Still No Word On Any Compensation For these nerfs?

[Natixsphere]

Clearly you don't see the bigger issue. Sure we where fine in BC, Wrath, and Cata, but our mechanics were also drastically different. It's not the issue of casting on the move, but rather the fact that so much of affliction's damage is tied into MG and the ghost dot ticks it provides. By comparison, Shadow Bolt (and even Drain Soul) did a MUCH smaller portion of our damage in Wrath and Cata, and therefore it wasn't as much of an interruption to have to move.

While I personally would take AD for more flexibility, I wouldn't got as far as to calling someone an idiot for making KJC.

Just to clarify everything I didnt call anyone a "idiot" i said anyone who would take KJC over AV after 5.4 is an idiot. Now yes I understand that aff has changed since MoP but we wont need to worry about MG channeling since it now decreases the dmg our dots will do on the current target. Its pretty much a useless spell now. I even heard someone saying that it wll be drain life we use as the filler once we have all our dots up whether this is true or not idk I dont play on the PTR. Either way though it doesnt matter to me. If anyone rerolled warlock in MoP and is now QQing over the KJC change than they need to get over it. I have been playing since BC and have been threw all the nerfs and buffs its a roller coaster with the warlock class but you need to learn and adapt not QQ on the forums.

[Grizelda]

I don't know about that "get over it part".

Forum debate is what preserved KJC (in a better form in my opinion) for 5.4.


Also I'm pretty sure MG doesn't decrease the damage of your DoTs for 5.4. You probably meant that it's damage has been decreased.


Maybe we can change the title of this thread to: "Where is the compensation for the mechanics change to RoF".

[Biruta]

People are too caught up with the general idea of compensation ... Destro dps was not the target for the RoF nerf; ember generation through RoF was.

I'm pretty sure they did straight up say they did not intend to nerf Destro dps and that they would re-balance it around not generating embers through RoF on single-target.

Less embers = less dps = dps nerf
wtf are u talking about?

[Deleted]

If they would compensate for nerfs, wouldn't that beat the whole purpose of nerfs?

[Deleted]

If they would compensate for nerfs, wouldn't that beat the whole purpose of nerfs?

not if the devs specifically said there would be compensation.

[Sylar Hao]

Why do so many people in this thread come back and forth say "what's the purpose of a nerf if they get compensated"? Do they just come here to troll the thread because they hate/envy warlocks? Or they just don't worry to read what the changes are to know why are we asking for compensation?

I fail to understand why is it so hard for them to understand...

[Werst]

If the word compensation makes people agitated I think we can all agree that the term "mechanical improvements" would be both more accurate and needed. RoF was 30% more embers single target than was intended. Fine...I am the first to say it should go. However even with that the spec was significantly behind demo, aff, and the successful specs of many other classes.

The game's balance and quality would be much better served by working on those mechanics first then revisiting numbers. Right now destro still has issues with raid trinket interaction, T16 set bonuses, and its mechanics to get through before any number tweaking that would be even remotely accurate would come in.

So for the "compensation" haters out there what is so wrong with the basic mechanics adjustments along the lines of the following:
*Minor glyph to swap backdraft's 30% haste for 30% crit to incinerate. (CB interaction unchanged)
*Conflag's recharge reduced by haste.
*A aimed shot/fulmination proc for shadowburn at any HP level
*Remove ICD from T16 4x piece so the bonus scales better with ember generation
*Change the T16 2x bonus to be 100% on crit or 20-25% on conflag hit

[Sylar Hao]

If the word compensation makes people agitated I think we can all agree that the term "mechanical improvements" would be both more accurate and needed. RoF was 30% more embers single target than was intended. Fine...I am the first to say it should go. However even with that the spec was significantly behind demo, aff, and the successful specs of many other classes.

The game's balance and quality would be much better served by working on those mechanics first then revisiting numbers. Right now destro still has issues with raid trinket interaction, T16 set bonuses, and its mechanics to get through before any number tweaking that would be even remotely accurate would come in.

So for the "compensation" haters out there what is so wrong with the basic mechanics adjustments along the lines of the following:
*Minor glyph to swap backdraft's 30% haste for 30% crit to incinerate. (CB interaction unchanged)
*Conflag's recharge reduced by haste.
*A aimed shot/fulmination proc for shadowburn at any HP level
*Remove ICD from T16 4x piece so the bonus scales better with ember generation
*Change the T16 2x bonus to be 100% on crit or 20-25% on conflag hit

I'd make the backdraft change for Incinerate baseline instead of a glyph. I would even go further and instead of increased critical chance, backdrafted Incinerates should generate an extra ember.
I totally agree with Conflagrate recharge reduced by haste, and a proc to add some randomness to the rotation would be awesome.

[Count Zero]

Less embers = less dps = dps nerf
wtf are u talking about?

I don't think you understood the point of my post.

They did not intend to nerf dps, but rather ember generation. However, yes, nerfing ember generation nerfs dps. But, since nerfing dps was not the point, they are planning to compensate for the lost dps elsewhere. They just didn't want us generating embers as quickly. Likely they'll buff the damage of the ember spenders to compensate for the fact we'll be spending less embers.

[rijn dael]

Likely they'll buff the damage of the ember spenders to compensate for the fact we'll be spending less embers.

Except they seem to hate chaos bolt hitting harder than a wet noodle. A base mastery% change maybe?

[Count Zero]

Except they seem to hate chaos bolt hitting harder than a wet noodle. A base mastery% change maybe?

Yeah, I dunno. I thought they did say they were planning on compensating but I might just be recalling people talking about something they never actually said, or maybe only implied, or I dunno.

I guess they could buff ember generator damage ... or not buff anything at all : /

[Sifonology]

Why do so many people in this thread come back and forth say "what's the purpose of a nerf if they get compensated"? Do they just come here to troll the thread because they hate/envy warlocks? Or they just don't worry to read what the changes are to know why are we asking for compensation?

I fail to understand why is it so hard for them to understand...

They see it on first phase and reacts like "WHAAAT? Warlocks got nerfed and crying to get compansated?". They have no other idea.

[traumabrew]

The RoF change was a mechanical change not an intended nerf. They wanted to remove RoF from single target rotation. So, we are not asking for a compensation to a nerf. We are asking for re balancing. They did not want to nerf ember regen so the ember regen we gained from using RoF was to be moved elsewhere.

As for being able to play destroy competitively , they need to take a hard look at the spec. Re rolling another class or choosing a different spec should not be an option. Blizzard has stood behind their philosophy of "bring the player, not the class" and in this vain has buffed or added spells to other classes to make them viable for a raid. So, the attitude of go aff or demo should not be part of this discussion.

I am waiting for the numbers pass and tuning phase of the PTR to make a call regarding destro's DPS. But I feel that many warlocks will be lagging behind in the DPS meters as we re learn to play our class. The changes to the class are extensive and is basically an overhaul, which would have been better off waiting for the new expac.

When you have been playing a warlock with KJC for 8 months, going back to being a turret will take time to get used to. You have an instinct that you can "run and gun" and now that AD seems to be the default option, standing still to cast will be something we will have to get used to again. I can see myself accidentally moving while casting interrupting my cast causing me to lose DPS. KJC should be a baseline ability for all locks as it is on the PTR currently, allowing us to cast our filler spells on the move.

The level 90 talents are so different from each other, it is hard to make them equal. If you make one choice more palatable, chances are you are going to make it OP compared to the other 2, that choice will be the de facto option or they nerf them so all 3 options are "meh" and it doesn't matter you take as they all have no importance. MF is situational. The old AV just plain sucked so KJC was the default option, even after the nerf. Blizzard saw this so they changed AV to AD, which makes it now the default choice. Reality is, the level 90 talents need a complete overhaul. They all need to accomplish the same thing but in a different manner and be comparable. Right now MF is for AOE, KJC allows you to run and gun and AD will increase your DPS.

Regarding PvE vs PvP, they should give every class a PvP spec or change abilities if you are fighting another player. They have the ability to do this, warriors abilities act differently if you are fighting a player or a NPC. This would make balancing the 2 a lot easier. It sucks that as a PvE only player, my play style and abilities change because of PvP and vice versa.

Finally people saying that warlocks did not have KJC before MoP and did fine is looking at the past with rose colored glasses. Warlocks were the red headed step child and during Wrath and Cata, it was hard to find a warlock. That's why they revamped the class. You can not compare pre MoP warlocks with current warlocks, it is almost a new class. Also, when you give a class a cool feature that significantly improves QoL then take it away, there will be a massive backlash. KJC did not break the class. Warlocks were not top of the charts. Also, the argument that other casters did not have the ability does not hold weight. KJC was a signature warlock ability. If you wanted to play a caster who could move and cast, roll a warlock. Blizzard has said they wanted the classes to feel unique, but these moves and changes only moves the classes towards homogenization and removes the uniqueness of individual casters.

[Schma]

The RoF change was a mechanical change not an intended nerf. They wanted to remove RoF from single target rotation. So, we are not asking for a compensation to a nerf. We are asking for re balancing. They did not want to nerf ember regen so the ember regen we gained from using RoF was to be moved elsewhere.

As for being able to play destroy competitively , they need to take a hard look at the spec. Re rolling another class or choosing a different spec should not be an option. Blizzard has stood behind their philosophy of "bring the player, not the class" and in this vain has buffed or added spells to other classes to make them viable for a raid. So, the attitude of go aff or demo should not be part of this discussion.

I am waiting for the numbers pass and tuning phase of the PTR to make a call regarding destro's DPS. But I feel that many warlocks will be lagging behind in the DPS meters as we re learn to play our class. The changes to the class are extensive and is basically an overhaul, which would have been better off waiting for the new expac.

When you have been playing a warlock with KJC for 8 months, going back to being a turret will take time to get used to. You have an instinct that you can "run and gun" and now that AD seems to be the default option, standing still to cast will be something we will have to get used to again. I can see myself accidentally moving while casting interrupting my cast causing me to lose DPS. KJC should be a baseline ability for all locks as it is on the PTR currently, allowing us to cast our filler spells on the move.

The level 90 talents are so different from each other, it is hard to make them equal. If you make one choice more palatable, chances are you are going to make it OP compared to the other 2, that choice will be the de facto option or they nerf them so all 3 options are "meh" and it doesn't matter you take as they all have no importance. MF is situational. The old AV just plain sucked so KJC was the default option, even after the nerf. Blizzard saw this so they changed AV to AD, which makes it now the default choice. Reality is, the level 90 talents need a complete overhaul. They all need to accomplish the same thing but in a different manner and be comparable. Right now MF is for AOE, KJC allows you to run and gun and AD will increase your DPS.

Regarding PvE vs PvP, they should give every class a PvP spec or change abilities if you are fighting another player. They have the ability to do this, warriors abilities act differently if you are fighting a player or a NPC. This would make balancing the 2 a lot easier. It sucks that as a PvE only player, my play style and abilities change because of PvP and vice versa.

Finally people saying that warlocks did not have KJC before MoP and did fine is looking at the past with rose colored glasses. Warlocks were the red headed step child and during Wrath and Cata, it was hard to find a warlock. That's why they revamped the class. You can not compare pre MoP warlocks with current warlocks, it is almost a new class. Also, when you give a class a cool feature that significantly improves QoL then take it away, there will be a massive backlash. KJC did not break the class. Warlocks were not top of the charts. Also, the argument that other casters did not have the ability does not hold weight. KJC was a signature warlock ability. If you wanted to play a caster who could move and cast, roll a warlock. Blizzard has said they wanted the classes to feel unique, but these moves and changes only moves the classes towards homogenization and removes the uniqueness of individual casters.

We've known about the KJC talent changes for a long long time now. Spec MF or AV on live for a while and practice so that when 5.4 comes out your dps will not be as impacted. You might still use KJC on some fights in SoO too who knows...

Also I disagree on one of your first points. I don't think there is anything wrong with being expected to play more than one spec of your class, especially for a pure dps class (and especially again for someone who is a somewhat serious+ raider). It makes the game more interesting. In ToT normal you can play destro for every fight with tot normal gear just fine, but it is by no means optimal. Once you start getting into heroics then it matters more.

[Werst]

I would really like to see a destro who had the changes I outlined in terms of a sim. Then tune the spells in the spec up or down accordingly. That would give us a more balanced and balanceable spec. I'm 100% sure blizz has that capability but they seem to be on a healthy dose of apathy regarding fixing destro in any reasonable form. We have seen the first round of numbers pass and destro got a trivial 10% to immolate which in no way solves the mechanics issues and is nearly in consequential in terms of making up its damage vs other specs.

[Veyne]

Indeed, lol. I love this "compensation" fad, as if any nerfs should be accompanied by compensations. I find it hilarious.

In this particular case, well the case of ember generation, it was expected. Blizzard took Rain of Fire out of the single target rotation because it was stupid and clunky, not because it allowed Destruction to produce burning embers too quickly.

[Deleted]

People who know absolutely nothing about warlocks other than "omg warlocks always above me on recount" really needs to stay out of things they dont understand instead of trolling/QQing the warlock forum. Seriously.
Destruction wasn't supposed to be nerfed in dps. RoF ember regen was reduced because they didnt like RoF being in the single target rotation, not because it did too much dmg. It was a mechanical change. Ergo, we should see a compensation for the dps lose.

[Werst]

In terms the derpy non warlocks might understand...
- you get a flat tire
- old tire is removed
- waiting for new tire and/or wheel to be put back on since the spec is sitting there w' only 3x wheels on the ground.

Make sense?

If you are at a progression level or 540+ilvl and destro is still beating you consistently on anything but maybe durumu walls or primordius you are doing it wrong. The spec took a very significant mechanics change to fix the mechanics. That change also reduced ember generation about 30% even in single target. As ilvl rises destro falls behind and even with 30%+ unintended extra embers it wasn't keeping up at 535 let alone 550ilvl. I seem to recall seeing something on twitter about blues looking at buffing ember consumers vs just buffing ember generation of immo/conflag/incin but it could be a caffeine induced delirium. If they do get ready for another kneejerk CB nerf vs players since its a subjective hot button for ignorant QQ'ers whom blizz seems to cater to in this matter.

Lets say they tweak ember consumers 30%'ish as a rough trade vs the RoF change destro's ember generators seems to still be woefully behind. They buffed immolate what 10%'ish but not conflag/incinerate and still nothing to counter the gcd capping of incinerates under backdraft. They fixed ele by making LVB a longer cast w' more dmg...I don't know if that will work for destro but a minor glyph trading 30% crit for haste would be a toggle players could use to adjust the playstyle based on their itemization and gearing level.

[pokeadott]

I seem to recall seeing something on twitter about blues looking at buffing ember consumers vs just buffing ember generation of immo/conflag/incin but it could be a caffeine induced delirium.

No quite what you're looking for, but here is GC on RoF and ember gen. He represents that the devs agree that ember generation is too slow without RoF. Whether they have changed their minds on that is yet to be seen...


Kaelynath ‏@Kaelynath 8 May @Ghostcrawler: "To which I mean, doesn't feel like it belongs there in the single target rotation. Just feels clunky and annoying. Thoughts?"

Greg Street @Ghostcrawler @Kaelynath "We agree. We didn't remove it for 5.3 because we'd want to buff ember generation to compensate."

source: https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...49925609037824

[FurtyIRL]

I dont think you understand what is a nerf if you ask for "compensation"

I don't know how many times it has to be repeated: Blizzard said some time ago that they intended to remove RoF from the single target rotation, and instead compensate generators to fill in the gap. Why is that so hard to understand?