Fury - tied to 1 spell

[Deleted]

Has any spec in the history of wow been tied to 1 spell more than Fury is currently reliant on Battlecry?

Sure we can good damage in raids and Mythic+ but the effort required seems far more than some other specs, in + especially. Outside of BC we do sub tank dps (providing no war machine buff). I might as well not hit the mobs at all when all I can do is WW -> WW -> BT.

Battlecry requires careful planning whereas locks, for example, have very few CD's and don't have to worry about which packs are coming up.

The severity of the problem differs from dungeon to dungeon and from tank to tank. It's good when a pack lasts long enough to get 2 BC's in / 1 BC but the pack is dead soon after. Outside of that the timer on BC is just nerve wracking.

The worst situations are when you're saving your BC for a big back that's coming after 2 mobs. 'Okay, I don't want to use BC on these two because I'm saving it for the big pack. Let's do wet noodle damage for now and go crazy on the next. Oh wait, the tank has pulled another solo mob. I better use BC now so I don't look like I'm a burden weighing the team down with no dps. Oh that mob died quicker than expected. Shit, we're on the big pull and BC isn't up.'

or when BC comes off CD when mobs are at 50% hp. Sometimes it's worth using it at that point, but then it won't be ready for the start of the next pull.

Overall we do competitive damage but man is it stressful sometimes.

TLDR; nerf BC or buff CoF -.-

[Deleted]

I dont play fury so i'm not here to comment on that. However this really isnt the place to ask for changes to your class. I mean unless you just want to /rant and forget about it

[Deleted]

I dont play fury so i'm not here to comment on that. However this really isnt the place to ask for changes to your class. I mean unless you just want to /rant and forget about it

I understand that. I'm just venting.

[Garoh]

Warriors have always been easy to play but difficult to master. Anyone can jump on and do a 1-2-3 rotation and manage decent dps as long as they throw in their BC at some point, but to really shine it requires some foresight and planning, as well as a decent bit of RNG in your favor. Not a playstyle for everybody, but I prefer it over playing something mindless.
That being said, I do feel your frustration. Nothing worse than waiting that 5 more secs for OF to come off of cooldown only to have the whole pack die. I would actually be in favor of nerfing CoF into the ground to the point it's unusable like they did with Draught just to open up more possibilities.

[valax]

Has any spec in the history of wow been tied to 1 spell more than Fury is currently reliant on Battlecry?

Sure we can good damage in raids and Mythic+ but the effort required seems far more than some other specs, in + especially. Outside of BC we do sub tank dps (providing no war machine buff). I might as well not hit the mobs at all when all I can do is WW -> WW -> BT.

Battlecry requires careful planning whereas locks, for example, have very few CD's and don't have to worry about which packs are coming up.

The severity of the problem differs from dungeon to dungeon and from tank to tank. It's good when a pack lasts long enough to get 2 BC's in / 1 BC but the pack is dead soon after. Outside of that the timer on BC is just nerve wracking.

The worst situations are when you're saving your BC for a big back that's coming after 2 mobs. 'Okay, I don't want to use BC on these two because I'm saving it for the big pack. Let's do wet noodle damage for now and go crazy on the next. Oh wait, the tank has pulled another solo mob. I better use BC now so I don't look like I'm a burden weighing the team down with no dps. Oh that mob died quicker than expected. Shit, we're on the big pull and BC isn't up.'

or when BC comes off CD when mobs are at 50% hp. Sometimes it's worth using it at that point, but then it won't be ready for the start of the next pull.

Overall we do competitive damage but man is it stressful sometimes.

TLDR; nerf BC or buff CoF -.-

what I don't like about fury it's it relies too much on the enrage buff . I get it class fantasy and all... but overall is bad class design to have them do shit dps unless you got the right amounts of X stat and Y stats.
Just like frost dk's and other classes that rely A LOT on rng . Probably the reason I won't main a warrior in next expansion , they rock as tanks but if you want to dps it's annoying

[Powell]

The idea is that they are essentially Berserkers.

Blizzard probably likes the idea that Fury Warriors just go bloodcrazed insane like a Berserker would for a short duration.
Its on a relatively short cooldown to compensate for the short duration and to keep it from becoming monotonous.
I don't dislike the idea of short windows of frenzies, but there is too much damage tied to an individual ability.

They would have to change Battle Cry fundamentally to change its impact, wich i dont see happening.

The way crit works, the damage amplifier for it is static and only scales with your overall damage.
This means that you can only adjust the value of Battle Cry through its duration.
They can't reduce the duration, as its already extremely short.
They can't reduce the crit % or its value would swing enormously based on RNG.

If they want Battle Cry to have less impact on the overall damage and more streamlined across the entire spec, they need to rework Battle Cry without crit.

Or they would have to change how crit works for Fury Warriors specifically.

[Mad_Murdock]

Couldn't the same be said back when Fury had colossal smash? Personally, I liked the Cata fury best

By dungeon to dungeon, do you mean Mythic+ runs? Because anything less seems not worth carrying about

[Deleted]

Couldn't the same be said back when Fury had colossal smash? Personally, I liked the Cata fury best

By dungeon to dungeon, do you mean Mythic+ runs? Because anything less seems not worth carrying about

By dungeon to dungeon I mean some are better suited to lining up BC on the appropriate packs etc. It's not as hard as I make it seem, I just feel the punishment whenever I don't have BC up for a pack in a +21 or whatever.


Another example I thought of is when a boss is almost dead. It's a huge dps increase to pop BC and execute but often I'll save it knowing there's a big pack coming up that the tank will immediately rush to after the boss is dead. Smart playing perhaps, but feels bad knowing I can't get big executes.

[Archimtiros]

Has any spec in the history of wow been tied to 1 spell more than Fury is currently reliant on Battlecry?

Yes, actually, most of them are. Strictly speaking, Battle Cry isn't even near the top, it just feels more impactful because it's a frequent cooldown.

Using a sample of top logs from M Garothi for each spec as an example (keep in mind there may be individual variance present):

Class	Cooldown	CD Damage	Total Damage	Percentage
Outlaw Rogue	Adrenaline Rush	196m	546m	36%
Marksman Hunter	Trueshot Aura	201m	562m	36%
Frost Mage	Icy Veins	223m	608m	37%
Fire Mage	Combustion	227m	594m	38%
Fury Warrior	Battle Cry	304m	622m	48%
Ret Paladin	Crusade	255m	457m	56%
Frost DK	Pillar of Frost	359m	597m	60%
Havoc DH	Metamorphosis	322m	516m	62%
Feral Druid	Tiger's Fury	508m	621m	82%

TLDR: The idea that Battle Cry is all important, or even a more important cooldown than most, is misinformed.

[Jastall]

Yes, actually, most of them are. Strictly speaking, Battle Cry isn't even near the top anymore, it's just feels more impactful because it's more frequent.

Using a sample of top logs from M Garothi for each spec as an example (keep in mind there may be individual variance present):

Class	Cooldown	CD Damage	Total Damage	Percentage
Outlaw Rogue	Adrenaline Rush	196m	546m	36%
Marksman Hunter	Trueshot Aura	201mm	562m	36%
Frost Mage	Icy Veins	223m	608m	37%
Fire Mage	Combustion	227m	594m	38%
Fury Warrior	Battle Cry	304m	622m	48%
Ret Paladin	Crusade	255m	457m	56%
Frost DK	Pillar of Frost	359m	597m	60%
Havoc DH	Metamorphosis	322m	516m	62%
Feral Druid	Tiger's Fury	508m	621m	82%

TLDR: The idea that Battle Cry is all important, or even a more important cooldown than most, is misinformed.

How is that calculated, exactly? I'm not all that knowledgeable on every spec listed here, but I know that Pillar of Frost and Tiger's Fury aren't extremely powerful cooldowns. A Frost DK outside of Pillar does pretty damn decent damage, they just do more during it, mostly with Frost Strike. Whereas Fury does immense amounts of damage during BC/execute and far less outside, to the tune of less than half, with all their abilities.

If the chart measures the uptime of said cooldowns, I'm not sure it's the best metric. To use my examples, Pillar of Frost and Tiger's Fury have a lot of uptime, more than BC even accounting for Convergence. So yes, a lot of damage is done during it, but said damage doesn't wholly depend on the specific cooldown even if it does help. Whereas Fury (mostly in T21) hits like a wet noodle outside of BC, especially outside of Enrage.

As an experiment, I'm pretty sure that if all the specs listed dropped the listed cooldown, Fury would be the one to suffer the most, with the possible exception of Ret since Crusade is also stupidly powerful and the entire spec is balanced around it.

[Archimtiros]

How is that calculated, exactly? I'm not all that knowledgeable on every spec listed here, but I know that Pillar of Frost and Tiger's Fury aren't extremely powerful cooldowns. A Frost DK outside of Pillar does pretty damn decent damage, they just do more during it, mostly with Frost Strike. Whereas Fury does immense amounts of damage during BC/execute and far less outside, to the tune of less than half, with all their abilities.

If the chart measures the uptime of said cooldowns, I'm not sure it's the best metric. To use my examples, Pillar of Frost and Tiger's Fury have a lot of uptime, more than BC even accounting for Convergence. So yes, a lot of damage is done during it, but said damage doesn't wholly depend on the specific cooldown even if it does help. Whereas Fury (mostly in T21) hits like a wet noodle outside of BC, especially outside of Enrage.

As an experiment, I'm pretty sure that if all the specs listed dropped the listed cooldown, Fury would be the one to suffer the most, with the possible exception of Ret since Crusade is also stupidly powerful and the entire spec is balanced around it.

Amount of damage done during said cooldown divided by the total amount of damage done.

What you "know" is a matter of perspective; you think Battle Cry should be more powerful than it is, doesn't mean it actually is. Clearly uptime is a part of the equation - it doesn't matter how powerful something is if it has zero uptime, and a weak cooldown (Tiger's Fury) can be extremely impactful with high uptime. Battle Cry is a middle ground, having neither particularly high uptime, nor an incredibly powerful effect.

Ignoring uptime, Battle Cry really isn't that powerful of a cooldown at all, it's actually gotten relatively weaker over the course of the expansion due to stat inflation. All it does is auto-crit, which is certainly bursty, but not actually all that powerful without outside factors like Draught of Souls, considering the innate chance to crit anyway; without Unrivaled Strength it would be pathetically inept. Enrage isn't a part of Battle Cry, so you shouldn't conflate the two in your argument, and is fairly cyclic to begin with.

[Forogil]

Amount of damage done during said cooldown divided by the total amount of damage done.

A bad measurement.

Say that someone put on Pepe 10% into the fight. That would count Pepe at about 90% - even stronger than Tiger's fury.
Or if they wear it the entire fight at 100% - impossibly strong Pepe, considering that it doesn't buff damage at all.

I believe a better estimate would be something like (d/(D-d))*(100-x)/x, where d is total damage with buff, D total damage, and x% is uptime of buff, which is an estimate of how much the buff increases the damage overall - but as any such measure it is flawed since buffs change the playstyle and cause you to stack other buffs during that time.

[Gotmor]

Amount of damage done during said cooldown divided by the total amount of damage done.

What you "know" is a matter of perspective; you think Battle Cry should be more powerful than it is, doesn't mean it actually is. Clearly uptime is a part of the equation - it doesn't matter how powerful something is if it has zero uptime, and a weak cooldown (Tiger's Fury) can be extremely impactful with high uptime. Battle Cry is a middle ground, having neither particularly high uptime, nor an incredibly powerful effect.

Ignoring uptime, Battle Cry really isn't that powerful of a cooldown at all, it's actually gotten relatively weaker over the course of the expansion due to stat inflation. All it does is auto-crit, which is certainly bursty, but not actually all that powerful without outside factors like Draught of Souls, considering the innate chance to crit anyway; without Unrivaled Strength it would be pathetically inept. Enrage isn't a part of Battle Cry, so you shouldn't conflate the two in your argument, and is fairly cyclic to begin with.

I understand what are you talking about but I think that it will be interesting to measure a dps between classes without burst cds at all. With such metric we could see the real situation and the dependency on burst damage. For fury the dependency on BC is seen clearly in Mythic+ when you have absolutely 0 damage without burst.

[Mamut]

You should see demon hunters with t19 when we pull ahead of everyone else by huuuuge margin at pull and when Meta/Nemesis/CB ended we were doing tank damage. There wasnt any other class tied to CD so heavily like DH.

[Archimtiros]

A bad measurement.

Say that someone put on Pepe 10% into the fight. That would count Pepe at about 90% - even stronger than Tiger's fury.
Or if they wear it the entire fight at 100% - impossibly strong Pepe, considering that it doesn't buff damage at all.

I believe a better estimate would be something like (d/(D-d))*(100-x)/x, where d is total damage with buff, D total damage, and x% is uptime of buff, which is an estimate of how much the buff increases the damage overall - but as any such measure it is flawed since buffs change the playstyle and cause you to stack over buffs during that time.

That's the dumbest thing I've heard today (don't worry, it's early).

Your Pepe example is nonsensical precisely because it doesn't buff damage (unless the question was, "how much damage is done while Pepe is applied?"). No matter how you want to assess it, uptime is relevant to the impact of a buff - a weak buff will always have higher uptime and a strong buff less for obvious reasons, the only relevant comparison is what you're doing during that buff as opposed to what you're doing without that buff.

The actual relevant factor left out of the above is the impact of stacking cooldowns; for example, Frost DK stacks every other-ish Pillar with Obliteration. There's simply no way to model around that, short of completely rewriting every SimC APL to ignore certain cooldowns and still use all other major rotations/abilities. Regardless, the comparison above remains indicative of the question posed by the OP - Fury cooldowns in general aren't anymore impactful than most other class cooldowns.

- - - Updated - - -

I understand what are you talking about but I think that it will be interesting to measure a dps between classes without burst cds at all. With such metric we could see the real situation and the dependency on burst damage. For fury the dependency on BC is seen clearly in Mythic+ when you have absolutely 0 damage without burst.

The problem in M+ isn't so much damage done outside of BC vs damage inside BC, it's to do with frequency, and it's a problem that affects every spec to one degree or another.

[Jastall]

That's the dumbest thing I've heard today (don't worry, it's early).

Your Pepe example is nonsensical precisely because it doesn't buff damage (unless the question was, "how much damage is done while Pepe is applied?"). No matter how you want to assess it, uptime is relevant to the impact of a buff - a weak buff will always have higher uptime and a strong buff less for obvious reasons, the only relevant comparison is what you're doing during that buff as opposed to what you're doing without that buff.

The actual relevant factor left out of the above is the impact of stacking cooldowns; for example, Frost DK stacks every other-ish Pillar with Obliteration. There's simply no way to model around that, short of completely rewriting every SimC APL to ignore certain cooldowns and still use all other major rotations/abilities. Regardless, the comparison above remains indicative of the question posed by the OP - Fury cooldowns in general aren't anymore impactful than most other class cooldowns.

- - - Updated - - -



The problem in M+ isn't so much damage done outside of BC vs damage inside BC, it's to do with frequency, and it's a problem that affects every spec to one degree or another.

I think a larger part of the problem is that Fury's DPS is so incredibly dependent on general buff stacking in T21. Enrage + BC + Bloodbath (+Jugg during execute phase), these are four powerful damage augments available, which means that your base damage must be trash to be balanced, and is why Execute has such unsatisfyingly crappy damage baseline for example. It was less bad before as we didn't use Bloodbath and Inner Rage was a bit less reliant on BC and the execute phase to do good DPS, but it's really come at the forefront now.

Personally I think Enrage and BC alone would be more than enough, and wouldn't mind having more base damage in exchange for less powerful damage augments. Not to make Fury the same as every other spec, and more to be less dependent on stacking cooldowns and augments. Ditch Juggernaut, ditch Bloodbath (bleeds were always more of an Arms/Prot thing to me), perhaps make Enrage a bit less powerful so that other stats can compete with Mastery. Won't happen before BfA of course, but still.

[Not A Cat]

While I think SoO fury was the most fun I've had with fury, I really like the way it is right now. It's simple but nuanced enough where you can make improvements to squeeze out as much damage as possible. It doesn't feel bloated like a lot of other specs do.

Still hate furious slash, will forever miss heroic strike...

edit: I still want glad back

[Archimtiros]

I think a larger part of the problem is that Fury's DPS is so incredibly dependent on general buff stacking in T21. Enrage + BC + Bloodbath (+Jugg during execute phase), these are four powerful damage augments available, which means that your base damage must be trash to be balanced, and is why Execute has such unsatisfyingly crappy damage baseline for example. It was less bad before as we didn't use Bloodbath and Inner Rage was a bit less reliant on BC and the execute phase to do good DPS, but it's really come at the forefront now.

Personally I think Enrage and BC alone would be more than enough, and wouldn't mind having more base damage in exchange for less powerful damage augments. Not to make Fury the same as every other spec, and more to be less dependent on stacking cooldowns and augments. Ditch Juggernaut, ditch Bloodbath (bleeds were always more of an Arms/Prot thing to me), perhaps make Enrage a bit less powerful so that other stats can compete with Mastery. Won't happen before BfA of course, but still.

No offense, but you don't know what you're talking about.

• Execute's baseline damage trucks. It's 600% MH/600% OH * 1.10 (990% total) weapon damage, about 25% stronger than Obliterate and 25% weaker than Shadowstrike, before considering Enrage or Juggernaut. Mine tooltips for over 1 million damage without buffs.
• Yes, a lot of Fury's base damage (BT/RB) is mediocre, but that's because of Enrage, not Battle Cry. That said, Enrage is cyclic and the overall uptime is very good, ~70-80%+ depending on legendaries.
• Juggernaut was already reduced significantly, and that damage rolled into base Execute.
• Other stats already compete with Mastery, and even surpass it. Arms is the one that's hurt for Mastery this whole expansion.

The only issue here is one of perception.

[Jastall]

No offense, but you don't know what you're talking about.

• Execute's baseline damage trucks. It's 600% MH/600% OH * 1.10 (990% total) weapon damage, about 25% stronger than Obliterate and 25% weaker than Shadowstrike, before considering Enrage or Juggernaut. Mine tooltips for over 1 million damage without buffs.
• Yes, a lot of Fury's base damage (BT/RB) is mediocre, but that's because of Enrage, not Battle Cry. That said, Enrage is cyclic and the overall uptime is very good, ~70-80%+ depending on legendaries.
• Juggernaut was already reduced significantly, and that damage rolled into base Execute.
• Other stats already compete with Mastery, and even surpass it. Arms is the one that's hurt for Mastery this whole expansion.

The only issue here is one of perception.

I mean sure Execute doesn't hit like a completely wet noodle like baseline RB or FS, but compared to pre-Legion (or even Arms Execute) where every single cast of Execute pulled some of the biggest numbers in the game, the non-BC, non-Jugg buffed Executes are underwhelming to me. I sure hope it hits harder than Obliterate, since Execute can only be used for 1/5th of an ordinary fight, that's the entire point of its existence.

And yeah, it's a question of perception, sure. Enjoying how a spec plays is tied up to perception a lot, that's how opinions work. I find T21 Fury significantly less fun to play than T20 and before Fury for several reasons. Had it been like that from the get-go, I'm not even sure I'd have mained DPS for the entirety of the xpack and would probably just have gone Prot or mained my DK instead.

[Archimtiros]

I mean sure Execute doesn't hit like a completely wet noodle like baseline RB or FS, but compared to pre-Legion (or even Arms Execute) where every single cast of Execute pulled some of the biggest numbers in the game, the non-BC, non-Jugg buffed Executes are underwhelming to me. I sure hope it hits harder than Obliterate, since Execute can only be used for 1/5th of an ordinary fight, that's the entire point of its existence.

And yeah, it's a question of perception, sure. Enjoying how a spec plays is tied up to perception a lot, that's how opinions work. I find T21 Fury significantly less fun to play than T20 and before Fury for several reasons. Had it been like that from the get-go, I'm not even sure I'd have mained DPS for the entirety of the xpack and would probably just have gone Prot or mained my DK instead.

Arms Execute is 202*4 * 1.10 = 888% weapon damage at max (40) rage, which is both less damage than Fury and 30% higher rage cost, making it's DPR 22.2 (24.6 Dauntless) against Fury's 39.6. Oh, and for references sake, both specs Execute have higher coefficients now than ever before, the previous height was in 6.1.2 with Fury at 350/350 and Arms at 135*4.

Unlike Obliterate, or even Arms Execute, Fury Execute can also be used on nearly every GCD sub-20% (at worst, 2 out of every 3), which plays into total damage and allows Juggernaut to ramp quite quickly, so you shouldn't arbitrarily ignore those or other damage effects like Enrage/CS out of hand. Sure, you won't use it as much as Obliterate, but that's why it's average damage is four times higher. Very few specs come even close to Execute damage output sub-20%.

Again, I'm not trying to be rude, but you don't know what you're talking about. You have a misinformed perception of what you think and are letting it control your interpretation of "facts". If the problem is one of opinion, that you just don't like the gameplay of Enrage/CS, or whatever else you don't agree with, that's fine - but the things your claiming are objectively false.