Enkidu

Hot off the latest Beta build (should be correct for the live 2.0.3 aswell), this is thanks to Lavina from Venture Co and Bifur from Emerald Dream who were bored enough to do this :).

Devastate R1 101-101.5
Devastate R2 101-101.5
Devastate R3 101-101.5

Yep, unified buffed threat for all ranks, pretty nice change really since it scales with damage on each rank per SA app.

Using R3 and http://www.thottbot.com/beta?i=16322 it hits for ~300 on mobs with 0 AC at 5 stacks of Sunder in Defensive Stance, ~360 using http://www.thottbot.com/beta?i=15863 (1H spec 1002 AP).

Expecting 30% or so DR on raid mobs we're looking at 311 threat we could say, that can crit aswell (sorry the hour is late so I didn't test an average hit, just took 1 Devastate with each weapon). Definitely something to use over Sunder Armor, especially when you're raid buffed (though completely rage starved and talented SA is still more efficient for those 5 mans till you hit a certain average damage point per Dev).

Edit: To clarify since I neglected to mention, the innate threat from Devastate still does not scale with SA stacks in any of the 3 ranks, only the damage portion does as per usual. We made sure to verify SA6 is still at 301.5 before trying it.

 

Enkidu

Speaking of the Druid change, does anyone have the innate numbers for Maul and Swipe?
As a positive note this atleast allows them to tank some mobs they couldn't previously, shielded mobs etc.

 

Fellwraith

Just out of curiousity, is that before or after stance/talent modifiers? If it's already been adjusted, then devastate got a small threat buff vs the last build.

 

Enkidu

This is all before the stance and talent modifiers.

 

Legend

How come our most beloved move Disengage is never found in those listings?

 

Nathariel

OK, from what i have read on the forums, the best test so far of what the static threat for Maul is works out around the 180 mark.

This would be very similar to the figures for heroic strike 9(173 threat) assuming the warrior was using a 2.4 speed weapon.

Thread: (post 9 seems most accurate) http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...64036507&sid=1

Edit: removed my conclusion about druid threat levels.

 

Ragnor

So assuming 180 threat is correct now and maul used to have a 1.75 modifier, any maul hit over ~240 damage used to generate more threat than it does now.

How much does maul hit for at @ 70 with decent tanking gear (good enough gear for heroic 5 man. kara etc)?

The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

www.retpaladin.com

 

Fellwraith

The fixed threat on all warrior abilities increases as you train the next rank. i.e. you should not expect to have the same fixed amount of threat for maul at 70 that you have at 60. If that's where you're going...

 

Ragnor

Ah yes I made an assumption 180 threat was for the max rank but it's probably for the max upto lvl 60 rank.

The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

www.retpaladin.com

 

Ayr

I still haven't found anywhere answers to how much aggro do VE and VT generate, nor how Shadow Affinity or Silent Resolve work with these two abilities, exactly. I would like to go and test this out myself, what would be the best and most exact way of testing? Hints and suggestions are welcome.

 

Athinira

500+ hits, 1.2k crits or in that range.

Fearie Fire as only debuff (-600 armor or so)
1.3k unbuffed AP

Moderator and Organizer on The Druid Wiki
http://druid.wikispaces.com
The Druid Wiki is currently outdated and is scheduled for a major WotLK overhaul. If you are looking for information on druids, i would suggest browsing these forums for now.

 

Adalys

The next and final rank of maul is at level 67. Draw your own conclusions for endgame viability

 

• Chicken

And are we certain that it does not auto-scale it's static threat component as you level up? If spells scale up a bit with each level a person gain, why wouldn't abilities like this? For that matter, perhaps the level 67 version of Maul does comparable threat to the level 70 Heroic Strike at it's base?

It's all about testing it, if the tests conclude that it's completely not viable, then you can complain.

buff /bʌf/ Pronunciation[buhf]
–verb (used with object)
- to reduce or deaden the force of

 

Exewut

This are the numbers at lvl 60, remember there is a mace with +140 AP, and that bear form gives some ap too.

(x = threat/s by spamming maul Y = your AP)



The numbers speak for themselves wouldn't you agree?

[e] I made a little mistake, new grap now.

Ask me about obscure politicians.

 

Boevis

Just finished testing the threat component with someone punching. Level 60, rank 7 Maul, full restoration spec.
Maul: 273
Pulled: 695
Didn't: 683

273 * 1.3 = 354.9
695/1.1 = 631.8 - 354.9 = 276.9 maximum bonus
683/1.1 = 620.9 - 354.9 = 266 minimum bonus

Maul: 571
Pulled: 1118
Didn't: 1105

571 * 1.3 = 742.3
1118/1.1 = 1016.4 - 742.3 = 274.1 maximum bonus
1105/1.1 = 1004.5 - 742.3 = 262.2 minimum bonus

Taking the Bearform innate modifier into account
266/1.3 = 204.6 minimum
274.1/1.3 = 210.8 maximum

At our static 2.5 speed, Maul is generating at most (210.8/2.5) = 84.3 threat per second.

Compare to Heroic Strike: 175 threat. At 1.5 Speed, it's 116.6 tps. At 2.0 speed it's 87.5 tps. At 2.5 speed it's 70 tps.

At the risk of being called biased, I'm going to call this nerf over the top. While I agree that bearform threat was removing the aggro component of making an encounter challenging ... Not only removing it's scaling, but also making it worse TPS than the average warrior ... uncalled for.

Edit: not sure where you're getting those numbers Exewu ... 800 AP with a full Feral spec was 429.6 damage for 449 TPS .. unless you're not counting the innate from Bearform, Predatory Strikes, or a MoUL in that 800 AP ... Now, that same Maul (429.6) is 382.5 TPS

And take it to a fully raid buffed case ... 1400 AP.
(((1400/14 + 54.6) * 2.5) + 128) * 1.1 * 1.2 * 1.3 * 1.15 * 1.75 = 1776.8 threat (710.7 tps)
versus
(((((1400/14 + 54.6) * 2.5) + 128) * 1.1 * 1.2) + 210) * 1.3 * 1.15 = 1329.3 threat (531.7 tps)

A loss of 179 TPS is nothing to sneeze at.

And look at the TPR now ...
((128 * 1.1 * 1.2) + 210) * 1.3 * 1.15 = 566.5 threat from Maul / 10 + Autoattack (~6 rage at 800 AP) = 35.4 TPR
Compared to Mangle at 800 AP
((((800/14 + 54.6) * 2.5 * 1.3) + 136) * 1.1 * 1.2 * 1.3 * 1.15 = 985.1 threat from Mangle / 20 rage = 49.25 TPR

 

• Chicken

That's interesting actually, though I think it'd be more interesting if you were to include the TPS numbers for Heroic Strike with different speed weapons in comparison to the TPS generated by Maul now.

We know the total TPS generated by Druids is hurt by this, so the interesting part after we've established by how much is how it compares to other similar abilities.

buff /bʌf/ Pronunciation[buhf]
–verb (used with object)
- to reduce or deaden the force of

 

Exewut

Hmm I used this formulla:
old threat:
(AP/14+128/2,5+50)*(1+0,1+0,2)*(1+0,3+0,15+0,75)

( AP/14 + maul damage /2,5 + 50 (base dps of bearform) ) * ( 20% on maul + 10% on all attacks ) * ( bearform bonus + 15% bonus + maul bonus)

new threat:
((AP/14+128/2,5+50)*(1+0,1+0,2)+$D$5/2,5)*(1+0,3+0,15)

( [ap/14 + maul damage /2,5 + 50 (base dps of bearform)] * [20% on maul + 10% on all attacks] + 180 threat ) * (bearform bonus + 15% bonus)

Did I do something wrong?
And I really should be studying instead of trolling all forums looking for hope. I doubt my teacher will accept 'but they nerfed bear threat!' as a good excuse for sacking my exam.

[e] using
old threat: =(AP/14+128/2,5+54,6)*(1,1*1,2)*(1,3*1,15*1,75)
new threat: =((AP/14+128/2,5+54,6)*(1,1*1,2)+210/2,5)*(1,3*1,15)
warrior: =((AP/14+157/1,7)*1,1+180/1,7)*1,3*1,15
this should be the correct graph:

Ask me about obscure politicians.

 

Boevis

% Modifiers are multiplicative, not additive, and bearform is 54.6 base. And Trust me, Maul is at least 205 and at most 210 threat not 180. So what you'd want is
old: (AP/14 + 128/2.5 + 54.6) * 1.1 * 1.2 * 1.75 * 1.3 * 1.15
new: ((AP/14 + 128/2.5 + 54.6) * 1.1 * 1.2) + 210/2.5) * 1.3 * 1.15

And I realized that I also screwed up pretty bad ... sigh

 

Babe Bridou

Side question:
how would you factor prayer of mending into the threat equation? I'm looking for figures/breakpoints/builds and situations where potentially prayer of mending can outthreat blizzard as an AOE threat generator.

Has anybody tested wether silent resolve, defiance, defensive stance, being a rogue, being a cat, being a paladin, being in bear form, etc, influence the threat from Prayer of Mending?

 

Athinira

Actually it seems to be 72 base. Im going to job now, but i will confirm the exact value when i get home.

Edit: 72 for level 70 of course. And just for info, bear form base isn't 54.6, at least in 1.12 it was 52 exactly and Cat Form was 54.8 :)

Moderator and Organizer on The Druid Wiki
http://druid.wikispaces.com
The Druid Wiki is currently outdated and is scheduled for a major WotLK overhaul. If you are looking for information on druids, i would suggest browsing these forums for now.

 

Fellwraith

I did some math on devastate's tpr vs sunder with the new threat level. I included the benefit of being in defensive stance, 3/3 defiance, and assumed 5 existing sunders.

Avg normal white hit dmg for TPR from Devastate to equal Sunder at level 60:
- No Points in focused rage and 0 imp sunder (26 TPR) = 68
- 3 Points in focused rage and 0 imp sunder (32 TPR) = 68
- 3 Points in focused rage and 3 points imp sunder (43 TPR) = 241-242

If your autoattack does an average of 240 damage or so, you're better off using devastate and probably better off not wasting any talent points on improved sunder.

I also ran the numbers based on the tested level 70 data and the damage ranges are remarkably similar because the next rank of devastate adds 10 more damage per sunder and the threat on sunder isn't scaling up that much (260 at level 60 to 302 at 70 from what I've seen). If anything Devastate will get dramatically better because you should have higher base damage on your weapons.

 

Muggins

I did a bit of my own maths and came up with the firgure of 34 damage without Imp Sunder for a full 5 sunder stack. Looking at your figures did you remember to halve the damage?

50% damage + 25*5 + 101

34 + 125 + 101 = 260 (sunder's unmodified threat value)

Or have i cocked up along the way?

 

Enkidu

The problem with that is the fact Devastate is mitigated by DR while Sunder is not, once you get an 80 DPS weapon or so I suppose Devastate would be the default.
Keep in mind we still prefer faster weapons for more HS TPS, tanking with Fool's Bane feels very sluggish.

SA is very good against mobs with high mitigation/damage shields, and of course in multi mob enviroments tabbing when Rev/SS are on cd. I think that for the 5 man instances 3 points in Imp.SA are a good investment.

Another thing I personally like about Devastate is that you can contribute a bit to RDPS by using it - the main use I had for it before these changes in the TBC beta when TPS/TPR wasn't a concern (swapped in Fool's Bane, too), it brings us a little bit closer to Bear DPS which is close to double ours when we tank with SA from most stats I've seen running through instances.

 

Fellwraith

We're both right. I did mine before the 50% because it's easier for most people to pay attention to their base white hit damage in combat on a mob than the "post-50% devastate damage which includes 125 damage from 5 sunders" damage. 34/0.5 = 68 ;)

I like to form simple heuristics so that when I'm tanking I can make a quick decision. "Looks like I've been doing about 70 white damage per nonglancing hit after 5 sunders in defensive stance, ok, time to use devastate instead." That way I don't have to do advanced calculus on the mobs armor value or worry about pre and post mitigation damage (is faerie fire up, do I have to worry about CoR, etc.)

 

Muggins

Ah apologies then, head's not screwed on properly today.