[6.2] Demonology Warlock Guide

[andromalia]

My complaints about simcraft's APL in other threads with regard to Cataclysm and Servitude's APL, I've explained fully over the past few days, and it's still randomly activating and immediately cancelling Meta, still wasting MC charges in Caster form, and still pissing away all its Fury on Touch of Chaos.

Have you sent this to Ghaddo as a bug? I know he browses the forums on occasion but I'm sure he'd appreciate feedback via bug or PM so he doesn't have to dig through threads on MMOC to find issues.

[Soulzar]

This is an incredibly archaic way of approaching game balance; the game hasn't been like that since Burning Crusade and it will never be like that again. You don't recruit a druid because you want him to play all 4 specs. Fact is the 'pure' classes bring plenty of utility and played crucial roles on many end bosses of the expansion (ring of frost, gates, traps, etc.)

Agree. While it may be a tough pill to swallow for a pure dps to be on par with a hybrid dps since they can bring other roles to the raid, Pures have the advantage of multiple dps specs to choose from. In the Warlocks case, this is one of the main reason we generally do so well, since each of our specs can take advantage of different fight types, allowing us to perform very well in a wide range of fights.

[evertonbelmontt]

Clearly at 90 while we had 30-40% DPS gap between top and bottom, there were a lot more 'gimped' specs that weren't worth taking, even though the content is utterly faceroll. Even if you didn't bench all your hunters or Shadow Priests, there was literally nothing fun for anyone about being carried as one.

Ok, let's look at this how things really are: it's clear now that these hotfixes were for "balancing" level 90 content. Demonbolt is the exception, not the rule.

First of all, it totally IS bullshit balancing for level 90 content that won't last for more than 3 weeks. "Why?"
Because they will HAVE to rebalance, and we know, EVERYONE knows, they are fast to nerf and slow to buff. How many times someone said this here already? The chances we get to be bad tunned/bugged in some way again are huge when things matter (lvl 100).
And there is no "the game just got 50% easier" argument. Fights are at max 4mins, in three weeks from now game will be 100, or even 200% easier for SoO people who want to catch up. They will have two weeks for leveling and doing SoO until the first raid comes after 6.1 starts.

Second: for what you're proposing, you did not have to nerf anyone. If they simple buffed everyone who, by your logic, was going to be benched for 3 weeks to be viable, everyone would be happpy. Then they could just revert the buffs later. Why doesn't it works for nerfs too (revert them later)? > Fast to nerf, slow to buff. A simple: "We are going to buff some classes a little to adjust to level 90 without perks and crucial talents, and revert it as soon as patch 6.1 gets in, be wary, and have fun getting your heirlooms!" would solve all the outcry that is the only counter argument I can think of.

This is the truth: "Yada yada demo locks, mage fires, warriors top 1 yada yada > nerfbat STRONG."
Basically, they just shifted the ladder.

[Deleted]

This is an incredibly archaic way of approaching game balance; the game hasn't been like that since Burning Crusade and it will never be like that again. You don't recruit a druid because you want him to play all 4 specs. Fact is the 'pure' classes bring plenty of utility and played crucial roles on many end bosses of the expansion (ring of frost, gates, traps, etc.)

You mean brought not bring in the case of warlocks.
Healthstones are crap
Demonic Gateway is a joke
What exactly are we bringing aside from dps? Not even a good cc.

[Jessicka]

Ok, let's look at this how things really are: it's clear now that these hotfixes were for "balancing" level 90 content. Demonbolt is the exception, not the rule.

First of all, it totally IS bullshit balancing for level 90 content that won't last for more than 3 weeks. "Why?"
Because they will HAVE to rebalance, and we know, EVERYONE knows, they are fast to nerf and slow to buff. How many times someone said this here already? The chances we get to be bad tunned/bugged in some way again are huge when things matter (lvl 100).
And there is no "the game just got 50% easier" argument. Fights are at max 4mins, in three weeks from now game will be 100, or even 200% easier for SoO people who want to catch up. They will have two weeks for leveling and doing SoO until the first raid comes after 6.1 starts.

Second: for what you're proposing, you did not have to nerf anyone. If they simple buffed everyone who, by your logic, was going to be benched for 3 weeks to be viable, everyone would be happpy. Then they could just revert the buffs later. Why doesn't it works for nerfs too (revert them later)? > Fast to nerf, slow to buff. A simple: "We are going to buff some classes a little to adjust to level 90 without perks and crucial talents, and revert it as soon as patch 6.1 gets in, be wary, and have fun getting your heirlooms!" would solve all the outcry that is the only counter argument I can think of.

This is the truth: "Yada yada demo locks, mage fires, warriors top 1 yada yada > nerfbat STRONG."
Basically, they just shifted the ladder.

Prior to these nerfs, everyone was expecting Demo to get nerfed anyway at 100, because it was too strong there too. I think it's either naive, or just pure wishful thinking to believe that while there was a significant element of this retuning aimed at 90, that none of it could possibly also have been aimed at 100 too. It clearly was, that is why it happened on Beta and why Demonbolt was a part of it.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you sent this to Ghaddo as a bug? I know he browses the forums on occasion but I'm sure he'd appreciate feedback via bug or PM so he doesn't have to dig through threads on MMOC to find issues.

I've brought it up in various threads now, I'm pretty sure I addressed him directly with it too; if not at least two others who have, in spite of having a sub-50 post count, portrayed themselves as having some involvement with simcraft too.

[evertonbelmontt]

@Jessicka

Yes, true.
But the way they did it, it doesn't matter if some of it is aimed at level 100, because it missed the point completelly. Demo needed a nerf at level 100, but not ~20%. And on top of that, they placed other specs where demonology was according to simcraft.

I can assure you, simcraft isn't the god of truth, but when there's a discrepancy of 20~30% (does it ring a bell?) between the top 7+ and demonology, something went very wrong if the intent was any real balance for level 100.
Also, as a sidenote, monk is the top 1 according to simcraft right now. IIRC, monk's AoE/cleave is as good as Demonology and less clunky. Top 2 is frost and doesn't get behind either.

Santoism just provided a log that he said his monk was destroying everything in sight. It's one more proof that they just shifted the ladder and simcraft can reflect this distancy even more with other classes.

TL;DR: Nerfs weren't needed that hard, balancing for level 90 is stupid.
yadayada warlocks, mage fires, warriors top 1 yadayada > nerfbat GINORMEOUS.

[andromalia]

The bottom line is, we don't know what data they are basing their balance off of. How do we know that where demon was wasn't where they want everyone before the nerfs happened? Maybe demon was tuned and the other classes needed buffed...We just don't know how they balance internally and we don't know what data they use (often it does not align with the assumptions we make) to create their illusion of class balance.

[Santoisms]

I used to have a lot of respect for your posts, but taking cheap shots is getting old. I don't develop simcraft nor do I gain any benefit by defending them, but what I will say is that 99% of people that use the patchwerk simcraft for t16 and then laugh about fights like fallen protectors have no idea what they are talking about. With the correct APL, you could have simmed LOLSWAP and you could have simmed havoc burning on small adds on sha or garrosh or <insert boss here>. The patchwerk sim is one tool of many. So instead of complaining about how unreliable sims are, how about complaining about how unreliable the people that run the sims are (or those that use the patchwerk sim as the penultimate example of where dps classes sit).
/rant
After playing demonology last night for a couple of bosses, I can safely say I won't touch it again until 100, and that's only assuming they get the numbers right.

Andro why are you so smart?

[DesireKT]

I did okay last night on our short raid night, I was 2nd on every fight but 1 or so, I couldn't touch our WW though, he was destroying.

Accelerate US-Tichondrius Logs 10/21/14

Saying you did well on 6 fights is hardly reflective of all of SoO and while you didn't specifically state the spec you were playing I can safely say you misrepresented this data as you doing well as demonology when in fact you were destro for 5 out of 6 kills. Overall this provided nothing.

[evertonbelmontt]

Sounds like what Werst said, to be honest.

- "HEY, YOU NERFBAT GUY NUMBER 3, GO LOOK AT THOSE 55sec FIGHTS ON WARCRAFTLOGS AND TELL US WHAT'S FIRST".
- "RIAR RIAR IRIARRIAR, IT'S DEMON, WARRIORS AND MAGE FIRE, DUUUUUUUDE".
- "WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? SWING'EM HARD."

Because it was aimed at level 90 content, it can't go right.

[Santoisms]

Saying you did well on 6 fights is hardly reflective of all of SoO and while you didn't specifically state the spec you were playing I can safely say you misrepresented this data as you doing well as demonology when in fact you were destro for 5 out of 6 kills. Overall this provided nothing.

Before you get all big chested on forums, view all the logs under Accelerate US on Warcraft Logs.

[Leyl]

Sounds like you aren't playing optimally because it's by no means that weak even with the most recent nerfs.

If I have a steak dinner in front of me, a lobster dinner in front of me, and a piece of bread in front of me, which ones look the most appealing to eat? Demonology underperforms at 90, and I bet level 100, when compared to our other two specs as it stands now. Destruction is by far easier to play right now, and does more damage. The same can be said for Affliction. Demonology is harder to play, has no benefit in doing more damage than the other two specs, and doesn't offer any special raid utility bonus.

Weakness in relation to proximity of the low lying fruit is still weakness. In relation to mages, WW monks, and in relation to warriors we are not in a top 5 spot, or even a top 8 spot.

[DesireKT]

Before you get all big chested on forums, view all the logs under Accelerate US on Warcraft Logs.

Uhm no I looked at what you provided and claimed you did well on. I have no responsibility to dig through your logs. If you intend to show something post it correctly if you thought it was worth showing in the first place you would have done so.

[Santoisms]

Uhm no I looked at what you provided and claimed you did well on. I have no responsibility to dig through your logs. If you intend to show something post it correctly if you thought it was worth showing in the first place you would have done so.

My bad next time I'll think about the big chests here before I try to post some feedback / logs.

[evertonbelmontt]

Taking Santoisms Siegecrafter log:

Second in DPS, very good.
Now let's deep in a little bit:

Fight lenght: 1:03min

Buffs: Two DS used.
Biggest source of damage: Doomguard - Doombolt 18% dps.
Imp Swarm and Berserk (racial).

For a fight like that, with that quantity of burst, IMO, he should have been way higher. Sustained dps will pay a high price because of this level 90 nerfs if they don't revert it for level 100.

EDIT: adding data.

[Santoisms]

http://www.warcraftlogs.com/reports/...TFZYP3#fight=5 -- Malk

http://www.warcraftlogs.com/reports/...TFZYP3#fight=1 -- Nazgrim

[evertonbelmontt]

Nevermind, he was using imp swarm as well as berserk (duh, he's a troll after all :P).

[Santoisms]

Taking Santoisms Siegecrafter log:

Second in DPS, very good.
Now let's deep in a little bit:

Fight lenght: 1:03min

Buffs: Two DS used.
Biggest source of damage: Doomguard - Doombolt 18% dps.
I can't tell if he's using Imp Swarm or not, but I saw that with 7 seconds already was 4 imps hitting, I believe he was. (Confirmation?)

For a fight like that, with that quantity of burst, IMO, he should have been way higher. Sustained dps will pay a high price because of this level 90 nerfs if they don't revert it for level 100.

Was using Imp Swarm. Didn't get a PBoI directly in opener so burst was a bit low. CW the only mines we got to burst it back up a bit.

http://www.warcraftlogs.com/reports/...uras&source=60 -- Siegecrafter buffs, PBoI popping something like 30-45 seconds into fight.

[dragonki69]

I actually think once the meta bug is fixed it might be a bit more viable since a lot of our damage *should* be coming from meta SF but isn't right now.

Sorry, what meta bug are you speaking of? Should I not be casting SF in meta at 90?

[evertonbelmontt]

Sorry, what meta bug are you speaking of? Should I not be casting SF in meta at 90?

Cast Soulfire out of meta.
Take the value you get, without any buffs to stay simple, and note/remember it.

Cast soulfire in meta.
Multiply the value you got before out of meta with your mastery inside of meta. That is what your soul fire should be doing.
Mine was doing 5.3k outside of meta, with 68% meta mastery, that value should be 5.3k * 1.68 = 8.9k
It's doing 7.25k for me, instead of 8.9k