Arms. Heroic Strike or Slam

[Kaljurei]

You forgot the added basedamage on Slam. That's why

Sigh. I did these calculations myself about a month ago.

HS at 1 Stack of TFB : 220% + 1238.

The Damage difference between a Slam and HS is (2.2WD+1238)-(1.9WD+2419) = (0.3*WD) - 1181

My current average WD as per my Armory is (12985+16803)/2=14894

Hence the damage difference becomes : ((3*14894)/10)-1181 = 4468-1181=3287

The WD figures were taken at level 85. The damage difference now should be even more than before.

[Darkfriend]

Well, as long as you don't let TFB stacks drop, there really is no reason NOT to save them for a CS.

As well, yes 1 TFB stack maybe better than a slam. HOWEVER slamming and waiting until 2 TFB stacks means that not only do you get an extra slam, but you get the same damage for the 1 HS as you'd have gotten for 1.5 HS (200%+HS damage compared to 100%+HS damage x2) meaning that waiting is actually a DPS increase due to a greater DPR as long as you are 1.) not letting stacks drop and 2.) using during a CS if possible.

So while you are TECHNICALLY correct that, assuming only 30 rage at the time, a 1 stack TFB proc will out damage a single slam, its actually better to wait, being better DPR.

[Maxie]

I assume that if a 1 tfb stack is about to fall off, I'm better off using HS than slam? Sorry if stupid question.

[Eluo]

Dafuq ?! Aren't you supposed to be some kind of machine to make decisions and apply them as well within 1.5 seconds ?!

I think I'm gonna go the human player way and only use HS when I have at least 2 stacks of TFB.

Sigh... by open gcd, I mean that slam is lower on the priority rotation, meaning if hitting CS or MS are going to cap you, hit HS with them to make sure you don't rage cap. HS is off the gcd so that you can burn rage if it's coming in faster than you can spend.

[Darkfriend]

I assume that if a 1 tfb stack is about to fall off, I'm better off using HS than slam? Sorry if stupid question.

Depends. Not during execute phase, not if it'd keep you too low rage to slam after your next MS-OP combo. Otherwise yes, especially if in a CS.

[Kaljurei]

Well, as long as you don't let TFB stacks drop, there really is no reason NOT to save them for a CS.

As well, yes 1 TFB stack maybe better than a slam. HOWEVER slamming and waiting until 2 TFB stacks means that not only do you get an extra slam, but you get the same damage for the 1 HS as you'd have gotten for 1.5 HS (200%+HS damage compared to 100%+HS damage x2) meaning that waiting is actually a DPS increase due to a greater DPR as long as you are 1.) not letting stacks drop and 2.) using during a CS if possible.

So while you are TECHNICALLY correct that, assuming only 30 rage at the time, a 1 stack TFB proc will out damage a single slam, its actually better to wait, being better DPR.

I only made that post to show that 1 stack HS is mathematically more damage than a Slam. I don't comment on when you should actually use it, which everyone should know if they read the Arms guide which is out there now, or using basic common sense.

[Fiercon]

I only made that post to show that 1 stack HS is mathematically more damage than a Slam. I don't comment on when you should actually use it, which everyone should know if they read the Arms guide which is out there now, or using basic common sense.

I find using basic common sense is expected a bit too much from Arms warriors! No really, the usage of HS should be of a "getting rid of it" mentality.

You don't want to use HS in itself you only want to use it to either get rid of too much rage (which rarely happens for me atm, especially when fighting 2+ targets) or to get rid of 2+ stacks of TfB.

The reason I say 2+ stacks is purely subjective - it makes my life easier to worry about HS in as few circumstances as possible - use HS just ONCE too often in a fight and you're rage-raped for the next 20 seconds.

[Deleted]

Slam ALWAYS over HS except when the following are true:

1.) You'd overcap on rage before you can next slam (So either before your next MS or melee swing) to avoid losing rage.

2.) When you have at least 2 TFB stacks AND CS is applied.

3.) To prevent losing 2+ TFB stacks before a CS can be applied.

Basically, slam is your rage dump, but HS is the "overflow" button or proc button.

You get a feel for it, TBH.

Your number two is wrong. This is in fact the #1 source of confusion about this mechanic. You do not, EVER, replace Slam with Heroic Strike, unless you are in a situation where you have only enough rage for one of them, and you are about to lose your stacks. If there is a potential that you can get more stacks, then always Slam. You Heroic Strike if you are GCD capped and Rage capped (regardless of stacks), or if you're about to lose your stacks and you have at least 2. They are the only situations.

EDIT: Seen people saying a 1 stack HS is better than Slam, but I've not experienced this. Two stacks seems to be ever so slightly better than Slam. Will do some more testing and number checking.

[Kaljurei]

I find using basic common sense is expected a bit too much from Arms warriors! No really, the usage of HS should be of a "getting rid of it" mentality.

You don't want to use HS in itself you only want to use it to either get rid of too much rage (which rarely happens for me atm, especially when fighting 2+ targets) or to get rid of 2+ stacks of TfB.

The reason I say 2+ stacks is purely subjective - it makes my life easier to worry about HS in as few circumstances as possible - use HS just ONCE too often in a fight and you're rage-raped for the next 20 seconds.

Well common sense didn't need to be applied while playing Cata Arms because the rotation was easy, only the dynamic usage of Overpower and CS made it interesting and fun. And the 2pc bonus made Heroic Strike so good compared to Slam that no one wanted to use Slam. Stupid gits.

Actually, making HS better than Slam at 1 stack makes it easier to dump those stacks because then you don't have to worry about whether you should Slam instead of HS at 1 or more stacks because HS will always be better once you have a single stack of TFB.

[Fiercon]

Actually, making HS better than Slam at 1 stack makes it easier to dump those stacks because then you don't have to worry about whether you should Slam instead of HS at 1 or more stacks because HS will always be better once you have a single stack of TFB.

I find it a bit confusing to debate wether to use EITHER slam OR heroic strike.
Heroic strike can basically be used all the time, rage allowing.
Slam can basically be used all the time, time allowing.

So if you have no other proccs/abilities ready and plenty of rage there is no reason not to use HS and Slam for maximum output.

The only limiting factor of HS is "Rage vs time"-usage, not Slam-over-HS priority. If your rage does not allow you to use both abilities (which is the case in 90% of the fight for me atm) you are basically better off using slam. If your timeframe does not allow you to get rid of too much rage because there are so many other abilities to hit, you are basically better off using heroic strike.

Theres only one exception, where your rage-limitation on HS is lifted and that's TFB stacks. If you like to use it at 1 stack (220% weapon damage + 998) over slam (215% weapon damage + 997 - clear loser) or try to get more stacks is totally up to you. I try to align 2+ stacks with CS and enrage or fire them when they are about to fall off.

[Kaljurei]

I find it a bit confusing to debate wether to use EITHER slam OR heroic strike.
Heroic strike can basically be used all the time, rage allowing.
Slam can basically be used all the time, time allowing.

First, you need to make a distinction here. You can't use Slam all the time, if you don't have GCDs, you're not going to be able to use Slam. Hence, the decision to be made at times is affected by the GCD that applies to Slam.

So if you have no other proccs/abilities ready and plenty of rage there is no reason not to use HS and Slam for maximum output.

True, I never said otherwise.

The only limiting factor of HS is "Rage vs time"-usage, not Slam-over-HS priority. If your rage does not allow you to use both abilities (which is the case in 90% of the fight for me atm) you are basically better off using slam. If your timeframe does not allow you to get rid of too much rage because there are so many other abilities to hit, you are basically better off using heroic strike.

Theres only one exception, where your rage-limitation on HS is lifted and that's TFB stacks. If you like to use it at 1 stack (220% weapon damage + 998) over slam (215% weapon damage + 997 - clear loser) or try to get more stacks is totally up to you. I try to align 2+ stacks with CS and enrage or fire them when they are about to fall off.

Yes that's also correct.

Look I'm not telling people when you should use Heroic Strike. All I'm saying is that at one stack HS is already better than Slam. So if you want to use HS over Slam, all you need is one stack of TFB to make it better. That's it. It's upto you when you actually want to dump TFB stacks on HS. Of course it is more beneficial to wait on those stacks for as long as possible so that you can align them with a CS and Enrage, but it's not absolutely necessary.

It's not wise to inflict a decision on people. Give them data and ask them to make the decision themselves. You don't need to do any kind of hand-holding, else you'll be doing it forever.

To be honest, Arms is not hard. I don't see why anyone needs to have detailed discussion on when to use HS or Slam. It can be so easily mathed out.