Aftermath Tier 2?

[Jahrastafari]

"Your Rain of Fire has a 12% chance to Stun targets for 2 sec., and your Conflagrate has a 100% chance to daze the target for 5 sec."

Why is this in tier 2? This talent is wholly irrelevant to Demonology & Affliction. I thought the point of 1st and 2nd tier talents is that they're supposed to be, at the very minimum, something that could be considered for any spec after you fill out your 31 in the primary tree.

Demonology and Affliction don't use RoF and don't have Conflag.

[pancakez]

Iknow 1 fight where this is usefull.. magmaw on the adds

[Jessicka]

Something had to move into ISF's place. As Demo, I'd rather have Shadowburn and/or Nether Ward, but meh.

[Jahrastafari]

Iknow 1 fight where this is usefull.. magmaw on the adds

As a Demonology warlock, I'd rather be using mobile hellfire than RoF and hope for a stun. Affliction, give me a soul-burned seed on those adds.

[Elanale]

The idea is not to give Affliction a replacement for Soulfire in Tier 2. It's to allow Affliction to invest those points in Demo or Affliction instead. They're taking Soulfire out of our rotation altogether, and if you didn't see that coming... well... you probably spend an unusual amount of time being surprised by WoW changes.

[Jahrastafari]

The idea is not to give Affliction a replacement for Soulfire in Tier 2. It's to allow Affliction to invest those points in Demo or Affliction instead. They're taking Soulfire out of our rotation altogether, and if you didn't see that coming... well... you probably spend an unusual amount of time being surprised by WoW changes.

I don't think you read my post. I'll reiterate, this isn't about me being surprised about the ISF removal to two trees, it's about "It's been explicitly stated that 1st and 2nd tier talents is that they're supposed to be, at the very minimum, something that could be considered for any spec after you fill out your 31 in the primary tree." Aftermath in tier two breaks that design philosophy.

[ComputerNerd]

Still very situational. Rain of Fire for anything but destruction is sub-par at best and I am wondering if really that stun would be of sufficient utility to offset that. Somehow I doubt it.
Something had to replace it, just perhaps was not an easy choice as to what.

[Drakhar]

I don't think you read my post. I'll reiterate, this isn't about me being surprised about the ISF removal to two trees, it's about "It's been explicitly stated that 1st and 2nd tier talents is that they're supposed to be, at the very minimum, something that could be considered for any spec after you fill out your 31 in the primary tree." Aftermath in tier two breaks that design philosophy.

Not as much as a mandatory talent for all specs in tier two breaks their design philosophy.

I agree it's kinda stupid but mehhh gives us more options with those extra talent points.

[Fenrir_Rendar]

I don't think you read my post. I'll reiterate, this isn't about me being surprised about the ISF removal to two trees, it's about "It's been explicitly stated that 1st and 2nd tier talents is that they're supposed to be, at the very minimum, something that could be considered for any spec after you fill out your 31 in the primary tree." Aftermath in tier two breaks that design philosophy.

Not really it allows affliction locks and demo lock to put more points elsewhere. Instead of taking aftermath as demonology i would now take doom and gloom personally, as for affliction I don't need to take emberstorm anymore so I would invest those points into demonology. specifically dark arts and fel synergy. Sure you don't fill out all of the points anymore but i'd rather have a tougher living pet now then a chance to stun.

[Jahrastafari]

Not really it allows affliction locks and demo lock to put more points elsewhere. Instead of taking aftermath as demonology i would now take doom and gloom personally, as for affliction I don't need to take emberstorm anymore so I would invest those points into demonology. specifically dark arts and fel synergy. Sure you don't fill out all of the points anymore but i'd rather have a tougher living pet now then a chance to stun.

Again, you're missing the point. It's not about obligatory talents, it's about a talent in tier two Destruction for abilities that the other two trees don't have/use. That runs counter the design philosophy.

[Fenrir_Rendar]

Again, you're missing the point. It's not about obligatory talents, it's about a talent in tier two Destruction for abilities that the other two trees don't have/use. That runs counter the design philosophy.

No, You seem to be missing the point, you don't NEED to take aftermath, sure it's not beneficial to demonology or affliction but you don't NEED to go for the tier 2 talents ALL the time.

[Jahrastafari]

No, You seem to be missing the point, you don't NEED to take aftermath, sure it's not beneficial to demonology or affliction but you don't NEED to go for the tier 2 talents ALL the time.

I'm not saying you should NEED to take aftermath. I'm saying that design philosophy is that while no talent is mandatory, 1st and 2nd tier talents in every tree are explicitly supposed to be considerations for any spec after you fill in your first 31. This breaks that design philosophy. I've made this plain to you three times now. I'm done typing this over and over in hopes that you'll read and understand.

[Jessicka]

It was actually a stated design goal pretty early on that they actually wanted Warlocks to be the class that actually picked up a couple of talents in both sub-specs to go with the fact that we used spells and abilities tied to all three of our trees. This actually goes in favour of that.

[Fenrir_Rendar]

I'm not saying you should NEED to take aftermath. I'm saying that design philosophy is that while no talent is mandatory, 1st and 2nd tier talents in every tree are explicitly supposed to be considerations for any spec after you fill in your first 31. This breaks that design philosophy. I've made this plain to you three times now. I'm done typing this over and over in hopes that you'll read and understand.

I understand that, but you are forgetting you don't need to take a tier 2 talent everytime. They are still following the design philosophy and as Jessicka just stated we want to put points in each tree, But i'm sorry you are frustrated over this.

[gherkin]

It was actually a stated design goal pretty early on that they actually wanted Warlocks to be the class that actually picked up a couple of talents in both sub-specs to go with the fact that we used spells and abilities tied to all three of our trees. This actually goes in favour of that.

This was because they couldn't design a second tier of talents with any amount of balance, as we have just seen. You either get stuff you don't really want in the first place (if my pet dies, I deserve to waste a shard or calculate whether its worth hard-summoning) or you get stuff that seems useful but really isn't (Searing Pain execute? Maybe in PVP... oh wait, Shadowburn + Conflagrate do 25% damage regardless)

[andromalia]

Again, you're missing the point. It's not about obligatory talents, it's about a talent in tier two Destruction for abilities that the other two trees don't have/use. That runs counter the design philosophy.

By your logic, the immolate talent should be appealing to me as affliction though UA is the spell I get by taking the affliction tree. Last I checked, they can't be applied to the same target. It's not supposed to always work out that way. Once they fix the other 2 specs to account for 15% lost haste (around 1900 rating) I'm sure we'll all be thankful that ISF is gone. Looks like mandatory hard casting will still be in place for Destruction locks.