[OFFICIAL] MoP Beta Build Changes Discussion Thread

[Radux]

Read my 2nd paragraph. Your making assumptions of numbers right now. You have no idea if FT will yield more dps (neglecting extra LL damage and the Spell damage buff) than FB. Unless you can run hours of testing on a dummy in beta and somehow log it or something... you're just guessing.

And taking the above into account + your suggestion, the only difference is the UE effect (and the fact that FB would have the utility without lowering damage).

I'm not trying to say that WF/FB should never happen or anything. I'm saying your suggestion is a poor way to go about it. You seem like it will 100% fix the problem. None of us know that would do anything of the sort. You just took the 'damage vs. utility' thing out of it.

[Protoman]

Read my 2nd paragraph. Your making assumptions of numbers right now. You have no idea if FT will yield more dps (neglecting extra LL damage and the Spell damage buff) than FB. Unless you can run hours of testing on a dummy in beta and somehow log it or something... you're just guessing.

And taking the above into account + your suggestion, the only difference is the UE effect (and the fact that FB would have the utility without lowering damage).

No...I'm not making assumptions. FT doing more DPS then FB is common knowledge:

http://wow.joystiq.com/2011/02/19/to...weapon-imbues/

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/2089201105

Then I ran Clous against two types of targets, high armor and low armor. Both are estimates based on PvP geared players in my guild. High armor being 14% dodge (simulating dodge + parry), 4% melee miss, 4% spell miss and 32,000 armor. Low armor being 4% dodge, 4% melee miss, 4% spell miss and 8,000 armor.

High Armor
WF/FT -> 10,582 dps (10,788 dps)
WF/FB -> 9,230 dps
FB/FT -> 10,163 dps (10,841 dps)
(FT/FT -> 11,168 dps)

Low Armor
WF/FT -> 13,995 dps (13,585 dps)
WF/FB -> 12,515 dps
FB/FT -> 12,484 dps (12,906 dps)
(FT/FT -> 13,203 dps)

FT procs every swing, FB procs ~ 9ppm. Just based on the melee proc alone, FT does higher DPS then FB. The Unleash effect makes FT an even more obvious choice for higher DPS.

Nothing seems to be changing in how FT and FB will scale in MoP, so this will most likely still be the truth. And if it does change, you can simply nerf the damage of FB and problem is solved. FB is supposed to do less dps then FT, and if thats not the case I'm sure Blizz would correct it. The problem here is not the proc damage between FT and FB, its the loss in our OTHER damage, specifically LL and all spells when we try to use FB.

I'm not trying to say that WF/FB should never happen or anything. I'm saying your suggestion is a poor way to go about it. You seem like it will 100% fix the problem. None of us know that would do anything of the sort. You just took the 'damage vs. utility' thing out of it.

And how would you solve the problem? FB is supposed to be our PVP imbue, but we ignore it and that is a design flaw. You say my suggestion is poor, but its actually perfect. It would promote the use of FB in PVP, without overpowering FT in PVE because FT still provides higher dps, thru proc or unleash effect.

[Cunning Stunts]

Forgive me if this is already answered, but do these changes point to Enhancement using the Primal Elementalist talent? I know I have seen many Shaman posters both here and on the official WoW forums upset over their elementals becoming pets, but I personally am looking forward to that. I have two Shaman toons, one Enhancement and one Elemental, so I'm particularly curious.

[Radux]

Again... you're assuming NOW. Things might not be the same in MoP. Arguing numbers about something in an expansion because it's that way now doesn't mean it'll work out that way. That's my entire point with the whole "it's obvious that FT > FB damage". You don't know that for MoP. I don't know that for MoP. No one knows that for MoP yet.

As for what I would change? I have no idea.

I mostly disagree with your idea because it's a damn near carbon copy of FT. That's not interesting. At all.
Like I mentioned before. I have no problem having Enh forced into WF/FB.

Giving everything good about FT to FB just means you get to add a snare.

I mean, without knowing really anything about numbers, I'd rather FB dmg proc get a big buff so that when it does happen, it's a big deal.
Giving the Spell damage buff to FB and getting rid of the LL (even baking it into the ability) from FT isn't interesting.

It's like saying Rogues are OP in PvP because they have a Sprint. So Blizzard gives everyone else a Sprint too so everyone has a chance in PvP. That's not the right way to go about it.

[Endus]

And how would you solve the problem? FB is supposed to be our PVP imbue, but we ignore it and that is a design flaw. You say my suggestion is poor, but its actually perfect. It would promote the use of FB in PVP, without overpowering FT in PVE because FT still provides higher dps, thru proc or unleash effect.

The easy way?Have it add the new [PvP]Power stat like we'll be getting on PvP gear.Bam, it's suddenly the go-to imbue for PvP, but still near-useless for PvE.

[Deleted]

The easy way?Have it add the new [PvP]Power stat like we'll be getting on PvP gear.Bam, it's suddenly the go-to imbue for PvP, but still near-useless for PvE.

Personally I dont even feel this needs to be the case. In Mists if you choose to take Unleash Fury then you have obvious reasons to take FB - another sprint - and without unleash fury you're either taking Elementals or you're taking Elemental Cone. If your taking Elemental Cone you would benefit far more from being in melee range because if you're not your not going to get the damage portion off - so I would only see people taking Cone with FB, as for Elementals they are Melee units without slows of their own, if they are kited then that talent suddenly becomes useless too besides the damage reduction cooldown fron earth ele and 5% more damage from Fire Ele. I'd again say it would be more DPS to use FB, atleast when the Elementals are down.

All 3 t9 talents have heavy weighting towards the extra slow than FB provides to get their full usefulness, and thus I can see FB being a real contender choice. FT might still be better but the gap would be smaller and you would be able to cater it around your comp ('oh I have a frost mage on my team I dont need it' or 'oh I have a Ret on my team, it could help') rather than being forced to take one to prevent yourself being gimped.

[Radux]

On the contrary, Undefetter. You're assuming the Enhancement Shaman is the only one capable of a Slow. Things could definitely weigh towards FT if your team mates can keep a slow on the target (at least if you take EF or the Super Elemental Totem talents).

[Protoman]

Again... you're assuming NOW. Things might not be the same in MoP. Arguing numbers about something in an expansion because it's that way now doesn't mean it'll work out that way. That's my entire point with the whole "it's obvious that FT > FB damage". You don't know that for MoP. I don't know that for MoP. No one knows that for MoP yet.

I know it will be the same in MoP too, because Blizz intent is that FT should yield higher DPS then FB. If FB for whatever reason starts to do more DPS, Blizz themselves would nerf it's proc damage to bring it below FT. They have kept that standard throughout Cata, and will continue it in MoP.

The DPS between FT and FB proc is irrelevant anyways, its not why people continue to pass on FB in PVP. The unleash effect is not an issue either, its fine if we have to trade our flame shock damage for extra control....that's a fair trade. What is not fair though is also losing out on 40% LL damage and 7% spell damage. That's too much damage to give up for the snare.

Frozen Power used to give us 10% more damage on all spells, to counteract the bonus SP from FT. This is being removed as well, so it's yet another reason to prefer FT over FB. That is why I suggest FB gives 5% spell damage vs 7% spell damage for FT.

Main thing that needs to go is 40% LL damage being baked into ability baseline, not tied to FT.

I mostly disagree with your idea because it's a damn near carbon copy of FT. That's not interesting. At all.
Like I mentioned before. I have no problem having Enh forced into WF/FB.

Giving everything good about FT to FB just means you get to add a snare.

I mean, without knowing really anything about numbers, I'd rather FB dmg proc get a big buff so that when it does happen, it's a big deal.
Giving the Spell damage buff to FB and getting rid of the LL (even baking it into the ability) from FT isn't interesting.

It's not a copy though, I don't know why you keep saying that. What makes FT so special? More damage/dps correct? Well that has not changed at all.....FT would still provide more DPS, and so would it's unleash effect. So it's still special for doing more damage. If you want something unique to add to FT to distinguish it from FB, you could simply allow it to give a small buff (5-10%) to periodic damage like flame shock, or maybe even fire totems. This would give it that "fire buffing flavor" that the bonus to LL damage used to provide, without such a big loss to our damage, since flame shock/fire totems aren't as big a deal in PVP as LL or our spells.

The suggestion would promote FB use in PVP, but not replace FT in PVE. That's exactly what the design intent is.

[Deleted]

On the contrary, Undefetter. You're assuming the Enhancement Shaman is the only one capable of a Slow. Things could definitely weigh towards FT if your team mates can keep a slow on the target (at least if you take EF or the Super Elemental Totem talents).

Of course, hense my comment at the end about it meaning your able to cater the choice around your comp. If your comp is low on slows you can take FB and not feel overly gimped like you do on live, whilst if you dont need the extra slow you can take FT. I see no problem with that system.

[Endus]

Personally I dont even feel this needs to be the case.

Probably not, I'm just saying, if you want our PvP enchant to be more useful in PvP, we have a new PvP power stat that we can add to it that wouldn't much affect PvE and threaten the use of Flametongue Weapon.

[Radux]

It's not a copy though, I don't know why you keep saying that.

Current FT design:
- Does damage
- 7% spell damage
- Extra LL damage

What you suggest for FT:
- Does damage
- 7% spell damage

What you suggest for FB:
- Does damage
- 5-7% spell damage
- Snare

Those are damn near identical. That's why I keep saying that.
You're changing the spell at it's core and then saying their not because the UE does different stuff.

That's why a few posts above I made the point of "what's from stopping them from getting rid of FT on the whole, then have FB's UE effect do something different on players vs. NPC targets".

If you want them to be more separated from PvE vs. PvP (damage vs. utility) then change the UE to make them more enticing.

[Deleted]

Probably not, I'm just saying, if you want our PvP enchant to be more useful in PvP, we have a new PvP power stat that we can add to it that wouldn't much affect PvE and threaten the use of Flametongue Weapon.

It would definitely fix the issue instantly, but personally I prefer the design target of FT doing more damage, FB supplying more control, and you choose based on what you need and what you're comp needs. Fury does that right out the bat, an on demand sprint would be amazing. Elementals and Cone both put less weight DPS wise on LL, and thus lower the percentage DPS lost from not having FT, and increase the DPS gained from FB due to higher uptimes on targets - assuming you're not supplied with sufficient slows already. If you are then you don't need FB anyway and you can just not take it. I see no problem with this. It gives more choice and flavour to enhance because at the moment the benefits of FB just are not significant enough because LL is too high a portion of Enhance's DPS.

[Protoman]

Current FT design:
- Does damage
- 7% spell damage
- Extra LL damage

What you suggest for FT:
- Does damage
- 7% spell damage

What you suggest for FB:
- Does damage
- 5-7% spell damage
- Snare

Those are damn near identical. That's why I keep saying that.
You're changing the spell at it's core and then saying their not because the UE does different stuff.

That's why a few posts above I made the point of "what's from stopping them from getting rid of FT on the whole, then have FB's UE effect do something different on players vs. NPC targets".

If you want them to be more separated from PvE vs. PvP (damage vs. utility) then change the UE to make them more enticing.

The UE is part of the imbue, regardless of the talent or not it has a big effect on which imbue you use. And I think the UE are enticing enough, you either get more flame shock/fire nova (poss LB) damage which has obvious benefit in PVE since thats where you maintain the dot or use aoe.....or you get a snare (sprint) which is obviously more helpful in PVP then some dot damage.

And you are oversimplifying "does damage". FT does MORE damage/DPS, and FB does LESS damage/DPS. FT being one of our highest DPS imbues is a signature feature of it. More DPS in PVP is a strong factor on its own, which is obvious since FT has been preferred over FB for that specific reason.

How about this then...

- 40% LL damage baked into ability baseline

What you suggest for FT:
- Does MORE damage/DPS
- 7% spell damage
- 5% buff to flame shock dot and fire totems (Fire theme)

What you suggest for FB:
- Does LESS damage/DPS (then FT)
- 5% spell damage
- Snare (Frost theme)

Probably not, I'm just saying, if you want our PvP enchant to be more useful in PvP, we have a new PvP power stat that we can add to it that wouldn't much affect PvE and threaten the use of Flametongue Weapon.

This might work, but I'd like to see if FB can be the obvious choice for PVP, and FT for PVE....without having to make FB behave differently just for PVP. Guess you could call that a last resort, easy quick fix. But I think it can be done without it, using my suggestion above.

[Deleted]

The UE is part of the imbue, regardless of the talent or not it has a big effect on which imbue you use. And I think the UE are enticing enough, you either get more flame shock/fire nova (poss LB) damage which has obvious benefit in PVE since thats where you maintain the dot or use aoe.....or you get a snare (sprint) which is obviously more helpful in PVP then some dot damage.

And you are oversimplifying "does damage". FT does MORE damage/DPS, and FB does LESS damage/DPS. FT being one of our highest DPS imbues is a signature feature of it. More DPS in PVP is a strong factor on its own, which is obvious since FT has been preferred over FB for that specific reason.

How about this then...

- 40% LL damage baked into ability baseline

What you suggest for FT:
- Does MORE damage/DPS
- 7% spell damage
- 5% buff to flame shock dot and fire totems (Fire theme)

What you suggest for FB:
- Does LESS damage/DPS (then FT)
- 5% spell damage
- Snare (Frost theme)



This might work, but I'd like to see if FB can be the obvious choice for PVP, and FT for PVE....without having to make FB behave differently just for PVP. Guess you could call that a last resort, easy quick fix. But I think it can be done without it, using my suggestion above.

But all your doing is shifting it from "Why would you take Frostbrand" to "Why would you take Flametounge". A snare is quite obviously beter than 5% damage to a low damage DoT (as your enhance so not lots of SP) and your Fire totems. The auto attack damage is not that significant. As for the unleashes, because of the similarity of the spells you may aswell make them the same spell and make the UE "Snares, if target is immune to snares increases damage of next Flame Spell" and be done with it? You dont need to move SP to FB or any of that. Just tweek the damage from Frostbrand and/or its PPM to improve it a bit if the changes already in Mists are not enough by themselves, make it so that its still a noticeable DPS loss to not use FT, but you get a snare instead. That way you can base your choice around situation and composition rather than just taking FB off your bars.

[Radux]

The UE is part of the imbue, regardless of the talent or not it has a big effect on which imbue you use. And I think the UE are enticing enough, you either get more flame shock/fire nova (poss LB) damage which has obvious benefit in PVE since thats where you maintain the dot or use aoe.....or you get a snare (sprint) which is obviously more helpful in PVP then some dot damage.

So it sounds like the classic "choose damage or utility" bit. Isn't that kind of what PvP is about? Given I've never been into Enhancement PvP, but if your Team Mate has a snare, you'd use FT, but if you are missing it, use FB?

I don't see an issue with having to make choices. It's not like using FB is absolutely crippling your play or anything.

And you are oversimplifying "does damage". FT does MORE damage/DPS, and FB does LESS damage/DPS. FT being one of our highest DPS imbues is a signature feature of it. More DPS in PVP is a strong factor on its own, which is obvious since FT has been preferred over FB for that specific reason.

Again, you're using numbers for now. You really need to stop making the assumption that everything will be the exact same number wise in MoP as it is now.
Yes, FT happens every swing.
Yes, FB is a proc.

They could try to balance them to have approximately the same damage done over 60 seconds or something. I'd be ok with that.

How about this then...

What you suggest for FT:
- Does MORE damage/DPS
- 7% spell damage
- 5% buff to flame shock dot and fire totems (Fire theme)

What you suggest for FB:
- Does LESS damage/DPS (then FT)
- 5% spell damage
- Snare (Frost theme)

Well... to be fair I didn't actually suggest any of that. You did.

Really I don't see a need to add anything to FB or remove anything from FT.
If FB is never taken in PvP in MoP (despite the UF changes), that's an issue, I agree. The best course of action would be to just tweak the damage numbers on the Proc and the UE damage to make it more of a threat... at the very least make it less noticeable when you aren't using FT.

Like I said, I'm a firm believer of having to make the choice between doing damage (using FT) or using utility (using FB). Both have strong cases for using them, and some for not using them.

[Tides]

So for Resto:
Glyph of Water Shield: Increases the passive mana generation of your Water Shield by 10%, but Water Shield no longer activates when you receive damage.
-whats this shit? I used it on early 85 and now I will never use this in future, because its shit?

I hope they will change ALL ele glyphs in useful...

I would kill for this Glyph on Spine Heroic when they make me go resto. Water Shield triggers liek... every time a blood dies.. Every time you get debuff or grip.. every time you get tendril,.... SIGH...

[Northy]

I ponder if Lava Flows (30% spell haste when Flame Shock is dispelled) will make a comeback in MoP...

[Radux]

I ponder if Lava Flows (30% spell haste when Flame Shock is dispelled) will make a comeback in MoP...

To begin, I certainly wouldn't object if they decided to add it.

However, given Dispels are on an 8 second cool down, and the addition of Glyph of Lava Burst (if you so choose), I'd be more surprised if they added it than leave it out.

[Endus]

I ponder if Lava Flows (30% spell haste when Flame Shock is dispelled) will make a comeback in MoP...

That was there to try and make Flame Shock a "bad thing" to dispel in PvP.If anything, the new LvB glyph is better, since we don't have to spend a GCD on Flame Shock to begin with to get guaranteed crits.

[Protoman]

But all your doing is shifting it from "Why would you take Frostbrand" to "Why would you take Flametounge". A snare is quite obviously beter than 5% damage to a low damage DoT (as your enhance so not lots of SP) and your Fire totems. The auto attack damage is not that significant. As for the unleashes, because of the similarity of the spells you may aswell make them the same spell and make the UE "Snares, if target is immune to snares increases damage of next Flame Spell" and be done with it? You dont need to move SP to FB or any of that. Just tweek the damage from Frostbrand and/or its PPM to improve it a bit if the changes already in Mists are not enough by themselves, make it so that its still a noticeable DPS loss to not use FT, but you get a snare instead. That way you can base your choice around situation and composition rather than just taking FB off your bars.

So it sounds like the classic "choose damage or utility" bit. Isn't that kind of what PvP is about? Given I've never been into Enhancement PvP, but if your Team Mate has a snare, you'd use FT, but if you are missing it, use FB?

The design intent was FT for PVE, and FB for PVP. Switching between FT and FB in PVP based on "situation and composition" sounds interesting, but it doesn't really work in game. Basically, if you have someone else in your group that can snare, you just go for FT (more damage vs control). And thats what always happens because snares in the game are pretty prevalent, plus you have frost shock. There is also the issue of wasting GCD's to switch between them constantly. Switching your imbues based on certain scenarios sounds like unique gameplay, but the game doesn't really support that type of playstyle. This only occurs in solo pvp, you might use FB vs a kiting class....but in group PVP FT is the superior option, no need to debate on what to choose.

And why would you tweak the damage/ppm of Frostbrand? The proc is irrelevant, that's not why the imbue is ignored and increasing its damage would still not encourage us to use it. The problem is with 40% LL damage, and the 7% loss on all our spells. FB doesn't need any buffs, FT needs nerfs. The snare/sprint on FB should be enough reason to want to use it in PVP all the time, even for some minor loss in DPS.....but its overshadowed by FT which gives damage buffs that are just too essential to being effective in PVP, stuff like LL and shocks/spells.

Again, you're using numbers for now. You really need to stop making the assumption that everything will be the exact same number wise in MoP as it is now.
Yes, FT happens every swing.
Yes, FB is a proc.

They could try to balance them to have approximately the same damage done over 60 seconds or something. I'd be ok with that.

And you need to stop making the assumption that FB will do as much or more then FT. FT's signature is that it is higher DPS then FB, and FB is lower DPS because it provides a snare. That has not changed, and it won't change in MoP. It's like saying "you shouldn't assume Earth shock will do more instant damage then Frost shock", when we all know that Frost shock has to do less damage then Earth shock cause it snares, even if its only 10 damage. Just like I can assume that Flame shock with instant+dot does more DPS then either Earth or Frost shock, because it doesn't do as much upfront and you have to wait for its full effect. These are basic properties of our abilities, so I am safe to assume them.

They could try to make their DPS equal over 1 min, but what would that accomplish? More DPS with FB is not going to solve the problem. They already have tried to make them similar in DPS btw, as I showed you in that table above, but FB still has to do slightly less overall DPS cause of it's snare.....and to distinguish FT as the obvious higher DPS imbue.

Really I don't see a need to add anything to FB or remove anything from FT.
If FB is never taken in PvP in MoP (despite the UF changes), that's an issue, I agree. The best course of action would be to just tweak the damage numbers on the Proc and the UE damage to make it more of a threat... at the very least make it less noticeable when you aren't using FT.

Like I said, I'm a firm believer of having to make the choice between doing damage (using FT) or using utility (using FB). Both have strong cases for using them, and some for not using them.

If you don't see why the LL bonus has to be removed from FT (and baked into LL baseline), then you don't understand the root of the problem.

The problem is that FT is too good, and buffs our biggest attack LL, along with spells like shocks which we spam alot in PVP, and that overshadows whatever utility FB might bring. If FT buffed other sources of damage that make an impact in PVE but not as significant in PVP like our flame shock/SF dots or fire totems instead of LL, then we would be able to use FB in PVP for extra control but not lose so much of our effective PVP damage.

That explains why LL needs to be removed. As for adding spell damage to FB, Frozen Power talent used to give 10% spell damage to targets snared by FB.......this was to counter the SP that FT gave and encourage you to use it in PVP. This failed though, wasn't enough to counter it. And now they are removing the buff without giving something else to replace it.....that is why I suggest the 5% spell damage.



Suggestions:
- 40% LL damage baked into ability baseline
FT:
- Does MORE damage/DPS
- 7% spell damage
- 5-10% buff to periodic fire damage (flame shock and searing flames) and fire totems (Fire theme)

FB:
- Does LESS damage/DPS (then FT)
- 3-5% spell damage
- Snare (Frost theme)


I really think this is a good way to go about it. We will still use WF/FT for PVE, but now can run around with WF/FB for PVP. By using FB in PVP, we will still be giving up damage for control, but the damage loss will come from stuff that improves our consistent DPS like dots and totems and offhand procs......not so much our instant, spammable abilities like LL and shocks.