Playing Arms is like being the guy that sits in The Hatch in LOST pushing the button every 108 minutes to avoid worldwide catastrophe. The button is keybinded to slam. That's how long the GCD feels to me.
Playing Arms is like being the guy that sits in The Hatch in LOST pushing the button every 108 minutes to avoid worldwide catastrophe. The button is keybinded to slam. That's how long the GCD feels to me.
8 target sim....arms beasting it in ptr for aoe.
http://imgur.com/BQLnPXu
Na, arms aoe as it stands on the PTR will not go live. I predict they will scrap the +100% deep wounds damage buff arms gets. Seeing as they are increasing deep wounds damage and scaling by 65%, we won't need that extra 100% modifier, our AoE will be strong as hell without it.
Sooo, next patch arms priority is slam>OP, which means that we'll spend all rage on 2 x slams pr MS cycle, and skip OP..... dat suxx. While I like the idea of Slam being a big hitter, I dont want to skip OP as I like the 1sec GCD. Why not make OP only cost rage and generate TFB, then make slam cost 2-3 TFB stacks?
Ok I am terrible at the whole math deal but if I were to take a log I have like my Heroic Lei Shen 10man kill this week and try to add in the current change to Deep Wounds, would that give me an accurate idea of what dmg I would have done in that circumstance if that buff was in place then?
Example Heroic Lei Shen 10man I pulled 192,213 dps. Deep Wounds was 5.5% of my overall dmg.
If I take the overall dmg that Deep Wounds did which was 5,388,550 and multiple by .65, which is 3,502,557. Then add that to the overall dmg of 5,388,550 I get 8,891,107 as my new overall dmg for Deep Wounds. I then take that and divide it by the overall damage I did on the fight which was 97,644,167. Which ends up being .091 or 9.1%. 9.1% minus the original Deep Wounds dmg of 5.5% would be 3.6%.
Does the math work that way or am I completely wrong. Or is the 65% buff to deep wounds a 3.6% increase in dps for Fury.
Also if you take that 3.6% and multiply it by the overall dps (192,213) you get 6919 dps. Which means we would typically gain that much dps.
Like I said I am not sure so if you do know for sure let me know. And I do understand that the deep wound numbers per fight are different depending on the situation but I just want to figure out what type of buff this might be for fury.
Last edited by Snuglz; 2013-08-15 at 12:53 PM.
Anyone guess if battle shout > slam if CS isn't up with the changes? Building up as much rage to dump as possible and all.
The "rotation" is simple come the patch.
If CS is up. MS > Slam | HS if close to ragecap
If CS ain't up. MS > OP > other stuff (HT / BS / IV)
Sub20% / 4piece proc.
If CS is up. MS > (If you got a beter weapon then the rest of your gear)Slam / (If your gear and weapon is at the same level) Execute
If CS ain't up. MS > Execute (If you don't have the "Free OP buff") > OP > Other rage free stuff (HT / BS)
5.5%x0,65=3,575% increase. No need to complicate it any further :PDeep Wounds was 5.5% of my overall dmg.
I am hoping with how strong Arms is currently on the PTR (only being 1.2k lower than SMF single target but also being much better sustained aoe) that we might see Fury being pushed behind. With Arms being just a tad lower but having a very clear advantage over fury as far as aoe goes. I do not see why you would stick fury if arms overall is better. Makes for less reforging/regeming/regearing and so on.
Last edited by Snuglz; 2013-08-15 at 05:52 PM.
When you see someone in a thread making the same canned responses over and over, click their name, click view forum posts, and see if they are a troll. Then don't feed them."Gamer" is not a bad word. I identify as a gamer. When calling out those who persecute and harass, the word you're looking for is "asshole." @_DonAdams
With the benefit of arms having much better sustained aoe and not being too far off of fury I don't think it matters too much which spec you go for. That is if the changes are kept bc the aoe right now as arms is crazy and hard to believe we get to keep something like that.
Edit: and how does that sound unimpressive?