[WINDWALKER] 7.X Discussion thread

[Deleted]

I'm using two 840 Roilling Fog relics which increase 5% FoF each and a third 845 iron one which also does the same. I just got a 860 Northern Gale relic which I could use. Do you think it's worth using a 860 northern gale instead of a 840 roilling fog? Northern Gale gives the Death Art trait effect.

[Deleted]

I'm using two 840 Roilling Fog relics which increase 5% FoF each and a third 845 iron one which also does the same. I just got a 860 Northern Gale relic which I could use. Do you think it's worth using a 860 northern gale instead of a 840 roilling fog? Northern Gale gives the Death Art trait effect.

For ST, it has to provide +14 iLev to the weapon over a FotW relic, and for AoE it's +20 ilev to the weapon; so check that (note it's ilev added to weapon, not ilev of the relic. Big difference); a quick wowhead check says there's a +6ilev difference, so FotW is better. http://www.walkingthewind.com/guides/tldr/; WtW is absurdly good.

[Deleted]

For ST, it has to provide +14 iLev to the weapon over a FotW relic, and for AoE it's +20 ilev to the weapon; so check that (note it's ilev added to weapon, not ilev of the relic. Big difference); a quick wowhead check says there's a +6ilev difference, so FotW is better. ; WtW is absurdly good.

Ah gotcha, so it is indeed worse what I currently have. I understood what it said after a min. Thanks!

[Soulwell]

This is absolutely not true.

It really is though, outside of monks having the back the only class that's actually parsing lower is sub and even they are retarded after they get their legendary. Monk st is just kinda off wack tbh.

[Babylonius]

It really is though, outside of monks having the back the only class that's actually parsing lower is sub and even they are retarded after they get their legendary. Monk st is just kinda off wack tbh.

Its true that Monk ST is on the lower side, but they're not the worse. So to your original comment, its absolutely not true that WW is the worst Single target spec. Odyn is also not a pure single target fight.

Odyn (H): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...8&difficulty=4
Odyn (N): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...8&difficulty=4

Guarm (H): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...2&difficulty=4
Guarm (N): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...2&difficulty=3

Nythendra (M): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statistics/10#boss=1853
Nythendra (H): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...3&difficulty=4
Nythendra (N): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...3&difficulty=3

Ursoc (H): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...1&difficulty=4
Ursoc (N): https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...1&difficulty=3

So yes, WW is not very strong in single target, but its not the worst.

[Ryuji]

WW isn't very strong single target, but its not in a bad place. Middle of the pack.

:< Well said guildie was a rogue, outlaw specifically but got tired of roll the bones screwing them over. Tried assassination for a bit but couldn't do as much DPS as outlaw ST so they switched to monk. Serenity's complexity's throwing them off though, was thinking of going assassination again or trying sub.

[ErothTV]

So yes, WW is not very strong in single target, but its not the worst.

I wouldn't consider Ursoc as a ST fight, tbh ;-)

[Iyosin]

I wouldn't consider Ursoc as a ST fight, tbh ;-)

Heroic and Normal are. He didn't link Mythic.

[ErothTV]

Heroic and Normal are. He didn't link Mythic.

My mistake, indeed.

[Gylen]

Anyone see anything wrong with creating macros for abilities that include [nochanneling]? I feel like, often when trying to squeeze into Serenity, I sometimes clip FoF.

Any negative impact?

[Conjugate]

Anyone see anything wrong with creating macros for abilities that include [nochanneling]? I feel like, often when trying to squeeze into Serenity, I sometimes clip FoF.

Any negative impact?

The negative impact - if you don't have the macro, you can start your next cast when your current channel is (your latency here) ms from ending, and fire off the spell just as the channel ends, however if you use a nochanneling you lose that gap and guarantee your next spell will be (your latency here) ms delayed at least(can be even more delayed, depending how frantically you smash the keyboard). However it is far less risky and many(me included) choose to go for it.

[Babylonius]

Anyone see anything wrong with creating macros for abilities that include [nochanneling]? I feel like, often when trying to squeeze into Serenity, I sometimes clip FoF.

Any negative impact?

The only hangup with that macro, is that if you need to use CJL because you made a mistake earlier, then those abilities wont stop CJL's channel.

[Gylen]

The negative impact - if you don't have the macro, you can start your next cast when your current channel is (your latency here) ms from ending, and fire off the spell just as the channel ends, however if you use a nochanneling you lose that gap and guarantee your next spell will be (your latency here) ms delayed at least(can be even more delayed, depending how frantically you smash the keyboard). However it is far less risky and many(me included) choose to go for it.

Hrmm, very good point. I do find myself, sometimes, squeezing in an ability at 0 seconds left and wonder if this would cause me to drop that from time to time.

As for CJL, I don't ever use it.

[Beingbob]

How is ww scaling looking? I saw some graphs on reddit that suggested it was above average, but then ww legendaries don't seem to be the game changers dps wise that certain other specs have.

[Syld]

That new WW legendary seems interesting, It can even increase the value of haste.

[Razios]

Did they just -5% crit us in 7.1.5 or I missed something in scaling?

[Honak]

That new WW legendary seems interesting, It can even increase the value of haste.

You would need to have 100 energy to be able to fully channel that CJL. It would require you to literally not play your class for 5 seconds to work up the energy for it. Either that or always put off using Energizing Brew and only use it when you had 25 stacks. CJL also only does roughly 22k damage while fully channeled. So 22,000*25=550,000. Granted you factor in our mastery+hit combo, but it just doesn't seem worth it. Meanwhile shamans get Hero/Lust timer doubled for themselves.

[FayrenPickpocket]

You would need to have 100 energy to be able to fully channel that CJL. It would require you to literally not play your class for 5 seconds to work up the energy for it. Either that or always put off using Energizing Brew and only use it when you had 25 stacks. CJL also only does roughly 22k damage while fully channeled. So 22,000*25=550,000. Granted you factor in our mastery+hit combo, but it just doesn't seem worth it. Meanwhile shamans get Hero/Lust timer doubled for themselves.

That was my thought too. I laughed out loud way louder than I should have. Not to mention it's a chest piece, so you could potentially be losing your 4 set with it depending on what other legendaries you have.

My opinion on how to make this legendary usable: Have it apply 200% per stack up to 10 stacks (for quicker load times), do the damage instantly, and only cost 20 energy.


"Hey, WW, we're going to make CJL useless in your rotation by giving it an energy cost, but we're also going to give it a legendary."

[Razios]

My opinion on how to make this legendary usable: Have it apply 200% per stack up to 10 stacks (for quicker load times), do the damage instantly, and only cost 20 energy.

To powerfull ... 20 energy cost 1400% ap skill every about 20 sec?

[FayrenPickpocket]

To powerfull ... 20 energy cost 1400% ap skill every about 20 sec?

With it's current iteration, it's going to be 500k every 50 seconds, if you spend 100 energy and do nothing else (not even auto attack) for 4 seconds. We may as well just Tiger Palm-Bok-Tiger Palm-BoK for that same damage and energy cost.

The point is simple:
Where in WW rotation do we have 100 free energy and 4 seconds to channel a spell that will be interrupted with movement? We don't. So, why would we even bother with this legendary if it does less damage than the regular rotation at optimal stacks?