30 41 0 raid support spec

[Deleted]

hey all!
http://talent.mmo-champion.com/?deat...0&version=9767
I thought of this spec, maybe for a 10man (ulduar) or even 25 man when both buffs are not yet in the group.
i am talking about abominations might and improved IT ofc

I think the greatness of the provided buffs for the raid could very well make up for the loss of personal dps, which shouldnt be all too bad anyway.

any thoughts, or even experiences?

________

edit: moved 3 pts from bloody vengeance to guile of gorefiend

or maybe even drop 1 pt in rune tap and two in vet of the 3rd war to gain bloody strikes? it must probably be tested if blood strike dmg is high enough to justify 3 talent pts. 45% is a lot though.

[Talamare]

http://talent.mmo-champion.com/?deat...0&version=9767

Slight fix

Its pretty weak spec unless your raid really need those buffs

Then youre sacrificing yourself for the good of the raid, which is rather noble... i guess

[Asgard]

this spec fails. Why ? enh shaman will bring the same raid buffs plus he'll dps. End of thread.

[Deleted]

this spec fails. Why ? Go enh shaman who willbring the same raid buffs plus he'll dps. End of thread.

really? I can see it for the impIT buff, but mark of blood and abominations might? if theres a shaman in the gr i would use a blood spec of course for more dps and no impIT.

http://talent.mmo-champion.com/?deat...0&version=9767

Slight fix

Its pretty weak spec unless your raid really need those buffs

Then youre sacrificing yourself for the good of the raid, which is rather noble... i guess

hm i thought if this is a raid support spec then I would take mark of blood too.

the dps with that spec is definitely not too big, but it was designed for the case when needed, that means if the total dps gained by the buffs is bigger than the amount lost. thought that was obvious.

Normally I have a 0 10 61 to switch to, so if i need my personal dps i know where to find it

when I tested a frost dps spec against 0 10 61, I found that my dps was lower a bit, but alone the amount of dps the 2 rogues gained from impIT made up for it already. that just to illuminate why i think above spec could work. maybe it only does in rare cases, but then...

[Skollvaldr]

this spec fails. Why ? enh shaman will bring the same raid buffs plus he'll dps. End of thread.

this.
no sane guild would take a dk with your spec.
enh shaman has imp it + abos might.
mark of blood is way too situational and not enough to justify the tons of dmg lost.

[Deleted]

this.
3.no sane guild would take a dk with your spec.
2.enh shaman has imp it + abos might.
1.mark of blood is way to situational and not enough to justify the tons of dmg lost.

it is not my spec, it is something i had in my mind

1. my mark of blood comment was just considering the changes someone proposed, so the discussion wasnt if this overall spec was good, but if IF you spec 30 41 0 you should or shouldnt take mob. but never mind.

2. for your shaman point - welll I thought it was clear that this is a spec I would use if there wasnt a shaman in the group.

and 3., I am in a sane guild, thank you. and if there is no shaman available for our next 10man ulduar (and there are like 2 rogues and a dps warrior like last time^°) Ill definitely try this spec. and we'll see if the raid performance is better than when i am using 0 10 61.

[Skollvaldr]

i surely didn't consider your answers 2 and 3 since you can faceroll through naxx 10 with any kind of setup. I was talking about serious stuff, aka ulduar 25.

BUT considering the setup you mentioned, why not go full blood?
plus, are you the only one providing a 13% spelldmg buff in that group?
those are also things you need to consider.

either way, your total raid dps will be better with full blood or unholy.

[Deleted]

i surely didn't consider your answers 2 and 3 since you can faceroll through naxx 10 with any kind of setup. I was talking about serious stuff, aka ulduar 25.

BUT considering the setup you mentioned, why not go full blood?
plus, are you the only one providing a 13% spelldmg buff in that group?
those are also things you need to consider.

either way, your total raid dps will be better with full blood or unholy.

who said sth about nax? (except for the typo that i thought I edited fast enough )
the main concern is ulduar10, in 25 i dont believe there will be a gr without a shaman.

and no im normally not the only one with the 13% spelldmg buff, in that case I wouldnt move an inch away from unholy.
maybe you are right about full blood just for the AP buff (or full UH) being better for the raid dps also - I still could think of rare cases where the buffs from that hybrid spec pay off, but I guess then the group is not really set up very well

[drbutcher]

really? I can see it for the impIT buff, but mark of blood and abominations might? if theres a shaman in the gr i would use a blood spec of course for more dps and no impIT.

Shamans have your abominations might buff for 4 years now in case you don't know it ....

Also why you call mark of blood a buff? ???

[Deleted]

Shamans have your abominations might buff for 4 years now in case you don't know it ....

Also why you call mark of blood a buff? ???

yeah not really a buff a .... hmmmm.... nice thingy

and that post up there, forget it, me brainlag :P but in general, this spec was intended for the case that no shaman is in the group.

[Talamare]

this spec fails. Why ? enh shaman will bring the same raid buffs plus he'll dps. End of thread.

Your response is what fails, hes saying there is no enhance shaman, and he said its impossible to get one

His raid dps will be higher with a spec like this even tho his personal will be lower

this is of course assuming most of the raid is melee

[Deleted]

Your response is what fails, hes saying there is no enhance shaman, and he said its impossible to get one

His raid dps will be higher with a spec like this even tho his personal will be lower

this is of course assuming most of the raid is melee

Thanks Talamare, this is basically what this is about.

So my conclusion will be, I'll try the spec in the case there is a melee-heavy no-shaman group, otherwise (and I thought that it was clear that i knew this) its no use.
Good to hear that I am not the only one believing in raid benefits :P

[kriS411]

Spec fails.

And no, it is not an option to spec into full gimp dps just for a few other ppl. to do more. This was TBC, not WotLK.
Get a reasonable raid setup where you have 10 ppl with correct specs.
Having a semigood raid setup with a buff bitch to make up a worse setup won't make it better, this is like raiding with 9 man...

[Deleted]

Spec fails.

And no, it is not an option to spec into full gimp dps just for a few other ppl. to do more. This was TBC, not WotLK.
Get a reasonable raid setup where you have 10 ppl with correct specs.
Having a semigood raid setup with a buff bitch to make up a worse setup won't make it better, this is like raiding with 9 man...

dude
please know that I know what a very well set up group can do.

but as I stated a zillion times now:

this spec is meant for the case where there are no alternatives, such as shaman.
d'you think I didnt know that otherwise its crap?
or did you just wanna disagree with something without knowing the whole story?

I was playing around with specs and came up with this one, I never meant it to replace my old dps spec, and I thought I made that clear in the other posts.
But well, reading this much is srz bsnz aint it.

[Talamare]

Besides hes not losing too excessively

15% more damage vs 8% more str

yea the 15% is more, but at least the 8% str attempts to make up for some of it

He has frost strike and GoG, so his hits will only do about 10% less then before