizoide]

Well said. That answers my questions on point #3.

[Challenge]

it is well said, but i already said it.

3. Necrotic strike also can't crit, or multi strike or scale with mastery. Thats why mechanically scourge strike is better. While NS bypasses damage reductions, scourge strike has the theoretical potential to be stronger with those factors

I can give scenarios where I want scourge strike to hit hard and I dont want to NS.

Your warlock just put a healer into a full fear, the mage doesnt have anymore blocks. You got a few secs to kill this mage before this healer comes out of this CC and pops a big CD to get the mage up

The point is they both preform the same end goal job, just in different ways. There is no need both both as an active strike. Because one will always be consistently better than the other (NS) for it to be viable.

- - - Updated - - -

2.) The other thing no one is talking about is not what we lose in WoD compared to now, but why would you bring a DK in WoD? I can bring a warlock and do the same thing a DK can do but gain spammable CC, buffs, bigger defensive CDs, etc.

.

Comparing a dk to a warlock? Why? They are brought for different reasons, not to mention melee=/=range

[Deleted]

Defensive cooldowns which got softcountered by using intelligently lose effectiveness in a meta that's not focused around getting people from 100 to 0 in a matter of seconds. And NS is effectively useless against cooldowns that remove the debuff entirely, like Iceblock or Bubble and, to a lesser extent, Deterrence and Evasion which cause the debuff to fall off because of us being unable to refresh it.

Secondly, NS does not scale with secondary stats other than haste, which would require constant tuning between patches for it to remain viable.

They took it away, yes, but they did so for the better, at least that is what I hope for.

[Tyrean]

Comparing a dk to a warlock? Why? They are brought for different reasons, not to mention melee=/=range

Just making the point that if the only thing we bring to the table is damage, there are other specs that bring damage and something else. Yes, warlocks are ranged and yes it is not a good direct comparison but warlocks have similar damage styles to an unholy DK so they are a decent analog for a why bring X when you can have Y argument.

Honestly though, just for discussion, could you tell me why you would bring a DK right now instead of a warlock? Furthermore, how will that change with what we know about WoD, not specifically the exact changes but rather the intentions they have been trying to convey to us on the delivered product.

[Rorke]

The only thing that I'm afraid about this change is that it means Frost will be the PvP spec for DK's. I don't care what anyone says, Unholy is awful in pvp without Necrotic Strike. Just imagine if DK's today didn't have Necrotic Strike, the class wouldn't even be playable above 2200.

The problem with this change is that it basically removed a niche that DK's had with damage. The class has been designed since Cataclysm to be the master of damage, the master of pressure ect. Now its just a damage bot without any pressure. It's basically just a magical Warrior with less utility, less CC and less defensive capability.

One could argue that the class was too much anchored to Necrotic Strike (which is true) but to outright remove it without some sort of compensation with Scourge Strike/Death Coil or Festering Strike spells bad news for a spec that requires a shit ton of strength to deal even remotely effective damage. And yes, I understand that "its just alpha man" but still I have a right to be concerned after a whole expansion of DK's being ignored and trash in pvp.

Another thing that people didn't bring up is that this change almost indirectly forces DK's to use Death Siphon. Now I'm not sure about this but didn't they buff Death Siphon damage wise in the Alpha patch notes? If they did, would that possibly mean that Death Siphon is basically just going to replace Necrotic Strike if they don't buff Scourge Strike or Festering Strike?

[Deleted]

Just imagine if DK's today didn't have Necrotic Strike, the class wouldn't even be playable above 2200.

And that's exactly what you shouldn't do, and everybody is trying to explain that. You can't just take one single change and apply it to the current situation.
When you do that, you get into a hypothetical situation that never will exist.
Basic example:
50% of our damage comes from NS, 50% from SS. Now they remove NS but buff SS by 100%. (this isn't the current situation, just an example)
what you're doing is simply looking at the NS removal and come to the conclusion that unholy DKs will do 50% less damage.
This is basically why that argument is simply false. When discussing the effects of a change, you have to look at ALL changes, not just one specific one and apply it to the current situation.

[Rorke]

Yes I can when there's no compensation on it. Unholy DK's are literally anchored to Necrotic Strike in PvP.

50% of our damage comes from NS, 50% from SS. Now they remove NS but buff SS by 100%. (this isn't the current situation, just an example)

Necrotic Strike isn't just damage, it's pressure that's better than anything damage can offer. When you remove that, you remove the spec's viability in PvP. And yes, I can compare it today's game because nothing in the alpha notes says that the spec is being redesigned to adjust to the Necrotic Strike removal.

what you're doing is simply looking at the NS removal and come to the conclusion that unholy DKs will do 50% less damage.

Do you even pvp on a DK? Because you seriously have no clue what you're talking about. Just stop. Your example's premise is just flawed because Necrotic Strike isn't damage.

[Schizoide]

Lets try to get past the bickering here, kids.

What if the heal absorb shield was added to Plague Strike? Say, for example:

Plague Strike
1 Unholy Melee Range
A vicious strike that deals 65% weapon damage, absorbs the next [X% of Attack Power] healing received by the target, and infects the target with Blood Plague.

This would still save a keybind and would have no effect on PvE whatsoever. Plague Strike is not normally used except to apply diseases, so pressing that button in PvP would present a real choice for the player between damage and the heal absorb. Costing 1U rather than 1D means that Unholy could use it much more often, so the heal absorb would need to be tuned accordingly. But that's easy enough to do.

Any reason why PvPers wouldn't rally around this change?

[Deleted]

Your example's premise is just flawed because Necrotic Strike isn't damage.

Healing absorbs are the same way damage as absorbs are healing. The only difference is that absorbs can heal you more than max health, wheras heal absorbs can reduce your health below zero (without you dying from it).

[Schizoide]

Healing absorbs are the same way damage as absorbs are healing. The only difference is that absorbs can heal you more than max health, wheras heal absorbs can reduce your health below zero (without you dying from it).

Have you not been reading the thread? Heal absorbs work through damage shields like PW:S and mitigation cooldowns like Shield Wall. They're used to apply pressure, not as damage. I'm not a big PvPer myself, but I at least understand this concept.

HiFish, do you PvP competitively? If not, I suggest being less argumentative and trying to listen to those that do. And if you do, please address the stuff about piercing damage shields and mitigation cooldowns, because that seems like a strong argument to me.

[Louis CK]

So first of all, I understand that not all changes are in yet I am more interested in what the role of a DK will be in the WoD meta game in PvP. I think a lot of the discussion in the changes thread about Necro is more from a PvE stand point and some people don't understand what necro means to a DK. I guess first of all I should point out the very few reasons DKs are brought into rated play right now:

RBG:
Dks are brought in for massive spread pressure, death grip, and pre-stacking necro on kill targets. As I understand it so far, we will still do a lot of damage and still retain death grip so it might not be a huge loss here. In RBG settings it is actually somewhat hard to get a proper stack on a kill target simply because of all the "smart" aoe healing being thrown around. I can say though, that many a game I have played has been won because we got a good kill on a target that was wounded but with a giant necro stack that could not be recovered from once we switched to them.

2v2:
Necro is currently huge here and pretty much the only way a DK can land a kill. It is unlikely that you can run double dps as a DK to any high rating, mostly because of the DK defensive toolkit being so slim. So in order to land a kill mostly solo as a DK you have to have to use necro wisely. The difference between a good DK and a beast is when they choose to stack up a big necro. Frost suffers from being able to do huge amounts of spike damage, but not quite enough to finish a target before they run out of runes, so most 2v2 play is unholy. Unholy is built around constant pressure and in order to land kills they need necro to protect soul reaper and to a larger effect make all those small ticks of pet, dot, strike damage amount to something scary to heal when behind a healing absorb. Without necro all those small hits are easily swatted away and unholy would need some serious big guns which would put them into season 5 mode with the garg, pet, diseases and then hard hitting strikes as well.

3v3:
It is much the same as 2v2 except your main job is to facilitate kills for your dps partner. Necro is how you do that right now because of the necro mechanic absorb not being affected by defensive CDs. You and your hunter/war partner start in on a target and when they pop defensives that is when you keep pressure on them with necro while your partner locks down the heals. Then when their defenses are down they have a giant stack, your partner starts back and the target most of the time dies.


The problem I think with the current discussion is that lots of people seem to think that necro is just damage in a different form. So why not just replace it with regular damage? Necro does not work that way, and people that use necro as just regular "delayed" damage are basically using it wrong. Necro has a couple of main uses:

1.) Delayed damage that is not readily apparent. This is in the case of large skirmishes where the healer will not see a target as being in trouble until they have a large deficit to make up.
2.) Keeping pressure up through defensive cooldowns. This is the real big benefit of necro, something that normal damage just cannot do.
3.) Covering DK execute mechanics. Soul reaper sucks pretty bad. We have to have necro stacks to keep people in that range long enough for soul reaper to proc. Even then it does not mean a kill, just more pressure.
4.) Assisting partners by artificially keeping a target in execute range. With the way healing works if necro were just straight damage then targets would get healed out of execute range pretty quickly which reduces your damage and your partners (in most cases).


Now the interesting thing that I would like to discuss is where will DKs fit into the WoD meta? If it is true that healing will be less whack a mole from 20% to full and more triage healing, then I understand how necro would be too strong. I don't think they will ever get healing into that state though because they have said time and time again they want to do this and all we get is more burst. Without necro what does a DK bring? death grip? damage? Why bring one of the squishiest classes if all they can do is damage? We have no CC, we are the least mobile melee by a long shot, when focused it not only tanks our damage but we just fold over and die... so what is the point of bringing a DK if they don't have the one thing that they were brought for anymore?

Good post.

One thing this made me think of... With the remove of NS, what if they changed the way Soul Reaper works to combine/compensate for the change?

For example:

It would stay as an execute, but instead of just sitting there until it "goes off", it would provide the absorb debuff, functioning a lot like NS does (obviously it wouldn't be stackable this way, so it could be fixed to still work). To even it out, if it's "healed through" then it drops off, if it's not healed through then it still goes off.

or, to keep it more like current NS, just have Soul Reaper stackable and provide the same healing debuff (although it will only blow up once). This way they can cut the inflated keybind while retaining the ability.

IDK, just a couple thoughts. I think NS as a button should be gone, but not as a function.