Does this mean we can count on a post of some sort on SD.net to help raise awareness? Many of us have expressed concerns already on the PTR forums, but there's a lot of noise for them to wade through on there. I'm concerned that even if this IS a genuine "oops" on their part, the solution may not be a quick fix and we may hear "well it only affects the very outliers of paladins, so we CBA to fix this right away". Just a simple tweak to GbtL passive returns, or a spec-specific seal adjustment would be easy and elegant enough to take care of it, I'd think. Maybe 2x the returns on GbtL (without risking some insane change to PVP, as if Prot has any rep in PVP anyhow).
Please, please, PLEASE specify no return to the Sanctuary-style "x% mana return on dodge/parry"!
From a 25m POV, I think that's probably a fair guess. But in 10m, I think we may be able to use this new glyph depending on encounter and tank mechanics. I really wish the glyph would give us a new ability, instead of just changing the seal. One that allows us to toggle on/off the "battle healer" effect, so that we can adjust on the fly, but that's likely a bit too good. Even though, with the glyph turned "off" you'd be giving up the opportunity cost of a different glyph, it'd likely be too "set it and forget it" methinks.Battle Healer was sort of stupidly overpowered even at 20%. I guess they just decided it was too good at any percentage and redesigned it instead. Again, I'd bet that well over 90% of prot paladins used this glyph full-time, which puts it in that "so absurdly good that it's mandatory" range, which isn't ideal. I've probably had GoBH glyphed for 6 months or more, to be honest. I change out the other two, but never that one. It was just a matter of time.
That said, the new version is probably useless to any protection paladin working on difficult content. Giving up SoI is too much of a survivability hit unless you're already over-gearing the encounter. Might be an interesting option for 10-man or normal/flex tanks that don't feel threatened.
Yep, and didn't you save us from this version the first time around? I suppose it's not ALL bad; sounds like a lot of add-related fights in SoO, so this may actually be a net gain. Still, a definite nerf to fun, given the removal of any personal action or interaction to cause the proc anymore.The Grand Crusader change is the original version they tested during 5.3 PTR. It obviously does a better job of propping up dodge/parry, but leaves off-tanking a little more boring. But I don't think it's a good idea to infer long-term plans from that change either. Sure, they could remove dodge and parry, but that's not something they're going to do in a 5.x patch. That's an expansion-level overhaul.
So I see this change as saying something more akin to "well, we know you're stuck with this stuff on some of your gear for a little while longer, we'll try to make it more useful to you in the short-term."
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/to...3519?page=3#55
"The Seal of Insight change is not intended as a Protection nerf, or to make haste less attractive. In fact, the change is being made because of a Holy concern. Although Seal of Insight does benefit from haste, the stat’s real value for Protection comes from Sanctity of Battle. Regardless, we will be making adjustments to make sure Protection doesn’t start having mana issues. Current thinking is to increase the mana gain from Guarded by the Light to 10%.
Glyph of the Battle Healer was something we had originally intended to allow Holy to adopt a “melee healer” playstyle, but as class design changes shifted Protection towards using Seal of Insight primarily, it has become both mandatory and overpowered. It’s just significantly stronger than a glyph should be. We think that the redesign will still allow it to be useful for Protection, but much more situationally, which is fine.
The Grand Crusader changes are indeed intended to make avoidance more attractive. The goal isn’t to nerf haste; as I mentioned, Sanctity of Battle is where the majority of haste’s value lies (along with other secondary benefits such as its interaction with Sacred Shield). However, we’ve seen overwhelming feedback that dodge and parry feel like wasted stats to Paladin tanks. It’s fine if you still prefer haste over avoidance, but we still intend to put avoidance on plate tanking gear, and we don’t want you to feel like those stats don’t benefit you when you get them.
We are paying careful attention to your feedback while we work through these changes. Please keep in mind that specific feedback regarding what exactly your concerns are about the changes is significantly more useful to us than sweeping generalizations. Thanks "
Some updates from a blue.
Nairobi and I both have posts on page 4 asking some questions. Make sure you guys go and ask questions, give suggestions. DON'T demand stuff and turn the thread into a complete qq fest of nerdrage, that's how you get ignored quickly and get the answers that are questions like "why shouldn't you like dodge over haste". The qq and those types of responses will do nothing for this discussion.
Last edited by Aceshigh; 2013-07-09 at 11:17 PM.
Fairly certain you can and will run oom at 0% haste, considering I run oom in less than 1 minute with 40% haste, even managed to oom in 24 seconds by doing my rotation + DP, SoL, Rebuke and Reckoning. If you involve more things than just your rotation, if you have to use an interrupt, SoL, DP and stuff like that you can for sure go oom even at 0% haste.
The only thing I am worried about with GC is that it promotes some very shady play including pulling multiple extra mobs on the tank and keeping them alive for constant stream of GC procs for 100% SotR uptime and increased dps. Have a feeling we are gonna see several insane strats involving prot paladins and a lot of rage and complaint from the rest of the community because of it.
Last edited by Fhi; 2013-07-09 at 11:35 PM. Reason: Excessive font size/color cleanup
1) Kind of odd since holy's melee damage is nonexistant - did they really not have the insight that this would be much much more useful to prot (and ret).
2) Thing is that they did the very same thing with the last change to GC and even then we already said that this change does next to nothing for dodge/parry and only serves to make tanking anything other than 1 target (that includes 0 targets) retarded !:
The horse wasn't dead until 10 minutes ago when this was confirmed, and you're the only person to really mention it specifically since. Good work, continue to rage about people discussing how things CURRENTLY are instead of saying "oh it's cool, this probably won't go live (which MANY of us said...).
Yeah, I made a post asking why that didn't work in the 5.2/5.3 PTR but it does now, what has changed.
Last edited by Fhi; 2013-07-09 at 11:35 PM. Reason: Cleaned up quote
But it is fun
On a more serious note, really hope they settle for atleast 12% mana regen with GbtL, 10% could still cause mana starve issues. Even 12% could cause starvation on fights with the need for cleanse and/or rebuke. Imo we need atleast 15%.
Also wonder when (if???) they are gonna realise how retarded that GC change is for multi-target tanking.
Last edited by mmoc4d8e5d065a; 2013-07-09 at 11:29 PM.
Sounds like it isn't necessary based on Ace's link. But yeah, if it was going to be a problem I would probably have written a blog post about it.
Yeah, I think the glyph might actually be interesting in 10m. I just know that on 25H, I wouldn't give SoI heals up.
Not sure I can take credit for that, but I did blog about it. It's sort of disappointing on the one hand, but on the other it will strengthen the dodge/parry we do get stuck with.
I should have SimC updated as soon as the new data is added to the PTR spell database, at which point I can give you a better estimate of exactly how much this shifts haste, dodge, and parry around.
By the way, the next release of SimC will include my new smoothness metric (TMI), including the ability to generate stat weights using it.
Isn't raging, more like a big red post so i can rage when 5 posts down people continue discussing how we can fix it.
And you mean using common sense and realizing that since a bunch of other tanks (druids, warriors) aren't limited by resources, blizzard isn't going to make us manage a 2nd resource ?
I haven't tested it personally, but my friend (Kerriodos from Odyssey) did. At ~44% haste he was able to keep the full rotation up for a little over 2 minutes, if my memory of our conversation is correct.
I'd have to do some math to confirm it, but going from 6% to 10% is probably close to what SoI was returning anyway.
4% base mana per melee, CS, SotR. Let's be generous and assume 40% haste, so your melee swing timer is 2.60/1.4/1.1 = 1.688. CS happens every 4.5/1.4 = 3.214 seconds, and you should get about 1.4/4.5+1.4/6.75=0.519 HP/sec from CS and J. Let's throw some avoids in there and round up to 0.5454, which gives us a mean time between SotRs of 5.5 seconds.
SoI is 20 PPM, so it's an 86.67% chance to proc per melee event with a 2.6-speed weapon. Based on that level of haste, we have
1/1.688 + 1/3.214 + 1/5.5 = 1.085 chances to proc per second, which is 0.94 procs per second, or about 3.76% of base mana returned per second.
So it's about half of what SoI gave us, but then again we never needed all of that SoI gain to maintain the rotation. I'm not sure exactly how much it'll cost to maintain the rotation at 40% haste (though again, it should be pretty easy to calculate), but I expect that the additional 2% base mana per second will cover it. If not, it wouldn't be hard to buff it to 12% or 14% if it's absolutely required.
Dude you're being difficult for absoltely no reason. People have said it many, many times that Blizzard has let big things slip past them before and let REALLY dumb shit go live, this was so that didn't happen and then people talked about what would happen IIIIIIFFFFFF it did. And from the looks of the responses it was an oversight by them or they would already have accounted for it. Jesus Christ man, read the fucking threads, read what people are actually writing. Yeah common sense says something like this would cripple a spec/playstyle if it went live. Past experience says dumb shit happens if it isn't talked about. Apply that same common sense to instances where dumb/broken shit goes live then come back and say "but but but it's common sense!!!!"
Last edited by Aceshigh; 2013-07-09 at 11:56 PM.
With 10% we can still oom fairly easily using our normal rotation, especially if we are abusing GC procs. We would need 14% to substain chain GC procs at 50% haste, think around 12% to substain a normal rotation, but we have to remember the utility abilities around that. Imo we need atleast 15%, preferably closer to 18%, so we can use cleanse and rebuke freely.
14% is close to what we have now.
Last edited by mmoc4d8e5d065a; 2013-07-10 at 12:15 AM.
You know, while the fact they will be making sure Prot doesn't go oom should be obvious to everyone, the whole discussion just made me wonder why classes that can't go oom or aren't intended to (under normal circumstances) even have mana. Bit of a legacy these days. Maybe it makes sense for say, Ret and Prot Paladins because they can spam inefficient heals in a pinch. But what about Fire and Frost Mages? Weird as it seems I can actually imagine them making mana an Arcane only resource in the future.
And if mana only exists for non-healers as a limiter on offhealing then that could be accomplished by other means as well.
Well I'm not saying the players are dumb for taking the optimal stats, I'm saying it's dumb that DPS stats are optimal for tanks. Good is okay, optimal isn't. What if dodge became the best stat for a ret pally? That would just be absurd.
I agree about the active mitigation model, I really like the way my Prot Pally plays as of MoP. Probably my new favourite tank (sorry Prot Warrior).
On the everything-has-a-cooldown model yeah, I can see how it's a bit of a clunky design. But they do want to make each class unique. Shrug. Still feels better than my Warrior who gives me RSI mashing keys lol.
Dodge and parry being old fashioned is... well a symptom of the age of the game I guess. Their design goals for tanks are a bit wobbly I have to say, and in the last couple of expansions has caused some weird situations. I think a good solution would be to consider redesigning the stats entirely so that they play directly into your active mitigation instead of being a bit pile of passive mitigation. That way they would remain valuable but also feel like fun stats to take. Be a big redesign though.
Are we talking about prots being OP in PvP? What alternate reality is this?
18% would allow us to cast one FoL ever 4.1 seconds, that is hardly OP. And doing so would not allow us to cast anything else. We would do no DPS, and we would do a lot higher dps by not casting FoL at all, presuming you can reach your target in melee. It would not really change a thing about prots current state in PvP, which is non-existant.
18% is not much higher than what we have now which is around 14%.